The DAO FAIL

[dinofelis]

the dream of ethereum is dead in any case.

Perhaps for you.

You think there will be another DAO adventure ?  Really ?

[1714991171]

1714991171

[1714991171]

1714991171

[1714991171]

1714991171

[1714991171]

1714991171

[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.