The DAO FAIL

[spartak_t]

This one is a $174Mn FAIL!



"One of the greater experiments of the decade finds itself in limbo as the DAO token holders weigh solutions to a number of attack vectors exposed by Emin Gün Sirer, Vlad Zamfir and others.

Attacks against the DAO

“There are so many attacks against the DAO that some of them cancel each other out,” said Sirer in a recent interview. Such as the stalker attack which may allow an attacker to steal your money when you try to withdraw DAO tokens through a split function.”

“It’s a race condition,” says Sirer, comparing it to Microsoft’s blue screen of death, “it’s just not good system design.”

“Building a solution to this is very, very easy,” says Zamfir. “Having a withdraw function would be a very elegant fix.” Other attack vectors may take months, but “unlikely to take more than a year” according to Sirer.

Moratorium to freeze the DAO’s activities

The DAO functions through token holders voting for proposals with a minimum quorum of 20%, but there is a bias towards voting yes, say researchers, as a ‘no’ vote may aid in reaching the quorum.

Out of 59 proposals the most popular is a moratorium to freeze the DAO’s activities until solutions are implemented. With only three days to go it has 7.24% of the quorum, despite receiving wide publicity. Most have voted in favour by a wide margin, but there are proposals where the ‘no’ vote has far more support, such as almost 85% voting against a proposal for curators to hire contractors to fix the DAO for 5,000 Ether. Few seem to suggest that a ‘yes’ bias does not exist with other more direct flaws such as the inability to withdraw funds after voting even if you are against the proposal.

“There are techniques from game theory for how to solve [the attack vectors], but evolving from where we are now to all of those is not a two-week patch – there is some thought to be given,” says Sirer in an Epicenter Bitcoin interview.

Key solutions and Slock.it

One method may be to upgrade the code, but that would require a 53% quorum which may not be reached. Another solution suggested by Alex van de Sande, one of the DAO curators, is creating a set of guidelines and a smart contract template for business proposals to address the attack vectors as a temporary solution until the DAO is upgraded.   

The proposals guideline suggestion is supported by Slock.it, the creator of the DAO, and therefore may find wide agreement, but ironing out the details may prove a tricky task and may take some time. Token holders are, however, growing impatient. On the DAO slack channel there are numerous complaints about what some perceive as a limbo, with Griff Green, a spokesman for Slock.it, stating that they were waiting for the curators.

The future of DAO depends on the community’s response

The uncertainty is reflected on DAO’s price which stands below parity at around 0.9 ether per 100 tokens even though some bought at 1.5 ether during the ‘creation’ period. However, a shaky start is to be expected as the DAO’s wild success in raising 12 million ether took everyone by surprise, bringing in far more scrutiny and careful analysis of its many aspects.

The current difficulties, therefore, may just be the start, but the real test lies in the community’s response. Specifically, whether they will stand up to the challenges, or turn against each other as they vie for the money."

Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/fixing-dao-will-take-months-communitys-response-is-crucial

[1713975768]

1713975768

[1713975768]

1713975768

[Wind_FURY]

This is a good opportunity for other devs to create their own DAO. Maybe Lisk devs should start creating one. This is a massive opportunity to get a better one out in the market. 

[Minecache]

This is a good opportunity for other devs to create their own DAO. Maybe Lisk devs should start creating one. This is a massive opportunity to get a better one out in the market. 

The LISK goons can't even run a website or create a functioning wallet. But yeah why don't these clowns copy others great ideas.

[Spoetnik]

This is a good opportunity for other devs to create their own DAO. Maybe Lisk devs should start creating one. This is a massive opportunity to get a better one out in the market.  

The LISK goons can't even run a website or create a functioning wallet. But yeah why don't these clowns copy others great ideas.

You mean copy a web site and fork the code from a wallet ?
Yeah those are some real impressive ETHEREUM accomplishments.
Is there a DAPP for that ?

So when does ETH take over for Bitcoin (like you been saying all along with 20 accounts)
I am still waiting..

I would expect the price of ETH to surpass Bitcoins compared to the US dollar.
How are those grandiose predictions of your coming along kid ?

Oh and if you want to sound smart you should not mix up the concepts of web design and coding.
Contrary to MCXnow they are are separate issues entirely.

Still not sure why you think anyone should listen to a loud mouth anonymous NOOB account
who has done nothing in this very short time since the pump & dump you showed up for.
Can i ask why you showed up with a bunch of other dummy fake accounts you control during
the recent big hype spam Bitcointalk Ethereum campaign ?
How much did they pay you minecache (or should i use one of your other names?)

Stay in your Big top clown.. this ain't a circus & no one wants your ICO scam coin !
And please DO STFU with the moronic predictions for your grand ICO pyramid scam block chain token thingy.
Everyone already bought and dumped for their uber elite profits and don't give two shits about it anymore.
Hell.. even V. Butterin himself admitted he dump on you all  

Someone open a window it reeks like desperate bag hold NOOB ACCOUNT scam "token" pusher in here !

EDIT:
@OP
Good info ..thanks for posting it

[BillyBobZorton]

The problem with investing in something like DAO is the risk reward may be big in short them, but stuff like this is prone to flash crash. They still have to fix some fundamental issues with ETH before considering this DAO thing imo.

[jmpFCE2]

UHUH , DAO and ETH still every faecescoin's wetdream while rising slowly , HF

[spartak_t]

.. but stuff like this is prone to flash crash...

Of course. Technology is becoming more and more sophisticated. I'm kinda against that, because majority of the people are not "geeks". This could be a big problem for Bitcoin (and others), since it is cryptocurrencies against fiat money "thing" (i.e. people vs. banks). Making things more hard to understand will eventually interfere the adoption of the cryptocurrencies (at least in the way we see it now, because in the future, the banks can use the technology for themselves and the ordinary guy will be screwed... again). Maybe current technologies may find its use in 5-10-20 years (who knows...), but not now...  

[kaconk]

1 fail, 2 fail, much fail 

[benthach]

this whole ethocreampie ecosystem included the daos are useless and worthless craps, without the whales to manipulates the fake volume it's already dead long ago. whales are now moving to legitimate platform like LISK

[spartak_t]

this whole ethocreampie ecosystem included the daos are useless and worthless craps, without the whales to manipulates the fake volume it's already dead long ago. whales are now moving to legitimate platform like LISK

And how exactly LISK proved to be legitimate?

[Malayko]

I just read a good article on coindesk regarding this. Personally I did not invest any eth into dao.
I may later on if it proves to be legit.

[spartak_t]

I just read a good article on coindesk regarding this. Personally I did not invest any eth into dao.
I may later on if it proves to be legit.

The question is not if its legit or not. The question is that they raised $174Mn, yet allowed this to happen. Its like inventing a tank for $174Mn, but then it turns out that you can stop it with knife...

[x13]

I mean it is too early to say. But from the economical site the ICO was not a hit yet. And I doubt it will get better in the next weeks.
The main problem is that there are less projects DAO could invest in. Sock.it is the only one that is mentionable but besides this there isn't nothing yet.

[iamnotback]

So the new normal is write 2080 lines of code (less code than I write in a week) and raise $168 million or don't write any code and use someone else's code and raise $15 million:

Just stay away if you're not invested or slowly sell them without upsetting the price if you're holding them. You are missing the opportunity to invest in other more profitable prospects. Looking at github they have been working on these projects but without any solid results yet. So it might better to wait until they have something to show for and check of their assets are worth to invest in.

Such as Waves which apparently raised $15 million for vaporware and selling a crowdsale pitching IOHK's open source code (and which jl777 was said to be advisor):

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1504381.msg15138357#msg15138357

And Lisk which raised $10 million apparently still has problems in the functioning of the wallet:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1504381.msg15139560#msg15139560

Or The DAO which raised $168 million with only 2080 lines of sol code:

https://github.com/slockit/DAO

Seems these days it is better to be good at marketing and selling ideas than actual code that is stable and ready for the launch.

[gogodr]

What kind of project are they allowed to invest in. Is there some sort of criteria?

[Minecache]

This is a good opportunity for other devs to create their own DAO. Maybe Lisk devs should start creating one. This is a massive opportunity to get a better one out in the market.  

The LISK goons can't even run a website or create a functioning wallet. But yeah why don't these clowns copy others great ideas.

You mean copy a web site and fork the code from a wallet ?
Yeah those are some real impressive ETHEREUM accomplishments.
Is there a DAPP for that ?

So when does ETH take over for Bitcoin (like you been saying all along with 20 accounts)
I am still waiting..

I would expect the price of ETH to surpass Bitcoins compared to the US dollar.
How are those grandiose predictions of your coming along kid ?

Oh and if you want to sound smart you should not mix up the concepts of web design and coding.
Contrary to MCXnow they are are separate issues entirely.

Still not sure why you think anyone should listen to a loud mouth anonymous NOOB account
who has done nothing in this very short time since the pump & dump you showed up for.
Can i ask why you showed up with a bunch of other dummy fake accounts you control during
the recent big hype spam Bitcointalk Ethereum campaign ?
How much did they pay you minecache (or should i use one of your other names?)

Stay in your Big top clown.. this ain't a circus & no one wants your ICO scam coin !
And please DO STFU with the moronic predictions for your grand ICO pyramid scam block chain token thingy.
Everyone already bought and dumped for their uber elite profits and don't give two shits about it anymore.
Hell.. even V. Butterin himself admitted he dump on you all  

Someone open a window it reeks like desperate bag hold NOOB ACCOUNT scam "token" pusher in here !

EDIT:
@OP
Good info ..thanks for posting it

Now others and I know 100% that you are full of nothing but FUD because I only have, and need, 1 account here as any admin can verify through IP address. You really are a prize goon. What's wrong, can't afford any new clown shoes?

[stoat]

Better sell your shitcoins to buy ETH.

ETH made all your shitcoins obsolete, thats why the scammers and shit devs on this forum MAD AS HELL about ethereum

[Spoetnik]

Better sell your shitcoins to buy ETH.

ETH made all your shitcoins obsolete, thats why the scammers and shit devs on this forum MAD AS HELL about ethereum

Did you post on the wrong topic smart guy ?

And your statement is obviously bloody stupid..

minecache, you are a liar.

kind of like when you lied and said IBM & Microsoft are using ETH.

[spartak_t]

Better sell your shitcoins to buy ETH.

ETH made all your shitcoins obsolete, thats why the scammers and shit devs on this forum MAD AS HELL about ethereum

Maybe I should have launched a moderated topic. Are you 12? We currently have a $174Mn problem, which can cause huge negative impact on the future of cryptocurrencies and such statements are unnecessary!

[Spoetnik]

I get what you posted and why to some extent tech wise anyway LOL
You can see many of these assholes around here are not interested in talking Crypto.
They really do just come here to spam and play cheerleader and cry FUD for bucks.

@OP
Your comment you told that guy.. it doesn't matter if it's scam or not was correct.
But good luck trying to have an intelligent UNBIASED conversation around here about it.

The plague that has persisted around here since day one is NEVER admit fault.
The name of the game is deny deny deny ..then Cry Troll & FUD.
Meanwhile the security is compromised and the bad guys are exploiting
and the nubs are left in the dark about the issue having to go deaf listening to FUD babies crying.

[freshman777]

this whole ethocreampie ecosystem included the daos are useless and worthless craps, without the whales to manipulates the fake volume it's already dead long ago. whales are now moving to legitimate platform like LISK

And how exactly LISK proved to be legitimate?

benthach invested in it, seems legit.

[iamnotback]

5. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO). Technically the idea that investors buy a colored coin which enables them to vote on how the funds (denominated in which every token was exchanged for the colored tokens) are spent, and to sell this colored coin at-will on the market. Issues:

• Game theory appears to be insolubly broken in that "No" votes are more expensive/risky than selling your vestment. There doesn't appear to be any remedy because even holding up funds for a grace period doesn't stop the run on the price after the "Yes" on a stupid proposal. However, I thought of a possible mitigation is to limit the value of proposals that can be voted on simultaneously, so that no bad outcome can't drastically impact the price. But this doesn't mitigate the game theory that there is an incentive for those who want to steal the funds to buy up the colored tokens so they can influence the outcome of the votes and those who see it has been infiltrated have more incentive to just sell than to fight, thus the infiltrators get to buy the tokens at cheaper and cheaper prices and yet the funds they control does not diminish in value. The game theory seems insolubly broken.
  
  Eric S. Raymond wrote about the Iron Law of Political Economics, and it is always a power vacuum. When pooling funds, the game theory is a mess.
• Organization is the antithesis of decentralization. Business projects require cohesion and continuity with fluidity of decision making. There is no way to make this into a decentralized structure which doesn't destroy the essence of efficiency of production. Production is highly interactive and collaborative. The time lag in the communication overload of the Mythical Man Month can render a project into gridlock oscillation between competing options. Top-down voting is top-down governance, which is the antithesis of decentralized production. Decentralized version control open source (DVCS) solves this discord to obtain resonance by allowing every participant to have their own perspective on changesets. DAO is entirely wrong model for decentralized production. It fights against everything we learned with decentralized open source development, which is that the individual should be empowered to act independently.
• Note I could envision tracking investment, decentralizing the trading of the shares (colored tokens), voting on a board, and distribution of dividends. But this voting on each proposal as a flat democracy does not work.

it is hype for scam purpose only

In the case of DAO, Slock.it, and Augur, then that seems to be the case. There is no valid use case which isn't game theory broken for those. Expect The DAO to eventually collapse in a massive clusterfuck of theft and waste with most losing their money. Wise people would get the hell out of The DAO as fast as they can, because the DAO is broken in the sense that you can be jammed from exiting.

Decentralized crowd funding might be viable.

I see the DAO as a game of who can compromise it first and cash out the funds to themselves.

Yup that is what it appears to be. But can you fathom what this is going to do to all the bagholders and to ETH.

I got your point that maybe there is some game theory to how long you stay vested. You like Russian Roulette I guess.

The SEC will be coming... this is the event that will start the SEC's involvement in actively regulating CC. Thanks to Vitalik and Tual.

[danel]

I don't consider DAO as fail, give it few more months it will surely come back stronger and better after all known issues have been fixed.

[iamnotback]

I don't consider DAO as fail, give it few more months it will surely come back stronger and better after all known issues have been fixed.

The game theory issues appear to be fundamental. Meaning they can not be fixed.

It is analogous to wanting to build a skyscaper to the moon. We can't do it. No matter how good our technology is.

Some things are truly impossible.

[gustav]

I don't consider DAO as fail, give it few more months it will surely come back stronger and better after all known issues have been fixed.

You can't fix humans. Even if all technicals were resolved (which they won't be) you still have the errors and loopholes in the democratic process. It takes a few people and a good understanding about the inherent weaknesses of majority-votes to let a small group of knowing people steer this to their liking. Most people lack basic knowledge about democracy to understand it's failing either way.
You just don't consider it a fail because you don't have all relevant info.
Sorrry, i don't have time to discuss democratic weaknesses and exploits in all depth currently but the dao is cerrtainly open to more attacks than one could count. There are so many angles from which to attack this, it's totally incredible.
People throwing such huge money at it shows how massive the amount of stupid money in crypto really is. Boggles the mind.

[iamnotback]

Yet, to keep The DAO from capsizing, Tual said he thinks members need to accomplish three objectives – rounding out its list of curators, amending its governance model to see after the concerns of voting members and investing in sound business ideas.

Bribe the curators.

This is just the corruption of government we are all fighting to remove with block chains and then we bring it right back again and place this $150+ million UNREGULATED honeypot to attract the flies.

Since it is unregulated, the criminal mindsets will be drawn to this like flies to honey.

It is just a matter of time before The DAO is in political bickering and probably worse with the power vacuum being always a "winner take all" phenomenon.

[Spoetnik]

Lessons will learned and a few guys have been giving warnings to the LOUD masses
..that falls on deaf ears of course.
As usual and as always these dipshits in crypto act like obnoxious mouthy brats defending "their coin"
then VANISH when they have dumped (probably hopping to another Alternate Forum account for shilling game round #2)

What i am getting from this topic and the replies (that matter and have some intelligence)
Is that, knowing what you are investing in has become now more than ever tantamount !
It's just not an option anymore to blindly invest in what ever is on Poloniex etc.
OR... risk getting burned hard !

So what we have is people peering into the tech.. REAL REALITY
Vs. the dipshits you see on this very topic spouting off like a cat scratching you Shilling it up with personal attacks.
Shows their incessant bag holding paid hype campaign shilling agenda's.

I don't base my opinion on people solely by their support for a coin.
But by the quality of their comments..
And i would never in million years have a shred of respect for the whole crew of irritating
obnoxious brat shills like stout minecache & about a dozen other accounts.
(if you covered their names you can NOT tell them apart) suspicious ? uhh yeah LOL
Here is an example of more of this brats childish name calling shill stupidity.. for ETH of course.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1387036.msg14105080#msg14105080

When the SEC comes knocking i hope he is 2nd to get led away in cuffs (after Butterin)
Who knows.. maybe HE IS Butterin ROFL

People take my commentary as my personal opinion.
I know i have a unique perspective on things a lot less so smarts on the tech.

Other guys here are crypto tech wizards and know this the code far better than i ever will.
Because they did the work.. and when those guys are raising red flags on ETH & DAO
i suggest you listen  


Fear Uncertainty & Doubt ?

The only guys that ever cried FUD were doing it to smooth over a scam coin.
Further more they don't even know what it means and have actually tried to redefine the word  

You bet your god damn bloody ass there should be FUD !
Looking at the actual thing in question combined with the savage amount of risk
and the overall context and history of these "scheme coins" <-- made up new term just now
then fuck yes there should be FUD.. and LOTS OF IT !

By my estimates (before ETH / DAO / LISK / Waves / ICO #3,023 / ICO #3,024 etc)
We all in Crypto had already been burned by around a BILLION dollars usd $$$$$$
Never mind gambling sites other misc services escrows etc.

So tell me smart fuckers when do *YOU* have F.U.D. ?

If you looked around and did not have any FUD i would have to think your a brain damaged retard
..or a thief.


Spoetnik'ism Dictionary Definition: "Scheme Coin"

/skēm/koin/

A block-chain based alleged currency with some gimmick that was distributed via an ICO
A scam coin solely for the purpose of trading on centralized exchanges for profit $$$

.

[spartak_t]

Call me stupid, but I have never ever researched Ethereum, the DAO and such (I will not mention others), because of two simple reasons:
1. They are gathering vast amount of money via IPOs/crowdsales. I'm not against that! Funding projects its not a bad thing, but not at this stage of life of the cryptocurrencies, and not with that kind of money! If Bill Gates or Warren Buffett (I'm just giving an example) decide to throw money into a project, then I'm all okay with that! I will even invest! I just believe that if we "do it for the sake of cryptocurrencies", then it can be done with a lot less money. Currently people are throwing their 0.001 BTC holdings with the only hope to make profit firstly in fiat money, and secondly in Bitcoin. This is not the way!
2. How come a project claims to be "decentralized", yet it has CEOs, CTOs, CFOs, CMO etc...?! HOW THE F* THIS WORKS?

Houston, we have a problem here and this problem refers to all of us. No matter which coin/token/asset/somethingdumb you are supporting!!!

[iamnotback]

Thanks for sharing that epistle from CIYAM (community can be decentralized with DVCS open source):

Are "virtual corporations" really a great idea?

Could creating such autonomous entities actually make the world an even worse place?

It doesn't matter, because as I explained in the OP, a decentralized management structure by mass voting is a dysfunctional structure. It will simply blow up and fail to produce anything but redistribution of the money pool. I enumerated two reasons:

1. Organization is the antithesis of decentralization.

2. Money pools + voting = power vacuum

The DAO is nonsense except as a game around money pool power structure and politics. I am not even interested in discussing it further as it is a waste of time. Investors are doing that because they are deluded into thinking they can get rich want to lose their money. I think n00bs feel more comfortable with politics, than technology. They understand are familiar with politics. The DAO is taking technology that n00bs don't understand and packaging it in something the n00bs think is fair— democracy. Yet democracy is a power vacuum that always leads to totalitarianism. Since n00bs have never figured this out in 6000 years, then this can be reused to enslave them over and over again.

Vitalik, Tual, Larimars, etc.. seem to have wild fantasies that have no grounding in reality. I don't understand those dudes. Don't they know what they are building is crap. Or are they really deluded by their naive fantasies. Or maybe subconsciously the money is enough to motivate them, i.e. they are clever marketers, since it is obviously much easier to sell the fantasies to n00bs than to build mass adoption. Any way, I don't have time to worry or wonder about the way their thinking operates. And I don't want to go back into criticizing people. I will stand aside and observe them crash and burn. Unfortunately, those guys probably walk away with $millions and the n00bs lose. Boohoo that has been life for 6000 years.

I am just trying to ascertain if there are any valid use cases that I need to be aware of.


Edit: others are pointing out that investors better get the fuck out of the DAO and accept the -33% loss else they are going to end up losing everything:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1494333.msg15157775#msg15157775

Who ever invested in the DAO deserves the -33% instant loss to teach them a lesson. Those who hold on, will lose more.

I do expect the SEC will be coming after Tual et al, or who ever ends up capturing the power vacuum and keeping all the ETH wealth as it is extracted from the system by n00bs selling out as they realize it is fucked and by forcing "Yes" votes that pay to themselves. See the game theory I explained in my OP.

[Dinosaur]

I really regret giving all my eth for dao

[jmpFCE2]

I really regret giving all my eth for dao

being a clueless inbred doesnt help , does iT.

You could sell your DAO for a profit N O W unless you are a total idiot...

[Spoetnik]

I see a problem and have for years now..

They say Spoetnik what coin should i invest in..
And i am sorry but i don't know what to tell you guys anymore.
Times have changed and the "Schemes" get more complicated and there for far more risky.
Knowing what you are investing is critical !

So i see a NEED ..people are clutching money (real money)
And they must find a coin to invest in, because they HAVE to PROFIT ..and ASAP !!!
This is not a matter of i seen a project that inspires me and speaks to me
and there for i want to "support" it..
Instead we have guys who simply show up here to make a fast buck (fast cash / fiat $$$)

@KO
The OP's comment about how much is ACTUALLY needed for many for these projects was..
..a slap across the face of Crypto !
He slugged a few thousand of you on your ass in 1 sentence... K fucking O !
He's right !

@BlockNET
And that too was what pissed me off about the BlockNET ICO for hair under a million dollars.
In that example the dev claimed he had wrote 75% of the code before launching the project publicly.
So he was effectively asking the public for a $1,000,000.00 worth of Bitcoin.
..so he could at a leisurely pace sit at home puttering around with code on Github
..posting random coming soon comments on his self-modded ANN topic for the next year or two
(and that is EXACTLY what he did do) NOTE: He couldn't even keep hosting paid a year later.
And right now ? He is flying under the radar ignored (he got away with it and Bittrex and Poloniex made their cut etc)

"Looking For Work:"
And i knew damn well this would simply light a fire under the other scammy greedy cunt dev's "looking for work"
Which is why no one complained about BlockNET and they all ran to support it even under intense flaming & drama.
Everyone was eager to get a slice of the pie.. no matter how scammy it is !

How much did the BlockNET dev make per hour giving him a check *in advance* for a million dollars ?
Like yeah i get it.. you want to be "paid" for your coding work etc
But how much does it amount too ? $1,000 an hr for a vaporware concept project ICO "Scheme Coin" ?

Copy-cat ICO Schemes Unleashed:
You all stayed silent on that and we seen an explosion of copy cat ICO schemes unleashed..
And we seen the greedy profiteer dregs go along with it all so they could profit off them all.

When i asked the dev of BlockNET why he needed a million dollars in Bitcoin
He told me word for word, "to ensure it's a success"

Crypto-Minimum Wage Increase ?
When i started this coin devs would work on projects for FREE.. mostly.
Satoshi did not put his hand out and say i want a MILLION DOLLARS first before i release anything..

How much did this DAO project pull in ? (ahead of release ?) and when will it be compete and working as intended ?

Further more..
I will harp on another one of my points i have stuck in my craw lately

The DAO shit can never be a currency nor any of these shitty ICO's because
they could never exist with-out the need to acquire FIAT cash money $$
..in order to BUY Bitcoin to BUY Shitcoin "tokens"

Get it ?

So tell me smart guys how do you create a currency that REPLACES FIAT
if you *NEED* Fiat in order to Buy the damn shitcoin ROFL
See a problem yet boys ?

EDIT: Spelling

[iamnotback]

Copy-cat ICO Schemes Unleashed:
You call stayed silent on that and we seen an explosion of copy cat ICO schemes unleashed..
And we seen the greedy profiteer dregs go along with it all so they could profit off them all.

When i asked the dev of BlockNET why he needed a million dollars in Bitcoin
He told me word for word, "to ensure it's a success"

Crypto-Minimum Wage Increase ?
When i started this coin devs would work on projects for FREE.. mostly.
Satoshi did not put his hand out and say i want a MILLION DOLLARS first before i release anything..

It is true that the ICOs aren't really providing any funding for development that matters. It is just the insiders cashing out.

That being said, no top notch s/w developer will work on a risky project that might net him $0, if he can't at least generate $250,000 per year of effort. And that is really on the low end since most of them can make that much (and more with stock options) in a job in silicon valley.

For example, I have been doing research and basically "working" in crypto since 2013. If I launched a project, I would expect to recover those years of investment.

But I also wouldn't waste all the funds on nonsense development of pie-in-the-sky fantasies.

But any way, I am not going to ask anyone to give me an ICO money. Mined distribution is clearly the fair way to launch a coin.

But just keep in mind if the developer is receivng a $million for years of effort, it is really just about break even, if he is a top developer. Please be respectful of the opportunity cost of top developers.

Also even the developers have a right to seek higher ROI. Speculators invest and risk to get a big payoff. When developers invest their time/effort and risk to get a big payoff, this is capitalism.

Having said that, afaik most of the developers of altcoins are not top developers. Afaics, most of them have nearly no experience as employed software developers before their work in crypto. This is excluding the Bitcoin core devs of course. There are experienced developers in the Bitcoin ecosystem.

The DAO is only 2080 lines of source code. And it can never be "fixed" or "finished" any more than it already is, because it is a flawed concept and I have difficulty believing Tual doesn't realize it.. It probably wasn't intended to grow into something great. It was probably a quickie rush to latch on to the euphoria about ETH and so those looking to cash out of ETH at the double-top at $15, had another option The DAO. It was probably a timing and marketing product decision and not an engineering or long-range focus. I could understand your criticism of something like that. But it is a free market and you can't stop them.

[CraigWrightBTC]

i think it is not fail but it is just correction of price. DAO is new coin i will wait and see for next decission.

[bones261]

i think it is not fail but it is just correction of price. DAO is new coin i will wait and see for next decission.

   The DAO isn't a coin. It is a smart contract that resides on the Ethereum blockchain. People sent ETH to the contract address which created tokens. The intended purpose of these tokens is to give the owner voting rights and possibly income generated for the investments the DAO approves. The tokens are not really a currency since the primary purpose for them is not to buy goods and services or to pay debts.
  If my suspicions are correct, the DAO was a smashing success. I personally think it was just a scheme to get people to buy up Ether tokens on the market, and pump up the price on ETH. Then the ETH is basically locked away in some "fund" that cannot be easily liquidated. Everything about the DAO is designed to delay liquidation as much as possible. Even the obvious suppression of it's price on the market, which is below the ICO price.

[Spoetnik]

That being said, no top notch s/w developer will work on a risky project that might net him $0

Did you read where i pointed out how it started as dev's working for free ?
And since all their old code is recycled they must not have been that bad of a dev LOL
Satoshi was an amateur ?
How about the other early coders ?

Who are these coder(s) that deserve quarter million dollar salaries and guaranteed work / paychecks ?

This is not the place for them (if they really exist)
And if freelance 250k salary dev's are here working on crypto coins ?
Then i expect them to improve the distribution of coins (and none of them ever have been)
..and not simply unload yet another god damn fucking ICO scheme.
GET IT ............ yet ?

AKA:
Work on the glaring obvious big problem facing all of crypto (that all these so called dev's continually ignore)

You need minimum 250k devs ?
Look elsewhere because this is not the place for you "PRO" coders.

Further more if you can not afford to pay your rent while you code the whole entire world a brand new digital currency ?
..then leave it up to those who have the means financially to pull it off.

