Topic: [ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning - page 801. (Read 2006413 times)

I think that about sums it up. Good game everybody.

Hahaaaa just don't get it do ya? You want bailouts ok cool head to the bank. Expecting crypto to change the rules because people make bad decisions? Not gonna happen dude, don't believe me ok, just stay tuned. People worked hard to make bitcoin and crypto what it is today, you think you and a few other people are going to be worthy of destroying it for your mistakes or money? Goddamn LOOOOLL!! All I have to say to you.

Are you sure that's an example you want to bring up on a crypto forum? 

How about this instead:

https://www.ethereum.org/

In Reply:

If, what you say is true:

Why has doing bailouts been an accepted practice in every national economy on Earth for many thousands of years?

These are economy's are worth $77.609 trillion (estimation based on 2014 figures).

In fact: find me an economy on Earth, which has a publicly stated policy of never doing a bailout?

Exactly. Teaching your kids there are no do overs is going to be an important lesson. No...hey son, you don't like history...just roll it back buddy lol! The stupidity here is epic. And using kids and people's parenting ability to protect your investment? Yep you too sir are in the right place with the others who have no morals. Bravo smart guy, you are the king of debates lol!!

My baby dint doo nuffin!!!!

He's a good boy!!!

He deserves another chance!!!

 

Nah man, people have not and will not always bail out people, your entire world view is fucked up here fella. And even if it were even remotely rooted in reality, this isn't about human history and nature. This is about the blockchain, you know that thing that is the basis of the world supercomputer that can't be tampered with? Well it got tampered with, and in a way that destroys credibility and turns the promises of the "eth foundation" into typical crypto self serving garbage. Which is the same self serving garbage everyone still rambling on in this thread is trying to promote. This proves that what's left as eth supporters are total naive crypto noobs. Or heavily invested shills that broke rule number one about going all in, either way there really isn't any point trying to get any of you to see the light. Your going to have to learn the hard way like the rest of us. This is crypto, your swimming with sharks and it's sink or swim. No one cares about you losing money, that's your bad decision. None of it matters, just like Vericoin reversing transactions for money because they had the same we're super cool and the blockchain is ours to play with attitude, eth too will learn that there are some rules you don't break.

Children lack agency and are thus less culpable for their mistakes.  And they still need consequences, or they turn into spoiled brats.

DAO investors and the TBTF firms Jim Rogers speaks about are not children.  Please don't infantalize them in order to justify indulging their mistakes with bailouts and do-overs.

Please STFU with your "fundamental certainties" because I'm fundamentally certain you have no clue about how smart contract are supposed to work.

Here you go little baby, I'll be a nurturing parent and utilize this teachable moment to bail you out of your ignorance, but then it's time for your nap.   

A smart contract enforces a commitment without resorting to the threat of external litigation [2].

Nick Szabo, Formalizing and Securing Relationships on Public Networks. 1997

as cited by http://elaineou.com/2016/06/19/contracts-code-and-complexity/

means ? you teach your kids that bail out is the way to go ? and to acept it ? so if your kids do a crime or fail  you bail them out ? and not let them deal with consequences ?

Lol!! Massive premine, massive amounts for the "team", programming flaws that allow theft to occur, reverse transactions following the Vericoin script of crypto suicide...oh yeah man, motherfuckers got it going on hahaaa

In Reply:

People always bailout out other people!

This is a fundamental certainty, which makes human existence possible.

You cannot have children or raise offspring without complete acceptance of the fundamental principle of bailing out people.

I can tell, if, you are making that argument you going to be terrible father or mother!

Not everyone agrees with your (externally litigious) definitions of "ethics" and "stolen."

By pretending your subjective external definitions are not controversial, you commit the logical fallacy of assuming the consequent.

If that's not bad enough, your logical fallacy is then used to justify the moral hazard of bailing out the greedy and stupid, to the detriment of the wise and smart.

Shame on you.  Shame!

In Reply:

The question is irrelevant: "The DAO" mandate is maximise the valuation for it's investors and Ethereum Foundation supported "ETH".

"The DAO" mandate is profit maximisation for "ETH" investors.

"The DAO" was not established to answer questions

Should you want, that question answered set up a "smart contract"!

And, see if you get enough investors to fund a dedicated research team to answer that particular question.

i guess the question wasnt here is the fork rightful or not .
the question is by training the dao with the white attack or black attack . was it a theft like theDao said and the foundation said too.
and if so is  it  still theft on the etc chain?

can the originaly holder of the dao demand there stolen ether back now? from the white hat attackers

that was asked .

Not really,

"The DAO" are the Party, who requested the Fork in Ethereum Blockchain from the Ethereum Foundation.

They are fully and completely obligated to operate in manner that boosts the price of the forked blockchain.

