[alkonaut]

Exactly. There is no way I'd ever want to anything remotely important, or remotely high value, on a system that isn't run by humans and with transactions reversible in courts.

Who is it that uses these smart contracts, and for what? Is it mostly a gadget for research and speculation (still)?

[iSnow]

I work in old industry and the supply chain guys as well as finance is having a boner from the idea of moving their crufty systems to blockchain. The whole paper trail around a bill of lading isn't a joke if you are shipping from say China to South America.

But - like the internet - it's just a fad that will soon pass.

[RhodesianHunter]

It'll never happen on the supply chain because of all of the entities in the middle with zero desire to participate.

[rglullis]

If they don't, they will be put out of business. Do you think if Walmart says "I will only buy from you if I am able to audit you and prove that your shrinkage is less than X%" they are just going to say "Opposite, sorry we can't do that."?

Or if Amazon ever starts a blockchain-based certification system to crack down on counterfeit products, the legit distributors are not going to push down on all their suppliers? Of course they will.

[RhodesianHunter]

This thinking belies a very simplistic view of a very complex supply chain.

Brands like Nike often don't touch their products after they produce the design.

Manufacturing, distribution, shipping, warehousing, sales are all handled by a massive web of smaller entities with long term contracts. Most of these businesses use very very old tech, and will actively resist change.

Its a chicken or egg problem too, since having half of your products on a blockchain is pretty much worthless, it's an all-or-nothing problem which makes it that much more of a massive undertaking.

I've studied this pretty extensively and honestly don't think it'll ever happen. At least unless the current paradigm of supply changes massively.

[rglullis]

> I've studied this pretty extensively and honestly don't think it'll ever happen. At least unless the current paradigm of supply changes massively.

"I don't think we will see any changes in the industry, unless the industry changes." Kind of tautological, no?

> Most of these businesses use very very old tech, and will actively resist change.

I don't think we are disagreeing. Maybe we are just thinking in different timescales.

I don't doubt current business will resist change. What I am saying is that there will be a point where adopting the technology will be such an obvious advantage for the large players that the existing business will either be forced to adopt or be disrupted by some new business.

[RhodesianHunter]

> "I don't think we will see any changes in the industry, unless the industry changes." Kind of tautological, no?

Kind of not-at-all what I said no? Change is inevitable, blockchain is not the right tool for this job.

>adopting the technology will be such an obvious advantage for the large players

A centralized solution from a trusted third party has all of the benefits of blockchain with just about none of the downsides. Many institutions could fill this role from technology companies to major law firms in the supply chain space.

[rglullis]

For all the scams, ponzi schemes and outright theft that has happened in the blockchain space, I can bet a good amount of money that we as a society lose more every year to corrupt officials, subverted institutions and petty theft than we will ever lose on a system that is not run by humans.

[ivalm]

In total? Yes. As a fraction of total volume? Debatable.

[rglullis]

Some quick Google searches:

- World GDP: 142 trillion USD.

- Global cost of corruption: At least 5% of World's GDP according to WEF. [0]

- Cost of violence: estimated to be 11% of GDP in 2012 [1]

We are already at 16% and we are not even counting resources and parts of the world economy under the control of authoritarian regimes.

[0]: https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sc13493.doc.htm

[1]https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261037678_Estimatin...

[ivalm]

Then for crypto you need to count what fraction of value is used for illicit activity. Here is a paper estimating its about 46% of transactions [0]. If you look at transactions that cause real economic activity (as opposed to speculation) I bet the fraction would be in the 90%+.

[0] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3102645

[rglullis]

You are moving the goal posts. The point initially was to show that the current socio-political institutions are no better than "Wild-West" blockchain systems to avoid fraud and misappropriation of assets.

You are now talking about how much of a "real economy" blockchain can handle, which is a different matter and a totally unfair comparison. Let's talk about a "real economy" when people are allowed to enter a work agreement and have a contract specifying a salary in crypto.

[ivalm]

Even without the real part I showed 44% is illegal activity, which is ore than 16%.