the GUI wallet...
 |
|
|
|
The trolling is in the form and approach, not the content.
You will have the last world as I have neither time nor eloquence to discuss that properly right now. btw English is my 3rd language, maybe I should indeed head to DOGE, it might better fit my capabilities. "Much amaze" and "such currency" looks a hell of a lot easier. Your English is better than most Americans, and conversing with me further improves your vocabulary.  Yes, I sometimes tend be a wrecking ball (and prickly when my position is misrepresented by accusations of perfection-seeking). But your asinine talking point about "trading was only closed for 2 minutes" is condemnable, and should be demolished. I did that by pointing out fortunes were made and lost in that short time, with Polo admins picking the winners and losers. Then you just dropped the argument as if you had never made it, much less read my response. That's rude, and borderline trolling. Did you make that "but but only 2 min" argument as a throw away position to waste my time? Regardless, let's be friends and get back to enjoying the rally and some quality shitposting!  |
|
|
|
I think you are expecting too much. You pretend a perfectly balanced, economically, ethically, morally and philosophically pondered decision to be made in the very moment an event of tectonic dimensions takes place in the altcoin world. At a time where nobody, apparently not even the ETH devs have really understood what is going on, much less a bunch of exchange reps who are given no information about the nature and possible cause of said event. If you were to read the rest of the log you would see how that unfolds...but you know that, right? [4:47:08 AM] Tristan D'Agosta: It is much more likely to cause market panic if the blockchain is considered unreliable [4:00:11 AM] Tristan D'Agosta: Disabling trading is about as extreme as it gets. Why are we being asked to do this? Is it only to prevent the attacker from cashing out?
[4:02:25 AM] Tristan D'Agosta: We need to know why before we do that -- we may have a better way of addressing the issue
plenty more where that came from to show that none of the exchange reps present in that chat just did what Vitalik Leninowitsch Butlerin told them to do. You have the heart in the right place but your wrecking ball method is fucking annoying and has been for a long time. Anyway I have no time for off topic troll wars. ON Topic: XMR to da moon! EDIT: for what it's worth I fully agree with you that exchanges should never halt trading as long as there isn't some serious issue with the blockchain itself! I didn't ask for perfection-on-the-fly, which is an unreasonable expectation. I asked for predetermined, optimal rules and principles to be created. Such heuristics may help even (perhaps especially) in scary, surprising, acute, unpredictable, fluid situations. Polo needs a better approach than "LOL let's just make snap decisions under enormous pressure when something happens and see how it works out." Especially when so many shitcoins they list (*cough* MAID and DASH *cough*) are overdue for DAO-type epic pwning. I told you exactly what I think and you: A. concede my heart is in the right place but (contradicting yourself) also B. flamebait by insinuating I'm trolling. If the rhetorical bombast here too much for your delicate sensibilities, you may find the lighthearted fun-and-friendship emphasis over Dogecoin is a better fit. Don't you think Polo should eschew moral hazard and confirm they will never (again) halt trading as long as there isn't some serious issue with the blockchain itself?Or is that asking for perfection?  |
|
|
|
OMG that took a while!  We're getting old and slow; gone.png postings used to happen mere nanoseconds after the latest Bitcoin debacle!  |
|
|
|
icebreaker I think it is very unsavory of you to present the events re: Poloniex and busoni's reaction out of context. Here's the full chat log for people who might be interested in the complete picture: http://pastebin.com/aMKwQcHRtrading was frozen for less than 2 minutes btw... I trust in the capability of my esteemed Monero community to build their own opinion and not run around with pitchforks and torches screaming SCANDAL. Fortunes were made and lost in those 2 minutes btw. "It was only a tiny little bit of moral hazard and arbitrary winner/loser picking" isn't a convincing reason to put down the pitchforks. I think is is very unsavory of Polo to halt trading FOR ANY AMOUNT OF TIME based on orders from "Helicopter" Buterin's Plunge Protection Team. Your distracting, myopic focus on the duration of the halt (rather than its impact on traders and the fact it happened at all) betrays the fact you don't understand how smooth's Razor applies to this situation. Only systems that are structurally incompatible with fraud don't suffer from the overhang of potential fraud. Do you think my request for Polo to create/clarify/enforce predetermined rules and principles governing similar future situations (rather than just following orders made under VB's coercive rollback extortion) is reasonable? |
|
|
|
Yes. Breaking the consensus and social covenant in Ethereum over a failed contract is the real issue here. I mean did Bitcoin fork over, pirateat40, MtGox, Silkroad in favor of the US Government, the Silkroad seizure against the US Government, etc.? No, No, No, No, ...