In other words don't sit there and create the problem to sell me the solution !
AKA: I need work so i need a paycheck (for my coin scheme)
Which solves nothing but adds yet another ICO to Poloniex or Bittrex etc.

YOU WANT 250k mother fuckers ?
I better god damn fucking see an improved version of Bitcoin.
And it better have MAJOR improvements on it's initial distribution.

or..

I WILL TAKE YOUR 250k and put out my own "Scheme Coin" ICO

yeah i can code too cunts.. i have been at it for DECADES !

Where is my paycheck that is the North American equivalent to winning the lottery ?
(many people would love to win 250k or a MILLION DOLLARS playing the lottery)
So what is the criteria cunts ? Unloading another fucking ICO on the public ?

fine....... count me in

PAY ME THEN CUNTS !

Make the check for a MILLION DOLLARS out to Spoetnik

And fuck yeah..
..if all these other SCHOOL CHILDREN can do it then i as an adult with decades of coding & cracking experience should deserve it.
- I have a resume a 10 miles long.. i made a file sharing program for example.
- The BlockNET dev's were shown here via pictures at school having water fights at lunch
and eating in the cafeteria at SCHOOL

Lets spin.. lets spin the bloody god damn bull shit some more guys.  

but.. can i play too ?  
Why do i have to sit on the side lines broke with morals ?

Just ignore my "FUD" guys and make our your checks to Hollywood High California grade 9 class
..they are already working on ICO #2,004 ..with world class 250k salary code of course

By the way guys.. in case you forgot ?
We are talking about Alternate Currencies (see what forums section you are in ?)
Not i made up a fake "use" for a "block-chain" so i tacked a token onto it and then unloaded another ICO Scam Forum section..
There is a section for those.. it's called the "Scam Section" here.

And hey if you all don't know what a Currency is ?
..let me know i can explain it too you REEEEEEALLY fucking slowly.
 

[iamnotback]

That being said, no top notch s/w developer will work on a risky project that might net him $0

Did you read where i pointed out how it started as dev's working for free ?
And since all their old code is recycled they must not have been that bad of a dev LOL
Satoshi was an amateur ?
How about the other early coders ?

Who are these coder(s) that deserve quarter million dollar salaries and guaranteed work / paychecks ?

Some estimate Satoshi mined 1 million BTC so roughly a $billion.

Very good developers do command ~$150 - $250k per year plus stock options.

You get what you pay for.

That being said, the altcoin space appears to dominated by hucksters with some coding abilities.

So I am not dissuading you from criticizing the level of ethics and professionalism, but I am telling you that if you expect me to work for $0, then you will not have my respect.

[manselr]

I think DAO still has a good one or two pumps on it before it deflates like yet another alt. ETH probably has twice the pumps before it becomes irrelevant.

[bones261]

I think DAO still has a good one or two pumps on it before it deflates like yet another alt. ETH probably has twice the pumps before it becomes irrelevant.

   No wonder none of the proposals for the DAO are anywhere near the 20% quorum needed to even count. Most are just checking out POLO & Bittrex, hoping for the next ETH/DAO pump so that they can unload their tokens on the next sucker. They don't want to use their tokens to vote on stupid proposals, which is what they were supposedly intended for. They want to see some whales pump up ETH to some god awful value, and hope the DAO leech tokens follow suit.
   Oh well, I'm probably being a hypocrite anyway, since I am doing the same thing.   However, I refuse to shill this shit, anymore, in a pathetic attempt to escape my poor judgement in this case.

[Malayko]

I think DAO still has a good one or two pumps on it before it deflates like yet another alt. ETH probably has twice the pumps before it becomes irrelevant.

   No wonder none of the proposals for the DAO are anywhere near the 20% quorum needed to even count. Most are just checking out POLO & Bittrex, hoping for the next ETH/DAO pump so that they can unload their tokens on the next sucker. They don't want to use their tokens to vote on stupid proposals, which is what they were supposedly intended for. They want to see some whales pump up ETH to some god awful value, and hope the DAO leech tokens follow suit.
   Oh well, I'm probably being a hypocrite anyway, since I am doing the same thing.   However, I refuse to shill this shit, anymore, in a pathetic attempt to escape my poor judgement in this case.

You should get a medal for this post or some sort of award. People are not realizing that the dao was a big mistake and could never really work. I wonder where the next school of fish are going to come from to let the first school of fish out.

[bones261]

I think DAO still has a good one or two pumps on it before it deflates like yet another alt. ETH probably has twice the pumps before it becomes irrelevant.

   No wonder none of the proposals for the DAO are anywhere near the 20% quorum needed to even count. Most are just checking out POLO & Bittrex, hoping for the next ETH/DAO pump so that they can unload their tokens on the next sucker. They don't want to use their tokens to vote on stupid proposals, which is what they were supposedly intended for. They want to see some whales pump up ETH to some god awful value, and hope the DAO leech tokens follow suit.
   Oh well, I'm probably being a hypocrite anyway, since I am doing the same thing.   However, I refuse to shill this shit, anymore, in a pathetic attempt to escape my poor judgement in this case.

You should get a medal for this post or some sort of award. People are not realizing that the dao was a big mistake and could never really work. I wonder where the next school of fish are going to come from to let the first school of fish out.

I'll bestow upon myself and accept this reward:

Screw off, ICO scam tokens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGIY5Vyj4YM

[Spoetnik]

Satoshi mined early ?

Does that in ANY way justify the concept of an ICO
or requiring your personal coding services be paid in the amount of $250,000.00 usd per year ?

LOL

What if he premined 2% for "purposes" ?
Then.. what is an ICO ?

It is a 100% premine now isn't it ?

careful you might get tripped up in your own logical fallacy here pretty quick guys.
And while you are writing your next retort to beak off at me i will be ?
Searching up your account history..
Seeing who screamed scam on Premined ANN coin topics (while publicly defending ICO's)  

PS:
250k ?

News Flash "Dev's" ..

YOU ARE NOT SATOSHI  

[Zer0Sum]

I think DAO still has a good one or two pumps on it before it deflates like yet another alt. ETH probably has twice the pumps before it becomes irrelevant.

   No wonder none of the proposals for the DAO are anywhere near the 20% quorum needed to even count. Most are just checking out POLO & Bittrex, hoping for the next ETH/DAO pump so that they can unload their tokens on the next sucker. They don't want to use their tokens to vote on stupid proposals, which is what they were supposedly intended for. They want to see some whales pump up ETH to some god awful value, and hope the DAO leech tokens follow suit.
   Oh well, I'm probably being a hypocrite anyway, since I am doing the same thing.   However, I refuse to shill this shit, anymore, in a pathetic attempt to escape my poor judgement in this case.

Well, the more one investigates the DAO the worse it gets...
No Proposal is coming close to 20% quorum because the whales are colluding and not voting.




Why would anyone invest millions $$$ of highly liquid ETH into an flaky, experimental venture fund...
Unless the whole thing was rigged and a guaranteed return.

So there you go...
The Top 9 accounts can create a 20% quorum... or any combination of the Top 50 accounts easily...
So it doesn't matter how "investors" vote because the insiders can strip the DAO of ETH at will.

Just pitch semi-plausible Proposals (a "good story" as they call it on Wall Street)...
And methodically siphon off all the money over a year or two... while delivering ongoing "promotion" and not much else.

[ICOcountdown.com]

I think DAO still has a good one or two pumps on it before it deflates like yet another alt. ETH probably has twice the pumps before it becomes irrelevant.

   No wonder none of the proposals for the DAO are anywhere near the 20% quorum needed to even count. Most are just checking out POLO & Bittrex, hoping for the next ETH/DAO pump so that they can unload their tokens on the next sucker. They don't want to use their tokens to vote on stupid proposals, which is what they were supposedly intended for. They want to see some whales pump up ETH to some god awful value, and hope the DAO leech tokens follow suit.
   Oh well, I'm probably being a hypocrite anyway, since I am doing the same thing.   However, I refuse to shill this shit, anymore, in a pathetic attempt to escape my poor judgement in this case.

Well, the more one investigates the DAO the worse it gets...
No Proposal is coming close to 20% quorum because the whales are colluding and not voting.




Why would anyone invest millions $$$ of highly liquid ETH into an flaky, experimental venture fund...
Unless the whole thing was rigged and a guaranteed return.

So there you go...
The Top 9 accounts can create a 20% quorum... or any combination of the Top 50 accounts easily...
So it doesn't matter how "investors" vote because the insiders can strip the DAO of ETH at will.

Just pitch semi-plausible Proposals (a "good story" as they call it on Wall Street)...
And methodically siphon off all the money over a year or two... while delivering ongoing "promotion" and not much else.

You can say the same exact thing about Bitcoin. Replace the words ETH and DAO with BTC and you will find the same similarity.

[bones261]

You can say the same exact thing about Bitcoin. Replace the words ETH and DAO with BTC and you will find the same similarity.

I'm absolutely fucking speechless at this retort. Roach or Spoetnik, care to comment on this?  

[ICOcountdown.com]

You can say the same exact thing about Bitcoin. Replace the words ETH and DAO with BTC and you will find the same similarity.

I'm absolutely fucking speechless at this retort. Roach or Spoetnik, care to comment on this?  

I don't understand why you are so perplexed the DAO is a new system like Bitcoin is.

[bones261]

You can say the same exact thing about Bitcoin. Replace the words ETH and DAO with BTC and you will find the same similarity.

I'm absolutely fucking speechless at this retort. Roach or Spoetnik, care to comment on this?  

I don't understand why you are so perplexed the DAO is a new system like Bitcoin is.

New system? The Dao is just a smart contract/ token barfed up from the Ethereum blockchain.

Just go here. Copy, paste, edit. You too could become the next millionaire.

[ICOcountdown.com]

You can say the same exact thing about Bitcoin. Replace the words ETH and DAO with BTC and you will find the same similarity.

I'm absolutely fucking speechless at this retort. Roach or Spoetnik, care to comment on this?  

I don't understand why you are so perplexed the DAO is a new system like Bitcoin is.

New system? The Dao is just a smart contract/ token barfed up from the Ethereum blockchain.

Just go here. Copy, paste, edit. You too could become the next millionaire.

Again you speak about similarities between Bitcoin-  Bitcoin can be cloned this is why we have the alt industry. What I'm saying is it is a different idea, it is a special idea.

[bones261]

You can say the same exact thing about Bitcoin. Replace the words ETH and DAO with BTC and you will find the same similarity.

I'm absolutely fucking speechless at this retort. Roach or Spoetnik, care to comment on this?  

I don't understand why you are so perplexed the DAO is a new system like Bitcoin is.

New system? The Dao is just a smart contract/ token barfed up from the Ethereum blockchain.

Just go here. Copy, paste, edit. You too could become the next millionaire.

Again you speak about similarities between Bitcoin-  Bitcoin can be cloned this is why we have the alt industry. What I'm saying is it is a different idea, it is a special idea.

An altcoin industry? I could have my dog(e) take a daily dump and call it an industry too. I could then try to convince people that if they can give me enough $$$ upfront, that I can improve upon it and give it all kinds of new and innovative features. Perhaps promise that it will be the next cure-all for whatever physical, emotional or financial turmoil they are facing. Perhaps I can have the logo plastered on some race car to make it seem more legit.

[NattyLiteCoin]

The BTC "premine" was a proof of concept that a novel PoW technology actually worked before being deployed. It was a revolution and I'm not sure most of the posters here get that. Some of you make my eyes bleed.

[ICOcountdown.com]

You can say the same exact thing about Bitcoin. Replace the words ETH and DAO with BTC and you will find the same similarity.

I'm absolutely fucking speechless at this retort. Roach or Spoetnik, care to comment on this?  

I don't understand why you are so perplexed the DAO is a new system like Bitcoin is.

New system? The Dao is just a smart contract/ token barfed up from the Ethereum blockchain.

Just go here. Copy, paste, edit. You too could become the next millionaire.

Again you speak about similarities between Bitcoin-  Bitcoin can be cloned this is why we have the alt industry. What I'm saying is it is a different idea, it is a special idea.

An altcoin industry? I could have my dog(e) take a daily dump and call it an industry too. I could then try to convince people that if they can give me enough $$$ upfront, that I can improve upon it and give it all kinds of new and innovative features. Perhaps promise that it will be the next cure-all for whatever physical, emotional or financial turmoil they are facing. Perhaps I can have the logo plastered on some race car to make it seem more legit.

I don't really understand this arguement, technological development is happening here.

[bones261]

The BTC "premine" was a proof of concept that a novel PoW technology actually worked before being deployed. It was a revolution and I'm not sure most of the posters here get that. Some of you make my eyes bleed.

I totally agree with you. Plus the vast majority of the "premine" has sat idle for years, even after Satoshi passed the torch. The main developer of ETH has already admitted that he dumped much of his portion.

I don't really understand this arguement, technological development is happening here.

Pac-man, which came out in 1980, demonstrated more innovation than the vast majority of what I see going on in the altcoin world these days. Hell, Ms Pac-man was more innovative than most of this nonsense.
I'm no young whippersnapper by any means. Don't try to sell me on what technological innovation is. I've seen some awesome shit come out since I was born in 1968. And if you think this altcoin "innovation" would impress someone like me who has been around a while, it's just not going to fly.

[gogodr]

Btc is moving and dao is doing nothing. I dont understand why people even invested in this trash.

[bones261]

Btc is moving and dao is doing nothing. I dont understand why people even invested in this trash.

It was a feedback loop. ETH was being pumped, so people thought they would give DAO a shot. As people were obtaining ETH, so they could get DAO, ETH soared even more.  Many, including me, assumed this would be just like most of the ICO scams around here. There would be some kind of pump once it hit the exchange, then one could dispose of the tokens and move on to the next scheme. The problem was, the pump never came. Why? Because the DAO was probably created to cause a pump and dump for ETH. The intended pump and dump already happened by the time the DAO creation period was over, and it was launched on the exchanges. Now, you see all these people claiming this is a "long term" investment. (This rhetoric was actually being touted during the ICO creation period as well.) If I want to make a long term investment, I'll contribute more to my 401K at work. At least any risk that I am taking with that is mitigated by my employer's contribution.

[iamnotback]

Apologies that the following is not very humble. Some frankness is required so Spoetnik is aware of the reality.

You need to stop equating those proven s/w developers with these inexperienced kids and hucksters in the altcoin arena.

If you don't respect the worth of the serious professionals, then don't expect them to work for your ecosystem.

Please try to wait and judge based on the outcome, instead of lumping me together with Vitalik, Tual, etc..

PS:
250k ?

News Flash "Dev's" ..

I was generating up to $30k per month for a one-man company coolpage.com where I was the sole programmer. I did $350+K in 2001. Inflation-adjust that!

In 1995, I had an $80k salary and $1 million stock options offer (to vest over 2 years) working at Fractal Design Corp on what is now Corel Painter, and I left the company (forsaking the stock options offer) to go walk barefoot in the jungle in the Philippines. Inflation-adjust that!

In 1989 or thereabouts (age 24), my Neocept WordUp was grossing > $100k per year for a 2-man company. Inflation-adjust that!

Sorry you are wrong. I am worth much more $250k annually if I am healthy. My problem had/has been debilitating Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) and other manifestations of a chronic autoimmune illness since 2012.

YOU ARE NOT SATOSHI  

Before the end of this year, I intend to prove I am more capable than Satoshi.

Let's see what happens. It virtually all depends on my health continuing to improve. Because I can't code with CFS.

[iamnotback]

I don't really understand this arguement, technological development is happening here.

Pac-man, which came out in 1980, demonstrated more innovation than the vast majority of what I see going on in the altcoin world these days. Hell, Ms Pac-man was more innovative than most of this nonsense.
I'm no young whippersnapper by any means. Don't try to sell me on what technological innovation is. I've seen some awesome shit come out since I was born in 1968. And if you think this altcoin "innovation" would impress someone like me who has been around a while, it's just not going to fly.

The technological development that is occurring is half-assed, pie-in-the-sky bullshit (perhaps not IOHK's work) that any high IQ senior professional software developer would know isn't going to work and thus wouldn't work on. Thus only the hucksters (and dreamers? do Vitalik and Tual really believe in their fantasies?) are willing to promulgate the delusions of the altcoins. But the market wants it. Who am I to tell the market what it shouldn't buy.

One can argue that those guys are brilliant and efficient marketers. Reality sucks. But reality is reality. For me, the key is how to employ their methods, but accomplish something truly great and revolutionary that benefits us not only in terms of speculation but also in terms of real advancement of CC so that we have a better world to live in. That is my goal. I will not inhibit myself from using efficient marketing in order to reach my goal. This is altcoinUK's myopia. He doesn't understand that words are useless and we need to get what we need by any means possible.

Even Blockstream is now taking Bitcoin into the half-assed Rube Goldberg direction (SegWit, Sidechains, and LN are all flawed if decentralization is required), but they really don't have much leeway because of Satoshi's Model T design.

But there are some ideas in each development that are perhaps worthy. I have borrowed for example some concepts from Iota, even though I have explained that (afaics) the DAG can't be a decentralized consensus algorithm. So you can't say that it has all been worthless, neither from a marketing development nor technological concepts development perspective.

Nature meanders on the path of annealing optimum fittness. The noise is necessary in order to not get stuck in a local minima. Study simulated annealing algorithms over N dimensional spaces.

I am not going to criticize the projects of others. I think the speculators have to wise up or lose their lunch money. That is life. After all, even you are playing the speculation musical chairs game. The market is what it is. If I deny reality, I am diminishing my opportunities to succeed. The BS about "if I can't do it the 'right way' then I don't want to do it", doesn't make sense to me. I played competitive team sports. You do what you need to do to win, within the confines of the rules. There are no rules in this market. For me, losing is failure, even losing by refusing to win by any means. Thus for me, altcoinUK's dogma is failure. He is not a Michael Jordan.

P.S. I am 3 years older than you and I began coding at age 13. Perhaps if you are a coder, you can relate how difficult it is to code at your age as you did at a younger age, because energy levels, interests, and focus changes. But I am pretty much hyper motivated by this time with all the water under the bridge the past 3 years. And besides, I am an extremely type A, overachiever any way. And even for example, still striving to be competitive in sports with guys 3 decades younger. But still, it isn't easy trying to recover from an "incurable" chronic illness, trying to work 14 hours a day coding, and trying to train hard. I am having difficulty fitting it all in and dealing with the fact that my body gets extremely exhausted and needs sleep.

This is not easy Spoetnik! You try to do it!

[bones261]

P.S. I am 3 years older than you and I began coding at age 13. Perhaps if you are a coder, you can relate how difficult it is to code at your age as you did at a younger age, because energy levels, interests, and focus changes. But I am pretty much hyper motivated by this time with all the water under the bridge the past 3 years. And besides, I am an extremely type A, overachiever any way. And even for example, still striving to be competitive in sports with guys 3 decades younger. But still, it isn't easy trying to recover from an "incurable" chronic illness, trying to work 14 hours a day coding, and trying to train hard. I am having difficulty fitting it all in and dealing with the fact that my body gets extremely exhausted and needs sleep.

   I wish that I could help you bolster your point, but I can't code for shit. Hats off to you. I couldn't program "Hello World" from scratch, if my life depended on it. However, I do now how to copy and paste and I took the liberty to copy and paste the DAO code into notepad. I find a little over 1000 lines of code, much of it comments.  I guess is this is good, since it helps a total layman such as myself get an inkling what is going on. However, even if this code was original, which I doubt; how long would it take someone proficient in coding javascript to come up with this? I highly doubt it took 150 million USD worth of effort.
   What scares me more is someone such as myself, with absolutely no programming skills, can just copy and paste this DAO code, make a few modifications, and then unleash it on the community. Maybe it wouldn't raise millions, but getting $25.00 out of it would far surpass the true value of the work involved.
   I certainly hope you get to feeling better and can bring your aspirations to the altcoin world and dazzle us. It doesn't take long for many in this scene to become jaded.

[Spoetnik]

@ICOcountdown.com
You could.. but people like me will laugh at you  
And unlike DAO Bitcoin is a currency that is actually used as such.

I have no idea why this DAO ICO "Scheme" is even posted here.. it is NOT an Alternate Currency.
So why is it posted here and all over the Crypto coin scene ?
Are you all using it for some purpose or another ?
No ?
Ok what then ?

cough cough profits ?  

..that is it's use.

This shit playing out is interesting and i am amused it's back firing
on the brain dead cocky dipshit legions of lippy tards who made it & backed it.
..you know the ones who are silent in hiding right now avoiding defending their "scheme"

What does the 'D' in DAO stand for ?

Decentralized Autonomous Organization

Decentralized ?
That is not true. and how do you have an Organization that is Decentralized ?
It's a contradiction right in the name of it LOL

Autonomous ?
Except for the part where it all hinges entirely on proposals by humans ROFL

You are all quick to spout off catch phrases & terminology at the drop of a hat..
Block chain this "decentralized" that..
But i don't think the creators or backers of these "Schemes" gave much of it any thought really.

PS:
I don't enter coding pissing contests.
My work + name is word renown in various circles and many people on Earth have had my code on their machines and i also have my name listed as a credit for code work in some well known projects and.. yes i too have been coding for a billion years.. starting with basic back in the 80's
so..
Blow me assholes.

PPS:
By the way smart fuckers why has the ETHEREUM ICO (non mined coin)
..added "mining" ?
Answers please 

[duts_bg]

It is quite normal for a child to stagger and fall, or to try to go with both feet simultaneously, when made its first steps. Ultimately, all starts  to walk. The alternative to DAO is known: Federal Reserve, the IMF, the World Bank, the group of Bilderberg. The choice is ours.
 

[Minecache]

3 pages in its clear that Spoetnik has another successful thread accomplished spreading nothing but bitter lies and FUD.

Admit you missed the ETH train and move on.

Nothing to see here. Thread closed.

[ICOcountdown.com]

The BTC "premine" was a proof of concept that a novel PoW technology actually worked before being deployed. It was a revolution and I'm not sure most of the posters here get that. Some of you make my eyes bleed.

I totally agree with you. Plus the vast majority of the "premine" has sat idle for years, even after Satoshi passed the torch. The main developer of ETH has already admitted that he dumped much of his portion.

I don't really understand this arguement, technological development is happening here.

Pac-man, which came out in 1980, demonstrated more innovation than the vast majority of what I see going on in the altcoin world these days. Hell, Ms Pac-man was more innovative than most of this nonsense.
I'm no young whippersnapper by any means. Don't try to sell me on what technological innovation is. I've seen some awesome shit come out since I was born in 1968. And if you think this altcoin "innovation" would impress someone like me who has been around a while, it's just not going to fly.

Ms Pac Man was a technological development and a variant to Pac Man. Ms Pac Man had optimized technology relating to Pac Man. The same similarities that you use are exactly the same as the differences between Bitcoin technology and other technology based on Bitcoin. If you do not care about innovation then that is fine but technology changes all the time, different technology is used for different things.

[Spoetnik]

V. Butterin dumped on you all.. Satoshi did not.

How is that for a "lie" minecache ?

[gagalady]

The management of the DAO is still centralized, I sold most of my coins.

[bones261]

Admit you missed the ETH train and move on.

Missed the ETH train? It's more like I got run over by it.

[gagalady]

Admit you missed the ETH train and move on.

Missed the ETH train? It's more like I got run over by it.

Hopefully you don't get run by DAO train too

[Minecache]

V. Butterin dumped on you all.. Satoshi did not.

How is that for a "lie" minecache ?

You're not comparing like with like you clown. Butterin is human and has bills to pay. The fact that he sold a tiny portion of his ETH hodlings to pay down his salary so he could pay these bills and focus 110% on continuing the great development of Ethereum is, in my eyes, money well earnt and spent. Whereas Nakamoto we have no idea who, what, or which group they are.

Besides I have both my clown shoes firmly in ETH and BTC so you waste your own CPU clicks spout your disgusting FUD against my good name or Ethereums.

[X7]

Lots of hate on this thread

[iamnotback]

Some new research just published is showing that the DAO is a naturally declining value investment, i.e. the trend can never be upwards on the price (unless they can make profitable investments that return more ETH than was invested, which is very unlikely because decentralized voting is the antithesis of organization and productivity):

http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/06/13/the-dao-can-turn-into-a-naturally-arising-ponzi/

The DAO is an epic fail underway. Anyone who hasn't sold already (or perhaps immediately) is likely going to lose their money.

There is absolutely no reason to not convert your DAO back to ETH, so you will be ready to sell. All upside on your DAO is due to the rise in ETH as others rush in to buy the DAO. Your other alternative is to sell your DAO for ETH so you don't have to wait 48 days before you can sell the ETH, but this costs you 6% as of last time I checked. That is unless you really believe the BS about the DAO making investments that return more ETH than the DAO invests. The above linked research is pointing out the DAO may convert itself into a Ponzi scheme and use its ETH to buy DAO at a discount expecting ETH to rise in price thus returning more ETH than was invested. In that case, holding DAO has upside leverage over holding ETH, but this is a Ponzi scheme that will eventually burst and those still in DAO will be trapped as ETH collapses in price.

Charles Ponzi and Bernie Madoff would be very proud.

...the DAO code into notepad. I find a little over 1000 lines of code, much of it comments.  I guess is this is good, since it helps a total layman such as myself get an inkling what is going on. However, even if this code was original, which I doubt; how long would it take someone proficient in coding javascript to come up with this? I highly doubt it took 150 million USD worth of effort.

Of course that DAO code is not even $25,000 of work.

The $150 million was not given to Tual (the DAO coder), but apparently it is going to be possible to top-down game the system to extract some significant portion of that $168 million.

And I believe it was you who eloquently pointed out that the likely motivation for creating the DAO was to provide the insiders more liquidity and time to dump ETH by keeping all those who speculated on ETH locked into ETH longer, as well driving more new speculative capital into ETH.

It is clever and the speculators are willing victims.

What scares me more is someone such as myself, with absolutely no programming skills, can just copy and paste this DAO code, make a few modifications, and then unleash it on the community. Maybe it wouldn't raise millions, but getting $25.00 out of it would far surpass the true value of the work involved.

The only attribute that protects a block chain instance from copycats is the level of permanent user adoption. Bitcoin has this. I don't know to what extent Ethereum has this? I think perhaps none, which is why they had to create the DAO to prevent a mad rush out of ETH and back into Bitcoin. Meanwhile the insiders are probably dumping their IPO tokens.

It is quite normal for a child to stagger and fall, or to try to go with both feet simultaneously, when made its first steps. Ultimately, all starts  to walk. The alternative to DAO is known: Federal Reserve, the IMF, the World Bank, the group of Bilderberg. The choice is ours.
 

But the DAO is worse than Fed. There are some great paradigm shifts we can do with decentralized block chains, but 1) no block chains are scaling decentralized, 2) a decentralized organization is implausible (see my prior posts for the reasons). Decentralized version control open source works because each individual can act independently, i.e. each has their own repository/fork, thus disorganization is an essential attribute of the decentralization.

Admit you missed the ETH train and move on.

So you admit it is time to move on from ETH? You didn't tell him to invest more in ETH at $15.

Btw, you may remember that I called the top at $15, and before it happened I said it would bounce off $7 and make a double-top at $15. I also called the major tops in ETH on the way up towards $15. All the posts are still there for evidence. Not that this is worthy anything. Just saying.

The management of the DAO is still centralized...

Yup. And a huge $168 million money pool for them to expropriate via manipulation over time and/or just a way for them to sell more ETH at high prices with less competition for the available buying liquidity.

V. Butterin dumped on you all.. Satoshi did not.

You're not comparing like with like you clown. Butterin is human and has bills to pay. The fact that he sold a tiny portion of his ETH hodlings to pay down his salary so he could pay these bills

$million is tiny  

$million bills and salary for a 20 year old. Not to mention all the tokens his wealthy ($60 million net worth) father and friends probably obtained which are not being documented.

If Vitalik had actually accomplished any thing of long-term technical value with Ethereum, I'd say a $million for the developers would be reasonable. Vitalik got $100,000 cash grant from the bankster/globalist Peter Thiel (Paypal, Bitpay, etc), I presume he took a salary from the $18 million expended since IPO, and also the $18 million expended for all the other developers since IPO.

Many dozens of untold $millions squandered. And what result? The DAO fail and collapse is going to be epic. My popcorn is ready.

