https://blog.slock.it/proposed-hard-fork-specification-394245b968dd#.vaa0n7h7m
is this why price is falling?
not sure if I understand correctly but if I traded ether for DAO in last two weeks of ICO, I get no DAO after HF?
"1. Token holders who created tokens during the last 2 weeks of the creation period"
Topic: [ANN] Ethereum: Welcome to the Beginning - page 874. (Read 2006108 times)
When do you guys think the uptrend will start?
I don't believe that will happen any time soon. Reasons:
1. HF - it's something (not just) the market fears.
2. DAO-Investors will be able to get their DAO-Ether back and that will most likely make some more pressure on the price
3. Bitcoin-price is likely to go up more.
During the DAO-ICO the ETH-price increased because some bought ETH to buy into the ICO and all those ETH were taken away from the market and locked into The DAO. After unlocking that value and after all the bad news of the last weeks - some may dump it, maybe many.
The most likely scenario in my opinion is that it will go down more, and maybe it will be really extreme if Bitcoin should shoot up (not sure if that will happen but it's not unlikely). If BTC should even find a new ATH, wherever it may be, the bubble will burst at some point - like late 2013.
And that could be the beginning for the ETH-price to come back and if the dust has settled then, it's maybe possible that it will see old highs again or maybe even new highs. But that will depend on the situation. Under the line I believe that wouldn't be a bad scenario for Ethereum, even if it would be a hard road in midterm. The situation is serious and it will need some time to get over it.
Well analyzed. Makes total sense to me.
ETH down again it is good entry point or can go lower below 0.014?
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4r9yud/the_current_hf_status/
The Current HF Status
submitted an hour ago by vbuterin
1) The implementation has been largely spec-frozen to the following python:
# call before running transactions
def initialize():
if state.block_number == DAO_HARDFORK_BLKNUM:
for acct in HARDFORK_DAO_LIST:
state.set_balance(HARDFORK_DEST, state.get_balance(acct) + state.get_balance(HARDFORK_DEST))
state.set_balance(acct, 0)
However, the dev community is debating the simplest way to minimize risks of issues related to light client syncing. The actual logic that allows DAO token holders to claim their ether would be implemented in HARDFORK_DEST.
2) The ether claiming logic is largely a simple withdrawable token contract, but small details are being debated regarding how to deal with secondary daos, legit splits, etc. Note that this can proceed in parallel to (1), there are no sequential dependencies. Simplicity of the ether claiming contract is understood to be a very important concern.
3) Note that the above should absolutely not be taken as an official endorsement of hardforking by either the foundation, or ethcore/slock/string, or the individual devs involved; some of the devs involved are pro-fork and some are anti-fork, the goal is to give the community a choice.
thanks for all the great posts mrpumpitis. I cant believe there is still question on HF. seems like its a no brainer. Stealing shouldn't be rewarded even if done under guise of smart contractThe Current HF Status
submitted an hour ago by vbuterin
1) The implementation has been largely spec-frozen to the following python:
# call before running transactions
def initialize():
if state.block_number == DAO_HARDFORK_BLKNUM:
for acct in HARDFORK_DAO_LIST:
state.set_balance(HARDFORK_DEST, state.get_balance(acct) + state.get_balance(HARDFORK_DEST))
state.set_balance(acct, 0)
However, the dev community is debating the simplest way to minimize risks of issues related to light client syncing. The actual logic that allows DAO token holders to claim their ether would be implemented in HARDFORK_DEST.
2) The ether claiming logic is largely a simple withdrawable token contract, but small details are being debated regarding how to deal with secondary daos, legit splits, etc. Note that this can proceed in parallel to (1), there are no sequential dependencies. Simplicity of the ether claiming contract is understood to be a very important concern.
3) Note that the above should absolutely not be taken as an official endorsement of hardforking by either the foundation, or ethcore/slock/string, or the individual devs involved; some of the devs involved are pro-fork and some are anti-fork, the goal is to give the community a choice.
It is good that they are thinking about the hard fork. But is there any news about the soft fork yet?
if I understood well, soft fork was cancelled because of vulnerability vis-a-vis DOS possible attacks.
You are all such statements lower the ETH, but the swing will go up soon
You Sir, are in denial.
Not the case, but I think that the instrument that is traded from January 2016, there can be no trend
From January 2016? You Sir, are clueless.
Simmer down, brother.....seems you're just failing to understand loral.
I think what he's saying is that the ETH uptrend which began in January cannot be correlated to any market analysis since the hack, making all previous trends null when trying to determine a future price target.
Yes, for example, on the C-CEX traded from January
You are all such statements lower the ETH, but the swing will go up soon
You Sir, are in denial.
Not the case, but I think that the instrument that is traded from January 2016, there can be no trend
From January 2016? You Sir, are clueless.
Simmer down, brother.....seems you're just failing to understand loral.
I think what he's saying is that the ETH uptrend which began in January cannot be correlated to any market analysis since the hack, making all previous trends null when trying to determine a future price target.
You are all such statements lower the ETH, but the swing will go up soon
You Sir, are in denial.
Not the case, but I think that the instrument that is traded from January 2016, there can be no trend
From January 2016? You Sir, are clueless.
