Revolutionising Smart Contracts with Crypto Technology

Smart contracts have revolutionized what blockchain and crypto can achieve, and it is undeniable. However, being overly enthusiastic about any innovation can lead to its stagnation or even failure when other factors do not match. The idea that new technology is perfect and that everyone should be aware of its genius is out of date. This attitude not only generates an adversarial relationship when regulation appears, but it also reduces the incentive to improve new applications to maximize their value.

Smart contracts and companies that build their products around them are approaching this impasse. So, what can be done to bridge these gaps and potentially create an alternative?

The crypto world offers a wide range of options, from crypto block to crypto podcast, from crypto luna classic to crypto australia, from crypto headlines to crypto predictions 2022. Even the Apple Health application is a web 3.0 product. All these options open the door to a wide range of possibilities.

The gaps

The lack of Bitcoin (BTC) support is already hampering the widespread adoption of smart contracts. Ethereum has become a major force in the blockchain industry, hosting many of the world’s applications, but Bitcoin still stands out above the rest in terms of its capabilities. As BlackRock, the leader of traditional institutions, is making attempts to break the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Bitcoin ETF barrier, the gap between them and other projects will only become more obvious.

It would be short-sighted to say that the aversion to smart contracts is hindering Bitcoin’s interoperable potential and decentralized app integration, particularly when considering the recent ETF filings and developments in Bitcoin-driven finance.

Another issue is the lack of an efficient way to link crypto and fiat through a smart contract framework. It is possible to use centralized intermediaries to facilitate crypto-fiat exchanges, but this solution is not transparent, requires trust, and is quite costly, which defeats the purpose of cryptocurrency altogether. Not to mention the security risks associated with such implementations.

Regulators are already aware of the vulnerabilities of smart contracts. The controversial Data Act of the European Union, which requires companies using smart contracts to have a “kill switch”, is a good example of this. This mandate shows the inherent technological risk that regulators are unlikely to ignore as more international blockchain regulations are implemented.

Necessary changes

If crypto firms and institutions want an alternative to smart contracts, they need to take several major steps to make it happen. Or, if an alternative is not feasible, smart contracts should be modified to secure funds.

Smart contracts might appear to be similar to vending machines to the average person, but this comparison isn’t quite accurate. To ensure safety, developers need to code smart contracts properly, and some suggest creating new smart contract languages or adding a “fact check” software to the code.

Complications arise when considering “right to be forgotten” data privacy regulations, such as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, which gives citizens the right to request their personal data be erased. This is impossible if they’re bound to a digital legal agreement.

In order for smart contracts to cooperate with traditional financial institutions and fiat, they must be significantly altered. However, this is not a practical or necessary solution at this time, so the focus should be on mitigating the security and privacy risks associated with smart contracts.

Smart contracts are useful, but they may need to be seen as a “proof-of-concept” rather than the answer to universal adoption. To make crypto more accessible and compatible with fiat, developers need to prioritize this type of development and tackle the obstacles that stand in the way. This may involve exploring other options or primitives, rather than relying solely on smart contracts.