This also begs the question: Are all failed Ethereum contracts reversed or just those too big to fail?
Of course in Monero such selective shenanigans would be impossible because the censor would not know which transaction(s) to reverse, undo etc. It's tempting to make the point in ETH/DAO implosion discussions that if ETH was fungible it would be impossible to even consider the possibility of blacklisting "stolen" coins. But it's better to let DAOists figure that out for themselves. Also relevant to our fun "I TOLD U SO LOL" fun: Dash is DigitaltrASH. Why? Because of this: Only systems that are structurally incompatible with fraud don't suffer from the overhang of potential fraud. Smooth's Razor ®Professor l33th4x0r and LeastAuthority warned DAO about stalking attacks and called for a deployment moratorium, yet were overruled/ignored: http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/06/17/thoughts-on-the-dao-hack/No way in hell do these clowns deserve a bailout. Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.
Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations.
-Laozi |
|
|
|
Good news, everyone! /u/biglambda, the comedy genius who created intheoreum.org, is rage-quitting ETH and joining Team Mustang! He should be a good fit for Monero Mountain's thriving neckbearded turbo nrrd community, as his occupation is reportedly writing HPC compilers.  I won't be upgrading my miner to fix the DAO and here is why. self.ethereum
submitted 13 hours ago * by biglambda
I've been mining ETH since the Olympic test net and I believe in the Ethereum blockchain. This "hack" is within consensus and the results of the hack should stand on the blockchain because /u/vbuterin is not my character Bob
If this happened on the Bitcoin blockchain, the blockchain would give zero fucks about a contract regardless of it's size. And in fact in order for "crypto law" to be a possibility, the consensus must stand. The right solution for DAO holders is to negotiate with the hacker to return the funds by allowing them to keep a percentage of the stolen coins without repercussions. If you rollback the blockchain you compromise the integrity of the entire Ethereum experiment and the value of the Ether token.
Once my miner is forked off the network, I will build a Monero client and continue mining.
Soon there will be dozens of us. DOZENS!1!!  |
|
|
|
Plans for Reimbursing Exchange losses to prevent price discover-  Blacklists.  and state warrants and demands ... Oh my! "Helicopter" Buterin of the ETH Plunge Protection Team goes into action! Wow such distributed. Very autonomous! |
|
|
|
If Polo won't commit to them, I will be finding another exchange and encouraging others to do the same.
Centralized exchanges have their role and finding another one may the right call for you, but either way I would still encourage trying to build liquidity on bitsqaure. I've had offers on there at times but I was often alone on the order book and didn't get any fills. I'll continue to list when I have the opportunity to do so. How solid is the Bitsquare platform? Does it rely on "smart" contracts? How long until it supports advanced features like margin trading? Is there a testnet version to try out? Once Bitsquare is somewhat comparable/competitive feature-wise, I'd be happy to offer some XMR there at a discount, to coax volume away from the morally hazardous exchange under the command of ETH Fed Chairman Vitalik "Helicopter" Buterin. |
|
|
|
brb, need to go spend at least an hour LMAO at rbtc's ETH huffing Gavinistas!
WTF are you shilling about? I don't recall Gavin ever publicly recommending to buy into the DAO. BitcoinUserNotAffectedMeme.png You are correct, Gavin actually is very skeptical, but there are many "Gavinistas" addicted to mETH and you can see the pump on Vers forum and /btc Appears many more Classic/BU/XT supporters are also invested in mETH and there are plenty of reasons why. Never mind Gavin, ETH smart contracts were Roger VERified! Please recall Roger Ver, Brian Armstrong, Eric Voorhees, etc. spending the last year hyping Ethereum while simultaneously attacking the consensus of Bitcoin's socioeconomic majority and governance/development structures. So you'll forgive my enjoyment of Team KryptoKit's comeuppance and the resolution of the DAO experiment: |
|
|
|
|
The Code Is The Law.*
*Until someone gets butthurt.