Hey but I guess I can appreciate that Ethereum has lead the way towards $multi-million paydays for altcoin launches. That kind of incentive helps to keep a top developer interested in coding for the ecosystem. I am here for idealistic reasons as well, but I doubt I'd be here if the upside for me was only $100,000. Sorry Spoetnik, just being frank.

[iamnotback]

Imagine Vitalik's father ($60 million networth) probably invested a small amount in ETH's IPO. Let's say $100,000, because that is small for him. So now with ~100X gain ($18 million mcap to $1.x billion now), he would have the problem of how to sell $10 million of ETH. And hypothetically he is not the only one. Let's guess $6 million of the $18 million IPO was insider money, so that is on the order of $600 million needing willing buyers.

Understand why the n00bs are being led to the slaughterhouse (probably by-design) with The DAO.

TPTB rape us, then they can use this example as an excuse for the SEC and G20 to start regulating altcoins as investment securities.

[spartak_t]

Disqualifying the potential of all future projects before even having seen the proposals is nonsensical.

This was not the original idea of the thread and I completely agree with your statement. The DAO currently has a big problem and I'm not saying it will not be resolved, but it kinda makes me angry on how people can gather so much money (after recent ETH price rise we are now talking about over $200Mn), yet allowed this to happen...

[healtheworld]

Dao is no failure, just money is transferred to other markets, when the right time will rise of success I think
I often pay attention to the dynamics of the DAO, the hope can have what new project

[iamnotback]

Considering this is Cryptoland...  DO NOT underestimate the fact that once a project chooses to get funded through The DAO only DAO Token Holders (DTHs) get to invest (as opposed to the crowdfund being completely open to the masses).  Disqualifying the potential of all future projects before even having seen the proposals is nonsensical.

It is not nonsensical to realize that serious projects are not going to touch a dysfunctional and potentially illegal structure. You want a clear relationship with the investors (and if it is a crypto currency then you want them to be the decentralized owners of the open source forkable project so you are not marketing an illegal investment security) and a clear legality if your project is serious.

If a project is any good on its merits, what is the advantage to giving an exclusive to the DAO versus offering a public crowdsale?  Seedr is available to do it legally.

Why would I want my project's investors' ROI to be diluted by other crappy projects in the dysfunctional DAO system? I want them to reap the full rewards of investing in my project, not be caught up in some Rube Goldberg experiment.

What is the advantage to pooling the funds versus each investor allocating his/her funds to investments? The only advantage is to gain leverage through an investment pump of the DAO itself.

I suppose it is promotional value. You get promoted to 18,000+ investors in the DAO.

The game theory is to offer some good bullshit projects to take the money (because the really serious projects are not going to offer themselves to the DAO). Pump it up and try to get some more greater fools to come in. The DAO can reap some gains. So repeat. Eventually after so many failed projects and insufficient supply of new greater fools, it implodes due to the reality that they are not producing anything of value other than an investment pump.

No one who is producing real technology with good fundamentals, is going to touch the DAO. No way I would offer my work as a project to be funded by the DAO because it is probably an illegal structure. You will just get a lot more shitcoins and stuff of that nature. I don't know how long they can keep the delusion alive and harvesting new greater fools. Eventually it will implode.

There is significant legal risk to being involved as an investor in or project funded by The DAO, unlike other speculations where most of the legal risk falls on the issuers:

http://www.coindesk.com/the-law-of-the-dao/

https://www.google.com/search?q=is+the+DAO+legal

Also there are other problems:

Agreeing to fund projects may actually cause a drop in the value of ETH and DaoTokens because a project will require The DAO to transfer ETH to a contractor, who would then likely convert it to fiat currency, which may depress the value of the ETH on open trade markets, which would then reduce the value of The DAO’s ETH holdings. As Larimer suggests "Every time a project is funded, the amount of ETH backing the DAO tokens falls and is replaced with speculative IOU from a contractor." Thus, The DAO funding a project may actually cause a reduction in the value of ETH and reduce the value of its own investment base.

[iamnotback]

Disqualifying the potential of all future projects before even having seen the proposals is nonsensical.

This was not the original idea of the thread and I completely agree with your statement. The DAO currently has a big problem and I'm not saying it will not be resolved, but it kinda makes me angry on how people can gather so much money (after recent ETH price rise we are now talking about over $200Mn), yet allowed this to happen...

Yes, I guess I shouldn't have focused only on the latest comments in the thread.  Not sure if you're following the progress, but here are a few blogs that address the concerns in the OP:

https://blog.slock.it/dao-improvement-requests-the-way-forward-for-the-dao-be5f84eaec6c#.tck8md11o
https://blog.slock.it/announcing-dao-framework-1-1-35249e2e001#.zb6ci161l
https://blog.slock.it/upgrading-the-dao-to-framework-1-1-a-step-by-step-guide-547a58e00137#.bcpcmedcy

The insoluble problem is not the technology. Rather it is that pooling funds means people are going to get pissed off and not agree with all the investments. Binding investors together across multiple investments is lacking degrees-of-freedom.

Besides when you have a honeypot of pooled funds that can't be effectively managed with democracy (because democracy is always about a plurality of disagreements), then it is a power vacuum that is captured by whom ever is the most clever at game theory of politics.

Politics and investment do not work together.

Each investor should be free to invest in what he or she wants to.

It is an investment pump delusion. There is no way for politics+investment to function and compete.

[stoat]

Tptb. Looks like you were completely wrong about the price of ETH. It's $18 now,  probably rise even further soon.  Why don't you stop spending your entire time FUDing great projects like ethereum and spend more time going for walks in the countryside with your family

[iamnotback]

Nick Szabo's Etherplan

http://etherplan.com/etherplan-proposal

It is capped at $5m ROI on a $1m investment. A very high risk investment (creating a social network built around wealth planning in the midst of a global sovereign debt collapse) that will probably fail and yet the upside is limited to 500% ROI over several years.

Has Nick Szabo ever created any successful s/w company in his entire life? I don't think so.

There is no Etherplan token, so no opportunity for speculative upside.

Exactly what I am warning. The insiders will siphon off that $168 million. The DAO is their personal slush fund. This is Vitalik's $18 million escapade of "pay ourselves fat salaries with your money and accomplish technobabble" gluttony on steroids.

Why couldn't Etherplan be marketed directly to investors? Why do they first need to corral them into a DAO. Because no one would invest in Etherplan.

You've got to make it part of some grand investment delusion pump in order to siphon off that money for Etherplan.

Tptb. Looks like you were completely wrong about the price of ETH. It's $18 now,  probably rise even further soon.  Why don't you stop spending your entire time FUDing great projects like ethereum and spend more time going for walks in the countryside with your family

What are you talking about   I called the temporary top at $6, I called it again at $15, I predicted in advance the bounce at $7 and the double-top at $15. My pricing calls on ETH have been extraordinary. Do we need to go quote posts to prove it to you? (please don't waste my time)

I have not disagreed that it is possible to create an investment pump.

But the music only continues for as long as you can delude enough new fools. Eventually you've got to actually produce real adoption and value. And I can't see anything from Ethereum, Slock.it, Etherplan or anything I've seen from that crowd that will have any real adoption.

More power to them and you and go for it. See how high you can pump this hot air balloon.

There is no shortage of money seeking investments. There is a shortage of high quality investments with huge upside. The DAO's problem is they won't be able to find high quality (risk vs. reward) worthy investments for the $168 million. Perhaps they will morph it into a Ponzi scheme and buy DAO units with their ETH. Who knows maybe we can see $100 ETH before it runs out of greater fool gas.

P.S. I originally underestimated either how ignorant or insouciant CC investors are. They either really believe in nonsense, and/or they really only care about trying to form as much pump excitement as possible regardless of any realities about actual user value created. It also appears to be a difference of perspective on what constitutes value with many here I guess thinking that enabling more investment vehicles of any form is an advance of value. I haven't yet determined the mix between naivete, insouciance, and different valid perspectives. I am still trying to determine if I missed some key factor about value being created. And I am not trying to tell them to change. I am trying to understand this altcoin investing market and where it will lead.

Lots of hate on this thread

I am not hating these guys. More power to them to have created so much investor interest in altcoins.

I am just sharing my analysis of the possible outcome. I am bit perturbed when people idolize this stuff so much. But I am learning to realize it is necessary. I am okay with every person having their own free will.

[iamnotback]

Ledger

https://forum.daohub.org/t/ledger-proposal-for-the-dao-1-ethereum-hardware-wallet/1750

This looks like a reasonably (risk vs. ROI) worthy investment, except it is far too small of an investment to be worth the attention of the $168 million DAO. It will have no relevance whatsoever on the DAO's ROI.

And on top of all that, all the units might not even be sold by that time, but that is really irrelevant to my point. Why didn't they Indiegogo or Kickstarter this? Would have provided a lower unit price to the crowdfunders because no need to return a 300% gain to investors. Probably because they would not have gotten the 120,000 Euros they need.

Again I reiterate, the problem is there are not $168 million of quality investments available to the DAO. The investors in the DAO would be better served to join Seedr if their objective is to find quality investments and be in control of which investments they are vested in.

The main reason to invest in the DAO is to create Ponzi and/or investment pump. It is a greater fool investment theory gimmick. It is not about actually improving the world.

[iamnotback]

Slock.it's EC & USN

https://slock.it/ethereum_computer.html

https://download.slock.it/public/DAO/Proposal1.pdf

Well they think you need a special computer and I think I will be able to accomplish it all from your mobile phone with more clever s/w.

And which do you think will scale adoption faster: using your existing mobile or buying a new piece of h/w.

Ah the DAO is a gimmick. Enjoy.

[Hueristic]

...

P.S. I originally underestimated either how ignorant or insouciant CC investors are. They either really believe in nonsense, and/or they really only care about trying to form as much pump excitement as possible regardless of any realities about actual user value created. It also appears to be a difference of perspective on what constitutes value with many here I guess thinking that enabling more investment vehicles of any form is an advance of value. I haven't yet determined the mix between naivete, insouciance, and different valid perspectives. I am still trying to determine if I missed some key factor about value being created. And I am not trying to tell them to change. I am trying to understand this altcoin investing market and where it will lead....

I have consistently underestimated the idiocy of those surrounding me to the point where I have become the idiot. -Hueristic

[Spoetnik]

Tptb. Looks like you were completely wrong about the price of ETH. It's $18 now,  probably rise even further soon.  Why don't you stop spending your entire time FUDing great projects like ethereum and spend more time going for walks in the countryside with your family

A great project to you is another mans cardboard box he is living in later..

FUD is warranted.
Learn what FUD stands for.. Google it.

I need not defend my shitcoin criticisms.. they are well deserved.
Your attempt at censorship to shut down people having a technical discussion is shameful.
I hope you feel embarrassed right now.

If YOU can not handle criticism then YOU should go for a walk in the countryside..

[X7]

Only time and action will tell what actually happens here - and a click bait title like DAO FAIL is clear on what your true intentions are before even reading through the thread.

[iamnotback]

I have not disagreed that it is possible to create an investment pump.

But the music only continues for as long as you can delude enough new fools. Eventually you've got to actually produce real adoption and value. And I can't see anything from Ethereum, Slock.it, Etherplan or anything I've seen from that crowd that will have any real adoption.

Barry Silbert says:

Although Silbert is excited about Ethereum, he does not agree with the vision held by some of Ethereum’s most-ardent supporters. He explained:

    “I sense there’s a certain utopian view of society, which I may or may not agree with philosophically, that I just don’t see from a real-world application perspective happening anytime soon.”

Silbert went on to explain that a world where there is no regulation, lawyers, contracts, or SEC rules is not going to exist in the near future. He then clarified, “It may solve some problems. The idea of a decentralized autonomous organization, it’s super interesting.”

Silbert also noted that many of the earliest applications built on Ethereum are related to gambling, Ponzi schemes, or pyramid schemes, but he also admitted that this isn’t necessarily a problem. He added, “That’s OK because that’s an interesting way to experiment; it’s certainly what happened with Bitcoin.”

What Does the World Need from Ethereum?

One of the main criticisms of Ethereum up to this point has been the lack of useful applications that solve real-world problems. On a recent episode of Unconfirmed Transactions, host Dan Anderson and Wall Street veteran Tone Vays described how Ethereum supporters were unable to provide any use cases for the project to them at a recent meetup in New York.

During his panel appearance on day one of Consensus 2016, Silbert seemed sympathetic to the idea that practical applications of Ethereum are yet to be found. He stated: “I don’t think the world needs a decentralized Uber, which is one project. I don’t think the world needs a decentralized AirBnb, which is another project.”

Having said that, it’s important to remember that Ethereum is a platform on which a developer is essentially given the power to build any decentralized application they wish. It’s possible the best use cases of Ethereum have simply not been thought of at this point.

During his final comments on DAOs, Silbert questioned the role these decentralized organizations can play in the real world. He concluded:

     “These DAOs that are raising money from the masses with — basically it’s a blank check. It’s a pool of capital that’s going to be deployed in a way that I think will be very democratic. I’m skeptical because I don’t know the role it needs to play in society. I don’t know, in the capital formation process, what’s wrong with our current system that it’s solving for. I’m philosophically supportive. I hope it’s successful, but I don’t see the problem it’s solving yet.”

[spartak_t]

Only time and action will tell what actually happens here - and a click bait title like DAO FAIL is clear on what your true intentions are before even reading through the thread.

You should carefully read what I have later said. I strongly support that part of the Silbert's statement:

During his final comments on DAOs, Silbert questioned the role these decentralized organizations can play in the real world. He concluded:

     “These DAOs that are raising money from the masses with — basically it’s a blank check. It’s a pool of capital that’s going to be deployed in a way that I think will be very democratic. I’m skeptical because I don’t know the role it needs to play in society. I don’t know, in the capital formation process, what’s wrong with our current system that it’s solving for. I’m philosophically supportive. I hope it’s successful, but I don’t see the problem it’s solving yet.”

That is why I've said that if Bill Gates or Warren Buffet (for example) decides to throw over $200Mn in a cryptocurrency/token/asset, I'm all in! No matter if they FAIL at some point, because I will at least know that they thought very carefully before releasing it. DAO's took over $200Mn from the "masses" and now it turned out that they have problemS (not only one). You can't just take $200Mn from the people, without doing vast amount of researches on your product (though I admit again that I didn't make any deep researches on ETH or DAO)! This could kill all the crypto!

This is my problem! I'm not a troll and I'm not against ETH/DAO. Whats better for crypto in general, its better for everybody.

[Hueristic]

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

[iamnotback]

You can't just take $200Mn from the people, without doing vast amount of researches on your product

That insouciance is what happens when you put Millennials in control.

Barry Silbert says:

Although Silbert is excited about Ethereum, he does not agree with the vision held by some of Ethereum’s most-ardent supporters. He explained:

    “I sense there’s a certain utopian view of society, which I may or may not agree with philosophically, that I just don’t see from a real-world application perspective happening anytime soon.”

I have a new theory that the altcoin speculation market is largely stratified by generational differences (in addition to for example cultural differences between Europeans and Americans for example).

On one end of the spectrum, we have Millennials (Z generation) who were raised spoiled by their middle-age boomer parents, and thus have this sort of unrealistic cartoonish or "everything is  a game" (and take money from the rich like we did to our parents) outlook similar to how Vitalik described himself:

Buterin won’t commit to a full explanation of why he became interested in Bitcoin on the second go around. He had recently quit playing World of Warcraft, and perhaps he was just looking for the next obsession to take its place, he says. But he does admit to having a dualistic worldview that faulted centralized powers with many of society’s sins.

“I had a much more cartoon mentality,” he says as he squeezes a lemon wedge into his green tea, then begins looping the string on the teabag incessantly around the handle of his mug. “I saw everything to do with either government regulation or corporate control as just being plain evil. And I assumed that people in those institutions were kind of like Mr. Burns, sitting behind their desks saying, ‘Excellent. How can I screw a thousand people over this time.’”

In this way, his worldview was harmonious with the vast majority of Bitcoin early adopters who fully expected the technology to operate as a stealthy foil for the status quo. And though he says he has substantially updated his binary assessment of good and evil, Buterin is still motivated by a conviction that the powerful have far too much power.

“I think a large part of the consequence is necessarily going to be disempowering some of these centralized players to some extent,” he says. “Because ultimately power is a zero sum game. And if you talk about empowering the little guy, as much as you want to couch it in flowery terminology that makes it sound fluffy and good, you are necessarily disempowering the big guy. And personally I say screw the big guy. They have enough money already.”

Just older than them are the Tweeners (Y generation) such as Daniel Larimer who were born in between the neglected X generation and the spoiled Z generation, thus they have a confused identity with some mix of wannabee Libertarianism like us GenXers but needing the pillow of increasing collectivism/socialism under which they were raised.

I am GenX. We were abandoned by our parents and the socialism wasn't very well developed yet in the 1970s and 1980s when we were growing up. So we had to fend for ourselves and thus are very pragmatic.

...

What Steemit is trying to do is collectivize our funds amongst the entire social network, then redistribute our funds based on who receives the most valid up voting.

Sorry but people don't want to join a social network to have their funds taken from them (for all those who are average) and redistributed to those who are above average.

Dan Larimer is a smart guy but in my opinion has always been (since I first debated him in BCT in 2013 about his plan to pay every token HODLer a dividend) a socialist/collectivist in a faux Libertarian skin. And that is why in my opinion all his designs have failed to achieve greatness.

Here are more recent examples I've experienced when interfacing with these irresponsible youth:

It is about you failing to respond to any of my technical points and wanting to just ignore the reality.

You don't want to have substantive debate with an expert.

Seems you are offended by something. I asked you what is 'rancid' in the other thread I linked to which had expressed some of the same logic as your OP, and you said the threads smell like fish. That isn't a very substantive response. You are all fluff. How about focusing in on the issues instead. I raised many issues and you seem to not be interested even though they are directly related to your OP.

Any way, I don't care. Enjoy what ever you are doing with this thread.

The reason I mentioned ego is in response to your statement, " With such "Technical superiority" your modesty is astounding.". I asked you to be aware of my knowledge set and not brush off my comments nonchalantly. You got offended by my lack of modesty.

It seems you don't comprehend the seriousness of the situation facing the world right now. When you are stuck in a 666 enslavement system some years from now, it will be too late to get your freedom back.

I have been working night and day for many years to prevent that from happening. You made an OP that seemed to recognize that Bitcoin is in dilemma. I am making you aware that it was designed to be in that dilemma. Because it is designed to enslave the world.

I have studied the consensus design and even explained that Satoshi didn't solve the Byzantine Generals Problem. I have studied the SegWit and other changes being made to Bitcoin. There is a pattern to all of this.

Your technical expertise are appreciated elsewhere this was a logical discussion about Bitcoin and only Bitcoin's future. Not the future of the whole world.

Bitcoin can't be fixed. The issue that your OP explains in insoluble. You can only hope to replace it. Bitcoin will be scaled up centralized. And it will enslave the world. Period. That is the answer.

I offered another option, but you don't want to discuss it. So end of thread.

The centralized Bitcoin won't be 51% attacked bcz those controlling it will have the 666 control system they designed Bitcoin to accomplish. In the transitionary phase now, the Chinese miners will be handed lots of wealth as the process of centralizing mining proceeds. We can't say every Chinese miner today knows he is part of the ultimate plan. We can't even say the Blockstream devs know they are part of some diabolical plan. They are just trying to fix a design that can't be fixed without restarting from scratch. Compartmentalization is the modus operandi of the DEEP STATE. This is a process. The DEEP STATE that designed Bitcoin has a plan over years.

Our other hope is the system blows up technically. But that is why Blockstream is receiving so much funding, because they probably have the expertise to centralize Bitcoin sufficiently whil still being able to give some illusion of decentralization for sufficient time that Bitcoin maximalists fall into the trap, of which SegWit is a major step in that direction.

In all honesty the Vcash project moves fast. It's only a year and half old and has evolved quite a bit since genesis. Because of Johns rapid pace of development on the Vcash project we (the community) are consistently trying to play ketchup understanding his technology and architecture. It's a learning process for us and much as it is for you. We are only human. Unfortunately the very people like Fuserleer who could take a deeper look into John's code is unwilling. So what more to discuss? His mind is made up already who are we to tell him he's wrong?

I pity you n00bs. Sincerely good luck.

Welcome back TPTB. I thank you for your sincerity but I don't really need your pity. I have every confidence in John Conner's work because he actually developing and pushing real software. He doesn't just talk, he does. In my n00bie opinion that's what matters most. Talk is cheap because action speaks louder than words.   

Action. Like the 1000 shitcoins that came before and died. And Vcash is apparently not entirely launched yet.

Yes you are welcome to hump any random garbage can along the side of the road. That is a form of action. Again I pity you.

Vcash is in beta sure but damn guy you don't have be to rude. Sure we have different views no need to get hostile and start insulting others for it.     

I am not intending to be any more rude than the rudeness of your insinuation that I have not done action. How is for example this action by myself not action?

Action is a nebulous term. That is what I am explaining to you by example.

I am also explaining you are quite blind to the action that others are doing. A single-minded focus on the random tree stump in front of you, is what a dog does.

[Hueristic]

...I am GenX. We were abandoned by our parents and the socialism wasn't very well developed yet in the 1970s and 1980s when we were growing up. So we had to fend for ourselves and thus are very pragmatic....

True but also (in the US at least) 40% of my paycheck was taxed my entire life and I was assured that was for my retirement so our generation expects to have some services when we retire or become injured. I also contributed 8% to a 401k as well which is needed if you expect to live near or above the poverty level when you retire (proof of the pragmatism).

[spartak_t]

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

Maybe, but it could also get "other people" interested in to ban just about everything. There are many people who thinks that cryptocurrencies are beating the banks (for example), and they are enthusiastically "singing" POWER TO THE PEOPLE, but the truth is that governents, banks and big companies are already exploring Bitcoin and such. They don't need Bitcoin, Ethereum or something else, which is part of our "cryptoworld". Do you think that they don't have the funds and the power to make something similar (or even better) than Bitcoin, Ethereum, or... whatever? How do you think you will react if you deposit $200Mn in a bank and get a response: "Thank you sir, but keep in mind that there is a chance for you to be robbed.". FUCK NO!

What I am trying to say with my not so rich english is that if you invest in a ICO and the initiator runs away with 10 BTC... that's a problem. But when you have gathered $200Mn from the "masses" and there are so important security flaws... that's a BIG FUCKING PROBLEM. Then these "other people" have another BIG excuse to get involved and guess what may happen next?

[Hueristic]

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

Maybe, but it could also get "other people" interested in to ban just about everything. There are many people who thinks that cryptocurrencies are beating the banks (for example), and they are enthusiastically "singing" POWER TO THE PEOPLE, but the truth is that governents, banks and big companies are already exploring Bitcoin and such. They don't need Bitcoin, Ethereum or something else, which is part of our "cryptoworld". Do you think that they don't have the funds and the power to make something similar (or even better) than Bitcoin, Ethereum, or... whatever? How do you think you will react if you deposit $200Mn in a bank and get a response: "Thank you sir, but keep in mind that there is a chance for you to be robbed.". FUCK NO!

What I am trying to say with my not so rich english is that if you invest in a ICO and the initiator runs away with 10 BTC... that's a problem. But when you have gathered $200Mn from the "masses" and there are so important security flaws... that's a BIG FUCKING PROBLEM. Then these "other people" have another BIG excuse to get involved and guess what may happen next?

I think we have alot of ideas that agree but I am not quite grasping your post here. Even though you tried to encapsulate it. Lol

[iamnotback]

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

But when you have gathered $200Mn from the "masses" and there are so important security flaws... that's a BIG FUCKING PROBLEM. Then these "other people" have another BIG excuse to get involved and guess what may happen next?

It is all part of the game. The ecosystem is the game. I think Heuristic was correct:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15233191#msg15233191

[shyliar]

Interesting article about a found vulnerability in the DAO and apparently wide spread.

http://www.coindesk.com/leaderless-dao-put-test-following-reported-ethereum-vulnerability/

[spartak_t]

I think we have alot of ideas that agree but I am not quite grasping your post here. Even though you tried to encapsulate it. Lol

http://uk.businessinsider.com/dao-hacked-ethereum-crashing-in-value-tens-of-millions-allegedly-stolen-2016-6

Do you understand me now?

[iamnotback]

I think we have alot of ideas that agree but I am not quite grasping your post here. Even though you tried to encapsulate it. Lol

http://uk.businessinsider.com/dao-hacked-ethereum-crashing-in-value-tens-of-millions-allegedly-stolen-2016-6

Do you understand me now?

His point is that is all part of the game. It is actually good for crypto. Our ecosystem learns and grows stronger.

This is the way decentralized nature anneals fitness.

[spartak_t]

His point is that is all part of the game. It is actually good for crypto. Our ecosystem learns and grows stronger.

This is the way decentralized nature anneals fitness.

I know what he meant, but I'm not sure if he understand why I did started this thread and my point here. It is part of the game, but its not good for crypto.

[iamnotback]

Btw, you did predict the likelihood of technical failure.

It is part of the game, but its not good for crypto.

Not to get in a heated argument, but I respectfully disagree.

I explained why I think that by not allowing experimentation and failure, you actually will never succeed. Most people don't understand how knowledge is created:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1513252.msg15236118#msg15236118

Here are some more posts which expound:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1513252.msg15234366#msg15234366
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1513252.msg15235684#msg15235684
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1513252.msg15237291#msg15237291
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1513252.msg15234109#msg15234109

[Biodom]

Only time and action will tell what actually happens here - and a click bait title like DAO FAIL is clear on what your true intentions are before even reading through the thread.

You should carefully read what I have later said. I strongly support that part of the Silbert's statement:

During his final comments on DAOs, Silbert questioned the role these decentralized organizations can play in the real world. He concluded:

     “These DAOs that are raising money from the masses with — basically it’s a blank check. It’s a pool of capital that’s going to be deployed in a way that I think will be very democratic. I’m skeptical because I don’t know the role it needs to play in society. I don’t know, in the capital formation process, what’s wrong with our current system that it’s solving for. I’m philosophically supportive. I hope it’s successful, but I don’t see the problem it’s solving yet.”

That is why I've said that if Bill Gates or Warren Buffet (for example) decides to throw over $200Mn in a cryptocurrency/token/asset, I'm all in! No matter if they FAIL at some point, because I will at least know that they thought very carefully before releasing it. DAO's took over $200Mn from the "masses" and now it turned out that they have problemS (not only one). You can't just take $200Mn from the people, without doing vast amount of researches on your product (though I admit again that I didn't make any deep researches on ETH or DAO)! This could kill all the crypto!

This is my problem! I'm not a troll and I'm not against ETH/DAO. Whats better for crypto in general, its better for everybody.

Silbert? he he-he needs to explain why his bitcoin derivative (GBTC) is trading at almost 2X NAV.
Nothing wrong there, no, sireee.

[Biodom]

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

I agree and ALL bitcoin was almost zeroed at least once due to a major software error.
EDIT: in 2010

[philipma1957]

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

I agree and ALL bitcoin was almost zeroed at least once due to a major software error.

post on my poll have some fun with it.

[Hueristic]

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

I agree and ALL bitcoin was almost zeroed at least once due to a major software error.

post on my poll have some fun with it.

Linky?

found it.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516039.msg15254465#msg15254465

[BitUsher]

Remember The Dao's marketing pitch?  - "operating solely with the steadfast iron will of unstoppable code"?

[Fanpant]

DAO failed for now. If the code is written properly and test robustly, it might come back again, but it will take some time.

[BitUsher]

https://twitter.com/fivedogit/status/743867427742703616

"I accidentally deleted the keys to 830 ETH back in the day. Can I get a bailout too? "

[CryR]

Ethereum gone too far, time to dump all

[iamnotback]

Remember The Dao's marketing pitch?  - "operating solely with the steadfast iron will of unstoppable code"?

Likely plagiarized derived from the slogan of the book The Spider and The Starfish, The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations.

[hv_]

https://twitter.com/fivedogit/status/743867427742703616

"I accidentally deleted the keys to 830 ETH back in the day. Can I get a bailout too? "

Need to ask FEDalik Butyellen first...

[BitUsher]

Plans for Reimbursing Exchange losses to prevent price discover-



Blacklists.



and state warrants and demands ... Oh my!