Dang Ether is tanking nicely. Maybe pick up time?
You are all such statements lower the ETH, but the swing will go up soon
You Sir, are in denial.
Not the case, but I think that the instrument that is traded from January 2016, there can be no trend
You are all such statements lower the ETH, but the swing will go up soon
You Sir, are in denial.
You are all such statements lower the ETH, but the swing will go up soon
I'll consider buying some too at 0.01
I may consider buying at 0.001 lol
When do you guys think the uptrend will start?
No uptrend all is doomed. The thief gets to keep millions of ETH and dumps them on the market ETH will go back below $. Yay decentralization & smart contracts!
As the thief said:
When do you guys think the uptrend will start?
I don't believe that will happen any time soon. Reasons:
1. HF - it's something (not just) the market fears.
2. DAO-Investors will be able to get their DAO-Ether back and that will most likely make some more pressure on the price
3. Bitcoin-price is likely to go up more.
During the DAO-ICO the ETH-price increased because some bought ETH to buy into the ICO and all those ETH were taken away from the market and locked into The DAO. After unlocking that value and after all the bad news of the last weeks - some may dump it, maybe many.
The most likely scenario in my opinion is that it will go down more, and maybe it will be really extreme if Bitcoin should shoot up (not sure if that will happen but it's not unlikely). If BTC should even find a new ATH, wherever it may be, the bubble will burst at some point - like late 2013.
And that could be the beginning for the ETH-price to come back and if the dust has settled then, it's maybe possible that it will see old highs again or maybe even new highs. But that will depend on the situation. Under the line I believe that wouldn't be a bad scenario for Ethereum, even if it would be a hard road in midterm. The situation is serious and it will need some time to get over it.
I'll consider buying some too at 0.01
Got my buy orders ready @ 0.0100 BTC
Fireworks will begin soon! It will be a volatile month. I will be a massive buyer under 7.5, waiting 3 digits for small sells. Important points to consider:
10.50 1st support
9.25 2nd support
7.25 3rd big support
and
16.75 first resistance
21 second resistance
33.75 third big resistance
10.50 1st support
9.25 2nd support
7.25 3rd big support
and
16.75 first resistance
21 second resistance
33.75 third big resistance
As I correctly predicted fireworks started and we almost hit 3rd big support. At this point, only the brave can enter the long side of ETH. I'm one of them.
lol all those waiting for $10- ETH, lol keep waiting, if ETH goes anywhere near $10, before/after fork, spork,no fork ...it will be scooped up and never be sold so cheap ever again.
$9.80 per eth!
Now scoop up you shit premined coin to 20 usd idiot mrpumperits
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4r9yud/the_current_hf_status/
The Current HF Status
submitted an hour ago by vbuterin
1) The implementation has been largely spec-frozen to the following python:
# call before running transactions
def initialize():
if state.block_number == DAO_HARDFORK_BLKNUM:
for acct in HARDFORK_DAO_LIST:
state.set_balance(HARDFORK_DEST, state.get_balance(acct) + state.get_balance(HARDFORK_DEST))
state.set_balance(acct, 0)
However, the dev community is debating the simplest way to minimize risks of issues related to light client syncing. The actual logic that allows DAO token holders to claim their ether would be implemented in HARDFORK_DEST.
2) The ether claiming logic is largely a simple withdrawable token contract, but small details are being debated regarding how to deal with secondary daos, legit splits, etc. Note that this can proceed in parallel to (1), there are no sequential dependencies. Simplicity of the ether claiming contract is understood to be a very important concern.
3) Note that the above should absolutely not be taken as an official endorsement of hardforking by either the foundation, or ethcore/slock/string, or the individual devs involved; some of the devs involved are pro-fork and some are anti-fork, the goal is to give the community a choice.
thanks for all the great posts mrpumpitis. I cant believe there is still question on HF. seems like its a no brainer. Stealing shouldn't be rewarded even if done under guise of smart contractThe Current HF Status
submitted an hour ago by vbuterin
1) The implementation has been largely spec-frozen to the following python:
# call before running transactions
def initialize():
if state.block_number == DAO_HARDFORK_BLKNUM:
for acct in HARDFORK_DAO_LIST:
state.set_balance(HARDFORK_DEST, state.get_balance(acct) + state.get_balance(HARDFORK_DEST))
state.set_balance(acct, 0)
However, the dev community is debating the simplest way to minimize risks of issues related to light client syncing. The actual logic that allows DAO token holders to claim their ether would be implemented in HARDFORK_DEST.
2) The ether claiming logic is largely a simple withdrawable token contract, but small details are being debated regarding how to deal with secondary daos, legit splits, etc. Note that this can proceed in parallel to (1), there are no sequential dependencies. Simplicity of the ether claiming contract is understood to be a very important concern.
3) Note that the above should absolutely not be taken as an official endorsement of hardforking by either the foundation, or ethcore/slock/string, or the individual devs involved; some of the devs involved are pro-fork and some are anti-fork, the goal is to give the community a choice.
It is good that they are thinking about the hard fork. But is there any news about the soft fork yet?
Jump to: