Smart contracts rely on a trusted ledger. The original smart-contract discussions in the 90s were in the context of a contract between various users in virtual open-world games, enforced by the trusted game server. This setting also meant that many of the lame parts of EVM, like the inability to represent capabilities or to protect cryptographic secrets, were supplanted by the game server's encapsulated backend logic and database.

Blockchains and smart contracts don't have to be related at all.

Yes, I read the article because I always try to be a skeptic, but smart contracts is where the author goes off the rails.

Then he ties in crypto currency volatility and Mt Gox as part of its “trust” failures. Being able to trust the results of a block chain does not mean that people will value any currency based at the same price from day to day, or that people who offer to trade and store that currency got you will be competent and honest.