Void where prohibited. No representation or warranty, express or implied, with respect to the completeness, accuracy, fitness for a particular purpose, or utility of these materials or any information or opinion contained herein. Actual mileage may vary. Prices slightly higher west of the Mississippi. All models over 18 years of age. No animals were harmed during the production of this product. Any resemblance to actual people, living or dead, or events, past, present or future, is purely coincidental. This product not to be construed as an endorsement of any product or company, nor as the adoption or promulgation of any guidelines, standards or recommendations. Some names have been changed to protect the innocent. This product is meant for educational purposes only. Some assembly required. Batteries not included. Package sold by weight, not volume. Contents may settle during shipment. No user-serviceable parts inside. Use only as directed.
Do not eat. Not a toy.
Postage will be paid by addressee. If condition persists, consult your physician. Subject to change without notice. Times approximate. One size fits all. Colors may, in time, fade. For office use only. Edited for television. List was current at time of printing. At participating locations only. Keep away from fire or flame. Avoid contact with skin. Sanitised for your protection. Employees and their families are not eligible. Beware of the dog. Limited time offer. No purchase necessary. Not recommended for children under 12. Prerecorded for this time zone. Some of the trademarks mentioned in this product appear for identification purposes only. Freshest if eaten before date on carton. Subject to change without notice. Please allow 4 to 6 weeks for delivery. Not responsible for direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages resulting from any defect, error or failure to perform. Slippery when wet. Substantial penalty for early withdrawal. For recreational use only. No Canadian coins. List each check separately by bank number. This is not an offer to sell securities.
Read at your own risk. Ask your doctor or pharmacist. Parental guidance advised. Always read the label. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Do not stamp. Breaking seal constitutes acceptance of agreement. Contains non-milk fat. Date as postmark. Lost ticket pays maximum rate. Use only in well-ventilated area. Price does not include taxes. Not for resale. Hand wash only. Keep away from sunlight. For a limited time only. No preservatives or additives. Keep away from pets and small children. Safety goggles required during use. If rash, irritation, redness, or swelling develops, discontinue use. Do not fold, spindle or mutilate. Please remain seated until the web page has come to a complete stop. Refrigerate after opening. Flammable. Must be 18 years or older. Seat backs and tray tables must be in the upright position. Repeat as necessary. Do not look directly into light. Avoid extreme temperatures and store in a cool dry place. No salt, MSG, artificial colouring or flavoring added. Reproduction strictly prohibited. Pregnant women, the elderly, and children should avoid prolonged exposure to this product. If ingested, do not induce vomiting. May contain nuts. Objects in mirror may be closer than they appear. Do not use if safety seal is broken.
Apply only to affected area. Do not use this product if you have high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, thyroid disease, asthma, glaucoma, or difficulty in urination. May be too intense for some viewers. In case of accidental ingestion, seek professional assistance or contact a poison control center immediately. Many suitcases look alike. Post office will not deliver without postage. Not the Beatles. Products are not authorized for use as critical components in life support devices or systems. Driver does not carry cash. Do not puncture or incinerate. Do not play your headset at high volume. Discontinue use of this product if any of the following occurs: itching, aching, vertigo, dizziness, ringing in your ears, vomiting, giddiness, aural or visual hallucinations, tingling in extremities, loss of balance or coordination, slurred speech, temporary blindness, drowsiness, insomnia, profuse sweating, shivering, or heart palpitations. Video+ and Video- are at ECL voltage levels, HSYNC and VSYNC are at TTL voltage levels. It is a violation of federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling. Intentional misuse by deliberately concentrating and inhaling the contents can be harmful or fatal. This product has been shown to cause cancer in laboratory rats. Do not use the AC adaptor provided with this player for other products.
DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE -- make depend depends on it.
