monsanto
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1241
Merit: 1005
..like bright metal on a sullen ground.
|
 |
June 17, 2016, 11:56:14 AM |
|
First, the DAO should have capped investment like Digix did. That way it could have been hacked and failed but not threatened the entire Ethereum project.
Second, the hard fork may not be so bad because ethereum hasn't even chosen it's final PoS algorithm. It's not like they are forking a mature coin. To people who argue that this makes it centralized, I would answer yes, but they never pretended that it wasn't going to be until after they took care of the difficulty bomb and forced change from PoW.
They were always going to have to hardfork anyway to take care of the diff bomb werent they? or am I wrong? Yes, my understanding is that is why they put it in there in the first place: to give themselves a deadline for changing to PoS. Although I think I read they planned to fork first now to delay the bomb so that they could have more time to work on the algorithm change. So obviously it's not great to hardfork because of the DAO situation but it isn't like Ethereum is just free floating out in the wild like LTC or something. It's still actively being designed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AZwarel
|
|
June 17, 2016, 11:57:14 AM |
|
Looks like there is a fix though, seems the stolen eth cant be sold for a while. It may give them time to fix it.
A hardfork would be the worst thing they can do, it would be better to try and salvage what is left after this in some other way.
That even make it more super creepy. So not only they can "bail-out-too-big-to-fail" hard fork from a top to down centralized fashion, now they can "blacklist" addresses ? Than bye-bye fungibility, and network neutrality as well... Free market is all about paying the price for your mistakes, no rich uncle/regulator to bail you out. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jacques21
|
|
June 17, 2016, 12:01:33 PM |
|
Looks like there is a fix though, seems the stolen eth cant be sold for a while. It may give them time to fix it.
A hardfork would be the worst thing they can do, it would be better to try and salvage what is left after this in some other way.
That even make it more super creepy. So not only they can "bail-out-too-big-to-fail" hard fork from a top to down centralized fashion, now they can "blacklist" addresses ? Than bye-bye fungibility, and network neutrality as well... Free market is all about paying the price for your mistakes, no rich uncle/regulator to bail you out. That is true, since the DAO is the problem and not Eth, they should just let it go and have the DAO deal with its own shit. Getting involved in it might drag both of them down. |
|
|
|
|
|
2Pac
|
|
June 17, 2016, 12:06:41 PM |
|
That is true, since the DAO is the problem and not Eth, they should just let it go and have the DAO deal with its own shit. Getting involved in it might drag both of them down. ETH is heavily involved with DAO because all DAO investments made with ETH and they're locked in. Everything about DAO is related to ETH. They had to do something so they did the right thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
AZwarel
|
|
June 17, 2016, 12:07:02 PM |
|
Looks like there is a fix though, seems the stolen eth cant be sold for a while. It may give them time to fix it.
A hardfork would be the worst thing they can do, it would be better to try and salvage what is left after this in some other way.
That even make it more super creepy. So not only they can "bail-out-too-big-to-fail" hard fork from a top to down centralized fashion, now they can "blacklist" addresses ? Than bye-bye fungibility, and network neutrality as well... Free market is all about paying the price for your mistakes, no rich uncle/regulator to bail you out. That is true, since the DAO is the problem and not Eth, they should just let it go and have the DAO deal with its own shit. Getting involved in it might drag both of them down. Yes, and the mere thought - or message, asking for exchanges halting trade - is a 100% trust killing move. It is already too late for many of us in crypto to ever again take ETH seriously. They should have thought before speaking... Not to mention that someone wrote here, so now 2 gunmen can go and "ask nicely" for a rollback from a few devs??? Than it is not a trustless network. |
|
|
|
|
|
shyliar
|
|
June 17, 2016, 12:15:14 PM |
|
Can't roll-back every time someone writes a buggy contract. No matter how much is invested in it..
There are literally 10's of thousands of other contracts running that have no issue at all.