[CryR]

All is Lost https://blog.daohub.org/the-next-steps-786323e6fac9#.4qldc6maw

[bones261]

All is Lost https://blog.daohub.org/the-next-steps-786323e6fac9#.4qldc6maw

Wow, what wonderful choices. Either wait for a possible hardfork and watch the DAO get drained for more; dump your tokens on some other idiot for a loss; or try a split into another child DAO that will have the exact same vulnerability. I guess if every single DAO holder attempts to split off on their own, a few of the lucky ones may find themselves all alone, with no stalker trying to drain them dry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPVpMxVn6mk

Thank God that I divested myself of this nonsense a few days ago.

[Spoetnik]

I think we have alot of ideas that agree but I am not quite grasping your post here. Even though you tried to encapsulate it. Lol

http://uk.businessinsider.com/dao-hacked-ethereum-crashing-in-value-tens-of-millions-allegedly-stolen-2016-6

Do you understand me now?

His point is that is all part of the game. It is actually good for crypto. Our ecosystem learns and grows stronger.

This is the way decentralized nature anneals fitness.

oooooooh my fucking god damn god ROFL 

[iamnotback]

I think we have alot of ideas that agree but I am not quite grasping your post here. Even though you tried to encapsulate it. Lol

http://uk.businessinsider.com/dao-hacked-ethereum-crashing-in-value-tens-of-millions-allegedly-stolen-2016-6

Do you understand me now?

His point is that is all part of the game. It is actually good for crypto. Our ecosystem learns and grows stronger.

This is the way decentralized nature anneals fitness.

oooooooh my fucking god damn god ROFL  

Spoetic my dear Rambo Penguin (please set your machine gun down for a moment and hear me out), my point is that the ecosystem learns by experience.

You know when you try to tell a child not to touch the hot burner on the top of the stove, but since you told him not to do it, then he must do it. So he burns his hand and then he never does it again (unless he is one of those hard-headed types who torments his mother).

[Spoetnik]

You should not have said that.. LOL

I get it man i really do

When i was a little kid i stuck a key in the electrical plug-in on the stove
in front of my mom and her chick friend in the kitchen.. i said hey look at this !
She screamed as i did it then tried to lunge at me but it was too late.

I got fucking juiced sumthin' fierce  

I will never forget the sensation of raw voltage running through my body full force.

Years Later.. i was alone at home in like grade 5 and i was screwing around the house
And i have no idea what possessed me but i decided to grab some scissors
and cut the cord of a clock that was on the wall with a wired plugin..

It made a huge massive blinding flash and threw me flying back hard into the wall
and massive popping explosion.. and i got juiced again.

So ?

When do you Cryptards learn your god damn lesson ?

[iCEBREAKER]

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!   

[iamnotback]

You should not have said that.. LOL

I get it man i really do

When i was a little kid i stuck a key in the electrical plug-in on the stove
in front of my mom and her chick friend in the kitchen.. i said hey look at this !
She screamed as i did it then tried to lunge at me but it was too late.

I got fucking juiced sumthin' fierce  

I will never forget the sensation of raw voltage running through my body full force.

Years Later.. i was alone at home in like grade 5 and i was screwing around the house
And i have no idea what possessed me but i decided to grab some scissors
and cut the cord of a clock that was on the wall with a wired plugin..

It made a huge massive blinding flash and threw me flying back hard into the wall
and massive popping explosion.. and i got juiced again.

So ?

When do you Cryptards learn your god damn lesson ?

Man I knew I had a brother out there some where.

I used to lick 9V batteries to make sure they still had a charge. And I thought I'd try it on the wall socket. That was a thrill. Too bad for this forum, USA only has 110V.

[scyth3]

Bitcoin 1, Ethereum 0.

No amount of code repair will fix this mess. This kind of top down centralized control of any currency should not be tolerated. All DAO investors should lose their money and should not be bailed out. The "hacker" deserves the money for uncovering this scam.

[crypto jerk]

[bones261]

It's even worse the this. It's like cholera, the shits leading to death.

[BitUsher]

[iCEBREAKER]

OMG that took a while!   

We're getting old and slow; gone.png postings used to happen mere nanoseconds after the latest Bitcoin debacle!   

[parmatiya]

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!   

Buterin only has the power to propose the change, you can also propose changes. It is up to the community to adopt it.

[gogodr]

So its true. The dao did fail and is closing down.

http://www.coindesk.com/the-dao-is-closing-down/

[BitUsher]

[spartak_t]

I think that the attacker can be sued, but that doesn't matter. DAO got hurt in a way that I didn't expected, thought I pointed out that it has too many flaws.

[gogodr]

I think that the attacker can be sued, but that doesn't matter. DAO got hurt in a way that I didn't expected, thought I pointed out that it has too many flaws.

Sued by who?

A bunch of line of code cant sue anyone!

[CryR]

ROLF Signed message from the ethereum "hacker" http://pastebin.com/CcGUBgDG Eth = best scam ever

[ATA Group]

I think that the attacker can be sued, but that doesn't matter. DAO got hurt in a way that I didn't expected, thought I pointed out that it has too many flaws.

for what?

[spartak_t]

I think that the attacker can be sued, but that doesn't matter. DAO got hurt in a way that I didn't expected, thought I pointed out that it has too many flaws.

Sued by who?

A bunch of line of code cant sue anyone!

We are talking about vast amount of money and they will definitely try to do something (for example, hard fork). I'm not sure if they can really sue him, but time will tell.

ROLF Signed message from the ethereum "hacker" http://pastebin.com/CcGUBgDG Eth = best scam ever

Yeah, I saw it earlier today...

[ATA Group]

I think that the attacker can be sued, but that doesn't matter. DAO got hurt in a way that I didn't expected, thought I pointed out that it has too many flaws.

Sued by who?

A bunch of line of code cant sue anyone!

We are talking about vast amount of money and they will definitely try to do something (for example, hard fork). I'm not sure if they can really sue him, but time will tell.

He did absolutely nothing wrong!
Everything was according to the rules.

[vincentvincent]

WAIT! LET ME GRAB SOME POPCORN FIRST!

[spartak_t]

He did absolutely nothing wrong!
Everything was according to the rules.

But what if they decide to make a hard fork in order to return the "stolen" funds? Can the "attacker" sue them for taking what he rightfully claimed?

[LoyceV]

So its true. The dao did fail and is closing down.

http://www.coindesk.com/the-dao-is-closing-down/

I've only been following the dao a tiny bit, but do I get this right: Ethereum offers smart contracts, but there is no IRL application yet. So they made the dao, based on a smart contract, as the first one, with the single goal to fund other smart contracts. And since so many people are speculating hoping it will work, they threw millions of real dollars into this.
Now the first big smart contract turns out to be flawed, money disappears, and they're willing to block the stolen money therefore blocking the funds from within the chain, which takes away all trust in Ethereum being autonomous?

[Buratino]

DAO now is DOA, dead or alive.

[hv_]

DAO now is DOA, dead or alive.

Yes, its gone binary....

[spartak_t]

DAO now is DOA, dead or alive.

More like Dead On Arrival...

[hv_]

DAO now is DOA, dead or alive.

More like Dead On Arrival...

Dump All Out

[alyssa85]

I think that the attacker can be sued, but that doesn't matter. DAO got hurt in a way that I didn't expected, thought I pointed out that it has too many flaws.

Sued by who?

A bunch of line of code cant sue anyone!

We are talking about vast amount of money and they will definitely try to do something (for example, hard fork). I'm not sure if they can really sue him, but time will tell.

He did absolutely nothing wrong!
Everything was according to the rules.

It depends on whether he gets sued in a jurisdiction that goes with "the spirit of the contract" or "the letter of the contract". Lots of countries (like the UK) use "the spirit of the law" to protect against the need for legislators to foresee every possible scam permutation and write protections for each one into law.

[LoyceV]

It depends on whether he gets sued in a jurisdiction that goes with "the spirit of the contract" or "the letter of the contract".

That doesn't work for smart contracts: the whole spirit of the contract is to follow the letter of the contract. No exceptions.

[iamnotback]

This is what I meant about it is a good thing for The DAO FAIL:

I have been a fan of Ethereum from a little earlier in this year. I was thoroughly amazed by the smart contract technology and infrastructure for DAOs. I put a significant sum of money I had saved up in ethereum when the price was around 14$/ETH. I watched it go up and down daily but never sold. When "The DAO" came out, at first I was skeptical, but the community's approach changed my mind. Everyone was saying that it was a no-risk investment so I put all my ETH in it and to be honest I still haven't pulled out. After finding out that it was attacked, I didn't know how to act. I saw the DAO/ETH trading price falling well below 1 ETH/100 DAO tokens (which was the price I bought in). I could have sold my tokens in panic in an attempt to minimize losses then but I'd still have lost around 40% of my principal, so I just waited to see if there would be better options. DAO tokens still trade well below their presale price and the notion of a hard fork to fix this keeps seeming more and more distant as per Vitalik Butterin's words.

Through time though, I got in terms with the idea that I'm probably going to lose everything; I even got to like it. Fueling a financial revolution ain't easy, just think of how many bitcoiners have lost money to date. We're all just doing our part on bringing society closer to a bank-free future.

Ditto when I got my ass burned for selling $600 of BTC on Paypal.

[x13]

Wow, what a big step! Does anyone knows whether the investments into DOA are dead, too? Or is it possible to exchange them for Ether in any way. I have only got a small stake, so loss is not big but I am wondering if I still could liquidate them.

So its true. The dao did fail and is closing down.

http://www.coindesk.com/the-dao-is-closing-down/

[bones261]

Wow, what a big step! Does anyone knows whether the investments into DOA are dead, too? Or is it possible to exchange them for Ether in any way. I have only got a small stake, so loss is not big but I am wondering if I still could liquidate them.

You can go to their blog to find the options. None of them are good.
https://blog.daohub.org/the-next-steps-786323e6fac9#.n8b9ecru6

[Tacalt]

It depends on whether he gets sued in a jurisdiction that goes with "the spirit of the contract" or "the letter of the contract".

That doesn't work for smart contracts: the whole spirit of the contract is to follow the letter of the contract. No exceptions.

The present theft is committed by exploiting a flaw in the coding. Is that also a letter of the contract?

[luisb]

https://i.imgflip.com/161hkw.jpgvia Imgflip Meme Generator  https://i.imgflip.com/161hi8.jpgvia Imgflip Meme Generator

[iqlimasyadiqa]

Very shocking news of course. DAO previously been phenomenal with the financial strength that he had. because a hacker attack problems that take up most of their money this time DAO fall. they are too much to lose and DAO will be difficult to grow back.

[MySecondCunt]

It depends on whether he gets sued in a jurisdiction that goes with "the spirit of the contract" or "the letter of the contract".

That doesn't work for smart contracts: the whole spirit of the contract is to follow the letter of the contract. No exceptions.

The present theft is committed by exploiting a flaw in the coding. Is that also a letter of the contract?

If code is definitive (code is law), define the following:
"flaw in the coding"
"the spirit of the contract"
"jurisdiction"
ty

[Spoetnik]

@MySecondCunt
AGREED !
And love the name LOL

..rest of the Tards ?

..some FUD for YOU !
and some FUD for you..
Some FUD for you also !

No i did not forget about you too
..some FUD for you too.

[btc_zero_sum]

not sure if troll or for real, just like the "attacker letter", but because of this i need more popcorn




https://twitter.com/maguraaa/status/744161853891305473

[bones261]

@MySecondCunt
AGREED !
And love the name LOL

..rest of the Tards ?

..some FUD for YOU !
and some FUD for you..
Some FUD for you also !

No i did not forget about you too
..some FUD for you too.

Keep feeding this troll with FUD.



So tasty. ETH/DAO FUD is the best ever.

[LoyceV]

It depends on whether he gets sued in a jurisdiction that goes with "the spirit of the contract" or "the letter of the contract".

That doesn't work for smart contracts: the whole spirit of the contract is to follow the letter of the contract. No exceptions.

The present theft is committed by exploiting a flaw in the coding. Is that also a letter of the contract?

The coding is the contract, so by definition the coding is the letter of the contract.

[spartak_t]

Let's stick to the subject, which is:

[CjMapope]

ROLF Signed message from the ethereum "hacker" http://pastebin.com/CcGUBgDG Eth = best scam ever

sig dosent validate =  nope

either way, i find it just funny OP "called it" basically. tho i never touched ETH for the reason i find WAY too many holes in solidarity,
DAO? meh, it was a way for stephan taul that greaseball to fund his slock.it (a dumb idea noone will admit) so o well, RIP good riddance imo

[iamnotback]

ROLF Signed message from the ethereum "hacker" http://pastebin.com/CcGUBgDG Eth = best scam ever

sig dosent validate =  nope

either way, i find it just funny OP "called it" basically. tho i never touched ETH for the reason i find WAY too many holes in solidarity,
DAO? meh, it was a way for stephan taul that greaseball to fund his slock.it (a dumb idea noone will admit) so o well, RIP good riddance imo

Verify it with Keccak:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1517223.msg15273789#msg15273789

[CjMapope]

ROLF Signed message from the ethereum "hacker" http://pastebin.com/CcGUBgDG Eth = best scam ever

sig dosent validate =  nope

either way, i find it just funny OP "called it" basically. tho i never touched ETH for the reason i find WAY too many holes in solidarity,
DAO? meh, it was a way for stephan taul that greaseball to fund his slock.it (a dumb idea noone will admit) so o well, RIP good riddance imo

Verify it with Keccak:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1517223.msg15273789#msg15273789

o snap, your right. i fell victim to the SHA thought also, thx
hmm, now THAT makes this interesting, there's a sure chance miners could be profit motivated to vote to not fork wow im interested to see how this ends up in the next 30 days, hmmm.
i personally will vote for a fork, i understand it kills the decentralization, but can't help but agree that the attacker CANNOT be allowed to keep those funds. ETH is young, people forget that. shit happens

[LoyceV]

Let's stick to the subject, which is:

Nice summary to point at where it hurts.
The more I think about it, the more I believe smart contracts end here! Raising 174 million dollars from people who don't understand the contract clearly shows it's not possible to understand a contract. It's kinda like most people don't understand (or even read!) the full terms of their mortgage, but at least that is covered by conventional law, and banks have been fined for misleading consumers.
The smart contracts are in a way like Open Source Software: most users don't check it, assuming someone once in a while has a look at the source. For the smart contract, that "someone" turned out to be "The Attacker". He looked at the source, found a "feature" nobody knew about, and decided he'd take 50 million bucks. Even if he wouldn't have taken the money, someone else would have, as the Smart Contract can't be changed.
Who here has ever read the actual "The DAO's Smart Contract"? I tried to Google it but can't even find it. There's an explanation but that's not the actual code.
Even if you did read and fully understand the Smart Contract, would you want your money to be in the hands of a voting system that gives decision power to people who don't understand the contract?
For these reasons it's now my opinion Smart Contracts failed before they were even really used.

Blockchain Company's Smart Contracts Were Dumb:

The descriptions didn't matter; only the code did. The descriptions didn't allow for today's hack, but the code did. (By definition! If the code could be hacked, the code allowed for the hack.) Any vulnerabilities in the DAO's code were not flaws in the code; they were flaws in the descriptions -- which were purely for entertainment purposes.

[coinyard]

ROLF Signed message from the ethereum "hacker" http://pastebin.com/CcGUBgDG Eth = best scam ever

sig dosent validate =  nope

either way, i find it just funny OP "called it" basically. tho i never touched ETH for the reason i find WAY too many holes in solidarity,
DAO? meh, it was a way for stephan taul that greaseball to fund his slock.it (a dumb idea noone will admit) so o well, RIP good riddance imo

Verify it with Keccak:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1517223.msg15273789#msg15273789

o snap, your right. i fell victim to the SHA thought also, thx
hmm, now THAT makes this interesting, there's a sure chance miners could be profit motivated to vote to not fork wow im interested to see how this ends up in the next 30 days, hmmm.
i personally will vote for a fork, i understand it kills the decentralization, but can't help but agree that the attacker CANNOT be allowed to keep those funds. ETH is young, people forget that. shit happens

I am a miner. The hacker can keep 1,000 Ethereum to himself and return the rest to the community. If he does that, I will vote no. Otherwise, I will vote for the fork.

[hv_]

Predictable.

There is no real usecase for ETH, no real killerapp, but a big shiny hype.

DAO was just the bubble of the bubble, rushed in to ride the hype without good review.

People should always think of risks, but be free to invest at last.

[toknormal]

On balance, if I were Ethereum, I'd probably just leave it alone.

The investor bailout option is fraught with greater moral hazard than the non-bailout option because you're setting a precedent where stuff gets rolled back because the community didn't like it.

Kind of gives the blockchain the feel of a toy. A game of monopoly that's not real where you can just go back a few moves and scrub out history if you didn't like what happened.

People can argue all day about the practical implications but it's the symbolic implications that are of far greater significance to the future. If the fork goes ahead I doubt any serious big hitter contract users will ever touch this technology.

[toknormal]

...also, the 3.5 M Ether is better off in the hands of the "attacker" who seems a clever sort of chap than being returned to the DAO investors who will probably just dump it.

[anthonydar]

...also, the 3.5 M Ether is better off in the hands of the "attacker" who seems a clever sort of chap than being returned to the DAO investors who will probably just dump it.

I will vote for the 3.5 million to be returned to the original DAO holders. He can keep 280 Ethereum. If more, I will support hard fork.

[toknormal]

I will vote for the 3.5 million to be returned to the original DAO holders. He can keep 280 Ethereum. If more, I will support hard fork.

That will kill the whole veracity of smart contracts for evermore and migrate the rot to the entire Ethereum coin supply.

The people who should take the hit for this are the DAO investors. They took a risk and lost. If the blockchain does not properly reflect that fact then you have a useless technology which will be valued accordingly.

[toknormal]

P.S. In crypto, there are no "rightful owners".

Contrary to the banking credit world where posession and ownership are distinct, in crypto, ownership is unambiguously defined by possession. That is a cardinal quality of the blockchain that asserts its role as "bearer instrument".

If the mining community acts to disaffirm this principle - albeit in a meta currency layer - it will create an ambiguity that will haunt Ethereum for the rest of its existence IMO.

The lesson to be learned here is that Ethereum blockchain and Ethereum (Solidity) applications are distinct entities with distinct levels of reliability. If I write a piece of code in solidity (say to develop a coin) and I f*ck it up and loose my investors money does that mean I can get the Ethereum foundation to do a rollback and cover my a*ss ?

If not, why not ?

[sadyas]

P.S. In crypto, there are no "rightful owners".

Contrary to the banking credit world where posession and ownership are distinct, in crypto, ownership is unambiguously defined by possession. That is a cardinal quality of the blockchain that asserts its role as "bearer instrument".

If the mining community acts to disaffirm this principle - albeit in a meta currency layer - it will create an ambiguity that will haunt Ethereum for the rest of its existence IMO.

The lesson to be learned here is that Ethereum blockchain and Ethereum (Solidity) applications are distinct entities with distinct levels of reliability. If I write a piece of code in solidity (say to develop a coin) and I f*ck it up and loose my investors money does that mean I can get the Ethereum foundation to do a rollback and cover my a*ss ?

If not, why not ?

Miners are there to protect the integrity of the monetary system. If the thief cannot be caught in the real life, then we have to take back our money with a fork.

[gilangIDR]

This incident makes eth falling down. at the beginning we are sure eth could be a successor bitcoin. however, now that hope seemed to disappear. most of the coins had been taken by an unauthorized person.

[toknormal]

Miners are there to protect the integrity of the monetary system. If the thief cannot be caught in the real life, then we have to take back our money with a fork.

You will also have to pay the price of doing that which will be to have undermined one of the technology's core properties for evermore and make it toxic for any future serious players.

Bitcointalk is one thing, where people are aware of the subtleties of the background to this case. Major investors who have never heard of "smart contracts" up till now will not touch it with a bargepole once they learn that immutability can be compromised in this way - whether by mining consensus or in any other strategy. Your job as a miner is to consolidate history, not rewrite it.

Further, instead of confining the loss to DAO investors where it belongs, you will now be imposing it upon the entire Ethereum holder community.

Best to study historical precedents in this area:

http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-protected-vericoin-stolen-mintpal-wallet-breach/

[Ultrabat]

Miners are there to protect the integrity of the monetary system. If the thief cannot be caught in the real life, then we have to take back our money with a fork.

You will also have to pay the price of doing that which will be to have undermined one of the technology's core properties for evermore and make it toxic for any future serious players.

Bitcointalk is one thing, where people are aware of the subtleties of the background to this case. Major investors who have never heard of "smart contracts" up till now will not touch it with a bargepole once they learn that immutability can be compromised in this way - whether by mining consensus or in any other strategy. Your job as a miner is to consolidate history, not rewrite it.

Further, instead of confining the loss to DAO investors where it belongs, you will now be imposing it upon the entire Ethereum holder community.

Best to study historical precedents in this area:

http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-protected-vericoin-stolen-mintpal-wallet-breach/

I think the Ethereum community will pay the price for supporting the DAO owners. But that is the right price to pay.

[toknormal]

But that is the right price to pay.

Right for whom ? It may be right for DAO investors.

But it isn't right for Ethereum investors, it isn't right for future potential Smart Contract consumers, it isn't right for the cryptocurrency industry in general and it isn't right for developers.

The very architecture of a smart contract blockchain makes the logic of the "Turing Complete" scripting language independent of the logic of the blockchain on which it runs. Kind of like the separation of executive a legislative powers in states. If you decide to p*ss all over that principle just to save yourself embarrassment and investors in a known risky asset from taking a haircut then you just kill it for everybody.

It's different if the remedy comes from within the logic of the DAO code itself. That would be appropriate because that was where the logic failed. But forking at the Ethereum blockchain level is just suicide.

I realise that only the DAO would be affected by the fork but that just makes it even worse because it shows that forks can cherry pick what contracts they want to immute. I'm afraid the damage done in terms of loss of confidence will be irreparable.

The reason I'm p*ssed off about this is that I consciously did not invest in DAO because I understood the risk and what I was investing in. i.e. I realised I was buying a contract that floated on top of the Blockchain that carried its own logic (and therefore risk) which was independent of that of the platform tokens.

Now I find that that was not the case. That the risk is transferrable to Ether token holders because the fork needs to occur at the blockchain level. I don't think thats acceptable and although I could live with it as a one-off I doubt that future investors of industrial calibre will give a technology that entertains such cack handed tactics a second look.

[Kwiksave]

But that is the right price to pay.

Right for whom ? It may be right for DAO investors.

But it isn't right for Ethereum investors, it isn't right for future potential Smart Contract consumers, it isn't right for the cryptocurrency industry in general and it isn't right for developers.

The very architecture of a smart contract blockchain makes the logic of the "Turing Complete" scripting language independent of the logic of the blockchain on which it runs. Kind of like the separation of executive a legislative powers in states. If you decide to p*ss all over that principle just to save yourself embarrassment and investors in a known risky asset from taking a haircut then you just kill it for everybody.

It's different if the remedy comes from within the logic of the DAO code itself. That would be appropriate because that was where the logic failed. But forking at the Ethereum blockchain level is just suicide.

I realise that only the DAO would be affected by the fork but that just makes it even worse because it shows that forks can cherry pick what contracts they want to immute. I'm afraid the damage done in terms of loss of confidence will be irreparable.

If that is bad for the whole crypto currency community, then would the bitcoin holders give some help to the DAO owners so that there will not be a hard fork?

[toknormal]

If that is bad for the whole crypto currency community, then would the bitcoin holders give some help to the DAO owners so that there will not be a hard fork?

What kind of help ?

[bit tired]

But that is the right price to pay.

Right for whom ? It may be right for DAO investors.

But it isn't right for Ethereum investors, it isn't right for future potential Smart Contract consumers, it isn't right for the cryptocurrency industry in general and it isn't right for developers.

The very architecture of a smart contract blockchain makes the logic of the "Turing Complete" scripting language independent of the logic of the blockchain on which it runs. Kind of like the separation of executive a legislative powers in states. If you decide to p*ss all over that principle just to save yourself embarrassment and investors in a known risky asset from taking a haircut then you just kill it for everybody.

It's different if the remedy comes from within the logic of the DAO code itself. That would be appropriate because that was where the logic failed. But forking at the Ethereum blockchain level is just suicide.

I realise that only the DAO would be affected by the fork but that just makes it even worse because it shows that forks can cherry pick what contracts they want to immute. I'm afraid the damage done in terms of loss of confidence will be irreparable.

If that is bad for the whole crypto currency community, then would the bitcoin holders give some help to the DAO owners so that there will not be a hard fork?

Vitalik dumped a quarter of his share of the ethereum premine. He could use that money to bail out the DAO and stop a hard fork if he believes in his coin. He still has the other three quarters of his share of the ethereum premine. If he believes in his coin he could wait until it recovers to dump the rest.

If he doesn't help out his remaining share of the premine could become worthless.

[iamnotback]

It's different if the remedy comes from within the logic of the DAO code itself. That would be appropriate because that was where the logic failed. But forking at the Ethereum blockchain level is just suicide.

I realise that only the DAO would be affected by the fork but that just makes it even worse because it shows that forks can cherry pick what contracts they want to immute. I'm afraid the damage done in terms of loss of confidence will be irreparable.

Ignoring the legal factors which impact the game theory because that enterprise is not really decentralized (e.g. Vitalik, Tual, et al hyping moonshots to n00b dreamers without sobering disclaimers and the incestuous same set of good ole boys as Curators of The DAO), then I agree with you that the only fork of the Ethereum protocol which would be agnostic would be that which would futilely attempt to "fix" the litany of corner case bugs induced by Turing-complete programming.

[toknormal]

Well the confilct appears obvious to many commentators.

[BitUsher]

Blacklisting Feature going in the next Geth and they are calling it "illegal hashes" .

Nice Orwellian doublespeak. You cannot make this shit up.

[iamnotback]

Blacklisting Feature going in the next Geth and they are calling it "illegal hashes" .

Nice Orwellian doublespeak. You cannot make this shit up.

This will cause MP to fight them even more aggressively! We have war coming and the genius MP will not be the loser bcz he understand economics (i.e. reality) much better than Vitalik. Vitalik will be spanked on his shit soiled underwear diaper:

So is that interview legitimate? If so that guy gives zero fucks and is a straight internet gangster. Not my type person, but I kinda admire him.

Mircea Popescu (MP) has a core constitution which is that every person should be responsible for themself. And he originally was adamant that he would attack any Bitcoin fork that raised the block size. He also appears to be against shitcoins and he is a Bitcoin maximalist. He sees himself as a defender of anarchism. He also is motivated by profit. I definitely agree with his anarchism/self-responsibility constitution, but if he is supporting Blockstream's Rube Goldberg complexity future-clusterfuck Troika of SegWit, Side-chains, and Lightning Networks then he and I are going to disagree!

GTFO of ETH at $12 while you still can! The deadcat bounce is topping and lower, lower we will go. Because MP is not a bullshitter. And he has very significant BTC resources > 50,000 BTC.

[Spoetnik]

Miners are there to protect the integrity of the monetary system. If the thief cannot be caught in the real life, then we have to take back our money with a fork.

You will also have to pay the price of doing that which will be to have undermined one of the technology's core properties for evermore and make it toxic for any future serious players.

Bitcointalk is one thing, where people are aware of the subtleties of the background to this case. Major investors who have never heard of "smart contracts" up till now will not touch it with a bargepole once they learn that immutability can be compromised in this way - whether by mining consensus or in any other strategy. Your job as a miner is to consolidate history, not rewrite it.

Further, instead of confining the loss to DAO investors where it belongs, you will now be imposing it upon the entire Ethereum holder community.

Best to study historical precedents in this area:

http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-protected-vericoin-stolen-mintpal-wallet-breach/

I think the Ethereum community will pay the price for supporting the DAO owners. But that is the right price to pay.

Rightly.. Ethereum was made for this type of shit & was never a good or FAIR idea anyway.
So what other outcome would the Investarded expect ?

Invest in scammy schemes for profit you get what's coming to you !

[iamnotback]

The very architecture of a smart contract blockchain makes the logic of the "Turing Complete" scripting language independent of the logic of the blockchain on which it runs. Kind of like the separation of executive a legislative powers in states. If you decide to p*ss all over that principle just to save yourself embarrassment and investors in a known risky asset from taking a haircut then you just kill it for everybody.

