I will keep on mining the Etheruem in the future. I will save some for the long term and become PoS stake.
It may be shrewd to mine (if you insist), sell now, and rebuy later when the market settles out. Eth is most likely going down, bitcoin is most likely going up, and you could have more eth that what you would have been able to mine if you do this correctly. |
|
|
|
So the miners having 51% mining power can decide the fork or any code any way. There is no moral hazard. There is no argument at all. You just need to convince the majority of the miners.
Somebody here actually understands PoW = miners are a "decentralized authority". Ethereum miners have started voting in some pools on the "soft fork"... The "soft fork" simply freezes all ETH transfers from the DAO contract (rendering the current "attacks" unprofitable)... And there are roughly another 25 days left for miners to simply set a flag that locks up the DAO. Ethpool is voting 99.4% in favor of a "soft fork" here: http://ethpool.org/stats/votesLooking at these numbers... It's very likely miners will subsequently vote in a "hard fork" that will destroy the DAO... and return all ETH to investors. Ethereum will not suffer from the same paralysis Bitcoin did post-Gox... and still does. All the FUD you hear about "crypto purity" is from Bitcoin Maximalist Trolls... Miners acting as a "decentralized authority" on ANY issue is at the heart of PoW. Yes, the eth may be returned, but will the gesture ever be forgotten? Will the confidence in the system (and how easily it can be manipulated, apparently) ever be restored? Like you have said with Gox, no I don't believe so. But consider this: bitcoin had been around for quite some time with a much more active user base, and it's taken this long to shake off the shadow of Gox. How long will it take Ethereum, something so new and untried? |
|
|
|
I just want to know who are the fucktards still buying ETH at the current prices.
The answer was in your question  but seriously, those are the vultures, thinking there are bones at pick. It's going to get much leaner when they publically announce the forkage decision. Basically, if you are buying now, you are assuming this is the bottom (it's not). |
|
|
|
What we're seeing here is bad sportsmanship. A ruthless minority of people seem to have forgotten good old-fashioned virtues. They just can't stand seeing the other fellow win.  Your name is fucking hilarious, and while I do think this was mean spirited (gaining so much value/loosing said value for your brother), this was legal on the surface (a lot of legal precedent is going to be set with the ensuing case this breeds). Someone has to test the limits in a meaningful way in order to force change. I wouldn't have done this myself, but I don't judge this fellow. He will deal with all that at the end of him. The apparent "win" was a hollow victory. An overvalued, broken thing was being sold to the masses with the assurance of quality. That the price now reflects the state of the product is simply the way things work. |
|
|
|
You have to be kidding me. I mean, intellectually I know the hole in the code still exists, but really? This happened twice? And might be happening all the way to this fork business? This DAO thing to s going to be an expensive mistake. We will see if eth can decouple from this DAO madness eventually, the trust us shot to shit  |
|
|
|
Flawless victory..Mircea wins  So do we have proof that Mircea did this? He's not my favorite person, I will admit, but he does get a cookie if he managed to pull this off. He's a bit histrionic for my taste. The legalness of the "attack" got murky when the "attacker" put in the order for the eth short. Curious to see if using that information, or dissemination of it to others, constitutes insider trading. |
|
|
|
|
Polo is actually pretty solid on customer support imo, current fiasco aside, they seem like they would be extremely helpful if someone got inadvertently blocked and it was not obvious they weren't malicious. But, these are strange times right now.
Now if this was yobit...
|
|
|
|
The issue now is with DAO, not Ether.