10's of thousands might be an exaggeration; but, similarly there is other poor code being written by other ETH developers out there. http://www.coindesk.com/leaderless-dao-put-test-following-reported-ethereum-vulnerability/You are right that you can't roll back every time someone writes a buggy contract. This is just an example of the excitement that will happen when you develop a turing complete system. It will repeat again and again as more poor code is written. |
|
|
|
|
|
AZwarel
|
|
June 17, 2016, 12:52:04 PM |
|
Seen this shit from a mile along, self hacks with fake coverage should be nothing new to bitcoin people.
This isn't a hack actually. The function is proper and were always in the code for DAO. In a sense it is legit, the contract does what it supposed to do : "There is an attack going on against "theDAO". A recently discovered recursive-split attack can be used to to initiate ether-sends before the contracts burns them. Buy this the contract will hand over ETH that you shouldn't have control over. Technically, this attack can be continued until all ETH are drained from "the DAO". It seems Daniel Larimer was right about Is The Dao going to be DAO https://steemit.com/crypto-news/@dan/is-the-dao-going-to-be-doa" from https://steemit.com/thedao/@xeroc/ongoing-attack-on-thedao---eth-draining-from-the-pot |
|
|
|
|
|
kennyP
|
|
June 17, 2016, 01:04:05 PM |
|
rollback is madness, don't do it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
onemd
|
|
June 17, 2016, 02:03:24 PM |
|
Seen this shit from a mile along, self hacks with fake coverage should be nothing new to bitcoin people.
Do you think the developers hacked the DAO? If so, why would they invalidate the coins with a hard fork? |
|
|
|
|
spartacusrex
|
|
June 17, 2016, 02:09:02 PM |
|
So.. now 'they' are going to 'convert' (shutdown) DAO into a simple contract that allows you to withdraw your funds and nothing more.. https://twitter.com/DanDarkPill/status/743789597482692608How in 'Holy Hell' are they able to completely rewrite the ETH code when it was meant to be a completely Decentralised Autonomous Organisation.. !? I just don't get it.. Me thinks someone has more power over this DAO than they should have.. or anyone thought they would have. |
Life is Code.
|
|
|
|
yelllowsin
|
|
June 17, 2016, 02:34:40 PM |
|
This is very interesting.. As they say - IF they can somehow 'FIX' this.. (rollback / blacklist / some other thing) it means any government that wants it's ETH back can 'FIX' that too.. very dangerous. I think Ethereum should 'NOT GET INVOLVED'. At all. The truth is that the ETH network is running completely fine. Let DAO sort it out if they can. And if not.. a lesson learned. hmm.. This will probably send us(crypto) back a few years in credibility though..  It is not that simple as you say. Vitalik was one of its Curators along with many others, he put his credibility on the Dao. If it was someone elses project i could agree with you, but he is part of the team and for that i aspect him to take responsability for it. Ethereum is a much larger project, it is not about ETH only, thinking small like that will never get ETH the future it is designed for, btw smart contracts is all about that otherwise it is only a coin. |
|
|
|
|
|
shyliar
|
|
June 17, 2016, 02:36:08 PM |
|
I don't understand how a rollback can be accomplished. Please explain if I'm missing something.
For miners it would mean any blocks that they find would just disappear back to the moment of the rollback? If so miners would not want to adopt the new code or at the least should stop mining now (waste of electricity).
All transactions back to the moment of the rollback would just disappear? If so how could that be accomplished? If a user transfers all their ETH to an exchange now sells it for bitcoin, transfers bitcoin out of exchange now, after the roll back doesn't he have his ETH back plus the bitcoin? Doesn't the buyer lose all thier ETH? I understand Kraken has stopped trading ETH (but their CEO has been very supportive of ETH from start?); but, not all other exchanges have followed through.
Seems like a rollback just does not make sense. Is considering one just marketing so those in the know can get their money out?
|
|
|
|
|
Spoetnik
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1011
FUD Philanthropist™
|
|
June 17, 2016, 02:37:15 PM |
|
What's so wrong with a good old fashioned fund freeze / rollback?
Ripple did it, and look where they are today:
One of the top crypto's in the world!
Who controls "your" coins?
Those 2 Chinese bitcoin miners?
The Ripple Gods?
Maybe "The Ethereum Community"?
