[Gigachad]

That was the obvious issue with all the blockchain smart contract stuff that was getting pushed previously. Any time it interacts with the physical world the blockchain goes out the window the moment on someone on the ground decides they don’t agree with it. Your cryptographically signed deed means nothing and can’t evict someone off the land.

[jeremyjh]

There is little room for a property or money transfer system that leaves no avenue for legal recourse. And the DAO fork made it crystal clear why it was always just window dressing on the same social consensus game.

[pocksuppet]

Sure there is, it's the one for people who are trying to avoid unjust legal recourse.

[jeremyjh]

I said little room, not no room. For most entities using crypto where legal recourse is a more realistic threat model than scammers/hackers it isn't the unjust kind they are so worried about.

[pocksuppet]

If you're selling shoes you have little legal threat. If you're doing anything unusual, you need protection from the government because the government hates anything out of the norm unless you bribe it.

[inigyou]

The "violence" in that case is taking someone's money away so they might lose their home or starve.

[cucumber3732842]

This comment ignores the cost of deploying government violence. In most of the world the government cannot "just" rubber hose every petty criminal on the basis that "he might have some crypto he's not telling us about". The people would not stand for it.

[Gigachad]

I think you misunderstood my comment. The scenario I was thinking of is something like a blockchain contract that declares you own a block of land. If a hacker stole the NFT land contract, the government and society would still agree it belongs to the real owner and thus the blockchain out of sync with reality.

A smart contract can't physically secure ownership of land.

[JuniperMesos]

Even if the people did stand for it, it still costs money and human effort for the government to pay its police employees to do the rubber-hosing - and there are principle-agent problems like government agents being susceptible to bribes (perhaps in cryptocurrency!), being too lazy to enforce the written laws, or having personal scruples about cryptocurrency use.