Incorrect! Turing-completeness is unbounded recursion. Thus it makes it impossible to encapsulate scripts from each other and from internal recursion, etc.. It is the opposite of your incorrect assumption!

You should stop spreading lies about computer science that you do not understand.

[BitUsher]

Incorrect! Turing-completeness is unbounded recursion. Thus it makes it impossible to encapsulate scripts from each other and from internal recursion, etc.. It is the opposite of your incorrect assumption!

This!

Many mETH heads are making the incorrect assumption these fundamental security weakness lie within the DAO solely and not within the fundamental nature of the Ethereum blockchain. They are content to wait for the attack to come to them in a sense of naive delusion and ignore security researchers screaming warning signs to no avail.

http://vessenes.com/ethereum-contracts-are-going-to-be-candy-for-hackers/

http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/06/16/scanning-live-ethereum-contracts-for-bugs/

[x13]

No, I do not agree!  The open letter of the attackers states what the truth is. I rightly created a child dao and used it to recursively get Ether. This is acutally not forbidden it is just a bug in a feature in a decentralized environment.

P.S. In crypto, there are no "rightful owners".

Contrary to the banking credit world where posession and ownership are distinct, in crypto, ownership is unambiguously defined by possession. That is a cardinal quality of the blockchain that asserts its role as "bearer instrument".

If the mining community acts to disaffirm this principle - albeit in a meta currency layer - it will create an ambiguity that will haunt Ethereum for the rest of its existence IMO.

The lesson to be learned here is that Ethereum blockchain and Ethereum (Solidity) applications are distinct entities with distinct levels of reliability. If I write a piece of code in solidity (say to develop a coin) and I f*ck it up and loose my investors money does that mean I can get the Ethereum foundation to do a rollback and cover my a*ss ?

If not, why not ?

Miners are there to protect the integrity of the monetary system. If the thief cannot be caught in the real life, then we have to take back our money with a fork.

[glerand]

No, I do not agree!  The open letter of the attackers states what the truth is. I rightly created a child dao and used it to recursively get Ether. This is acutally not forbidden it is just a bug in a feature in a decentralized environment.

If you are near an ATTM, the ATM malfunctioned, it spit out cash. If you take the cash and did not give it back, it is criminal action.

[iamnotback]

Incorrect! Turing-completeness is unbounded recursion. Thus it makes it impossible to encapsulate scripts from each other and from internal recursion, etc.. It is the opposite of your incorrect assumption!

This!

Many mETH heads are making the incorrect assumption these fundamental security weakness lie within the DAO solely and not within the fundamental nature of the Ethereum blockchain. They are content to wait for the attack to come to them in a sense of naive delusion and ignore security researchers screaming warning signs to no avail.

http://vessenes.com/ethereum-contracts-are-going-to-be-candy-for-hackers/

http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/06/16/scanning-live-ethereum-contracts-for-bugs/

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!

[iamnotback]

No, I do not agree!  The open letter of the attackers states what the truth is. I rightly created a child dao and used it to recursively get Ether. This is acutally not forbidden it is just a bug in a feature in a decentralized environment.

If you are near an ATTM, the ATM malfunctioned, it spit out cash. If you take the cash and did not give it back, it is criminal action.

The problem here is who decides what the "intent" of the contract was?

You're mixing apples and potatoes here. Bitcoin mostly uses soft-forks in order to improve its capabilities. Bitcoin has never used any kind of coin-control or bailouts which is exactly what ETH is going to do. If they do that, ETH is not immutable. Period.

Forking to remove 184 billion Bitcoins is a form of coin control.

Do you understand that Bitcoin was forked to address an issue created by a bug in the Bitcoin code?

It was not forked because a transaction script did not do what someone expected as DoOverCoin is proposing to do.

Intent is ambiguous unless we bind ourselves to a majority vote:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1505886.msg15278364#msg15278364

Thus I now say the fork of Bitcoin was equivalent to a fork of Ethereum w.r.t. to the context we are debating.

I just realized this.

Btw, this is also why Satoshi did not solve the Byzantine General's Problem.

[Hueristic]

...

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!

That is friggin awesome is all I can say.
All thought experiments must be written this way!

[CryR]

The DAO Hack - Hitler Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu638L-iVt8 ROFL

[RastoMan]

No, I do not agree!  The open letter of the attackers states what the truth is. I rightly created a child dao and used it to recursively get Ether. This is acutally not forbidden it is just a bug in a feature in a decentralized environment.

If you are near an ATTM, the ATM malfunctioned, it spit out cash. If you take the cash and did not give it back, it is criminal action.

The problem here is who decides what the "intent" of the contract was?

The miners will decide what the "intent" of the contract was? There is a voting going on in several mining pools.

[Tacalt]

No, I do not agree!  The open letter of the attackers states what the truth is. I rightly created a child dao and used it to recursively get Ether. This is acutally not forbidden it is just a bug in a feature in a decentralized environment.

If you are near an ATTM, the ATM malfunctioned, it spit out cash. If you take the cash and did not give it back, it is criminal action.

The problem here is who decides what the "intent" of the contract was?

The miners will decide what the "intent" of the contract was? There is a voting going on in several mining pools.

I think the "hacker" or the DAO holders are trying their best to persuade the miners to work in their favour.

[BitUsher]

I think the "hacker" or the DAO holders are trying their best to persuade the miners to work in their favour.

Indeed . The Daoattacker is playing with ethereum devs and staying one step ahead-

http://pastebin.com/9MRVDC9h

[coinyard]

I think the "hacker" or the DAO holders are trying their best to persuade the miners to work in their favour.

Indeed . The Daoattacker is playing with ethereum devs and staying one step ahead-

http://pastebin.com/9MRVDC9h

That could be a scam. You send bitcoin, DAO or Etheruem to them, but they might not send the in contracts.

[RastoMan]

I think the "hacker" or the DAO holders are trying their best to persuade the miners to work in their favour.

Indeed . The Daoattacker is playing with ethereum devs and staying one step ahead-

http://pastebin.com/9MRVDC9h

That could be a scam. You send bitcoin, DAO or Etheruem to them, but they might not send the in contracts.

Has anybody in the forum tried to contact the hacker and get 20x profit? It seems too good to be true. Why did not the hacker keep the 20x profit to themselves.

[MySecondCunt]

https://s33.postimg.org/wphzy4usf/froz_l.png

https://s32.postimg.org/7xdxcvslh/Capture.jpg https://s32.postimg.org/cnkogkqsl/Capture.jpg

https://s33.postimg.org/5l5sfkbmn/froz_r.png

Where is your god now?

[Minecache]

I think the "hacker" or the DAO holders are trying their best to persuade the miners to work in their favour.

Indeed . The Daoattacker is playing with ethereum devs and staying one step ahead-

http://pastebin.com/9MRVDC9h

That's NOT the attacker. When will people quit fudding this. Don't believe me send them some of you precious BTC and see what happens.

[spartak_t]

Where is your god now?

Here it is:

[MySecondCunt]

^Typical bitcoiner has-been. Swills shitty beer & reminisces about your retrocoin's glory days
Times change, granddad, the past is the past. You had a good run, but you let it slip away, rested on your laurels a bit too long, failed to disrupt and innovate.
Now get that dangerous bitcoin contraption off the road, pops, you know how this ends.

https://s32.postimg.org/jxbfqiyz9/Capture.jpg

P.S. If you really want to get into dicksizing, ETH is up x10 this year alone. Bitcoin? Oh yeah, crashing on BFX as we speak, $650
P.P.S. Fixed your chart, because don't care about bitcoin market cap increasing due to printing bitcoins out of thin air.

Here it is:
https://s32.postimg.org/5gqh0pjl1/Capture.jpg

[spartak_t]

....

^ Typical forum troll. Let's get into "dicksizing" then. The price of Bitcoin was even $614 on BTC-e, but so what? You do realize that I started this topic 12 days ago? Can you enlight us what happened 4 days ago? Ah, yes... The DAO was screwed with $78 million (at the time of the attack). What they are trying to do now? To fork it! Do you know what that means? It means that they will prove it has central authority. What does DAO stand for?

I don't consider myself as a bitcoiner, nor I am against ETH/DAO. I am just for a "better crypto-world"...

[MySecondCunt]

....

^ Typical forum troll. Let's get into "dicksizing" then. The price of Bitcoin was even $614 on BTC-e, but so what? You do realize that I started this topic 12 days ago? Can you enlight us what happened 4 days ago? Ah, yes... The DAO was screwed with $78 million (at the time of the attack). What they are trying to do now? To fork it! Do you know what that means? It means that they will prove it has central authority. What does DAO stand for?

I don't consider myself as a bitcoiner, nor I am against ETH/DAO. I am just for a "better crypto-world"...

Bitcoin was hardforked before, because a handful of guys agreed to do it. lrn ur history.
As far as that decentralization/no central authority backstory? You actually think it's 4realz?
Girlfriend please! This is how your fate is decided:

https://s32.postimg.org/be7o32qet/bitches.jpg

>What does DAO stand for?
What does BTC stand for? It stands for a tradable asset, a less stigmatic form of gambling on the interweb.
That way we can tell friends & family we're entrepreneurs, maybe traders. Not degenerate gamblers.

[spartak_t]

Bitcoin was hardforked before, because a handful of guys agreed to do it. lrn ur history.

Really? Can you tell me when exactly was hard forked? Looks like I forgot about that......

[MySecondCunt]

Bitcoin was hardforked before, because a handful of guys agreed to do it. lrn ur history.

Really? Can you tell me when exactly was hard forked? Looks like I forgot about that......

Looks like you never knew about that, here: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/36090/has-a-hard-fork-ever-occurred
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-network-shaken-by-blockchain-fork-1363144448

https://s32.postimg.org/o9b2cg3j9/no1.jpg

[spartak_t]

...

Bitcoin was never hard forked!

[MySecondCunt]

...

Bitcoin was never hard forked!

Right, and 2+2 doesn't equal 4. Very convincing

I can believe verifiable facts, or I can take your erroneous claim on trust, random guy from the internet.
Why is it that every time I try to educate and enlighten the bitcoin fandom, I'm met with so much anger and resistance? You know that refusing to accept the facts, no matter how unpleasant and inconvenient they may be, won't make them go away, right?

Denial is not a healthy coping mechanism, mainly due to the fact that reality will inevitably rear its ugly head sooner or later, no matter how adamantly you choose to deny it.

[CIYAM]

By definition a "hard fork" would require every node to upgrade their software.

(that didn't happen back then - what happened was that some pools decided to downgrade their software because of an issue with the DB that was being used at the time to store blocks)

[spartak_t]

By definition a "hard fork" would require every node to upgrade their software.

(that didn't happen back then - what happened was that some pools decided to downgrade their software because of an issue with the DB that was being used at the time to store blocks)

^ This. But the troll is too busy trolling and he doesn't check his "facts"....

I can believe verifiable facts, or I can take your erroneous claim on trust, random guy from the internet.

EDIT: And btw, my real name is in my nickname (Spartak or.. Spartacus) and I am using a real picture for avatar. You are the "random guy from the Internet", not me.

[MySecondCunt]

By definition a "hard fork" would require every node to upgrade their software.

Read the links provided. A hard fork is a hard fork. Downgrade; upgrade. Same difference. A handful of guys got together on IRC & decided to change shit. Like so:
https://s32.postimg.org/chfdwg1at/waifu.jpg

I will not engage you any further, you have an ugly habit of blackmailing people when you do not get your way.
Consider yourself ignored.

I can believe verifiable facts, or I can take your erroneous claim on trust, random guy from the internet.

EDIT: And btw, my real name is in my nickname (Spartak or.. Spartacus) and I am using a real picture for avatar. You are the "random guy from the Internet", not me.

Don't care about your shitty opsec, you're free to plaster your name & face all over the web. Give jackbooted statist thugs as much of a paper-trail as you possibly can, to me you're just a random Anon. I wouldn't know you from a hole in the wall

[RastoMan]

The Bitcoin or the Etheruem are still at the early stages of developments. They need improvement. Hard fork is necessary.

[BitUsher]

READ THE FINE PRINT

[MySecondCunt]

...and once we're done with hand-waving and mouth-foaming, we're left with cold, hard facts:

https://s33.postimg.org/wphzy4usf/froz_l.pnghttps://s31.postimg.org/ljuo5b4vf/Capture.jpghttps://s33.postimg.org/5l5sfkbmn/froz_r.png
http://coinmarketcap.com/

[spartak_t]

The attacker did it again: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4p9z93/it_seems_attacker_just_targeted_the_whitehatdaos/

[MySecondCunt]

The attacker did it again: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4p9z93/it_seems_attacker_just_targeted_the_whitehatdaos/

The market reacts:
https://s32.postimg.org/9jg60yqqt/Capture.jpg
https://s31.postimg.org/xk39a809n/hownow.jpg
http://coinmarketcap.com/assets/the-dao/

[spartak_t]

....

Here is what I think about your posts:

https://media.giphy.com/media/xT0GqpswuzhOqHP6gM/giphy-downsized-large.gif

[MySecondCunt]

....

Here is what I think about your posts:

https://media.giphy.com/media/xT0GqpswuzhOqHP6gM/giphy-downsized-large.gif

Yeah, I realize that your poisonous schadenfreude backed by mouth-foaming and hand-waving is far superior to actual dispassionate facts.
I guess I got nothing.
...wait, perhaps a topical palliative?

https://s32.postimg.org/yqg3h2lbp/butthurt.jpg

[kattokassinen]

Decentralized smart contracts are probably the dumbest contracts in existence.

Contracts will never be flawless, they will always have bugs. Is Ethereum going to soft fork everytime something bad happens?

Centralized contracts are the way to go. NEM and its Mosaics are the best solution for centralized contracts.

[MySecondCunt]

^
Decentralized currency controlled by a handful of bros burning coal-fired, government-subsidized electricity in Chinese chicken coops doesn't sound like a begging idea either, tho it never stopped bitcoin

[funkenstein]

[...] smart contracts are probably the dumbest contracts in existence.

I agree.  They may teach us a lesson however:

http://frass.woodcoin.org/smart-contracts-could-save-the-legal-system-but-not-in-the-way-you-think/

[spartak_t]

Decentralized smart contracts are probably the dumbest contracts in existence.

Contracts will never be flawless, they will always have bugs. Is Ethereum going to soft fork everytime something bad happens?

Centralized contracts are the way to go. NEM and its Mosaics are the best solution for centralized contracts.

NEM is controlled by the chinese as far as I know. You can say it for Bitcoin too, but it's kinda different story.

[kattokassinen]

Decentralized smart contracts are probably the dumbest contracts in existence.

Contracts will never be flawless, they will always have bugs. Is Ethereum going to soft fork everytime something bad happens?

Centralized contracts are the way to go. NEM and its Mosaics are the best solution for centralized contracts.

NEM is controlled by the chinese as far as I know. You can say it for Bitcoin too, but it's kinda different story.

Speaking from someone who has been around NEM since the beginning, I don't quite get the Chinese claim. Yes there are some nice Chinese people around NEM, but I don't see them controlling the ecosystem nor having any sort of XEM majority.

[carajillu]

Do you still have confidnce in somethink that has been (recursively hacked)^n?

[spartak_t]

Speaking from someone who has been around NEM since the beginning, I don't quite get the Chinese claim.

The chinese pumped many coins for no reason. TIPS and EAC are one of the examples. This is my only concern.

[MySecondCunt]

Speaking from someone who has been around NEM since the beginning, I don't quite get the Chinese claim.

The chinese pumped many coins for no reason. TIPS and EAC are one of the examples. This is my only concern.

You're ignoring one major coin the Chinese have pumped for no reason. It begins with a "B," has "TC" in the middle, and always ends in tears.

[BitUsher]

This is getting ridiculous , the daoattacker is treating ETH/DAO like his little playthings - 


https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4p9z93/it_seems_attacker_just_targeted_the_whitehatdaos/

[MySecondCunt]

This is getting ridiculous , the daoattacker is treating ETH/DAO like his little playthings -  

The Market Responds:

https://s33.postimg.org/wphzy4usf/froz_l.pnghttps://s32.postimg.org/99a140tlh/Capture.jpghttps://s33.postimg.org/5l5sfkbmn/froz_r.png
http://coinmarketcap.com/
Above price is current @ time of this post.

[gogodr]

Are you people still buying this crap dao? Did you all not get the memo. Dao is dead.

[log2exp]

Price went up like crazy before Mt. Gox about to crash, history tends to repeat itself.

[spartak_t]

I will repeat that I am not against the DAO, Ethereum, Bitcoin or whatever., but the DAO must change its abbreviation, because it failed (as of now) to be decentralized. And I'm still angry that few people gathered so much funds, but allowed this to happen.... ah....

[MySecondCunt]

I will repeat that I am not against the DAO, Ethereum, Bitcoin or whatever., but the DAO must change its abbreviation [...]

We must contact the Decentralized Better Business Bureau immediately!
They'll send their virtual, non-violent uninforcement friendgents so that the case could be tried in the High p2p Internet Court of Natural Law. This can't stand!
 
Bitcoin is controlled by a handful of factory mines in China, yet some still insist on calling it decentralized.

[kattokassinen]

This happened to first ever MAJOR Ethereum based contract.

What do you expect in the future? Forks, forks and forks.

Smart contracts don't work. There will always be bugs.

I of course stand corrected, if Ethereum can provide a bug-free utopia.

[MySecondCunt]

This happened to first ever MAJOR Ethereum based contract.

What do you expect in the future? Forks, forks and forks.

Smart contracts don't work. There will always be bugs.

I of course stand corrected, if Ethereum can provide a bug-free utopia.

The first time you try to drive a nail with a hammer, you smash your thumb.
From this, according to your logic, we proceed to infer:
    1. You should give up. If the first attempt failed, the second could only fail harder.
    2. Your sore thumb is not your fault, it is the fault of Etherium the hammer. For not having a childproof thumb guard.
    3. A hammer without a thumb guard is useless.

Am I reading you correctly?

[kattokassinen]

This happened to first ever MAJOR Ethereum based contract.

What do you expect in the future? Forks, forks and forks.

Smart contracts don't work. There will always be bugs.

I of course stand corrected, if Ethereum can provide a bug-free utopia.

The first time you try to drive a nail with a hammer, you smash your thumb.
From this, according to your logic, we proceed to infer:
    1. You should give up. If the first attempt failed, the second could only fail harder.
    2. Your sore thumb is not your fault, it is the fault of Etherium the hammer. For not having a childproof thumb guard.
    3. A hammer without a thumb guard is useless.

Am I reading you correctly?

No, I am saying Ethereum will probably sell as well as head mounted toilet paper dispenser. It's pointless, expensive and there are way better and cheaper methods to achieve the same.

[MySecondCunt]

This happened to first ever MAJOR Ethereum based contract.

What do you expect in the future? Forks, forks and forks.

Smart contracts don't work. There will always be bugs.

I of course stand corrected, if Ethereum can provide a bug-free utopia.

The first time you try to drive a nail with a hammer, you smash your thumb.
From this, according to your logic, we proceed to infer:
    1. You should give up. If the first attempt failed, the second could only fail harder.
    2. Your sore thumb is not your fault, it is the fault of Etherium the hammer. For not having a childproof thumb guard.
    3. A hammer without a thumb guard is useless.

Am I reading you correctly?

No, I am saying Ethereum will probably sell as well as head mounted toilet paper dispenser. It's pointless, expensive and there are way better and cheaper methods to achieve the same.

You are free to think whatever you want, though the rationale you have offered to back your opinion is junk.
In the meantime, I'll just leave this here:

https://s33.postimg.org/wphzy4usf/froz_l.pnghttps://s32.postimg.org/se0dnj4ut/Capture.jpghttps://s33.postimg.org/5l5sfkbmn/froz_r.png
http://coinmarketcap.com/


Yeah, that's how well the toilet paper dispenser is selling right now

[kattokassinen]

This happened to first ever MAJOR Ethereum based contract.

What do you expect in the future? Forks, forks and forks.

Smart contracts don't work. There will always be bugs.

I of course stand corrected, if Ethereum can provide a bug-free utopia.

The first time you try to drive a nail with a hammer, you smash your thumb.
From this, according to your logic, we proceed to infer:
    1. You should give up. If the first attempt failed, the second could only fail harder.
    2. Your sore thumb is not your fault, it is the fault of Etherium the hammer. For not having a childproof thumb guard.
    3. A hammer without a thumb guard is useless.

Am I reading you correctly?

No, I am saying Ethereum will probably sell as well as head mounted toilet paper dispenser. It's pointless, expensive and there are way better and cheaper methods to achieve the same.

You are free to think whatever you want, though the rationale you have offered to back your opinion is junk.
In the meantime, I'll just leave this here:

http://coinmarketcap.com/


Yeah, that's how well the toilet paper dispenser is selling right now

How do you fix something that inherently doesn't allow fixing?

I find it hard to believe that there will be any mass adoption for such product.

Why wouldn't I choose my own centralized contract that works with NEM's Mosaics, for example? With centralized contract I am able to fix any flaws there might be.

Additionally, why would I develop new decentralized contracts for Ethereum network when I have my superior centralized contracts done already? It would be an expensive operation for any corporation.

I just don't see any reasons why I would use Ethereum network. I'd be scared to hell of any bugs.

[Glimpasmas]

Hitler kills the DAO Hacker 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAn0zQQQnuQ

[MySecondCunt]

This happened to first ever MAJOR Ethereum based contract.

What do you expect in the future? Forks, forks and forks.

Smart contracts don't work. There will always be bugs.

I of course stand corrected, if Ethereum can provide a bug-free utopia.

The first time you try to drive a nail with a hammer, you smash your thumb.
From this, according to your logic, we proceed to infer:
    1. You should give up. If the first attempt failed, the second could only fail harder.
    2. Your sore thumb is not your fault, it is the fault of Etherium the hammer. For not having a childproof thumb guard.
    3. A hammer without a thumb guard is useless.

Am I reading you correctly?

No, I am saying Ethereum will probably sell as well as head mounted toilet paper dispenser. It's pointless, expensive and there are way better and cheaper methods to achieve the same.

You are free to think whatever you want, though the rationale you have offered to back your opinion is junk.
In the meantime, I'll just leave this here:

http://coinmarketcap.com/


Yeah, that's how well the toilet paper dispenser is selling right now

How do you fix something that inherently doesn't allow fixing?

You must be talking about bitcoin? Are you attempting to highlight its inability to evolve and stagnant code base, due to its selling point being selfsame immutability, algorythmically guarranteed by maths and sciences, as resistant to the whims of fallible humans as the laws of the cosmos? Which, apparently, requires consensus for any change to take place, and since consensus is undefined and no one agrees on wtf it is, nothing ever changes?
Hell if I know how you fix the unfixable

I find it hard to believe that there will be any mass adoption for such product.

Mass adoption does not need to happen. The only thing that does need to happen is another guy buying your tokens for more than you paid for them, e.g. bitcoin.
Bitcoin don't do dick, and yet...

Why wouldn't I choose my own centralized contract that works with NEM's Mosaics, for example? With centralized contract I am able to fix any flaws there might be.

Additionally, why would I develop new decentralized contracts for Ethereum network when I have my superior centralized contracts done already? It would be an expensive operation for any corporation.

I just don't see any reasons why I would use Ethereum network. I'd be scared to hell of any bugs.

Please. Utility of a token is just a convenient backstory, it's the thing that distinguishes tokens from casino chips and what we do from gambling.
Because gambling is heavily taxed and regulated.
But we're not gambling, we're investing in fledgling technologies.
Get it?

[kattokassinen]

So you agree there are no realistic use cases.

Ethereum has value now, but I don't see much value when the "fanboys" realize this.

[MySecondCunt]

So you agree there are no realistic use cases.

Ethereum has value now, but I don't see much value when the "fanboys" realize this.

Of course not. I'm pretty sure most of the rabid supporters know it too, but it's not in their rational self-interest to admit it.
Same goes for Bitcoin.

[anthonydar]

So you agree there are no realistic use cases.

Ethereum has value now, but I don't see much value when the "fanboys" realize this.

We have to be patient. The Bitcoin was first used some time after it was introduced. We need to give it some time.

[RastoMan]

So you agree there are no realistic use cases.

Ethereum has value now, but I don't see much value when the "fanboys" realize this.

We have to be patient. The Bitcoin was first used some time after it was introduced. We need to give it some time.

The Augur, the prediction market is being developed at the moment. They do not have connection with the Foundation. It might not be buggy.

[BitUsher]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFdmgX8c6vg

[foserfox]

Why Corporations Love Ethereum

Ethereum, the world’s second most valuable cryptocurrency network after Bitcoin, recently fell victim to a sophisticated hack within one of its third party developer contracts, the DAO, which exposed more than $50,000,000 in user funds to loss — although for now, it appears the money is safely in frozen limbo, with a more concrete solution on the way in the form of a coming software update a majority of miners or nodes need to accept, known as a “hard fork” in cryptocurrency lingo.

The loss is embarrassing, but from a technical perspective, no great harm has been done, in my view. (Full disclosure: I do own some bitcoins and ether at time of publication; ether is the built-in currency or “fuel” of the Ethereum network. Like bitcoin, it is mined on computers all over the world.)

Ethereum is a year old in the marketplace, and has already briefly flirted with a US $1.5 billion market valuation. Despite this crazy vote of confidence from the crypto market, the technology is still new. Bitcoin had many problems in its first couple years that required correction or tweaking.

One time in August 2010, an attacker exploited a vulnerability to issue more than 184 billion bitcoins out of thin air. A fork was needed to heal from the attack.

A slightly less staggering 2,600 BTC were lost in October 2011 due to a malformed address.

Further, at least as a user and crypto enthusiast, this muck up provides interesting insight into the already interesting mind of Ethereum’s wunderkind creator, Vitalik Buterin.

Buterin, one of Bitcoin’s earliest adopters and a cofounder of Bitcoin Magazine, developed Ethereum alongside some of the world’s most skilled cryptographic minds when they realized Bitcoin’s scripting language was simply too restrictive to allow for many kinds of next generation use cases for a blockchain.

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-seaman/why-corporations-love-eth_b_10849632.html

[Hueristic]

Why Corporations Love Ethereum

Ethereum, the world’s second most valuable cryptocurrency network after Bitcoin, recently fell victim to a sophisticated hack within one of its third party developer contracts, the DAO, which exposed more than $50,000,000 in user funds to loss — although for now, it appears the money is safely in frozen limbo, with a more concrete solution on the way in the form of a coming software update a majority of miners or nodes need to accept, known as a “hard fork” in cryptocurrency lingo....

Actually, THE ENTIRE DAO was exposed to user fund loss and the attack was not an unknown sophisticated attack from the blue it was warned about ahead of time. And there is is no way those other funds can be considered safe in any shape or form. But nice try on the spin. If ETH didn't have such a high cap it would be completely dead and abandoned by now. But good luck in swaying the fools that took the bait to stick it out and feel the brunt of the coming collapse.

[Minecache]

Why Corporations Love Ethereum

Ethereum, the world’s second most valuable cryptocurrency network after Bitcoin, recently fell victim to a sophisticated hack within one of its third party developer contracts, the DAO, which exposed more than $50,000,000 in user funds to loss — although for now, it appears the money is safely in frozen limbo, with a more concrete solution on the way in the form of a coming software update a majority of miners or nodes need to accept, known as a “hard fork” in cryptocurrency lingo....

Actually, THE ENTIRE DAO was exposed to user fund loss and the attack was not an unknown sophisticated attack from the blue it was warned about ahead of time. And there is is no way those other funds can be considered safe in any shape or form. But nice try on the spin. If ETH didn't have such a high cap it would be completely dead and abandoned by now. But good luck in swaying the fools that took the bait to stick it out and feel the brunt of the coming collapse.

Why do you care? ETH and DAO are now rebounding after the community voted consensus for a HF. You have no skin in the game so why do you hate so much?

[Hueristic]

Why Corporations Love Ethereum

Ethereum, the world’s second most valuable cryptocurrency network after Bitcoin, recently fell victim to a sophisticated hack within one of its third party developer contracts, the DAO, which exposed more than $50,000,000 in user funds to loss — although for now, it appears the money is safely in frozen limbo, with a more concrete solution on the way in the form of a coming software update a majority of miners or nodes need to accept, known as a “hard fork” in cryptocurrency lingo....

