ETH hardfork incoming.

[BitUsher]

http://techgenix.com/mathematics-ethereum-hack/

If the leaders within the Ethereum community decide on a hard fork course, then the ultimate result, at some point, will be chaos within a system designed from the ground up to bring order.

This is a more generic point we want to make and not just in Ethereums case but with blockchains in general. HF for the express intent of targeting specific contracts, users, accounts or txs and not to fix fundamentals bugs or errors in future txs places a very dangerous precedent and undermines the integrity of the block chain.

If a block chain has to come to this than you may as well fork the code, rename the project , fix the underlying issues , and start over as all the trust has been lost.

In this case Ethereum cannot fix the underlying issues because it is fundamentally insecure by design and repairing these problems would create a radically different project.

[1714599703]

1714599703

[1714599703]

1714599703

[1714599703]

1714599703

[1714599703]

1714599703

[1714599703]

1714599703

[AlphaSun]

If I am a miner, I will support the soft fork and freeze the stolen funds. If the DAO holders offer us 50% of the stolen funds, we will do a hard fork.

If the miners can benefit from the hacking like this and the hacker does not benefit, he may think twice before his next hacking.

Other miners will mine more profitably by accepting his offer and thus have a greater hashrate.

Checkmate. Your vote has been economically overridden.

Andreas and Emin getting frantic and grasping for straws:

https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/744769932739624960

90% of the miners accepts the soft fork. You can see in the http://ethpool.org/stats/votes. But the result is not final yet.

[iamnotback]

If I am a miner, I will support the soft fork and freeze the stolen funds. If the DAO holders offer us 50% of the stolen funds, we will do a hard fork.

If the miners can benefit from the hacking like this and the hacker does not benefit, he may think twice before his next hacking.

Other miners will mine more profitably by accepting his offer and thus have a greater hashrate.

Checkmate. Your vote has been economically overridden.

Andreas and Emin getting frantic and grasping for straws:

https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/744769932739624960

90% of the miners accepts the soft fork. You can see in the http://ethpool.org/stats/votes. But the result is not final yet.

Try again to understand what I wrote.

The set of miners is open and unbounded. Anyone can decide to become a miner today and accept the hacker's more lucrative offer.

[Minecache]

"We come to you with great pleasure to now offer 2000% or 20x return contracts."

I admit my math skills are old and rusty (similar to my physique); but, none of the price break downs seem to give the type of returns initially offered.

It's NOT the DAO attacker.

[shyliar]

"We come to you with great pleasure to now offer 2000% or 20x return contracts."

I admit my math skills are old and rusty (similar to my physique); but, none of the price break downs seem to give the type of returns initially offered.

It's NOT the DAO attacker.

I think you're right. The DAO attacker most likely has basic math skills.

[BitUsher]

[iamnotback]

Redacted reality lol. I would have replaced 'smart' with 'disingenius' (misspelling on purpose).

[paddox]

If I am a miner, I will support the soft fork and freeze the stolen funds. If the DAO holders offer us 50% of the stolen funds, we will do a hard fork.

If the miners can benefit from the hacking like this and the hacker does not benefit, he may think twice before his next hacking.

Other miners will mine more profitably by accepting his offer and thus have a greater hashrate.

Checkmate. Your vote has been economically overridden.

Andreas and Emin getting frantic and grasping for straws:

https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/744769932739624960

90% of the miners accepts the soft fork. You can see in the http://ethpool.org/stats/votes. But the result is not final yet.

Try again to understand what I wrote.

The set of miners is open and unbounded. Anyone can decide to become a miner today and accept the hacker's more lucrative offer.

Isn't the hashing power each miner has more important than the number of miners who support a fork? If a miner with a GPU farm comprising 100 GPUs rejects the fork he could have 100 times more influence than a miner with one GPU.

[iamnotback]

Isn't the hashing power each miner has more important than the number of miners who support a fork? If a miner with a GPU farm comprising 100 GPUs rejects the fork he could have 100 times more influence than a miner with one GPU.

He who makes the most profit can rent the most GPUs.

He who can print tokens out of thin air by draining the DAO, makes the rules.

Sorry n00bs, you've been PWND.

[smooth]

If I am a miner, I will support the soft fork and freeze the stolen funds. If the DAO holders offer us 50% of the stolen funds, we will do a hard fork.

If the miners can benefit from the hacking like this and the hacker does not benefit, he may think twice before his next hacking.

Other miners will mine more profitably by accepting his offer and thus have a greater hashrate.

Checkmate. Your vote has been economically overridden.