Warranty does not cover normal wear and tear, misuse, accident, lightning, flood, hail storm, tornado, tsunami, volcanic eruption, avalanche, earthquake or tremor, hurricane, solar activity, meteorite strike, nearby supernova and other Acts of God, neglect, damage from improper or unauthorised use, incorrect line voltage, unauthorised use, unauthorised repair, improper installation, typographical errors, broken antenna or marred cabinet, missing or altered serial numbers, electromagnetic radiation from nuclear blasts, microwave ovens or mobile phones, sonic boom vibrations, ionising radiation, customer adjustments that are not covered in this list, and incidents owing to an airplane crash, ship sinking or taking on water, motor vehicle crashing, dropping the item, falling rocks, leaky roof, broken glass, disk failure, accidental file deletions, mud slides, forest fire, riots or other civil unrest, acts of terrorism or war, whether declared or not, explosive devices or projectiles (which can include, but may not be limited to, arrows, crossbow bolts, air gun pellets, bullets, shot, cannon balls, BBs, shrapnel, lasers, napalm, torpedoes, ICBMs, or emissions of electromagnetic radiation such as radio waves, microwaves, infra-red radiation, visible light, UV, X-rays, alpha, beta and gamma rays, neutrons, neutrinos, positrons, N-rays, knives, stones, bricks, spit-wads, spears, javelins etc.).
Other restrictions may apply. Breach of these conditions is likely to cause unquantifiable loss that may not be capable of remedy by the payment of damages.
This supersedes all previous disclaimers
Entire contents (c) 1999 by Our Group, Inc. This disclaimer is protected by copyright and its use, copying, distribution and decompilation is restricted. All rights reserved. No part of this disclaimer or any attachments may be copied or reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means, optical, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, telepathic, or otherwise, without the express witnessed and notarised prior written consent of the all holders of the relevant copyrights.
The information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. However, no warranty as to the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of such information is implied. No liability is accepted for errors, omissions or inadequacies in the information contained herein or for interpretations thereof. The reader assumes sole responsibility for the selection of these materials to achieve its intended results. The opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice.
|
|
|
|
It's also a prime example of why obscured blockchains are toast because the rot would still be in there festering and atrophying the integrity of the asset courtesy of a total absence of transparency. Atrophy is typically caused by lack of activity, not infection. I know you're all worked up into a rage-froth about the market's direction (IE, DASH COLLAPSING), but please don't ham-fistedly misuse SAT words in an attempt to look smart and convincing. Obfuscated blockchains may be proven to maintain their integrity through the use of zero knowledge proofs. ZKPs and homomorphic encryption are well known mathematical concepts. I'm not sure why you keep insisting they are some form of voodoo, and their black magic cannot be trusted. I guess it's because you're either bad a math, or holding bags of a coin threatened by superior fungibility/privacy. Your attempts to spread FUD about long-understood algebra and logic don't make increase DASH's appeal, to put it mildly. Here are two great places to start curing your superstitious fear of analysis-resistant blockchains: http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2014/11/zero-knowledge-proofs-illustrated-primer.htmlhttp://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/1710/how-to-construct-encrypted-functions-with-either-public-or-private-dataOh wait, those links are for adults. Here is one that explains like you are five years old: https://medium.com/@jinglan/how-to-explain-zero-knowledge-protocols-to-your-average-child-eb49feb4a41dAnalysis resistance is feature, not a bug. That's why Evan was going to (IE was talking about) adding ring signatures to Darkcoin. |
|
|
|
I see no circumstance under which I would ever support asking for a halt in trading on a centralized exchange. Trading on the exchange is trading book entry claims on the exchange's wallet. Even in the extreme case of a rollback or other problem affecting wallets, traders can assess the impact that might have on the solvency of an exchange and trade accordingly. However, an exchange might on its own (or in discussion with other exchanges) decide to halt trading. That's their call, it is their platform after all.
If there were a problem with the blockchain affecting (or even possibly affecting) wallets, I would support asking for (and recommending) a halt to deposits/withdrawals until it was resolved.During the initial stages of the 202612 attack exchanges may have stopped trading as we put out an general "red alert" until we actually figured out what was going on. Most decided to restart it but they kept wallet transactions on hold until bug was identified and the vulnerability deemed over. With respect to the DAO, it wasn't even a bug in the coin at all. Ethereum devs acting in that capacity shouldn't have been involved nor should they have asked exchanges to do anything in my opinion, nor should any fork, hard or soft, be on the table at all. My other (perhaps more controversial) opinion on the matter is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516067.0Needless to say I will never support a fork or rollback or any other sort of meddling with coin ownership in Monero on the basis of an external incident that was not a flaw in the implementation of the coin itself (an example of the latter being the overflow bug in Bitcoin).  I fully support the standards for halting trading, etc. you have described. If Polo won't commit to them, I will be finding another exchange and encouraging others to do the same. It's great XMR is going up so much, but right now we are printing money in a burning house. Tristan needs to assure us there will be no repeat of yesterday's intolerable, arbitrary market intervention. If Polo's solvency is not in danger, admins have no business changing the rules in the middle of the game to pick winners and losers. That's how you get your ass sued so hard you end up in a wheelchair. |
|
|
|
Do you know if Bitsquare has the ability to halt trading for a coin once it's listed?