Because, they are Party who needed the forked blockchain and they have to ensure that the forked blockchain is commercially successful.


 

id guess what aplys for the black hat attack aplys for the white hat attack too?
http://www.coindesk.com/sue-dao-hacker/

In reply:

Disposing, does mean whatever mechanism that generates greatest maximisation of the valuation for "The DAO" and maximisation of the valuation of ETH (supported by the Ethereum Foundation).

Therefore, disposal does mean a sell off ETC can be done, if, it offers the greatest maximisation of valuation in the "The DAO" and "ETH" (supported by the Ethereum Foundation).

However, should a sell off decrease the valuation of "The DAO" and "ETH", then destroying the ETC can be the disposal method.

THE DISPOSAL METHOD, is something that has to be decided by the "The DAO" according to what is the most profit maximisation resulting for it's investors and it's undertaking to the Ethereum Foundation supported ETH.

The mandate of "The DAO" is profit maximisation of The DAO" and "ETH" (supported by the Ethereum Foundation), which would imply the "The DAO" would sell off the ETC and use the funds to maximise the value of "The DAO and "ETH" (supported by the Ethereum Foundation).

The DAO, is operating in "Good Faith" for it's investors!

It has already transfered to the new blockchain for "ETH", because "The DAO" requested the new blockchain from the "Ethereum Foundation" to recover stolen coins.

Since, "The DAO" requested the new blockchain in "Good Faith", it has fully entered into full and complete undertakings too the "Ethereum Foundation", to always operate in manner, that maximises the valuation of "ETH" that is supported by the latter Party.

Your point A) The DAO is to maximise the valuation of "The DAO" price and to maximise the valuation of ETH price.

Yes - But on the old chain or the new chain? Original DAO was on the Ethereum Classic chain. The DAO had the function of rewarding investors of the DAO. Maximisation of investors funds involve redistributing ETC to all DAO holders.

Your point B) Under, this latter mandate, the recovery of obsolete unsupported ETC can be done, so long as the ETC is disposed off, in order to maximise the valuation of "The DAO" and ETH.

Disposing ETC would result in scarcity of the coins on the ETC chain. This would not maximise the valuation of ETH however maximise the valuation of ETC.

I was doing some thinking about "The DAO", reviewing the facts and evidence about the situation.

Just because it August and not a lot happens in August, because everyone is on their annual holidays

One of the fundamental building blocks of legal laws and ethics related to economic activity is:

All parties must act in Good Faith in economic deals

Party A - Ethereum Foundation has fulfilled this requirement, by implementing a fork, too ensure Ethereum investors in "The DAO" have recovered their stolen ETH.

Good Faith e.g. recovery of stolen funds for all Parties.

Part B

The DAO, have discharged their obligations to recover the stolen ETH and contacted relevant Parties (Ethereum Foundation) to achieve this objective.

Good Faith e.g. achieving the recovery of stolen funds and contacting relevant Parties.

-------------------------------------------------------------------The DAO mandate-------------------------------------------------------

The DAO mandate: is to maximise the valuation of "The DAO" price and to maximise the valuation of ETH price.

This gives the authority to people running "The DAO" to take actions that increase the valuation of the tokens and ETH.

Under, this latter mandate, the recovery of obsolete unsupported ETC can be done, so long as the ETC is disposed off, in order to maximise the valuation of "The DAO" and ETH.

Of course, people will disagree with this, but it is August and I'm sure everyone not on holiday is pretty bored

a vew thoughts i have on the case too:

i know that the ethereum foundation would like to see this as a inside case, which is or was intented to be solved in the crypto world. words like we are govering, code is law and so on. we show the world we deal with our case ourselfs.
but as the past in crypto showed the law of the real world does not see it like that. gox ...... if something is a theft the law enforcment steps in.
and befor the fork in the rush the white hat attacker did exactly what the black hat one did.
they call the first attack theft . if it was theft ( delema of code is law on the dao) the second one is also theft.

now the name of the white hat one is public.

there has to be only one prefork DAO holder who sues or reports . then the ethereum devs involved will have a big problem

its not like one just took a few dollars. its millions.

i would have thought the white hat attackers "goodies" would announce what they plan for the dao ETc. but no word so far.

the ethereum prefork thought with rolling back all will be solved. and evidence will be gone. but ETC is alive.

then a friend said some of the things that happened after the fork. leaks of skype conversations on the ether channel. show at least the need for investigation. market manipulation.
was it intented ? posts that leading people of "now ETH" whos statements can  and did impact the price, where followed by lines in the skype leak, "got free ETC, go and sell them . already did. that will crash ETC ". i am not sure if they were just kidding but an investigation will for sure show.

i dont know that much about market law but some said that might be not legal . even if they didnt intent to
but profited.
i dont know
but it will for sure be interesting  to see what will happen next