Andreas and Emin getting frantic and grasping for straws:

https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/744769932739624960

Isn't there an inter-fork fungibility issue? He can offer miners "higher" payments, but only using coins on the fork that recognizes his ownership. Depending on market value between the forks miners may still be better off on the other one.

[iamnotback]

If I am a miner, I will support the soft fork and freeze the stolen funds. If the DAO holders offer us 50% of the stolen funds, we will do a hard fork.

If the miners can benefit from the hacking like this and the hacker does not benefit, he may think twice before his next hacking.

Other miners will mine more profitably by accepting his offer and thus have a greater hashrate.

Checkmate. Your vote has been economically overridden.

Andreas and Emin getting frantic and grasping for straws:

https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/744769932739624960

Isn't there an inter-fork fungibility issue? He can offer miners "higher" payments, but only using coins on the fork that recognizes his ownership. Depending on market value between the forks miners may still be better off on the other one.

Seems to me that confusion is going to mean an ETH price of less than $0.25 for both forks, so the future relative price of them is not relevant right now.

So it seems this is mostly a shorting game now, to convert your ETH to BTC.

And/or to accumulate more ETH cheaply, in hopes it will someday recover and not go to $0 (i.e. die).

[BitUsher]

Seems to me that confusion is going to mean an ETH price of less than $0.25 for both forks, so the future relative price of them is not relevant right now.

So it seems this is mostly a shorting game now, to convert your ETH to BTC.

And/or to accumulate more ETH cheaply, in hopes it will someday recover and not go to $0 (i.e. die).

I don't think that it will lose value quickly. At most slowly capitulate because founders , developers, and original die hard investors hold most of the coins so the market cap can , misleadingly , remain high. I have seen many shitcoins last a long time in such circumstances. Where we should be looking is the moment when staff at the ETH foundation start leaving due to not being paid and a rush to switch to PoS - this will be the stronger indicator of problems.

[smooth]

Seems to me that confusion is going to mean an ETH price of less than $0.25 for both forks, so the future relative price of them is not relevant right now.

So it seems this is mostly a shorting game now, to convert your ETH to BTC.

And/or to accumulate more ETH cheaply, in hopes it will someday recover and not go to $0 (i.e. die).

I don't think that it will lose value quickly. At most slowly capitulate because founders , developers, and original die hard investors hold most of the coins so the market cap can , misleadingly , remain high. I have seen many shitcoins last a long time in such circumstances. Where we should be looking is the moment when staff at the ETH foundation start leaving due to not being paid and a rush to switch to PoS - this will be the stronger indicator of problems.

Nailed it. But realize that the entire switch to PoS has been this all along.

It will take a long time to die, absent some other unforeseen 'event'.

[BitUsher]

Nailed it. But realize that the entire switch to PoS has been this all along.

It will take a long time to die, absent some other unforeseen 'event'.

Yes, but the Casper PoS switchover was planned for later this year (but realistically 1st Q 2017 or later) would likely be moved up if funds started dwindling and price kept falling. Thus any switchover this year would potentially indicate a sense of desperation.

The event you speak of could be multiple targeted and repeated attacks within ethereum contracts directly which indeed could happen. We are finding out that solidity is not the only flawed language on the EVM; Serpent is vulnerable to similar problems.

http://www.joeykrug.com/home/a-serpent-send-exploit


This is what could indeed cause a general panic inducing both investors and a few developers to get out while they can .

Expect Ethereum 2.0 however , these folks are married to the turing complete koolaid.

[smooth]

Expect Ethereum 2.0 Mastercoin 3.0 however , these folks are married to the turing complete koolaid ICO.

FTFY

[iamnotback]

If the "attacker" is successful at winning the majority hashrate to defeat the fork, I expect a dump down quickly to $7 out of the corner of currently closing wedge.

Might get a bounce from there as many might perceive this as a victory for a decentralized Ethereum, although then potentially start the lawsuits from all the DAO losers. So a bounce could later be followed with a series of declines, eventually taking it down < $1. But as you say, this might take a while.

There are other scenarios though.

[Auponef]

If the "attacker" is successful at winning the majority hashrate to defeat the fork, I expect a dump down quickly to $7 out of the corner of currently closing wedge.

Might get a bounce from there as many might perceive this as a victory for a decentralized Ethereum, although then potentially start the lawsuits from all the DAO losers. So a bounce could later be followed with a series of declines, eventually taking it down < $1. But as you say, this might take a while.

There are other scenarios though.

That could happen. So why would the miners accept the bribe and destroy a long term business. i hope the miners will make a wise decision.

[sadasa]

I think Nicehash could provide a rent service. Miners can rent their hash there, whoever pays the highest, get the hashing.

