Is Web3 genuinely breaking new ground, or are we just recreating old systems with shinier tools? Smart contracts and oracles promise a decentralized internet that serves the people, but are they leading us toward a more equitable digital landscape—or just spinning another hype narrative? Let’s take a look.
Smart contracts, hyped as the autonomous engines of Web3, are designed to execute automatically based on pre-programmed conditions. Their deterministic nature means that they operate on strict logic: if X happens, then do Y. In theory, this efficiency can streamline processes like aid distribution, bypassing traditional red tape. But I would say they are more simple than smart.
Here’s the problem: real-world issues rarely fit neatly into “if-this-then-that” conditions. Human needs evolve, and social challenges shift unexpectedly, and rigid code rarely adapts without an external input. For example, imagine an international relief aid organization that runs smart contracts that sends aid without considering what happens in the world.
This is where I see the value of oracles. Oracles provide a feed of live, real-world data, feeding smart contracts with the context they lack. While smart contracts operate within their coded boundaries, oracles allow them to respond to changes like weather shifts, public health metrics, or even the latest local news. For example, during a natural disaster, an oracle could detect rising water levels or weather reports, relaying this data to a smart contract tasked with deploying emergency funds. The contract could then release resources in response to these conditions, making relief far more timely and responsive.
Oracles undeniably offer a solution to the limitations of (dumb) smart contracts. They create a bridge between the digital and physical worlds, allowing Web3 to feel more grounded and less robotic. In a sense, they allow technology to “listen” to our world. But we need to stay aware of the problems with oracles.
We can’t ignore the “oracle problem”—the challenge of ensuring that the data oracles provide is trustworthy. I hear concerns about manipulation: if an oracle feeds incorrect or biased data into a smart contract, the entire system could be compromised, causing harm in sensitive areas like healthcare, emergency aid, or social services.
And then there’s the question of control. If a smart contract is only as good as the data it’s fed, who controls the oracle, and who determines which sources are “truthful”? The influence of these data providers could create a new form of centralization within a system that claims to be decentralized. If we’re not careful, oracles might simply shift the problem of centralized control from one place to another, undermining Web3’s vision of true autonomy.
As much as oracles can enhance Web3’s adaptability, they don’t eliminate the need for a human-centered approach. Just as Ethereum, Solana, and other Web3 platforms flirt with decentralization yet remain controlled by a few key players, oracles could easily become another layer of the same centralization, albeit wrapped in new technical jargon. As I see it, Web3’s promise of decentralization will ring hollow if we don’t ground these technologies in human values—equity, accountability, and the public good.
It’s too easy to get swept up in the hype that every new project will “change the world.” The reality is that technology alone won’t drive societal transformation; it’s the underlying principles and governance structures that will either foster inclusivity and fairness or perpetuate the same monopolies of Web2. In fact, if we allow technology to change society, without human interaction, we will likely see the end of humanity.
We need to ask hard questions of every Web3 initiative: Who benefits? Is it primarily the investors and developers, while users remain mere participants? If so, it’s likely that these projects are more about chasing profits than transforming society. It’s worth repeating.
“While technology builds the infrastructure, human values are the blueprints for the future.”
Even as we innovate, we have to remember that a better world requires that these technologies—yes, even smart contracts—adapt over time to evolving human values. Without this adaptability, they’re just programs, not solutions.
Oracles might hold the key to breaking free from Web3's deterministic confines, yet their true potential is based on more than just technological prowess. It’s how we choose to govern and ground these innovations in genuine human values that will determine their impact. Will we stand for transparency, equity, and accountability? Or will we let profit motives lead us back to centralized control under a new costume? For Web3 to build a better world, we need more than code; we need a community ready to uphold the values that technology alone can’t encode.