I think you missed the point that GP was trying to make but, don't worry, I'll gladly explain.
Crypto enthusiasts (in particular those involved with ETH) continuously push this narrative that code is law, code is law. Other people, who are less naive, immediately pointed out how that kind of "contract" would not fly in the real world with real people, because, turns out that real people make mistakes all the time and it is nice to have a social structure behind it (like a true-ish framework of law) to save your ass when you actually mess up or things do not go as the parties involved in it wanted it to go.
I can give you an embarrasingly simple example that I think anybody could understand. You go to your favorite bank to pay for something, you tell the clerk you want to put $400 in someone's account but you hand out $500 in bills. The clerk (or you) could notice this and state "hey you gave me $500, but you told me you only wanted to deposit $400, here's $100 back", and literally nothing else happens. In the crypto world you would've just lost $100. (See the news from yesterday or so, about a guy who accidentally lost half a million dollars like this).
So then, crypto enthusiasts, instead of trying to address this issue, pretty much doubled down on their foolish stance that "code is law, code is law!" and everybody involved in it then knows (or SHOULD know) that they playing with fire regarding this. And people who play with fire shouldn't be surprised if/when they burn themselves and would look quite ridiculous if they start discussing about the ethical and moral implications of fire burning stuff when it does happen.