Ripple is a laughing stock and has been since day 1. It is regarded as the started of all these ICO scams. Your comment is retarded . |
FUD first & ask questions later™ |
|
|
Spoetnik
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1011
FUD Philanthropist™
|
|
June 17, 2016, 02:40:25 PM |
|
Its going to be a bit late to do a hardfork once that eth gets dumped. Im noticing some people are still buying atm. I guess they never got the news yet.
TheDao is not ETH. They are betting that ETH will survive whatever happens to the DAO. It is a sensible bet IMHO. Nope.. it's a DAPP isn't it ? A centralized ICO shit coin scam on top of another centralized ICO shit coin scam.. Proof ? The fact a roll back is even possible. Funny part is neither is a crypto-currency. LOL And what was the point here Investards ? I don't suppose it was a.... decentralized crypto-currency ? |
FUD first & ask questions later™ |
|
|
BitUsher
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 994
Merit: 1034
|
|
June 17, 2016, 02:46:11 PM |
|
Nope.. it's a DAPP isn't it ?
A centralized ICO shit coin scam on top of another centralized ICO shit coin scam..
Proof ?
The fact a roll back is even possible.
Funny part is neither is a crypto-currency. LOL
And what was the point here Investards ?
I don't suppose it was a.... decentralized crypto-currency ?
Not only that , but the central masters are looking to Hunt down and DOXX any opponents to their HF. https://twitter.com/DanDarkPill/status/743789597482692608 Don't betray your masters you mETH users! |
|
|
|
|
|
Auponef
|
|
June 17, 2016, 03:01:02 PM |
|
I think the hard fork to make sure the hacker cannot move the stolen Ethereum is good. I will run the new code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
NoBit
|
|
June 17, 2016, 05:48:51 PM |
|
How can one even discuss the possibility of a hard fork? Nothing's wrong with ethereum's code.
|
Bitrated user: nobit.
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
June 17, 2016, 06:00:55 PM |
|
There was no hack, and there is no 'hacker'. There is someone who owns what I would call a spin-off DAO. Don't buy the propaganda. Investors agreed to give their ETH to whomever it was who figured out how to take them up on their offer. Read this carefully. The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAO’s code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the express terms of The DAO’s code set forth on the blockchain; to the extent you believe there to be any conflict or discrepancy between the descriptions offered here and the functionality of The DAO’s code at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413, The DAO’s code controls and sets forth all terms of The DAO Creation.
(Unless someone can point to a bug in the EVM that executed the code improperly, but I haven't seen any such claim. |
|
|
|
|
thegreenone
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
June 17, 2016, 06:07:32 PM |
|
There was no hack, and there is no 'hacker'. There is someone who owns what I would call a spin-off DAO. Don't buy the propaganda. Investors agreed to give their ETH to whomever it was who figured out how to take them up on their offer. Read this carefully. The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAO’s code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the express terms of The DAO’s code set forth on the blockchain; to the extent you believe there to be any conflict or discrepancy between the descriptions offered here and the functionality of The DAO’s code at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413, The DAO’s code controls and sets forth all terms of The DAO Creation.
(Unless someone can point to a bug in the EVM that executed the code improperly, but I haven't seen any such claim. Maybe they can use another exploit to get the coins back instead of a fork. |
|
|
|
|
smooth
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
|
|
June 17, 2016, 06:09:49 PM |
|
There was no hack, and there is no 'hacker'. There is someone who owns what I would call a spin-off DAO. Don't buy the propaganda. Investors agreed to give their ETH to whomever it was who figured out how to take them up on their offer. Read this carefully. The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code existing on the Ethereum blockchain at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The DAO’s code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the express terms of The DAO’s code set forth on the blockchain; to the extent you believe there to be any conflict or discrepancy between the descriptions offered here and the functionality of The DAO’s code at 0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413, The DAO’s code controls and sets forth all terms of The DAO Creation.
(Unless someone can point to a bug in the EVM that executed the code improperly, but I haven't seen any such claim. Maybe they can use another exploit to get the coins back instead of a fork. That would be fair, and seems entirely possible given how bug-ridden The DAO and many other Ethereum contracts seem to be. |
|
|
|
|
|
