You, as the user, can see those functions and choose not to use those contracts. With a closed source or black box api you don’t have that power as an individual

So in this wonderful future we're building anyone who wants to safely execute a transaction should be a specifically skilled programmer? Sounds more dystopian than other possibilities

You mean how in the current world we live in to do pretty much anything you need to know how to boot up a computer, login, open up a web browser, connect to a remote server over a tcp protocol, navigate through a series of special documents rendered by the browser, access a separate protocol called email, reopen a hyperlink from the email in a new instance of a web browser, and then finally you can actually do something?

The reason all those things are so easy to do is down to years of work optimising the UI and handling errors well- we’ll get there with smart contracts too one day

I get what you mean, I feel like transparency should never be a "if you're in the know you're protected, if not you're taking a gamble".

This is probably a good case for natural language as a program. If smart contracts can be immutable natural language contracts that can be proven to compile to code in a repeatable manner then we're making progress.

Couldn't you say the same thing about the long legal documents that we all sign when signing up for commercial banking products?

We're all legally protected from unfair or arduous clauses in contracts because of legislation.

Pause functions are actually considered a matter of best practice. It's a way of mitigating the contract's risk. Now, who gets control of the pause function is an entirely separate discussion worth having. The controlling address could be a contract implementing a multisig scheme, allowing for the decision to be made by more than just a single individual.

https://consensys.github.io/smart-contract-best-practices/ge...