pgesmm

It's not that simple. Have you ever had to do anything with real legal complex matters? For example for patent suits, I am not sure if I didn't prefer a qualified and experienced set of judges over an anonymous hobby crypto arbitration court.. Don't kid yourself, you can get (and will) screwed in every which way. I also don't know much, but I think there is a lot a lot of illusion going on about "smart contracts"

Why a troll? I asked a question and provided reasonable arguments for my belief. - "Not wanting to rely on a central authority" is a political theme. - In my opinion saying "I use crypto because I do not agree with my governing central authority" is not really a good application (as I asked for in my question). You don't even have to commit illicit activities in a universal/ethically right way. It suffices to do "illicit" activities in the view of the government to get you into real trouble (jail time or worse). So to say "I use crypto as an expression of protest" seems like a questionable application to me

Good point, but are cryptocurrencies then needed (adding currency trafo risks)?

Further, how do you select the trusted 3rd party--can't you get screwed here if there are "multiple" 3rd party notaries? As far as I can see, you can't get rid of some "central" authority

Suppose we two make a "smart contract": I say I pay 100k, you say you sell me a functional car. Let's say you then deliver a broken car.

Now what? How can't we have disputes, we did a "smart contract"?