Incorrect. Okay. That is too technical. It is beyond my understanding. Do you mind explaining it in layman terms or, at least in bachelor's level? Does this help? http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/blogger/2008/01/19/how-dr-suess-would-prove-the-halting-problem-undecidable/Scooping the Loop Snooper an elementary proof of the undecidability of the halting problem Geoffrey K. Pullum, University of Edinburgh No program can say what another will do. Now, I won’t just assert that, I’ll prove it to you: I will prove that although you might work til you drop, you can’t predict whether a program will stop. Imagine we have a procedure called P that will snoop in the source code of programs to see there aren’t infinite loops that go round and around; and P prints the word “Fine!” if no looping is found. You feed in your code, and the input it needs, and then P takes them both and it studies and reads and computes whether things will all end as they should (as opposed to going loopy the way that they could). Well, the truth is that P cannot possibly be, because if you wrote it and gave it to me, I could use it to set up a logical bind that would shatter your reason and scramble your mind. Here’s the trick I would use – and it’s simple to do. I’d define a procedure – we’ll name the thing Q – that would take any program and call P (of course!) to tell if it looped, by reading the source; And if so, Q would simply print “Loop!” and then stop; but if no, Q would go right back to the top, and start off again, looping endlessly back, til the universe dies and is frozen and black. And this program called Q wouldn’t stay on the shelf; I would run it, and (fiendishly) feed it itself. What behaviour results when I do this with Q? When it reads its own source, just what will it do? If P warns of loops, Q will print “Loop!” and quit; yet P is supposed to speak truly of it. So if Q’s going to quit, then P should say, “Fine!” – which will make Q go back to its very first line! No matter what P would have done, Q will scoop it: Q uses P’s output to make P look stupid. If P gets things right then it lies in its tooth; and if it speaks falsely, it’s telling the truth! I’ve created a paradox, neat as can be – and simply by using your putative P. When you assumed P you stepped into a snare; Your assumptions have led you right into my lair. So, how to escape from this logical mess? I don’t have to tell you; I’m sure you can guess. By reductio, there cannot possibly be a procedure that acts like the mythical P. You can never discover mechanical means for predicting the acts of computing machines. It’s something that cannot be done. So we users must find our own bugs; our computers are losers! . Too long, did actually read; now head hurts and nose is bleeding. But seriously, thank you, that Turing completeness shit was jibber jabber nonsense until that poem. I get it now  |
|
|
|
so if they agree and hat they shake hands, they will move on then. lol
those who dumped their DAOs are going to really regret for life. They should really buy back now.
No, they shouldn't. It's not done going down, and who would hold this asset knowing the issues it has, that are still unresolved (and will be for weeks)? You guys don't give up, I'll give you that. |
|
|
|
Troll box on polo muttering refund. What is the word? Price is flying back upwards.
First I've heard of this. Is this even possible, given the enormity of the funds invested in this project? I'm cruising reddit looking for any mentions of this. Keep us informed |
|
|
|
@alyssa85 You are probably Smart enought to realise its most likely a fud message for obvs reasons
Those 2000 BTC worth that was reportedly short ETH just before the attack. Now he gets the capitulation to $7 or $1, so he can cash out BTC. And assuming he was highly leveraged on the shorts, when he covers that will probably be the bottom. He might even go long ETH if it overshoots to the bottom side and he wants to profit off any bounce. Also others who probably went short on the initial deadcat bounce after the flash crash to $13. But remember don't buy until there is blood in the streets. It must get very bloody and many must panic before it is a nobrainer buy. I didn't know about this short business, now this is starting to feel like an inside job. Surely the SEC/FBI will investigate the person(s) responsible for placing the order, if this were an SEC regulated asset that would be a no brainier. |
|
|
|
I can not understand where it comes from so much gloating. Like paid campaigns.
It's a great way to run up post count, say 'I told you so' and get out your maladaptive feelings for the day. Paid trolling! Yes. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin...ETH seems a bit riskier after the recent hacks.
Eth will be cool to invest in again, eventually. R3 still has a dog in this fight, as well as Microsoft's Azure Project. It's gonna go really, really low however; especially if they drag this decision out the full 27 days. Someone presented a trinary option in another thread for the paths Eth could take with this; they all end with loss of investor confidence, and massive asset devaluation. Kinda wish this DAO shit and Eth weren't so inexorably linked, no? |
|
|
|
Where do you all think these bad dev's from before that got hacked went ? They made new coins then cried..  ETH = DEAD You're the tard spreading lies and FUD. Classy nice guy ain't yah. Nope. You still defending this mess Mine? Despite how grave the warning was about this DAO thing, it was real. In retrospect, that make Spoet and Roach kind of right. I'm not trolling you, its just, this shit is dead in the water now. It will be awhile before there is sufficient trust in eth again. The slock.it dao will be the temporary laughingstock of the traditional finance world, and we will all move on. Until someone tries this again. |
|
|
|
I am going to say it straightly, 0.05 BTC.
There is a panic now, you guys are not wrong, hard-soft fork, eth pos etc. bla bla bla.
But after the dust, eth will see an all time high. Sorry.
