Is Elaine Ou a troll? Is Frances Coppola also a troll?
I could not care less if they are trolls or not. What I do care about is industry leaders such as Fred Ehrsam endorsing ETH and putting it front of millions of new eyes.
He matters, unlike you insignificant crybabies that continue to spam the thread.
You won't acknowledge that Ou and Coppola are obviously not trolls because you are too much of a fucking coward and pumping piece of shit.
A person with integrity would be capable of recognizing their analysis is certainly not trolling and be able to develop a more cohesive, mature response to their pointed criticisms than "I could not care less ZOMG YOUR A CRYBABY
."
Their essays are logically superior to Fred's tweets and AMA marketing hype, but you'd rather shift to focus to me, for daring to bring up the uncomfortable truths undermining Fred's cheerleading.
It sure is easier to miscategorize dissenting opinion as "spam" and shoot the messenger than counter their devastating (albeit inconvenient for pumpers) essays, isn't it?
Poor dear, you probably think "mutability" is something to do with the button that turns down the TV volume and don't understand what all the fuss is about.
As a Maxwell Maximalist, I'd like to remind everyone that when you find yourself disagreeing with GMAX on technical matters, you are almost certainly the one in error.
I think [the ETH TARP-fork is] a bad idea which will harm the reputation of cryptocurrency in general and potentially fuel adverse legal/regulatory intervention (e.g. will regulators believe that developers working on cryptocurrencies can make arbitrary adjustments on demand-- with ethereum as a proof point). It's also going to create wasted effort for users of Bitcoin do differentiate themselves from the not very decenteralized hf-ethereum. ...
When the DAO caught fire and I saw forwards of chatlogs with exchanges talking about hardforking to 'fix' it, I was shocked and sent Vitalik email urging them to not do so. In Bitcoin land such a thing would be unthinkable, and I think actually impossible.
Ethereum's website has long loudly advertised (even louder than Bitcoin materials): "Ethereum is a decentralized platform for applications that run exactly as programmed without any chance of fraud, censorship or third-party interference."; and all that goes out the window when a service using the system suffers a highly predictable fault from a well known class of vulnerabilities? I could certainly appreciate that ethereum could have a different philosophy than Bitcoin-- it's important that systems with many different philosophies exist-- but since ethereum has marked itself with a very Bitcoin like view, this is going to continue to create confusion in the market.
To all those people who argue 'hey, ethereum isn't money it's just fuel for a public distributed network' ethereum classic will probably have a pretty good value proposition: better integrity with a lower access cost (assuming its adoption doesn't overtake ethhf).
And just for good measure, here's Wlad with the coup de grace.
The moral hazard here is that the hardfork 'undid' a user error, not fixed a script/system-level issue
Wow, Prof. H4x0r is in that thread really getting stomped into the ground by fluffypony and Wlad!
Good luck building your mETH castle on a foundation of shifting sand, where exceptions to the rules (and ethos) are decided by Vitalik on a case-by-case basis, depending on how much bubbly
money overinvestment is at stake.