Actually, THE ENTIRE DAO was exposed to user fund loss and the attack was not an unknown sophisticated attack from the blue it was warned about ahead of time. And there is is no way those other funds can be considered safe in any shape or form. But nice try on the spin. If ETH didn't have such a high cap it would be completely dead and abandoned by now. But good luck in swaying the fools that took the bait to stick it out and feel the brunt of the coming collapse.

Why do you care? ETH and DAO are now rebounding after the community voted consensus for a HF. You have no skin in the game so why do you hate so much?

Because I hate to see lies pimping shit for profit.

[Ultrabat]

Why Corporations Love Ethereum

Ethereum, the world’s second most valuable cryptocurrency network after Bitcoin, recently fell victim to a sophisticated hack within one of its third party developer contracts, the DAO, which exposed more than $50,000,000 in user funds to loss — although for now, it appears the money is safely in frozen limbo, with a more concrete solution on the way in the form of a coming software update a majority of miners or nodes need to accept, known as a “hard fork” in cryptocurrency lingo....

Actually, THE ENTIRE DAO was exposed to user fund loss and the attack was not an unknown sophisticated attack from the blue it was warned about ahead of time. And there is is no way those other funds can be considered safe in any shape or form. But nice try on the spin. If ETH didn't have such a high cap it would be completely dead and abandoned by now. But good luck in swaying the fools that took the bait to stick it out and feel the brunt of the coming collapse.

Why do you care? ETH and DAO are now rebounding after the community voted consensus for a HF. You have no skin in the game so why do you hate so much?

Because I hate to see lies pimping shit for profit.

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

[spartak_t]

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

Really? Do you know what the "D" in the DAO stands for? The Ethereum Foundation sold "decentralized" project for hundreds of millions, which will be now hard forked.  

[killerjoegreece]

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

Really? Do you know what the "D" in the DAO stands for? The Ethereum Foundation sold "decentralized" project for hundreds of millions, which will be now hard forked.  

this dao thingie is just a joke and probably an inside job   https://youtu.be/_O5fdMFKEC0

[Kwiksave]

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

Really? Do you know what the "D" in the DAO stands for? The Ethereum Foundation sold "decentralized" project for hundreds of millions, which will be now hard forked.  

I do not think any Ethereum Foundation members have the rights to dictate the terms of the hard fork, only miners will.

[anthonydar]

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

Really? Do you know what the "D" in the DAO stands for? The Ethereum Foundation sold "decentralized" project for hundreds of millions, which will be now hard forked.  

I do not think any Ethereum Foundation members have the rights to dictate the terms of the hard fork, only miners will.

So that is an kind of democracy. I voted for the soft fork in the http://ethpool.org/ before, but there is no vote for HF now.

[glerand]

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

Really? Do you know what the "D" in the DAO stands for? The Ethereum Foundation sold "decentralized" project for hundreds of millions, which will be now hard forked.  

I do not think any Ethereum Foundation members have the rights to dictate the terms of the hard fork, only miners will.

So that is an kind of democracy. I voted for the soft fork in the http://ethpool.org/ before, but there is no vote for HF now.

Most miners and the Ethereum holders have voted for the hard fork to get back the stolen DAO. So we will see.

[Fanpant]

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

Really? Do you know what the "D" in the DAO stands for? The Ethereum Foundation sold "decentralized" project for hundreds of millions, which will be now hard forked.  

I do not think any Ethereum Foundation members have the rights to dictate the terms of the hard fork, only miners will.

So that is an kind of democracy. I voted for the soft fork in the http://ethpool.org/ before, but there is no vote for HF now.

Most miners and the Ethereum holders have voted for the hard fork to get back the stolen DAO. So we will see.

So far, the hard fork is quite smooth. The main chain is much longer than the other chain. So it could be good.

[Master_dandosha]

The price of DAO is connected to eth it is not a fail if the hardfork of eth succeeded..hope it works out .

[shyliar]

The price of DAO is connected to eth it is not a fail if the hardfork of eth succeeded..hope it works out .

The DAO as an investment vehicle is a complete fail. The investors can however get their ETH back and as such the Hardfork was successful.  Look here to see the rapid transfer of tokens to ETH as individuals recover their coins.

http://etherscan.io/token/TheDAO#txns

Wonder where all those ETH are heading.

Note: Millions have already moved.

[RastoMan]

The price of DAO is connected to eth it is not a fail if the hardfork of eth succeeded..hope it works out .

The DAO as an investment vehicle is a complete fail. The investors can however get their ETH back and as such the Hardfork was successful.  Look here to see the rapid trade of tokens to ETH as individuals recover their coins.

http://etherscan.io/token/TheDAO#txns

Wonder where all those ETH are heading.

Note: Millions have already moved.

Some people are buying the Etherruem at the moment. It seems the price has risen quite a lot today.

[shyliar]

The price of DAO is connected to eth it is not a fail if the hardfork of eth succeeded..hope it works out .

The DAO as an investment vehicle is a complete fail. The investors can however get their ETH back and as such the Hardfork was successful.  Look here to see the rapid trade of tokens to ETH as individuals recover their coins.

http://etherscan.io/token/TheDAO#txns

Wonder where all those ETH are heading.

Note: Millions have already moved.

Some people are buying the Etheruem at the moment. It seems the price has risen quite a lot today.

Seems that way. The ETH being transferred from tokens will either be sold or held (No one knows how much of each). Will be interesting to see if the buyers are willing to purchase everything being sold.

[Ultrabat]

The price of DAO is connected to eth it is not a fail if the hardfork of eth succeeded..hope it works out .

The DAO as an investment vehicle is a complete fail. The investors can however get their ETH back and as such the Hardfork was successful.  Look here to see the rapid trade of tokens to ETH as individuals recover their coins.

http://etherscan.io/token/TheDAO#txns

Wonder where all those ETH are heading.

Note: Millions have already moved.

Some people are buying the Etheruem at the moment. It seems the price has risen quite a lot today.

Seems that way. The ETH being transferred from tokens will either be sold or held (No one knows how much of each). Will be interesting to see if the buyers are willing to purchase everything being sold.

If the Ethereum from the DAO are sold, that will put pressure on the Ethereum price. It could reduce the price.

[RastoMan]

The price of DAO is connected to eth it is not a fail if the hardfork of eth succeeded..hope it works out .

The DAO as an investment vehicle is a complete fail. The investors can however get their ETH back and as such the Hardfork was successful.  Look here to see the rapid trade of tokens to ETH as individuals recover their coins.

http://etherscan.io/token/TheDAO#txns

Wonder where all those ETH are heading.

Note: Millions have already moved.

Some people are buying the Etheruem at the moment. It seems the price has risen quite a lot today.

Seems that way. The ETH being transferred from tokens will either be sold or held (No one knows how much of each). Will be interesting to see if the buyers are willing to purchase everything being sold.

If the Ethereum from the DAO are sold, that will put pressure on the Ethereum price. It could reduce the price.

So far, the price of the Ethereum is around 0.019. So there are very strong buying support to absorb the dumps.

[iCEBREAKER]

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

Really? Do you know what the "D" in the DAO stands for? The Ethereum Foundation sold "decentralized" project for hundreds of millions, which will be now hard forked.  

I do not think any Ethereum Foundation members have the rights to dictate the terms of the hard fork, only miners will.

So that is an kind of democracy. I voted for the soft fork in the http://ethpool.org/ before, but there is no vote for HF now.

Most miners and the Ethereum holders have voted for the hard fork to get back the stolen DAO. So we will see.

Whoever told you that is wrong.  You need better sources of information.

Most did not vote at all.


http://elaineou.com/2016/07/18/stick-a-fork-in-ethereum/#forkyou

A message on the Ethermine.org pool states:

    According to the voting result (65% in favor of not supporting the fork) the pool is supposed not to support the fork. But as all other major pools (e.g. dwarfpool, ethermine, nanopool) are supporting the fork we can and will not jeopardize any mining income of the pool by mining on a chain that has a very high probability to get orphaned. Therefore, according to our voting policy stated in the announcement, we will support the hard fork.

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@crazysmile/ethereum-hard-fork-due-miner-vote-overturned

Wow very democracy.  So many decentralized.

[RastoMan]

The people who did not vote, give up their rights to decide. So the people who voted decide the fate of the Ethereum.

[roselee]

The people who did not vote, give up their rights to decide. So the people who voted decide the fate of the Ethereum.

the pity is only miners ( who might have been invested in dao , interest conflict) could vote. and for the vote on that other page.
well if you holde lets say 1 mill ether like vitalik and every single one of you ether counts as one voice .... i doupt if thats democraty.....shouldnt it be : one head one voice one vote.......

[iCEBREAKER]

The people who did not vote, give up their rights to decide. So the people who voted decide the fate of the Ethereum.

Given the "unstoppable code" marketing, the people who did not vote may not have even been aware there was a vote, or that immutability was something controversial that could possibly and suddenly come up for a vote.

You can't suddenly hold a referendum on a DAO TARP and expect busy people to be paying attention, much less have the time to come to an informed decision in a few days.

Hey I know, let's have a vote on doubling the number of Bitcoins, to 42 million total.

Quick, go figure out how to sign a vote with your proof of stake!  You have Two Weeks.

Oh what, your coins are in an exchange?  Sorry, you'll just have to let other people act as your proxy.

Let's start taking bets on how long until there's another TARP fork.

I'll be optimistic, and wager ETH can make it another year with another obnoxiously hypocritical bailout for a TBTF dumb contract.

[Minecache]

The people who did not vote, give up their rights to decide. So the people who voted decide the fate of the Ethereum.

Given the "unstoppable code" marketing, the people who did not vote may not have even been aware there was a vote, or that immutability was something controversial that could possibly and suddenly come up for a vote.

You can't suddenly hold a referendum on a DAO TARP and expect busy people to be paying attention, much less have the time to come to an informed decision in a few days.

Hey I know, let's have a vote on doubling the number of Bitcoins, to 42 million total.

Quick, go figure out how to sign a vote with your proof of stake!  You have Two Weeks.

Oh what, your coins are in an exchange?  Sorry, you'll just have to let other people act as your proxy.

Let's start taking bets on how long until there's another TARP fork.

I'll be optimistic, and wager ETH can make it another year with another obnoxiously hypocritical bailout for a TBTF dumb contract.

You clearly don't know what a bail out is.

And yes it's entirely possible the one day BTC coinage could be increased from its hard coded 21m.

[Goms]

I would not bet on the btc coinage increasing from 21M, the price of 1satoshi will have to increase to make allowance for that. I won't be surprised if 1satoshi costs $10 someday.

[Hueristic]

The people who did not vote, give up their rights to decide. So the people who voted decide the fate of the Ethereum.

Given the "unstoppable code" marketing, the people who did not vote may not have even been aware there was a vote, or that immutability was something controversial that could possibly and suddenly come up for a vote.

You can't suddenly hold a referendum on a DAO TARP and expect busy people to be paying attention, much less have the time to come to an informed decision in a few days.

Hey I know, let's have a vote on doubling the number of Bitcoins, to 42 million total.

Quick, go figure out how to sign a vote with your proof of stake!  You have Two Weeks.

Oh what, your coins are in an exchange?  Sorry, you'll just have to let other people act as your proxy.

Let's start taking bets on how long until there's another TARP fork.

I'll be optimistic, and wager ETH can make it another year with another obnoxiously hypocritical bailout for a TBTF dumb contract.

You clearly don't know what a bail out is.

And yes it's entirely possible the one day BTC coinage could be increased from its hard coded 21m.

A bailout is a colloquial term for giving financial support to a company or country which faces serious financial difficulty or bankruptcy.

[crypto jerk]

The Ethereum is a live project and it is evolving all the time. It will be more popular after the crisis.

Really? Do you know what the "D" in the DAO stands for? The Ethereum Foundation sold "decentralized" project for hundreds of millions, which will be now hard forked.  

I do not think any Ethereum Foundation members have the rights to dictate the terms of the hard fork, only miners will.

So that is an kind of democracy. I voted for the soft fork in the http://ethpool.org/ before, but there is no vote for HF now.

Most miners and the Ethereum holders have voted for the hard fork to get back the stolen DAO. So we will see.

Whoever told you that is wrong.  You need better sources of information.

Most did not vote at all.


http://elaineou.com/2016/07/18/stick-a-fork-in-ethereum/#forkyou

A message on the Ethermine.org pool states:

    According to the voting result (65% in favor of not supporting the fork) the pool is supposed not to support the fork. But as all other major pools (e.g. dwarfpool, ethermine, nanopool) are supporting the fork we can and will not jeopardize any mining income of the pool by mining on a chain that has a very high probability to get orphaned. Therefore, according to our voting policy stated in the announcement, we will support the hard fork.

https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@crazysmile/ethereum-hard-fork-due-miner-vote-overturned

Wow very democracy.  So many decentralized.

Holy fucked up fork voting batman.

So a minority voted the fork in? Not voting at all is the same as a no vote. So Vitalik just raped ETH.
No means No vitalik, you rapist.

[Minecache]

The people who did not vote, give up their rights to decide. So the people who voted decide the fate of the Ethereum.

Given the "unstoppable code" marketing, the people who did not vote may not have even been aware there was a vote, or that immutability was something controversial that could possibly and suddenly come up for a vote.

You can't suddenly hold a referendum on a DAO TARP and expect busy people to be paying attention, much less have the time to come to an informed decision in a few days.

Hey I know, let's have a vote on doubling the number of Bitcoins, to 42 million total.

Quick, go figure out how to sign a vote with your proof of stake!  You have Two Weeks.

Oh what, your coins are in an exchange?  Sorry, you'll just have to let other people act as your proxy.

Let's start taking bets on how long until there's another TARP fork.

I'll be optimistic, and wager ETH can make it another year with another obnoxiously hypocritical bailout for a TBTF dumb contract.

You clearly don't know what a bail out is.

And yes it's entirely possible the one day BTC coinage could be increased from its hard coded 21m.

A bailout is a colloquial term for giving financial support to a company or country which faces serious financial difficulty or bankruptcy.

Exactly, zero financial support was given. A transaction was reversed. That's that.

[Hueristic]

The people who did not vote, give up their rights to decide. So the people who voted decide the fate of the Ethereum.

Given the "unstoppable code" marketing, the people who did not vote may not have even been aware there was a vote, or that immutability was something controversial that could possibly and suddenly come up for a vote.

You can't suddenly hold a referendum on a DAO TARP and expect busy people to be paying attention, much less have the time to come to an informed decision in a few days.

Hey I know, let's have a vote on doubling the number of Bitcoins, to 42 million total.

Quick, go figure out how to sign a vote with your proof of stake!  You have Two Weeks.

Oh what, your coins are in an exchange?  Sorry, you'll just have to let other people act as your proxy.

Let's start taking bets on how long until there's another TARP fork.

I'll be optimistic, and wager ETH can make it another year with another obnoxiously hypocritical bailout for a TBTF dumb contract.

You clearly don't know what a bail out is.

And yes it's entirely possible the one day BTC coinage could be increased from its hard coded 21m.

A bailout is a colloquial term for giving financial support to a company or country which faces serious financial difficulty or bankruptcy.

Exactly, zero financial support was given. A transaction was reversed. That's that.

Your understanding is either below grade level or you intentionally fail at reading comprehension. Wealth redistribution is no different than changing a transaction and the recipient has received the bailout. What would you call it if all the transaction's for everyone's tax returns were reversed back to the Gov? There is no difference. In that scenario the GOV would have received a bailout if the other criteria of "faces serious financial difficulty or bankruptcy" were met.

A transaction was reversed. That's that

THIS just shows you have no understanding of immutability and like the rest will lose long term with your centralized system.

[spartak_t]

The people who did not vote, give up their rights to decide. So the people who voted decide the fate of the Ethereum.

Given the "unstoppable code" marketing, the people who did not vote may not have even been aware there was a vote, or that immutability was something controversial that could possibly and suddenly come up for a vote.

You can't suddenly hold a referendum on a DAO TARP and expect busy people to be paying attention, much less have the time to come to an informed decision in a few days.

Hey I know, let's have a vote on doubling the number of Bitcoins, to 42 million total.

Quick, go figure out how to sign a vote with your proof of stake!  You have Two Weeks.

Oh what, your coins are in an exchange?  Sorry, you'll just have to let other people act as your proxy.

Let's start taking bets on how long until there's another TARP fork.

I'll be optimistic, and wager ETH can make it another year with another obnoxiously hypocritical bailout for a TBTF dumb contract.

You clearly don't know what a bail out is.

You really should think twice, before post such bs. I have 2 questions for you:

1. Where is TheDAO now? (look at the thread's title for reference)
2. What is a bailout? (will ignore Hueristic's quote)

[iCEBREAKER]

Exactly, zero financial support was given. A transaction was reversed. That's that.

Mutability?

What's that?  You mean the thingy on the TV remote that silences The Kardashians when you get a phone call?




#REKT

[Sharky444]

The DAO is a nice example of how marketing trumps technology.

[ArticMine]

The DAO is a nice example of how marketing trumps technology.

... but only for a limited amount of time. The DAO is basically off the radar as far as market capitalization is concerned. Technology trumps in the end.

[d@nte]

Epic fail in the crypto history... Sad but it's true.

[Minecache]

Just for the intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull:

https://blog.colony.io/an-ethereum-hard-fork-is-not-a-bailout-its-foiling-a-bank-robbery-db2a472fe9e1#.yoaaomh6v

https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereum-government-dao/

https://m.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ok3f1/the_dao_is_not_being_bailed_out/

[LoyceV]

I'm amazed the value of Ethereum went up after the hard fork. Greed wins from common sense? Is this the same way people "invest" in ponzi "doubling" websites? They know it's a scam, but hope to make a quick profit on the short run before the system (based on the greater fool theory) runs out of fools?
In my opinion Ethereum deserves to lose its value, and should always be remembered as an example of how not to handle a cryptocurrency. But it seems like it needs more time to die out.

[RastoMan]

Epic fail in the crypto history... Sad but it's true.

The future programmers should remember this and write good programs. Also we should have started the DAO smaller.

[spartak_t]

Just for the intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull:

https://blog.colony.io/an-ethereum-hard-fork-is-not-a-bailout-its-foiling-a-bank-robbery-db2a472fe9e1#.yoaaomh6v

https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereum-government-dao/

https://m.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ok3f1/the_dao_is_not_being_bailed_out/

I took a quick look to these articles, but I'm not even going try to reading them. Next time try using your own words. Here are some points you should consider:

1. There is no DAO, there was "D"AO.
2. 10% of the miners voted for the hard fork (I'm not quite certain if that was the %, but I'm not like some guys, which are using google to prove their point. I use my mind and memories.). What does that tell you?
3. It tells you that a "handful" of people decided it's destiny. Much like the % of people around the world who decides it's destiny.

[anthonydar]

Just for the intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull:

https://blog.colony.io/an-ethereum-hard-fork-is-not-a-bailout-its-foiling-a-bank-robbery-db2a472fe9e1#.yoaaomh6v

https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereum-government-dao/

https://m.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ok3f1/the_dao_is_not_being_bailed_out/

I took a quick look to these articles, but I'm not even going try to reading them. Next time try using your own words. Here are some points you should consider:

1. There is no DAO, there was "D"AO.
2. 10% of the miners voted for the hard fork (I'm not quite certain if that was the %, but I'm not like some guys, which are using google to prove their point. I use my mind and memories.). What does that tell you?
3. It tells you that a "handful" of people decided it's destiny. Much like the % of people around the world who decides it's destiny.

There are Classic Ethereum pools. The miners who do not vote for the fork can switch to those pools.

[spartak_t]

Just for the intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull:

https://blog.colony.io/an-ethereum-hard-fork-is-not-a-bailout-its-foiling-a-bank-robbery-db2a472fe9e1#.yoaaomh6v

https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereum-government-dao/

https://m.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ok3f1/the_dao_is_not_being_bailed_out/

I took a quick look to these articles, but I'm not even going try to reading them. Next time try using your own words. Here are some points you should consider:

1. There is no DAO, there was "D"AO.
2. 10% of the miners voted for the hard fork (I'm not quite certain if that was the %, but I'm not like some guys, which are using google to prove their point. I use my mind and memories.). What does that tell you?
3. It tells you that a "handful" of people decided it's destiny. Much like the % of people around the world who decides it's destiny.

There are Classic Ethereum pools. The miners who do not vote for the fork can switch to those pools.

I know that, but so what? Would you like me to tell you a story?

"Give us $18,5 million and we will present you Ethereum. Now please give us $100s of millions (not going to make calculations) and you'll have TheDAO. Unfortunatelly, TheDAO failed and we want you to vote for a fork. Oh, well, 10% of you voted for a hard fork? No worries, hard fork it is. TheDAO is now gone. There are people who are not happy with that? Here is the Ethereum Classic."

Now the speculations will be much more.

[mr.youhim]

The curators of the DAO is still live?

[roselee]

Just for the intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull:

https://blog.colony.io/an-ethereum-hard-fork-is-not-a-bailout-its-foiling-a-bank-robbery-db2a472fe9e1#.yoaaomh6v

https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereum-government-dao/

https://m.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ok3f1/the_dao_is_not_being_bailed_out/

I took a quick look to these articles, but I'm not even going try to reading them. Next time try using your own words. Here are some points you should consider:

1. There is no DAO, there was "D"AO.
2. 10% of the miners voted for the hard fork (I'm not quite certain if that was the %, but I'm not like some guys, which are using google to prove their point. I use my mind and memories.). What does that tell you?
3. It tells you that a "handful" of people decided it's destiny. Much like the % of people around the world who decides it's destiny.

i thought the blockchain might change that and makes this world a little bit fairer.

[RastoMan]

Just for the intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull:

https://blog.colony.io/an-ethereum-hard-fork-is-not-a-bailout-its-foiling-a-bank-robbery-db2a472fe9e1#.yoaaomh6v

https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereum-government-dao/

https://m.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ok3f1/the_dao_is_not_being_bailed_out/

I took a quick look to these articles, but I'm not even going try to reading them. Next time try using your own words. Here are some points you should consider:

1. There is no DAO, there was "D"AO.
2. 10% of the miners voted for the hard fork (I'm not quite certain if that was the %, but I'm not like some guys, which are using google to prove their point. I use my mind and memories.). What does that tell you?
3. It tells you that a "handful" of people decided it's destiny. Much like the % of people around the world who decides it's destiny.

There are Classic Ethereum pools. The miners who do not vote for the fork can switch to those pools.

I think so, if the miners do not like to mine at the new chain, they should move to mine the old chain.

[Ultrabat]

Just for the intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull:

https://blog.colony.io/an-ethereum-hard-fork-is-not-a-bailout-its-foiling-a-bank-robbery-db2a472fe9e1#.yoaaomh6v

https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereum-government-dao/

https://m.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ok3f1/the_dao_is_not_being_bailed_out/

I took a quick look to these articles, but I'm not even going try to reading them. Next time try using your own words. Here are some points you should consider:

1. There is no DAO, there was "D"AO.
2. 10% of the miners voted for the hard fork (I'm not quite certain if that was the %, but I'm not like some guys, which are using google to prove their point. I use my mind and memories.). What does that tell you?
3. It tells you that a "handful" of people decided it's destiny. Much like the % of people around the world who decides it's destiny.

There are Classic Ethereum pools. The miners who do not vote for the fork can switch to those pools.

I think so, if the miners do not like to mine at the new chain, they should move to mine the old chain.

According to http://fork.ethstats.net/, the Classic Ethereum chain mining difficulty is around 6% of the main chain.

[Fanpant]

Just for the intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull:

https://blog.colony.io/an-ethereum-hard-fork-is-not-a-bailout-its-foiling-a-bank-robbery-db2a472fe9e1#.yoaaomh6v

https://news.bitcoin.com/ethereum-government-dao/

https://m.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4ok3f1/the_dao_is_not_being_bailed_out/

I took a quick look to these articles, but I'm not even going try to reading them. Next time try using your own words. Here are some points you should consider:

1. There is no DAO, there was "D"AO.
2. 10% of the miners voted for the hard fork (I'm not quite certain if that was the %, but I'm not like some guys, which are using google to prove their point. I use my mind and memories.). What does that tell you?
3. It tells you that a "handful" of people decided it's destiny. Much like the % of people around the world who decides it's destiny.

There are Classic Ethereum pools. The miners who do not vote for the fork can switch to those pools.

I think so, if the miners do not like to mine at the new chain, they should move to mine the old chain.

According to http://fork.ethstats.net/, the Classic Ethereum chain mining difficulty is around 6% of the main chain.

The Ethreum Classic price is less than 4% of the Ethereum price. So it is not profitable to mine now .

[spartak_t]

The Ethreum Classic price is less than 4% of the Ethereum price. So it is not profitable to mine now .

There is something called "difficulty".

[RastoMan]

The Ethreum Classic price is less than 4% of the Ethereum price. So it is not profitable to mine now .

There is something called "difficulty".

The ETC price is 6% of ETH and the difficulty is about 4%. So it is more profitable to mine the ETC now.

[BitUsher]

[iCEBREAKER]

intellectually challenged Spoetniktard sockies in this tread who persist in their bailout scaremongering bull

Polo and Bittrex already trade ETC in volume surpassing the 51% attackers' pretender coin.

Kraken is coming soon.  Silbert and China are all over it.  The usurper project is rapidly bleeding $$$ and miners to the legitimate chain.

The immutable original chain is winning this popularity contest, which is being held in the marketplace.

Chancellor Butarin tried to kill his own project, but it will live on without him, stronger than ever before.

Chancellor Butarin is a weakness, a point of failure which has been excised via the mETH fork.

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

[s1gs3gv]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

[Hueristic]

There is just so much blood in the water!

[anthonydar]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

I think the Monero has also hard forked to correct some kind of problems. So is the bitcoin and other coins.

[dinofelis]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

Not immutability of the code.  Immutability of the past on the chain.

[iCEBREAKER]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

I think the Monero has also hard forked to correct some kind of problems. So is the bitcoin and other coins.

You can't really compare a non-contentious hard fork of software (like Monero's) with the contentious hard fork of a blockchain (like ETH).

Since many noobs are, like you, confused about these basic-albeit-overlapping Crypto 101 concepts, I'll try to get an educational, clarifying paper written about it. 

Working title: "There Will Never Be a Monero Classic."

Opening quote:

A hard fork to change the ownership of coins is next to impossible to pull off with Monero since it would break any subsequent transactions that used the tainted coins as a mixin.

Second opening quote: [the excellent bit fluffy wrote explaining the same thing, but with more words, that I can't find right now]

[roselee]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

I think the Monero has also hard forked to correct some kind of problems. So is the bitcoin and other coins.

but not to bail out investors. of a third party
and the bitcoin and monero didnt split in two ? or are there now monero 1 and 2 ?
know what they had true real consensus. not the propaganda of consensus.

[RastoMan]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

I think the Monero has also hard forked to correct some kind of problems. So is the bitcoin and other coins.

but not to bail out investors. of a third party
and the bitcoin and monero didnt split in two ? or are there now monero 1 and 2 ?
know what they had true real consensus. not the propaganda of consensus.

As long as one miner like to continue mining the fork of a coin, it will split into two chains. But one chain will die eventually.

[Ultrabat]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

I think the Monero has also hard forked to correct some kind of problems. So is the bitcoin and other coins.

but not to bail out investors. of a third party
and the bitcoin and monero didnt split in two ? or are there now monero 1 and 2 ?
know what they had true real consensus. not the propaganda of consensus.

As long as one miner like to continue mining the fork of a coin, it will split into two chains. But one chain will die eventually.

That is right. a 51% of attack can kill a chain. The ETC hash rate is 300GH/s at the moment, if it reduces further, it might be attacked.

[s1gs3gv]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

I think the Monero has also hard forked to correct some kind of problems. So is the bitcoin and other coins.

but not to bail out investors. of a third party
and the bitcoin and monero didnt split in two ? or are there now monero 1 and 2 ?
know what they had true real consensus. not the propaganda of consensus.

AEON ?

