# kaal:claim:3405401-010

**Claim.** Smart contracting cannot ensure the flexibility in interpreting intent that human interaction requires, because smart contract code does not follow the same logic on similar terms as natural human language.

**Type.** failure  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- interpretation of party intent is required

**Source quote.**

> Human interaction requires flexibility in interpreting intent that cannot be ensured by smart contracting because smart contract code does not follow the same logic on similar terms as natural human language.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, *Decentralized Commerce – A Primer on Why Decentralized Reputation Verification Systems Are Needed* (2019), IV. Downsides of Smart Contracts, page 5

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Decentralized Commerce – A Primer on Why Decentralized Reputation Verification Systems Are Needed (2019). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3405401

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `bc2d6f0ddc0852fb4085c4543c7c1dec19aaf8745eb67e3acc637e552bd7fb7d` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20-%202019%20-%20Decentralized%20Commerce%20%E2%80%93%20A%20Primer%20on%20Why%20Decentralized%20Reputation%20Verification%20Systems%20Are%20Needed.pdf

**Failure mode.** intent-interpretation-gap  (family: smart-contract-rigidity)

**Topics.** smart-contracts

**Keywords.** smart-contracts, intent-interpretation, natural-language, code-limitations

**Related claims.**

- restated_by: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3406323-032
- extended_by: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3441904-031
- restated_by: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3411897-032

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.