The DAO bad news is a big challenge to ETH. If this matter gets resolved, there is a good chance that ETH will continue its uptrend. If this bad news drags on, there is a good chance this coin will follow the footsteps of Litecoin. Unless something else replaces Ethereum as the leading marketcap for smart contracts, then Ethereum will recover as Bitcoin did. Litecoin apparently lost its main raison d'etre which was those who were pumping BTC to $1200 needed a highly liquid coin to exit into and it had served as a home for displaced GPU miners when Bitcoin ASICs appeared. This is assuming there isn't some insoluble technical issues, such as this one I opined about: The only way it is fixed is by the ecosystem maturing and having a wide diversity of smart contracts (many of which have been well vetted) so that the failure of any one of them can't impact the ETH price significantly. And I think also Ethereum might have a problem where bad contracts can infect other contracts, so that may prevent the ecosystem from ever being NOT TOO BIG TO FAIL (I need to research this more).
We don't need smart contracts so nothing needs to replace ETH.. And i doubt anybody is going to be interested in smart contracts for a long time. Smart contract = gimmick shit decentralized currency= very important Take home idea: we really don't need smart contracts. The Oracles cause centralization issues, and while smart contracts sound sharp, I really don't see a reasonable use case outside of finance/law (where the Oracle would be subject to regulation, and therefore would have the proper motivation to behave) Indeed, bitcoin had Gox, but Gox was intentional. This is almost like criminal negligence. |
|
|
|
Ethereum, DAO, and all related alternative cryptos are nothing more than hyped up shitcoins. None of this shit actually does anything. The whitepapers and theories and all that junk is just a bunch of garbage to convince more idiots to hop on their stupid altcoin train. The only reason why people invest in altcoins at all is to make a profit, none of them have life changing capabilities. If you want to invest in a feel good project that you think can make an blockchain-based impact, you should be looking into Bitcoin startups.
This hack should open eyes up to the worthlessness of Bitcoin's competitors, expect Ethereum to fall, and fall, and fall.
Amen. Give this man a cookie. One of the mall sized ones with the icing. Smart contracts, among some of the other hyped up crockery that has been served up here, sounds great on paper, but really doesn't do anything for real life use. It's all really sci fi, alot of these coins will be cool as hell later in the game. But after we figure out and apply block chain tech, not in its infancy like right now. This technology is less than a decade old. Give it some time to change the world, and focus on the most tangible offering, not some of these ephemeral alts that rise up in the night. Think of what all that dao money could have done for a good block chain project. That would have helped bitcoin, eth, and crypto in general. |
|
|
|
Simmer down man everyone knows this is an eth problem. Unfortunately for the eth camp, this dao thing isn't going to get any trust from anyone anytime soon. The dao shit the bed on this one eth may rise, but since eth and the dao are so inexorably linked, eth is going to be sitting in that same bed for a time. The fact that bitcoin is winning ATM isn't helping anything as far as eth is concerned. But as far as the DAO, at least the slock.it offering, that ship has been sunk. |
|
|
|
Observation: All of a sudden the theoretical discussions we've been having here look like they are getting a lot less theoretical over in The DAO and Ethereum. Many of the same principles and arguments apply. Will be _very_ interesting seeing how that pans out.
I do think it would be constructive for dev teams to take these situations into consideration and have a plan and/or stated policy in place for how to cope with "existential threat" hacks like this. If we all knew beforehand that coins would be burned, or that there would be a drive to do a rollback in specific situations, or some other course, even if we didn't agree with the policy at least it would be a lot more fair to know it beforehand. Everyone would know what they are getting into, instead of this "make it up as we go along" approach that we are seeing with Ether.
Pride, is always the last sin you see before they fall there was entirely too much investment into something so unproven, if they had righteous intentions they would have capped the funding at something reasonable (could have still been a ground breaking amount). But you are right, it is quite funny how things come to pass. |
|
|
|
every cryptocurrency it's a clone of bitcoin but bitcoin is much better and also expencive , as we can see price nowdays is around $700.
Stability, non volatility, and consensus. That's why bitcoin is the most trusted, and will remain the most trusted til the end (or some groundbreaking exploit). |
|
|
|
This is a good example of why Bitcoin cannot and will never hard fork, it would forever destroy confidence in the currency.
It may be annoying to have expensive fees and unreliable confirmations, but it is simply too late to make any changes to the Bitcoin without a collapse.
Exactly. It may have flaws, but those flaws are known and compensated for. People want consistantcy in the assets they trust their money to. This dao fiasco was an unknown unknown. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