[s1gs3gv]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

I think the Monero has also hard forked to correct some kind of problems. So is the bitcoin and other coins.

You can't really compare a non-contentious hard fork of software (like Monero's) with the contentious hard fork of a blockchain (like ETH).

Since many noobs are, like you, confused about these basic-albeit-overlapping Crypto 101 concepts, I'll try to get an educational, clarifying paper written about it.  

Working title: "There Will Never Be a Monero Classic."

Opening quote:

A hard fork to change the ownership of coins is next to impossible to pull off with Monero since it would break any subsequent transactions that used the tainted coins as a mixin.

Second opening quote: [the excellent bit fluffy wrote explaining the same thing, but with more words, that I can't find right now]

Good to see that we are getting some clarity now on the real issues. Generalized religious statements about immutability don't do anybody any good and confuse many of the less experienced trading on Polo, where the troll box is full of this crap.


The immutability of a block chain is a secondary property which is a function of the strength of consensus.

[JackJokasker]

oh man so sad 
a lot of wasted time to get dao coin but ........... 

[iCEBREAKER]

Without immutability, we're no better than fiat.  -Johnny_Mnemonic

With immutability we're just a legacy bug ridden piece of software.

~LOL~

I think the Monero has also hard forked to correct some kind of problems. So is the bitcoin and other coins.

You can't really compare a non-contentious hard fork of software (like Monero's) with the contentious hard fork of a blockchain (like ETH).

Since many noobs are, like you, confused about these basic-albeit-overlapping Crypto 101 concepts, I'll try to get an educational, clarifying paper written about it.  

Working title: "There Will Never Be a Monero Classic."

Opening quote:

A hard fork to change the ownership of coins is next to impossible to pull off with Monero since it would break any subsequent transactions that used the tainted coins as a mixin.

Second opening quote: [the excellent bit fluffy wrote explaining the same thing, but with more words, that I can't find right now]

Good to see that we are getting some clarity now on the real issues. Generalized religious statements about immutability don't do anybody any good and confuse many of the less experienced trading on Polo, where the troll box is full of this crap.


The immutability of a block chain is a secondary property which is a function of the strength of consensus.

Have you ever heard of the "Byzantine Generals' Problem?"

The solution (or workaround) relies on immutable reusable-proof-of-work ledgers, rather than Sybil (and Stalin) vulnerable social network consensus.

The rational for bailing out the troubled DAO asset relies on some flawed Rawlsian interpretation of redistributive social justice, and that's no way to run a blockchain.   

[s1gs3gv]

Good to see that we are getting some clarity now on the real issues. Generalized religious statements about immutability don't do anybody any good and confuse many of the less experienced trading on Polo, where the troll box is full of this crap.


The immutability of a block chain is a secondary property which is a function of the strength of consensus.

Have you ever heard of the "Byzantine Generals' Problem?"

The solution (or workaround) relies on immutable reusable-proof-of-work ledgers, rather than Sybil (and Stalin) vulnerable social network consensus.

The rational for bailing out the troubled DAO asset relies on some flawed Rawlsian interpretation of redistributive social justice, and that's no way to run a blockchain.  

I'll have to think about that for a bit.

Miners, being concerned mostly with making a profit, are going to mine the most profitable chain, where profit is not just the calculated current value but has some expectations for future value built in. I don't think they care about the BGP.

Now, we talk about consensus but don't we really mean profitability to mine ?

You (collectively) can waffle on about  theories of social justice and the right or wrong way to run a block chain but some might assert that all crypto-token systems are already compromised by the introduction of a profit motive.

And some might assert that the right way to run a block chain is the way the majority of miners and users prefer.

[dinofelis]

You (collectively) can waffle on about  theories of social justice and the right or wrong way to run a block chain but some might assert that all crypto-token systems are already compromised by the introduction of a profit motive.

No, it is the other way around.  The profit motive is not a way to compromise the system, but it is the engine of the system.  The whole trick was to make a system of which a solution of the Byzantine General Problem EMERGES from mutually untrustworthy, but hopefully very greedy, entities.

The block chain solution is not perfect, but attempts at such a system, and the *condition* is that there is sufficient decentralization and animosity between players, very much like a free market, which solves the problem of allocating resources and solving problems of scarcity by putting A LOT of mutually hostile entities together.

ETH failed in that respect, because there was too much centralisation: one BIG failing contract, and miners/developers/shareholders all colluding around that contract. 

[s1gs3gv]

one BIG failing contract, and miners/developers/shareholders all colluding around that contract.  

aka consensus, very likely because of a profit motive

[godzziilla]

 So many hopes...so much waste... :-\never know what worth believing! Bad story 

[iCEBREAKER]

You (collectively) can waffle on about  theories of social justice and the right or wrong way to run a block chain but some might assert that all crypto-token systems are already compromised by the introduction of a profit motive.

No, it is the other way around.  The profit motive is not a way to compromise the system, but it is the engine of the system.  The whole trick was to make a system of which a solution of the Byzantine General Problem EMERGES from mutually untrustworthy, but hopefully very greedy, entities.

The block chain solution is not perfect, but attempts at such a system, and the *condition* is that there is sufficient decentralization and animosity between players, very much like a free market, which solves the problem of allocating resources and solving problems of scarcity by putting A LOT of mutually hostile entities together.

ETH failed in that respect, because there was too much centralisation: one BIG failing contract, and miners/developers/shareholders all colluding around that contract. 

Well put; great answer.

I'm always surprised to hear from people who don't trust, nor understand, the profit motive and its critical role in aligning Bitcoin's incentive structure.

It's weird to find Marxists and other anti-capitalists here on BTCT of all places!   

But they are very welcome to sell me their ETC and continue playing make-believe with Chancellor Butarin's SocialJusticeCoin.

[s1gs3gv]

You (collectively) can waffle on about  theories of social justice and the right or wrong way to run a block chain but some might assert that all crypto-token systems are already compromised by the introduction of a profit motive.

No, it is the other way around.  The profit motive is not a way to compromise the system, but it is the engine of the system.  The whole trick was to make a system of which a solution of the Byzantine General Problem EMERGES from mutually untrustworthy, but hopefully very greedy, entities.

The block chain solution is not perfect, but attempts at such a system, and the *condition* is that there is sufficient decentralization and animosity between players, very much like a free market, which solves the problem of allocating resources and solving problems of scarcity by putting A LOT of mutually hostile entities together.

ETH failed in that respect, because there was too much centralisation: one BIG failing contract, and miners/developers/shareholders all colluding around that contract. 

Well put; great answer.

I'm always surprised to hear from people who don't trust, nor understand, the profit motive and its critical role in aligning Bitcoin's incentive structure.

It's weird to find Marxists and other anti-capitalists here on BTCT of all places!   

But they are very welcome to sell me their ETC and continue playing make-believe with Chancellor Butarin's SocialJusticeCoin.

I thought we were talking about the DAO failure, ETH and ETC.
I neither trust or don't trust the profit motive. It is what it is. So far, it is ensuring that ETH will survive and ETC will be relegated to the DOGE class.

Your belief in the power of the profit motive to align incentive structures and your belief in the superiority of ETC over ETH are contradictory.

~LOL~

[dinofelis]

I thought we were talking about the DAO failure, ETH and ETC.
I neither trust or don't trust the profit motive.

Well, without a profit motive, and only with (so-called) generous, (so-said) altruistic, collaborative people, the block chain concept wouldn't work, and would be totally exposed to one rotten apple.

But the profit motive has to induce sufficient antagonism, or it won't work either.  What we saw with ETH was that there was a profit motive all right (that would in principle make it work) but there was too much collusion and collaboration between the entities, which made the fork possible.  Too many greedy people with important roles (say, devs) had a common goal: getting bailed out.  They all looked in the same direction, even though they were greedy.  That was the reason for the failure of the block chain immutability.

That said, the thing resolved in an amazing way: those that colluded, have now their own, bailed out, block chain, and the very small minority of non-colluders have their own, original copy running.  

It is what it is. So far, it is ensuring that ETH will survive and ETC will be relegated to the DOGE class.

Well, I think it doesn't really matter: the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.  There won't, for a very very long time, be complex monsters like the DAO running on ETH and/or ETC.   Little Ponzi games like this one:

http://themerkle.com/ponzi-scheme-meets-smart-contracts-with-ethereum-piggybank/

and

https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/6439/etheramid-multi-level-social-invitation-game-no-ponzi

and, who knows, maybe smart bicycle locks are now the realistic ambitions of ETH and or ETC.

And yes, you can use ETH, because for small game, there won't be bail out forks and the chain will be reliable too.

Your belief in the power of the profit motive to align incentive structures and your belief in the superiority of ETC over ETH are contradictory.

No, ETH failed to solve the Byzantine Generals problem because of too much collusion of interests.  ETC has succeeded in keeping this solution, even though only a minority of former ETH users think so.  It is a bet of which the outcome is uncertain, but I'd think that the ETC people are potentially in a better position than the ETH people.

After all, most of the value of ETH came from the dream of megalo smart contracts.  A significant part of ETH was locked up in the DAO, which was the "engine" of the value rise.  The DAO holders were of course the first line winners of the dream, but the whole ETH holders went up with it.   But given that the DAO is dead, and probably most dreams of DAO like projects which were the driving force behind the ETH value, are dead now, rationally, the ETH must be strongly over valued.  So the ETC price may be much, much more in line with the value of a tiny smart contract ponzi game platform than the market cap of ETH, which has no much growth space any more.

That said, ETH is of course also a simple crypto currency, and there's no reason why ETH wouldn't thrive as a crypto currency.  Maybe institutional investors in normal crypto even find a value in the bail out precedent of ETH, and consider that Vitalik and the ETH people are reasonable people one can talk to if one has difficulties, and they will find a solution for you.

So in my opinion, ETH is, after the fall of the DAO, and all DAO-like dreams, now strongly over valued, but on the other hand, a bail-out crypto currency is maybe something institutional investors may find attractive.  In other words, what was lacking in crypto land was a rewindable block chain for important people, and there might very well be a huge institutional demand for that.  ETH has all its reasons of existence there, being the first such currency having shown that block chains don't have to be immutable, and transactions don't have to be irreversible - at least for important people, not for small players.  I'm sure that that proposition has a big market: a crypto that can bail out important people, but that keeps the small people play by the rules. 

[s1gs3gv]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Perhaps for you.

[s1gs3gv]

I thought we were talking about the DAO failure, ETH and ETC.
I neither trust or don't trust the profit motive.

Well, without a profit motive, and only with (so-called) generous, (so-said) altruistic, collaborative people, the block chain concept wouldn't work, and would be totally exposed to one rotten apple.

But the profit motive has to induce sufficient antagonism, or it won't work either.  What we saw with ETH was that there was a profit motive all right (that would in principle make it work) but there was too much collusion and collaboration between the entities, which made the fork possible.  Too many greedy people with important roles (say, devs) had a common goal: getting bailed out.  They all looked in the same direction, even though they were greedy.  That was the reason for the failure of the block chain immutability.

That said, the thing resolved in an amazing way: those that colluded, have now their own, bailed out, block chain, and the very small minority of non-colluders have their own, original copy running.  

It is what it is. So far, it is ensuring that ETH will survive and ETC will be relegated to the DOGE class.

Well, I think it doesn't really matter: the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.  There won't, for a very very long time, be complex monsters like the DAO running on ETH and/or ETC.   Little Ponzi games like this one:

http://themerkle.com/ponzi-scheme-meets-smart-contracts-with-ethereum-piggybank/

and

https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/6439/etheramid-multi-level-social-invitation-game-no-ponzi

and, who knows, maybe smart bicycle locks are now the realistic ambitions of ETH and or ETC.

And yes, you can use ETH, because for small game, there won't be bail out forks and the chain will be reliable too.

Your belief in the power of the profit motive to align incentive structures and your belief in the superiority of ETC over ETH are contradictory.

No, ETH failed to solve the Byzantine Generals problem because of too much collusion of interests.  ETC has succeeded in keeping this solution, even though only a minority of former ETH users think so.  It is a bet of which the outcome is uncertain, but I'd think that the ETC people are potentially in a better position than the ETH people.

After all, most of the value of ETH came from the dream of megalo smart contracts.  A significant part of ETH was locked up in the DAO, which was the "engine" of the value rise.  The DAO holders were of course the first line winners of the dream, but the whole ETH holders went up with it.   But given that the DAO is dead, and probably most dreams of DAO like projects which were the driving force behind the ETH value, are dead now, rationally, the ETH must be strongly over valued.  So the ETC price may be much, much more in line with the value of a tiny smart contract ponzi game platform than the market cap of ETH, which has no much growth space any more.

That said, ETH is of course also a simple crypto currency, and there's no reason why ETH wouldn't thrive as a crypto currency.  Maybe institutional investors in normal crypto even find a value in the bail out precedent of ETH, and consider that Vitalik and the ETH people are reasonable people one can talk to if one has difficulties, and they will find a solution for you.

So in my opinion, ETH is, after the fall of the DAO, and all DAO-like dreams, now strongly over valued, but on the other hand, a bail-out crypto currency is maybe something institutional investors may find attractive.  In other words, what was lacking in crypto land was a rewindable block chain for important people, and there might very well be a huge institutional demand for that.  ETH has all its reasons of existence there, being the first such currency having shown that block chains don't have to be immutable, and transactions don't have to be irreversible - at least for important people, not for small players.  I'm sure that that proposition has a big market: a crypto that can bail out important people, but that keeps the small people play by the rules. 

Me thinks you meander too much and are unclear in your rationale.

What is "collaboration between the entities" if not a process of consensus ?

[pereira4]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Perhaps for you.

It's yet to be seen, personally I think ETC should win because they are sticking to the good morals of not breaking the chain because of smart contracts going against holder's money.. that is bankster mentality. Let banks fail, let smart contracts fail.

[s1gs3gv]

Let banks fail, let smart contracts fail.

I wonder how you would feel if it was your money.

[dinofelis]

Me thinks you meander too much and are unclear in your rationale.
What is "collaboration between the entities" if not a process of consensus ?

The point was not to come to just any consensus, but to a "valid" one that implements a given function.  In the case of transactions, that means immutability of the past because that was the monetary principle to be implemented.  The idea was to implement a specific function, and consensus was the means, not the goal.  This is why the block chain needs to remain verifiable from the genesis block onward, with a specific monetary principle implemented.  In the case of a smart contract, that means "unstoppable code".

The idea was not to have a kind of "community that comes to consensus, just ANY consensus", but rather to have that that consensus came down to an immutable past and a given monetary principle.  Otherwise, you can just vote on a spread sheet and no block chain has to be maintained containing the past, only to maintain the vote.  People's holdings are then decided every weekend by voting (independent of any transactions you might have done).

The immutability and the monetary principle could be maintained as a consensus between sufficiently disparate and greedy entities that could not collude.  That was the brilliant invention of Satoshi.  Of course, from the moment that they collude, they can do anything, but that was recognized, and is nothing else but a 51% attack.  ETH is nothing else but the result of a 51% attack on ETC.

Consensus had to be understood in the same way as "price" is in a free market.  Consensus by collusion is called a cartel and destroys the free market function.  A 51% attack is nothing else but a majority cartel forming, and coming to another market price by collusion.  That is ETH.

[dinofelis]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Perhaps for you.

You think there will be another DAO adventure ?  Really ?

[s1gs3gv]

Me thinks you meander too much and are unclear in your rationale.
What is "collaboration between the entities" if not a process of consensus ?

The point was not to come to just any consensus, but to a "valid" one that implements a given function.

Valid ?

~LOL~

[s1gs3gv]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Perhaps for you.

You think there will be another DAO adventure ?  Really ?

Honestly, i don't care. But I never ceased to be amazed at how quickly mankind (collectively) gives up its compassion and humanity in its quest for ideological purity.

[iCEBREAKER]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Au contraire, the forking off of VitalikCoin and its hubris/moral hazard/centralization/dictatorship has *SAVED* the dream of ethereum.

With the single-point-of-failure voluntarily self-exiled to the BailoutEdition, ETC may spread its wings unencumbered by the nasty legacy of the DAO's ignoble TARP.

ETC is ready for prime time, now that it has demonstrated true decentralization and antifragility in the face of adversity.

[Minecache]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Perhaps for you.

It's yet to be seen, personally I think ETC should win because they are sticking to the good morals of not breaking the chain because of smart contracts going against holder's money.. that is bankster mentality. Let banks fail, let smart contracts fail.

Yeah gud wholesome morals like bankrolling a thief.

[Zer0Sum]

You (collectively) can waffle on about  theories of social justice and the right or wrong way to run a block chain but some might assert that all crypto-token systems are already compromised by the introduction of a profit motive.

ETH failed in that respect, because there was too much centralisation: one BIG failing contract, and miners/developers/shareholders all colluding around that contract. 

Ethereum needed adoption from corporate CTOs (much like Ripple does)...
Small startups have yet to deliver anything useful on Ethereum after 2 years... so that won't cut it. Too bad.

After the multiple debacles of he previous 2 months CTOs will review their options...
Because that cool game of "core wars" that gets Ethereum fetishists hard...
Is viewed as avoid-these-clowns-at-all costs by adults running billion $$$ businesses.

It's got nothing to do with crypto religion... it's all about control and running a stable business.

[dinofelis]

Me thinks you meander too much and are unclear in your rationale.
What is "collaboration between the entities" if not a process of consensus ?

The point was not to come to just any consensus, but to a "valid" one that implements a given function.

Valid ?

Yes, in the case of Bitcoin and Satoshi, he wanted to come to the valid function of immutable past, and of the acceptance rules of a currency (the seigniorage mechanism and the transaction mechanism) and of the *irreversibility of a transaction*.   The consensus was "a past everyone agrees on", but this was only a TOOL to obtain the "true past with the true rules".  The idea being that amongst a lot of adversaries, there would not be ever a way to implement a DEVIATING consensus from the truth (that is, the real past, and the original rules) because that advantage would always be only to a minority that would not be able to impose their deviant rules to their advantage.  The deviation from those original rules would be a breakdown of the system (even if there was "consensus"), called a 51% attack.

If there would have been 5000 DAO, then if one had been hacked, nobody would have forked over it, because the "immutability" proposition would be perceived much more profitable than the victims of one single DAO hack.  That's why bitcoin didn't fork, not even over MtGox.

The problem was that ETH was essentially a one-DAO system, so in the end you had DAO holders + ETH holders that saw the sole value of ETH in the DAO, versus the hacker, and the first community could easily form a 51% majority to do a 51% attack, which is what happened.

Other people see "consensus" as in "democracy".  But that is not the solution to the Byzantine Generals's problem.  That is like the generals not agreeing on a time of attack, but agreeing to go and drink a beer, after all.

[s1gs3gv]

agreeing to go and drink a beer

Afraid you lost me with all the adolescent absolutism bs, but i can agree to this

[dinofelis]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Au contraire, the forking off of VitalikCoin and its hubris/moral hazard/centralization/dictatorship has *SAVED* the dream of ethereum.

With the single-point-of-failure voluntarily self-exiled to the BailoutEdition, ETC may spread its wings unencumbered by the nasty legacy of the DAO's ignoble TARP.

ETC is ready for prime time, now that it has demonstrated true decentralization and antifragility in the face of adversity.

My point was that the whole value proposition of ethereum (from the beginning) is now dead.  The DAO has shown that "code is law" is a screwed concept, because in a complex contract, there is always the *possibility* of bugs and exploits.  That the Slock-it guys were particularly sloppy is not a reason to think that it cannot happen again.

The whole adventure has shown people that there is in fact no secure way to do smart contracting.  The forking has shown that if it goes wrong, then it is not simple to bail out.  Nobody in his right mind (and certainly not corporations) are going to take the risk to put a lot of money in something that can be exploited, and one cannot guarantee that one will not have written a code that has NO security hole in it.

So the value proposition of ethereum is over.  There won't be big smart contracts any more on it.  In fact, the DAO guys and the hacker did us an enormous favor.  Imagine, in ethereum's wet dreams, that a good part of the corporate world would be running smart contracts on ethereum, and then, say, Apple's funds get pumped into Samsung's :-)  What crisis would that not be ?

This apprentice sorcerer's game stopped in time.

[dinofelis]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Perhaps for you.

You think there will be another DAO adventure ?  Really ?

Honestly, i don't care. But I never ceased to be amazed at how quickly mankind (collectively) gives up its compassion and humanity in its quest for ideological purity.

That was exactly the value proposition of smart contracts (and of crypto in general): to get rid of humanity, no ?

[iCEBREAKER]

The whole adventure has shown people that there is in fact no secure fast, easy, centralized way to do smart contracting.

FTFY

also acceptable:

The whole adventure has shown people that there is in fact no secure way to do smart contracting contentious hard forks.

 

[Fanpant]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Perhaps for you.

You think there will be another DAO adventure ?  Really ?

Honestly, i don't care. But I never ceased to be amazed at how quickly mankind (collectively) gives up its compassion and humanity in its quest for ideological purity.

That was exactly the value proposition of smart contracts (and of crypto in general): to get rid of humanity, no ?

The smart contract is programmed by human, there will be human errors. So there should be other forms  of contract.

[DAOinvestorwantsETC]

PETITION CALLING FOR MEMBERS OF THE ETHEREUM FOUNDATION/TEAM AND OTHERS (WHITE HACKERS) TO RETURN ETC TO DAO HOLDERS ADDRESSES.

SEE POST BELOW & SIGN THE PETITION.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1576396.msg15827434#msg15827434

https://www.change.org/p/ethereum-foundation-members-of-ethereum-team-white-hats-to-return-etc-to-dao-holders

[RastoMan]

PETITION CALLING FOR MEMBERS OF THE ETHEREUM FOUNDATION/TEAM AND OTHERS (WHITE HACKERS) TO RETURN ETC TO DAO HOLDERS ADDRESSES.

SEE POST BELOW & SIGN THE PETITION.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1576396.msg15827434#msg15827434

https://www.change.org/p/ethereum-foundation-members-of-ethereum-team-white-hats-to-return-etc-to-dao-holders

Why do not you ask the DAO hackers to return the DAO he stole? If he returned it, there was no need for the hard fork.

[Ultrabat]

PETITION CALLING FOR MEMBERS OF THE ETHEREUM FOUNDATION/TEAM AND OTHERS (WHITE HACKERS) TO RETURN ETC TO DAO HOLDERS ADDRESSES.

SEE POST BELOW & SIGN THE PETITION.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1576396.msg15827434#msg15827434

https://www.change.org/p/ethereum-foundation-members-of-ethereum-team-white-hats-to-return-etc-to-dao-holders

Why do not you ask the DAO hackers to return the DAO he stole? If he returned it, there was no need for the hard fork.

It would be a good idea to ask the DAO hacker to donate his "stolen" coins and support the development of ETC.

[Hueristic]

PETITION CALLING FOR MEMBERS OF THE ETHEREUM FOUNDATION/TEAM AND OTHERS (WHITE HACKERS) TO RETURN ETC TO DAO HOLDERS ADDRESSES.

SEE POST BELOW & SIGN THE PETITION.


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1576396.msg15827434#msg15827434

https://www.change.org/p/ethereum-foundation-members-of-ethereum-team-white-hats-to-return-etc-to-dao-holders

Why do not you ask the DAO hackers to return the DAO he stole? If he returned it, there was no need for the hard fork.

It would be a good idea to ask the DAO hacker to donate his "stolen" coins and support the development of ETC.

If I gave a shit I would call for a Dev team formation and create proposals for funding goals and request the Dao holder to pledge funds from the diverted dao to an ongoing dev schedule, but what do I know.

[spartak_t]

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

[Hueristic]

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

Thx, I have tons Of good idea's that could launch this branch but zero incentive.

[spartak_t]

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

Thx, I have tons Of good idea's that could launch this branch but zero incentive.

Try to be more positive.

[RastoMan]

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

If Mr. Barry Silbert likes the ETC so much, the DAO hackers (white + black) should sell the ETC to him.

[Hueristic]

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

Thx, I have tons Of good idea's that could launch this branch but zero incentive.

Try to be more positive.

FAILCommunity

[spartak_t]

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

Thx, I have tons Of good idea's that could launch this branch but zero incentive.

Try to be more positive.

FAILCommunity

It has its niche. Do some research and you'll see we are kinda serious about this, though we are struggling for quite some time. We are some of the nice guys here.

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

If Mr. Barry Silbert likes the ETC so much, the DAO hackers (white + black) should sell the ETC to him.

I have pretty good feelings on why Silbert is buying ETC, but everybody is free to has its own opinion. I can only say that Silbert can afford to buy the ETC from the attacker and if he announces it.. well... it will skyrocket. It sounds like utopia though.

[Hueristic]

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

Thx, I have tons Of good idea's that could launch this branch but zero incentive.

Try to be more positive.

FAILCommunity

It has its niche. Do some research and you'll see we are kinda serious about this, though we are struggling for quite some time. We are some of the nice guys here.

LOL, I saw that and thought it was a political claim not an actual community.

I have no time for yet more research btw.

[spartak_t]

That might end up as a good idea. I mean if the attacker give part of the coins in his possesion for the ETC development. It would be a good answer to what EF did. About 2 weeks ago Mr. Barry Silbert said that the first coin (other than Bitcoin), which he bought was ETC at $0.50. From what I've heard he invested 5% from his BTC, which should be a pretty big amount. This clearly shows that some serious players are supporting ETC and you can see that it has twice the trade volume of ETH (leaving conspiracy theories aside).

Thx, I have tons Of good idea's that could launch this branch but zero incentive.

Try to be more positive.

FAILCommunity

It has its niche. Do some research and you'll see we are kinda serious about this, though we are struggling for quite some time. We are some of the nice guys here.

LOL, I saw that and thought it was a political claim not an actual community.

I have no time for yet more research btw.

You can still hardly say it is a community, but imagine 9GAG, FailArmy or YouTube channels with social experiments (such as helping homeless people) with its own cryptocurrency? Millions of people are following/watching them so like I said.. it has its niche.

[robdark]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

[Hueristic]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

/thread

[RastoMan]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

There is a alt chain of ETH called ETC. The hacker can have access to the ETC. Let us see if that is a fail or not.

[funbarrel]

it was a huge disappointment for me to be honest, i expected way more out of it, i think that it destroyed the ethereum though the time will show what will happen

[ontrackk]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

well most embarrassing thing is when people create the shitcoins just to dump it all on people, this was more like a mistake only, of course it is a shame but it is how it is

[Fanpant]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

well most embarrassing thing is when people create the shitcoins just to dump it all on people, this was more like a mistake only, of course it is a shame but it is how it is

That theory can be applied to the ETC. It might be a pump and dump coin. Some people might lose a lot soon.

[Minecache]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

[Nimbulan]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

thats true, i have never had any of my money in dao to be honest, i knew that sooner or later it is going to turn out as a joke

[thejaytiesto]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

The ones that should get a grip are the guys that invested millions in a super experimental technology. If that isn't the behavior of money hungry mindless scrubs then I don't know what it is.

[spartak_t]

The ones that should get a grip are the guys that invested millions in a super experimental technology. If that isn't the behavior of money hungry mindless scrubs then I don't know what it is.

That's not exactly the case. Nobody is talking about prices here! At least that was not my intention (as I was the one started this thread)! Those who invested millions should not get a grip, because that experimental technology broke the most important thing they promised - decentralisation.

[Minecache]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

The ones that should get a grip are the guys that invested millions in a super experimental technology. If that isn't the behavior of money hungry mindless scrubs then I don't know what it is.

Incorrect. Without investors willing to take risks in hugely potential projects then mankind would still be in the caves. I personally invested some of my wealth into the DAO because I was fascinated with the ideas and technology. Not because of some get rich quick scam. I have my own self-made fortune from the tech industry, but I want to invest part of that to help and encourage others to make something of themselves and technology. And I'd invest in DAO2.0 at the tip of a hat tomorrow, because the shame is not from ones failures it's from ones inaction.

[Ultrabat]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

That is right. If the authorities in the land cannot cope with that, then the cryto currency developers should deal with that.

[dinofelis]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

On the contrary.  Crypto was invented to survive in a hostile hacker and attacker environment.  Remember "trustless" ?  That's what it means.  If crypto suffers from hacking and attacking, instead of living off it, then it is a fail.

You might as well say that "enemy fire is what keeps people from getting into the army".  The whole purpose of an army is to resist to enemy fire.  Complaining about it for an army defeats the purpose.