It would be futile and self-defeating for Bitsquare devs to even try. Such an action would voluntarily relinquish their network effect, as pissed off users would quickly fork the project and simply run Bitsquare Classic or whatever. |
|
|
|
XMR has been looking strong at Polo for a while now. Why ?
Internal factors: emission dropping off, official GUI being written, I2P and 0MQ are bad ass, and RingCT is (close enough to) the Holy Grail of truly fungible ecash. The killer app for 100% fungible ecash is financial sovereignty. External factors: the market just got burned (we're talking 3rd degree oxygen chamber horror show stuff) by rushed inadequately spec'd/tested crypto. Monero is (in)famous for its mature, responsible, meticulous, cautious "no merge before its time" approach to development. We don't rush. We get it right. And Bitcoiners of all stripes are coming around to that paradigm: When (AND NOT BEFORE) we get ecash done right, then we can built smart contracts on top. Premature action is contraindicated. We are seeing the first few wispy clouds of a trillion dollar perfect Monero storm appear on the horizon. |
|
|
|
Question for XMR core devs:
Under what (if any) circumstances would you request (or like VB forcefully demand under threat of rollback) a halt to XMR activity on exchanges?
We already did this during the block 202612 attack. We asked them to halt deposits and withdrawals (but not trading!) until we figured out what was happening. The minute the fork resolved and we had a handle on what to do about it we told them they could resume. If, during that fork, an exchange had continued accepting deposits and processing withdrawals we wouldn't have stopped them, that's entirely at their own risk. Monero still has a lot of work to do, and we don't have $20 million to rest on, so I can imagine that a sophisticated attack like this might be repeated in future. As it stands right now, a resourceful attacked could probably just fork the network based on hashing power alone. Obviously we will do our utmost to ensure that this isn't possible, but if it does happen we will - again - handle things as best we see fit. We won't ever ask exchanges to pause deposits / withdrawals unless we don't know what's going on and fear that we may be under attack. Supremely informative answer, thanks! I'd forgotten the in/out halt during the troll block attack. But your retelling of the tale hits upon a critical distinction between XMR and ETH core dev's conduct/approach/attitude. XMR devs Highly Recommended exchanges halt deposits and explained the basis for that urgent suggestion, but did not Command & Demand like the ETH guys. And you didn't try to halt trading, preventing this kind of 100% bullshit scenario: [3:43:10 AM] Bill Shihara: Stopping the trading will stop the hacker from liquidating. but that may be penalizing legit traders Any exchange that penalizes legit traders to stop a hacker (especially one that only used the existing rules of a broken system to his benefit) is an amoral/unethical piece of shit. If I knew better than to trust ETH/DAO's concept/code/crypto and went short in order to make the market aware of my pertinent information, HOW DARE SOME FUCKING TWAT AT POLO HQ ARBITRARILY DECIDE TO HALT/ROLLBACK? All those presuming to force the invisible hand of the market should be pimp slapped by it until rendered unable to do further harm.  For all the cyber/cypherpunk name dropping Vitalik does, he still utterly fails to grok the ethos. And he's met Nick Szabo FFS. |
|
|
|
in my opinion DASH is the best altcoin. DASH is a shitty altcoin just waiting to be hacked, resulting in Masternodes being drained, de-anonymization, or both, or both and more! DASH takes a cavalier attitude to security. Duffiled has said (and yes, I will be digging up quotes) he's more concerned with shipping stuff ASAP than getting the code/crypto perfect. After the DAO/ETH scandal and collapse, that crap will no longer fly. Here's the issue in a nutshell: https://twitter.com/danWilcz/status/743736668901908480"#DAO vulnr validates that there is merit in having a security-first approach of #Bitcoin development"
In stark contrast to Monero, DASH does accept the merit of having a security-first approach.Back in 2014, when DASH was still called Darkcoin and before it had a bunch of feature bloat added, Kristov Atlas did a security review. Where is the security review of all the new DGBB stuff, which is EXACTLY LIKE THE STUFF THAT RUINED DAO? |
|
|
|
So I hope the classic shills that gave up and moved on to alts didn't get rid of all their BTC to get into Ethereum.