[iamnotback]

If the "attacker" is successful at winning the majority hashrate to defeat the fork, I expect a dump down quickly to $7 out of the corner of currently closing wedge.

Might get a bounce from there as many might perceive this as a victory for a decentralized Ethereum, although then potentially start the lawsuits from all the DAO losers. So a bounce could later be followed with a series of declines, eventually taking it down < $1. But as you say, this might take a while.

There are other scenarios though.

That could happen. So why would the miners accept the bribe and destroy a long term business. i hope the miners will make a wise decision.

Forking Ethereum destroys their long-term prospects. The following linked poll only confirms 23% of the people here are retards (the other 77% might also be retarded but it isn't confirmed by the poll):

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516799.0


The rest of us (those who aren't retards) will create a replacement for Ethereum which doesn't break the entire goal of crypto:

...

The game theory point is to share 70% of the spoils with other mutineers in order to ensure a fork (which voids the contract) is impossible to achieve.

Since the up to 15% of the money supply drained from the DAO is not sufficient to pay for mining hashrate forever, it is best to have others who have a vested interest in mining on the non-forked chain.

It also appears to be a test of whether anyone in crypto-currency really gives a shit about decentralization. Because if Ethereum forks, then it means it has been 51% attacked with arbitrary politics. Thus crypto-currency as a defense against the evils of Corporatism and the State is dead (if Ethereum's fork becomes the precedent for what people want).

Smooth and I discussed this in more detail, which I linked to upthread.

If Ethereum is able to fork and prosper after the fork, it is an sad outcome for those of us who wanted to change the world for the better.  

The "attacker" wrote:

@cryptodevil Vitalik Buterin is a an empty shithead. This literally means that where human beings normally carry gray matter, he instead used to carry brown matter, but it was taken out. So now his strangely shaped skull is just a foul smelling empty receptacle.

He's not the only one in this situation...

...Groups of scammers use these idiots, exactly like you would use a table...

...In the case of Ripple, the group of scammers was just that, a criminal gang. In the case of Doge the group of scammers was just a bunch of marketing retards...

Nevertheless, Bitcoin (no, not "cryptocurrencies", there is not nor can ever be such a thing as "cryptocurrencies") has put an end to all that. So it dun work no more.

Does that answer your question ?

His opinion of the merits of consensus voting:

The point remains that there exist customers whose custom no one wants. They will gather together somewhere, like all mammals ever do. Just by the simple fact of aggregation they do not achieve notability, nor is the headcount a valid reason to consider any position. Democracy, much like socialism, much like any other utopia, makes for excellent books and movies about history, but for appalling actual history and even worse living conditions. Let's just consider it buried alongside communism and move on.

...

I hope you get it, but in the end it makes absolutely no difference whether you get it or don't. The world is changing regardless.

A side dish of the fallout from the Fetlife drama is probably also indicated, at the very least the part that goes

IV. Frantic activity is not much of a cover-up for impotence. The true driver of all this "we protest Trilema for making a fool of Fetlife" is exactly the same mental process that drives "Dancing Man", and "kickstarter successes" where some randomly selected derp gets paid a chunk of change for inventing a can of Pepsi or whatever : the derps wish to convince the world, and in convincing the world convince themselves that their appreciation is valuable, and their displeasure dangerous. Because if it were the case that indeed their upvote was worth something, and their downvote had some sort of impact, then they themselves could be said to have value. Some, perhaps not much, but some. Some! Which some is a whole heck of a lot better than none whatsoever, which just so happens to be the case.

TD;LR: You're nothing to nobody. Get your head out of your ass.

He explains that the individualized perspective Web-of-Trust is the proper alternative to consensus, which is also my design for a decentralized social network and the correct design for a DAO-like disruption of consensus organizations:

II. The WoT works by reducing the unknowns problem.i It allows the user - any user - to confidently identify the sources of information, both in the negative and in the positive. That is to say, if sources of information exist, the user may by the WoT find them, and safely assume that should no sources of information be thus found, no sources of information in fact exist. It further allows the user to judge the quality, reliability and precision of said sources, and this independent both of the direct source and of the counterparty he's examining.

His opinion on whether Ethereum will survive his "attack" (and remember he also did the Mt.Gox attack):

The whole of ETH and DAO was a con to start with. Bunch of rich btc invectors wanted a new play toy. Don't worry folks the price will shoot back up because no one cares if there is security risks or a Ponzi that will never be used by ordinary citizens

DAO is a casino that just got robbed buy like all casinos they never fall because of human greed.

That [bolded] part is right.

[onemd]

If the majority of the miners accept the bribe and do not soft fork, the Ethereum is destroyed. The ethereum they get is worthless.