Hacker News Reader

Ok fair. But you can formally verify your smart contracts or you can test them, so this notion of "correctness" seems orthogonal to the discussion. Even if you formally verify a normal application, you can't trust your verification once you give it to me to execute.

View on HN

The name of the thing I think you're looking for is verifiable computing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verifiable_computing

I think there's one other aspect here that needs to be considered, which is what happens when undocumented features appear, as with the Polkadot fiasco, among others, where bugs in the shared walletsplus some thirs party actions used by many led to $hundreds of millions being completely inaccessible to all (ineptness, or malice, it is not clear).

The contracts were verifiable and correct enough, it seems, but some of the infrastructure turned out to be faulty, leading to a platform that was not trustworthy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com