[dinofelis]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

That is right. If the authorities in the land cannot cope with that, then the cryto currency developers should deal with that.

They should deal with it during development.  They should develop hacking and attacking resistent systems.  Because that's what crypto is about.  Undoing an attack by hand, just like in fiat, defeats the whole "automatic" purpose of crypto.  If that is what needs to be done, stay in fiat.

[anthonydar]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

That is right. If the authorities in the land cannot cope with that, then the cryto currency developers should deal with that.

They should deal with it during development.  They should develop hacking and attacking resistent systems.  Because that's what crypto is about.  Undoing an attack by hand, just like in fiat, defeats the whole "automatic" purpose of crypto.  If that is what needs to be done, stay in fiat.

That is right. But it is very difficult to develop bug/hack free software in the computer industry. It is better to counter attack after hack.

[coin_gambler]

that was one of the greatest fails i have ever seen to be honest, i hope we will not have any more situations like with this dao thing, i never invest in those

[vapourminer]

fails like this need to happen. mainly to teach lessons that would be ignored otherwise since they are too insignificant to be noticed.

although this lesson will be ignored too most likely.

[fravia]

that was one of the greatest fails i have ever seen to be honest, i hope we will not have any more situations like with this dao thing, i never invest in those

well yeah but it didnt destroy the ethereum, in my opinion ethereum will still have a pretty decent possibility to grow at a very rapid pace

[Hueristic]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

That is right. If the authorities in the land cannot cope with that, then the cryto currency developers should deal with that.

They should deal with it during development.  They should develop hacking and attacking resistent systems.  Because that's what crypto is about.  Undoing an attack by hand, just like in fiat, defeats the whole "automatic" purpose of crypto.  If that is what needs to be done, stay in fiat.

As long as idiots buy into premine ico scams this will never happen (with minor exceptions that get lost in the noise and are seriously underfunded). The greedy sheep support this shit and don't listen to warnings or learn which becomes a cycle of ever growing proportions that put them into a position where they have to jump on the next shitcoin train to recoup from the last and pull in new fools to buy that bag of shit. The entire Alt scene is one big pyramid with a few notable exceptions. The bag holders of one shitfest get to the next level of the next shitfest (if they don't cut their losses) and slowly work up the chain to break even if they stay long enough and then become part of the spoon feeding shit shoveling themselves and see profit. It's a training ground for bottom feeding fools no different than jail creating better criminals.

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

On the contrary.  Crypto was invented to survive in a hostile hacker and attacker environment.  Remember "trustless" ?  That's what it means.  If crypto suffers from hacking and attacking, instead of living off it, then it is a fail.

You might as well say that "enemy fire is what keeps people from getting into the army".  The whole purpose of an army is to resist to enemy fire.  Complaining about it for an army defeats the purpose.

Your posts are spot on but you are trying to point out logic to a shill that ignores logic when it doesn't support his shitcoin bag.

This is his handbook.

https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/fallacies_list.html

fails like this need to happen. mainly to teach lessons that would be ignored otherwise since they are too insignificant to be noticed.

although this lesson will be ignored too most likely.

They will never learn anything if they are allowed to bail themselves out, it's no different than the bankers we all detest and the reason CC exists. Fucking Hypocrites.

Those of us that try to warn the n00bs get tired of wasting our energy and experience on ungrateful turds. I've been warning of scams for years and haven't received one thank you. I dropped in every Bob surplus scam and warned people and I don't think one fool listened but they all cried when fleeced and Bob had a real good laugh. It gets to the point where you feel they deserve to get fleeced.

[dinofelis]

that was one of the greatest fails i have ever seen to be honest, i hope we will not have any more situations like with this dao thing, i never invest in those

well yeah but it didnt destroy the ethereum, in my opinion ethereum will still have a pretty decent possibility to grow at a very rapid pace

I do like altcoins in general if they come up with new ideas and new systems, because bitcoin, being the first, is also one of the poorest in ideas, but bitcoin is now too big and too conservative to try new things quickly.  So altcoins to explore and research are a good idea ; altcoins to scam and pump/dump not.  Sometimes it is hard to make the difference, but nevertheless, several altcoins have come up with really potentially good ideas.  That said, potentially good ideas sometimes turn out to be, after all, extremely stupid.  That's the nature of new ideas: they seem good in the beginning, but only a few turn out to be actually really good.

Ethereum is one of these altcoins, which proposed complex smart contracts.  I was initially quite enthusiastic about it ; I needed myself to witness the DAO fail to understand the fundamental failure: Turing Completeness.  Turing completeness is of course a great property of general purpose computing: you can write a piece of software for just any problem.   So it seemed like a good idea to use a Turing Complete language to write smart contracts in, much "richer" than the bitcoin scripting language which was, on purpose, not Turing complete.  As I said, it took the DAO failure for me to realize the stupidity of this initially seemingly brilliant idea.

Contracts are not just pieces of software.  They are supposed to be judges.  No law system is ever Turing Complete, because every law system needs to guarantee that it will come to a decision.

Once you realize that, but I had been blinded by ethereum's enthusiasm too, you realize the utter stupidity of ethereum.

This cannot be anything else but disaster area.  Writing contracts of which their execution is unverifiable, other than to run them, is a mightily crazy idea if you think about it.   It sounded brilliant, it was in fact tremendously stupid.  But it was so sexy that it took a thing like the DAO fail to demonstrate it.

So, what's there left for ethereum ?   I don't see much, actually.  One should limit one-self to such a small subset of Solidity that it can be automatically verified, and that all branchings of its execution can be examined, not by running it, but by analysing the code, that in fact, it will be reduced to not much more than the bitcoin scripting language.

In other words, if a contract on ethereum is "safe", it can also be run on bitcoin, and if you use fancy stuff from ethereum that is hard or impossible to do in bitcoin, you are open to DAO-like disasters.  No matter how much auditing.  You will NEVER BE SURE AGAIN.

[umairsaleem011]

This is a good opportunity for other devs to create their own DAO. Maybe Lisk devs should start creating one. This is a massive opportunity to get a better one out in the market. 

The LISK goons can't even run a website or create a functioning wallet. But yeah why don't these clowns copy others great ideas.

Well he did say other Devs. A decentralized autonomous organization is still a good concept in theory, it was just hacked. 

[RastoMan]

fails like this need to happen. mainly to teach lessons that would be ignored otherwise since they are too insignificant to be noticed.

although this lesson will be ignored too most likely.

The DAO is a good concept. It is still in the early stage of developments. So there will be some growth pains.

[Ultrabat]

fails like this need to happen. mainly to teach lessons that would be ignored otherwise since they are too insignificant to be noticed.

although this lesson will be ignored too most likely.

The DAO is a good concept. It is still in the early stage of developments. So there will be some growth pains.

I think so. The Ethereum is just one year old. It will make more mistakes in the future, we have to be tolerant.

[Master_dandosha]

fails like this need to happen. mainly to teach lessons that would be ignored otherwise since they are too insignificant to be noticed.

although this lesson will be ignored too most likely.

The DAO is a good concept. It is still in the early stage of developments. So there will be some growth pains.

I think so. The Ethereum is just one year old. It will make more mistakes in the future, we have to be tolerant.

i think eth need one more year to recover from what DAO caused . 

[Fanpant]

fails like this need to happen. mainly to teach lessons that would be ignored otherwise since they are too insignificant to be noticed.

although this lesson will be ignored too most likely.

The DAO is a good concept. It is still in the early stage of developments. So there will be some growth pains.

I think so. The Ethereum is just one year old. It will make more mistakes in the future, we have to be tolerant.

i think eth need one more year to recover from what DAO caused . 

It is difficult to say how long does it take for the Ethereum to recover from the DAO hack. In terms of price, it will take 6 months.

[lotfiuser]

i dont undersatand it dao etc ...

[Ultrabat]

fails like this need to happen. mainly to teach lessons that would be ignored otherwise since they are too insignificant to be noticed.

although this lesson will be ignored too most likely.

The DAO is a good concept. It is still in the early stage of developments. So there will be some growth pains.

I think so. The Ethereum is just one year old. It will make more mistakes in the future, we have to be tolerant.

i think eth need one more year to recover from what DAO caused . 

It is difficult to say how long does it take for the Ethereum to recover from the DAO hack. In terms of price, it will take 6 months.

I think the Ethereum price has already recovered from the DAO hack. The price is quite stable at around 0.0195 now.

[dinofelis]

The DAO is a good concept. It is still in the early stage of developments. So there will be some growth pains.

I was somewhat blinded too, but I think now that, looking back, the DAO was a very, very stupid idea.  After all, what was it ?  It was "making a pot of money" for "VC investment", and then having the contributors vote on where to put the money.  But that is ridiculous.  If you can vote proportionally to your contribution to where the money should go, *then put your money directly there* !  Simple crowdfunding of all the proposals would have been good enough.  No DAO needed.  You like it ?  Put your money in it.  You don't like it ?  Don't put your money in there.  How can it get simpler ?  What does the DAO bring in that simple crowdfunding doesn't ?  Apart from bringing in middle men, profiteers, "developers" and other parasites which crypto was designed to get rid off ?
The DAO was nothing else but a confusing way to do crowdfunding, with the possibility of using other people's money to a certain extend and with funny mechanisms to make "no voting" expensive.  There was not the slightest bit of economic rationale behind the DAO.  The same people who put money in the pot, vote for where the money should go.   Usually people vote DIRECTLY with their money, OR they trust an institutional investor to do it in their name.  But putting it in a pot to vote oneself for it, is totally ridiculous.

The other thing is of course the Turing completeness, which is an utterly bad idea (but which sounded good in the beginning).

So there was *NOTHING* that was a good concept in the DAO.  It was an economically ridiculous idea on a ridiculous platform.  It didn't solve any slightest bit of problem.  

[RastoMan]

fails like this need to happen. mainly to teach lessons that would be ignored otherwise since they are too insignificant to be noticed.

although this lesson will be ignored too most likely.

The DAO is a good concept. It is still in the early stage of developments. So there will be some growth pains.

I think so. The Ethereum is just one year old. It will make more mistakes in the future, we have to be tolerant.

i think eth need one more year to recover from what DAO caused . 

It is difficult to say how long does it take for the Ethereum to recover from the DAO hack. In terms of price, it will take 6 months.

I think the Ethereum price has already recovered from the DAO hack. The price is quite stable at around 0.0195 now.

I do not think so. The price of ETH should be around $15 if it is fully recovered from the DAO hack. The price is just below $12 now.

[spartak_t]

I think the Ethereum price has already recovered from the DAO hack. The price is quite stable at around 0.0195 now.

I do not think so. The price of ETH should be around $15 if it is fully recovered from the DAO hack. The price is just below $12 now.

You're both wrong.



The price of Ethereum was over 2.76m satoshi (i.e. $21 at the time) and its currently well under 2m satoshi. I think that Bitcoin also suffered from the DAO attack, because it lost more than half a billion $ from its market cap in a matter of hours.

[airsounds]

DAO is fail but should have been allowed to fail. Hardfork is most embarrassing event ever in crypto history. Absolutely shameful.

Are you for fuckin real? The most shame events are the constant hacks and attacks. This is the type of shit that's hodling back many many investors from entering the crypto-sphere. Get a grip. FFS

That is right. If the authorities in the land cannot cope with that, then the cryto currency developers should deal with that.

i doubt that anyone can deal with it to be honest we cannot do anything about the dao and i hope there wont be any of such cases in the future

[bbc.reporter]

The DAO is a good concept. It is still in the early stage of developments. So there will be some growth pains.

....

So there was *NOTHING* that was a good concept in the DAO.  It was an economically ridiculous idea on a ridiculous platform.  It didn't solve any slightest bit of problem.  

It was a sham from the very beginning. Many known people in the cryptosphere like GMaxwell, Peter Todd and Adam Back have already said that Ethereum will never become a viable platform for smart contracts. I do not think Vitalik is trying to scam the people but he should know deep inside that Ethereum as a platform will not work as promised. He is selling what is called "snake oil".

I hope developers who know will add to the conversation and explain in layman terms why Ethereum is not viable.

[q835197677]

Personally, I think DAO is a joke, from a certain point of view, it personally split the ETH, the emergence of ETH and ETC

[anthonydar]

Personally, I think DAO is a joke, from a certain point of view, it personally split the ETH, the emergence of ETH and ETC

That was not intended as a joke. It was a good experiment. But it failed due to a bug in the software implementation.

[dinofelis]

Personally, I think DAO is a joke, from a certain point of view, it personally split the ETH, the emergence of ETH and ETC

That was not intended as a joke. It was a good experiment. But it failed due to a bug in the software implementation.

As if it can be expected that complex code will not contain a bug or an exploit.  That was the first failure but it is a *fundamental* failure: one cannot write complex software from scratch, without having it used, and the guarantee that no bug or exploit will exist.
Normal software gets around this, by updates, when bugs or exploits are detected.  But, by definition, smart contracts cannot be updated because they are a contract which has, of course, to remain in place as it was originally convened (unless you make the update part of the contract, which opens even more the Pandora's box of potential bugs and exploits).

The principle of complex, Turing complete, bug free and exploit free smart contracts from the start, unstoppable and unalterable, is an oxymoron.

Moreover, the *economic function* of the DAO was ridiculous, as I posted earlier.  There's nothing the DAO could economically accomplish which simple crowd funding cannot accomplish.   It just got vastly more complicated, where some privileged got more to say about other people's money.

I really wonder what was the sense of this experiment, of which the disastrous outcome was evidently predictable.  Did one really need to mess with $150 million to find out the obvious ?

[spartak_t]

Personally, I think DAO is a joke, from a certain point of view, it personally split the ETH, the emergence of ETH and ETC

That was not intended as a joke. It was a good experiment. But it failed due to a bug in the software implementation.

As if it can be expected that complex code will not contain a bug or an exploit.  That was the first failure but it is a *fundamental* failure: one cannot write complex software from scratch, without having it used, and the guarantee that no bug or exploit will exist.
Normal software gets around this, by updates, when bugs or exploits are detected.  But, by definition, smart contracts cannot be updated because they are a contract which has, of course, to remain in place as it was originally convened (unless you make the update part of the contract, which opens even more the Pandora's box of potential bugs and exploits).

The principle of complex, Turing complete, bug free and exploit free smart contracts from the start, unstoppable and unalterable, is an oxymoron.

Moreover, the *economic function* of the DAO was ridiculous, as I posted earlier.  There's nothing the DAO could economically accomplish which simple crowd funding cannot accomplish.   It just got vastly more complicated, where some privileged got more to say about other people's money.

I really wonder what was the sense of this experiment, of which the disastrous outcome was evidently predictable.  Did one really need to mess with $150 million to find out the obvious ?

Keep in mind that not only the DAO got hurt, but the entire market. Before the attack, market cap of the cryptocurrencies was about $14.2Bn and it was shrinked to ~$12.5Bn in a ~week. Bitcoin was at its peak since the beginning of 2014. Look what I've said 2 days before the attack:

You can't just take $200Mn from the people, without doing vast amount of researches on your product (though I admit again that I didn't make any deep researches on ETH or DAO)! This could kill all the crypto!

... and what Hueristic answered:

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

I believe its safe to say that the DAO failure caused a few hundred million $ (quite possible to be even over a billion $) in losses. Its not like I'm bragging or anything, but I was expecting this to happen and it was the main reason to start this thread. Projects are coming and going all the time, but when it comes to a project with such funds, then we should all worry about on what may happen in future.

[dinofelis]

I believe its safe to say that the DAO failure caused a few hundred million $ (quite possible to be even over a billion $) in losses. Its not like I'm bragging or anything, but I was expecting this to happen and it was the main reason to start this thread. Projects are coming and going all the time, but when it comes to a project with such funds, then we should all worry about on what may happen in future.

I don't think this is a bad thing in itself.  Most of this market cap is first of all just a speculative bubble because the price is not really the price of "money" (the bitcoin and other coin USAGE as a means of exchange doesn't justify such a market cap) and is also not really the price of "store of value" (most bitcoin holders don't hold bitcoin as "store of value" - that is, to get out about the SAME value years later, but to get out MUCH MORE value without there being an equivalent production of value standing over it - so most of bitcoin's market cap at this moment is still coming from "greater fools" theory rather than "same value").

By this I do not mean that bitcoin's price will crash.  Absolutely not.  It might well be that bitcoin gets used one day are genuine money and that its monetary market cap will even be higher, but for the moment, the market cap is essentially speculation and doesn't come from the normal monetary value it should have as a means of exchange.

So if this market cap lowers a lot due to what happened to the DAO it won't hurt bitcoin as a means of payment (it has largely enough market cap remaining to do all the purchasing of goods and services one is doing with it right now, which isn't a lot).

On the other hand, a wake-up call was necessary.  It is necessary to see what happens when the block chain paradigm fails, such as happened to ethereum, and when a chain forks genuinely.   That such a block chain failure would occur one day now seems obvious (after the fact) and it is good to be aware of it, also for bitcoin.

That a few billion of hot air speculation got burned doing so is not so much of a problem I'd say.  Crypto is testing its limits, its behavioral features, and we need to know more about that before going further.

Also, my personal hope is that one will wake up about this monumental problem in bitcoin, which is traceability and the potential colouring of coins, as ethereum is now also experiencing.

[spartak_t]

I like how you think, but its not necessary to talk about long term "value". There are also a lot of "day traders" and I was mainly referring to them. On the other hand, my personal opinion (well, it may sound like a conspiracy theory, but its what I think) is that Bitcoin (by saying BTC I am referring to the entire market of cryptocurrencies) is still "working", because some "people" are still allowing it. And if we want things to stay this way, then we'd better not screwing with ICO's/crowdsales/whatever, because some authorities can find their reasons to get more deeply involved and then we are all f*cked.

[Ultrabat]

I like how you think, but its not necessary to talk about long term "value". There are also a lot of "day traders" and I was mainly referring to them. On the other hand, my personal opinion (well, it may sound like a conspiracy theory, but its what I think) is that Bitcoin (by saying BTC I am referring to the entire market of cryptocurrencies) is still "working", because some "people" are still allowing it. And if we want things to stay this way, then we'd better not screwing with ICO's/crowdsales/whatever, because some authorities can find their reasons to get more deeply involved and then we are all f*cked.

You are right about the day traders. The volume of ETC + ETH was about 100,000 bitcoins a few weeks ago. But today's volume is just 15,000.

[raphma]

Personally, I think DAO is a joke, from a certain point of view, it personally split the ETH, the emergence of ETH and ETC

That was not intended as a joke. It was a good experiment. But it failed due to a bug in the software implementation.

it was a joke... the biggest crowdfunding ever without proper auditing and testing... a joke.

[Hueristic]

Personally, I think DAO is a joke, from a certain point of view, it personally split the ETH, the emergence of ETH and ETC

That was not intended as a joke. It was a good experiment. But it failed due to a bug in the software implementation.

As if it can be expected that complex code will not contain a bug or an exploit.  That was the first failure but it is a *fundamental* failure: one cannot write complex software from scratch, without having it used, and the guarantee that no bug or exploit will exist.
Normal software gets around this, by updates, when bugs or exploits are detected.  But, by definition, smart contracts cannot be updated because they are a contract which has, of course, to remain in place as it was originally convened (unless you make the update part of the contract, which opens even more the Pandora's box of potential bugs and exploits).

The principle of complex, Turing complete, bug free and exploit free smart contracts from the start, unstoppable and unalterable, is an oxymoron.

Moreover, the *economic function* of the DAO was ridiculous, as I posted earlier.  There's nothing the DAO could economically accomplish which simple crowd funding cannot accomplish.   It just got vastly more complicated, where some privileged got more to say about other people's money.

I really wonder what was the sense of this experiment, of which the disastrous outcome was evidently predictable.  Did one really need to mess with $150 million to find out the obvious ?

Keep in mind that not only the DAO got hurt, but the entire market. Before the attack, market cap of the cryptocurrencies was about $14.2Bn and it was shrinked to ~$12.5Bn in a ~week. Bitcoin was at its peak since the beginning of 2014. Look what I've said 2 days before the attack:

You can't just take $200Mn from the people, without doing vast amount of researches on your product (though I admit again that I didn't make any deep researches on ETH or DAO)! This could kill all the crypto!

... and what Hueristic answered:

...This could kill all the crypto!...

LOL, not a chance in hell. When it crashes and burns it'll just get more peops interested.

I believe its safe to say that the DAO failure caused a few hundred million $ (quite possible to be even over a billion $) in losses. Its not like I'm bragging or anything, but I was expecting this to happen and it was the main reason to start this thread. Projects are coming and going all the time, but when it comes to a project with such funds, then we should all worry about on what may happen in future.

The night is young my friend, it will come to pass.

[Fanpant]

Personally, I think DAO is a joke, from a certain point of view, it personally split the ETH, the emergence of ETH and ETC

That was not intended as a joke. It was a good experiment. But it failed due to a bug in the software implementation.

it was a joke... the biggest crowdfunding ever without proper auditing and testing... a joke.

That is right. In the future, all the program/codes need to be tested throughly on the testnet before they can be released on the main net.

[dinofelis]

That is right. In the future, all the program/codes need to be tested throughly on the testnet before they can be released on the main net.

I think that is not sufficient.  First of all, you can hardly test a contract for a year on a test net, because then it is much less hassle to go through the normal legal system.  The idea was to make contracting "light quick and easy". Also, contracts can contain ideas, and agreements which are confidential until they are made.  If you make them public before the deal is real, you lose a lot of competitive edge.

But most of all, if contracts run on a testnet, there will not be the same incentive to hack them than if they are for real.  In fact, I would look at contracts running on test nets, try to find hacks into them, not reveal them until the contract runs for real and then attack it.  The test net phase simply gives me more time to find a hack.

[Ruhtilg]

That is right. In the future, all the program/codes need to be tested throughly on the testnet before they can be released on the main net.

I think that is not sufficient.  First of all, you can hardly test a contract for a year on a test net, because then it is much less hassle to go through the normal legal system.  The idea was to make contracting "light quick and easy". Also, contracts can contain ideas, and agreements which are confidential until they are made.  If you make them public before the deal is real, you lose a lot of competitive edge.

But most of all, if contracts run on a testnet, there will not be the same incentive to hack them than if they are for real.  In fact, I would look at contracts running on test nets, try to find hacks into them, not reveal them until the contract runs for real and then attack it.  The test net phase simply gives me more time to find a hack.

That is right. It is quite difficult to test the contracts on the test net. Hackers will not be interested. They have less incentive to do that.

[Gaugh]

There should be a regulatory body to ensure coins comply with a set of minimum standards.
Developers have to stop rolling out coins that are copies of existing ones, and their coins must not be of low standards.

[dinofelis]

There should be a regulatory body to ensure coins comply with a set of minimum standards.

You really understood the sense of crypto, didn't you ? 

[nova-rider]

Hard to know that's the biggest crowdfunding ever in crypto.

[spartak_t]

The night is young my friend, it will come to pass.

Sure, agreed, but that won't change the fact that probably some people out there committed a suicide because of what happened.

There should be a regulatory body to ensure coins comply with a set of minimum standards.

You really understood the sense of crypto, didn't you ? 

Sounds funny, but I was implying this in my previous comment.

[Minecache]

The DAO didn't fail, it was hacked. There is a MASSIVE difference.

And even if it had failed, which it didn't, there is no dishonour in trying to innovate or succeed. The shame is in doing nothing.

I hope there is a DAO2.0. I'll invest in it in a heartbeat.

[Hueristic]

The night is young my friend, it will come to pass.

Sure, agreed, but that won't change the fact that probably some people out there committed a suicide because of what happened.

Many people deserved alot more pain than the bailout scumsuckers ended up getting.

[dinofelis]

The DAO didn't fail, it was hacked. There is a MASSIVE difference.

"the safe didn't fail, it got cracked by the burglar".   
A smart contract "getting hacked" according to its own terms, is about the biggest failure you can imagine for a smart contract.

It is the equivalent of having on your fire insurance contract small print that says that you owe the insurance company 10 times the value of your own house if they re-imburse you for fire.  And then you are amazed that you're broke whenever your house burns down and they send you a lawyer to get 9 times your house's value from you.  Wonder whether you would consider that fire insurance a great success or a failure.

I hope there is a DAO2.0. I'll invest in it in a heartbeat.

Give me the weekend, I'll write one for you.  On ETH if you want...

[spartak_t]

The DAO didn't fail, it was hacked. There is a MASSIVE difference.

Your stupidity always amuses me.

Fantastic article by Alex Van de Sande dispelling all the FUD and lies currently being propagated by the ETC criminal coin tards.

https://medium.com/@avsa/the-truth-about-the-fork-fd040c7ca955#.ho7lo8uxv

[loveofmylife]

The DAO didn't fail, it was hacked. There is a MASSIVE difference.

Your stupidity always amuses me.

Fantastic article by Alex Van de Sande dispelling all the FUD and lies currently being propagated by the ETC criminal coin tards.

https://medium.com/@avsa/the-truth-about-the-fork-fd040c7ca955#.ho7lo8uxv

LOL, stupid people wouldn't admit dao has been failed, it is delisted from coinmarketcap, which means dao has been officially dead.

[iCEBREAKER]

The DAO didn't fail, it was hacked.

Quoted for hilarity.

Nice distinction without a difference you've made there.   

I hope there is a DAO2.0. I'll invest in it in a heartbeat.

Also quoted for hilarity.   

If Mindcrash didn't exist, we'd have to invent him.  Nobody else so neatly encapsulates the blithering hubris of the ETH Bailout Fork mindset better than he does.

[bbc.reporter]

The DAO didn't fail, it was hacked.

Quoted for hilarity.

Nice distinction without a difference you've made there.  

I hope there is a DAO2.0. I'll invest in it in a heartbeat.

Also quoted for hilarity.  

If Mindcrash didn't exist, we'd have to invent him.  Nobody else so neatly encapsulates the blithering hubris of the ETH Bailout Fork mindset better than he does.

Minecache is so desperate that he will say anything to justify his denial and blindness. The DAO did fail because it was hacked. You know why it was hacked? The answer will give you more clarity. I suggest you read and reread everything that happened with the DAO hack. It was not secure. It was a failure waiting to happen the day it was released.

I hope you invest in the DAO 2.0 too. I also hope the slock.it team is the one developing it again. Good luck bagholding that because you will be the only investor.

[anthonydar]

The DAO didn't fail, it was hacked.

Quoted for hilarity.

Nice distinction without a difference you've made there.  

I hope there is a DAO2.0. I'll invest in it in a heartbeat.

Also quoted for hilarity.  

If Mindcrash didn't exist, we'd have to invent him.  Nobody else so neatly encapsulates the blithering hubris of the ETH Bailout Fork mindset better than he does.

Minecache is so desperate that he will say anything to justify his denial and blindness. The DAO did fail because it was hacked. You know why it was hacked? The answer will give you more clarity. I suggest you read and reread everything that happened with the DAO hack. It was not secure. It was a failure waiting to happen the day it was released.

I hope you invest in the DAO 2.0 too. I also hope the slock.it team is the one developing it again. Good luck bagholding that because you will be the only investor.

If the DAO 2.0 is secure, I will invest in it. But I will just invest in a smaller amount. After it is proved safe, I might invest more.

[glerand]

The DAO didn't fail, it was hacked.

Quoted for hilarity.

Nice distinction without a difference you've made there.  

I hope there is a DAO2.0. I'll invest in it in a heartbeat.

Also quoted for hilarity.  

If Mindcrash didn't exist, we'd have to invent him.  Nobody else so neatly encapsulates the blithering hubris of the ETH Bailout Fork mindset better than he does.

Minecache is so desperate that he will say anything to justify his denial and blindness. The DAO did fail because it was hacked. You know why it was hacked? The answer will give you more clarity. I suggest you read and reread everything that happened with the DAO hack. It was not secure. It was a failure waiting to happen the day it was released.

I hope you invest in the DAO 2.0 too. I also hope the slock.it team is the one developing it again. Good luck bagholding that because you will be the only investor.

If the DAO 2.0 is secure, I will invest in it. But I will just invest in a smaller amount. After it is proved safe, I might invest more.

I might not invest in DAO 2.0. I will wait for the ETC to implement something like that, and wait after a few more months.