I didn't write the comment... but I would probably second this. I suppose in general smart contracts "replace" escrow companies. There are escrows for tiny things like buying random stuff in Alibaba. There are escrows for large things - like buying a house/property.

I would say that in general it seems weird to handle either of those cases with a smart contract. For example. Let's say I am on Alibaba as a seller. The escrow unlock is probably based on arrival of an item - which is tied to freight companies or possibly a fedex tracking number. This "seems" like it's totally amenable to a smart contract. But where things break is fraud. Let's say an alibaba seller starts shipping empty boxes so that the funds are released.

Now one could say that a smart contract as well as an escrow company would make the same mistake. But it's still not the same. If that seller repeatedly sends empty boxes - it will quickly catch up to them with an escrow company. At some point the escrow company will stop believing the company and start trusting the pictures of empty boxes arriving. Not so with a smart contract. It would mean un-ending fraud. Now you could back things up by saying there could be a company that the smart contract is tied to, not specifically fedex tracking. But then what is that? It's an escrow company.

For houses - if anyone has been involved in a real estate transaction I would say you are probably familiar with the notion that there are 15 days to attempt getting your loan. Some contracts can be 45 or even 90 days (or years for complex business/government escrows). There are also situations where the seller decides to not cause grief because of some other issues or mistakes. Again a smart contract is not going to understand this shit. It's very peoply.

Again, not the OP on this, but just some perspectives. Maybe someone else has a great use case on people betting on weather outcomes - but what great societal use is that?