brb, need to go spend at least an hour LMAO at rbtc's ETH huffing Gavinistas! Aww, did their GMAX-stalking Blockstream-hating Core-boycotting buttcoiner portfolios lose 33% overnight? Gee, that's just too bad. Jump you fuckers! DAOobituraries.com EthereumObituraries.com KlassikObituaries.com |
|
|
|
I still struggle with how the DAO can even claim it is a problem, as the DAO terms expressly say the code supercedes the description / intent. The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAO’s code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the express terms of The DAO’s code set forth on the blockchain; to the extent you believe there to be any conflict or discrepancy between the descriptions offered here and the functionality of The DAO’s code at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413, The DAO’s code controls and sets forth all terms of The DAO Creation. https://daohub.org/explainer.htmlSo I guess future DAO will need to have a disclaimer that there are situations where the code doesn't control, and therefore you have to look to intent... Which basically means opening the same can of worms lawyers and courts have been dealing with for ages, but "smart contracts" were supposed to avoid. It would be hilarious if the "hacker" sued the DAO for breach of contract if the "stolen" funds are returned! You've hit logical bedrock following up on my bit of initial conceptual drilling. Since XMR intends to implement smart contracts, we may learn something from this DAO/ETH/POLO SNAFU ETH/DAO were marketed to investors using the USP "The Code is the Law; The transaction is the settlement; Moral hazard has no power here." The last 24 hours have destroyed that conceit. Now we will roll our eyes when we hear happy talk about permissionless leaderless decentralization. Here is the point at which that dream died: [3:41:38 AM] George Hallam [ETH] : ALL EXCHANGES: please pause ether trading as soon as possible
[3:41:56 AM] Jesse: why pause trading?
[3:41:59 AM] Aurélien MENANT: done :p
[3:42:56 AM] Tristan D'Agosta: That's a pretty serious measure, is the stolen ETH moving?
[3:42:57 AM] Alex Hanin: Can you please elaborate on this pause?
[3:42:58 AM] dino: ALL EXCHANGES EMERGENCY PAUSE TRADING RIGHT NOW
[3:43:01 AM] Vitalik Buterin: ok can you guys stop trading
[3:43:05 AM] Tristan D'Agosta: Okay
[3:43:10 AM] Bill Shihara: Stopping the trading will stop the hacker from liquidating. but that may be penalizing legit traders significantly
[3:43:11 AM] Vitalik Buterin: and deposits and withdrawals
[3:43:18 AM] dino: ALL EXCHANGES STOP WITHDRAWALS RIGHT NOW EMERGENCY
[3:43:25 AM] Tristan D'Agosta: Okay, not trading then... http://pastebin.com/aMKwQcHR
Question for XMR core devs:
Under what (if any) circumstances would you request (or like VB forcefully demand under threat of rollback) a halt to XMR activity on exchanges? fluffypony must be enjoying this schadenfreude at VB's expense! |
|
|
|
Where's primer-? Bad day for Ethereum. Vitalik did the right thing, miners make the final decision and so far there seems to be a consensus. I haven't sold a single ether and i hold almost $500k usd worth (@ 0.028). I am more confident than ever that in 2-3 months, with Coinbase's support, we are to see a new ATH.. On another note, Monero pump looking better than ever! I'd love to see .003 soon! Vitalik did everything wrong. Last night the potential conflicts-of-interest created by his vast personal holdings of ETH and DAO were actualized. He should have told DAO to FOAD. Instead he made a bad situation much worse by throwing exchange operators and users under the bus in a vain attempt to save ETH's highest-profile project. DAO's incompetent devs and greedy bagholders are solely responsible for the consequences of this fiasco. But now we have moral hazard spreading to ETH and exchanges as the rot spreads upward. Is this type of situation going to happen again? It seems inevitable, given all the dubious low-security shitcoins Polo lists, one or more will be hacked in the future. When MAID and DASH get hacked, will Polo freeze trading, etc for tangentially related coins like BTC, forcing traders to lock in their losses? This godawful precedent implies the answer is yes, they will. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
