Topic: ETH hardfork incoming. - page 3. (Read 19067 times)
The full statement.
Following the events of the last 24 hours we want to keep the community updated:
After having received repeated legal threats from various individuals holding significant stakes in The DAO (still continuing), we sought legal advice to help us pursue our goal without endangering ourselves or the salvaged funds. We found support and legal advice from Bity SA, a trusted Swiss entity. It has agreed to protect, secure and later distribute the funds equitably under an independent Swiss legal structure. The number 1 goal has always been to ensure that the salvaged funds are distributed in a fair, transparent and just manner. This remains unchanged.
When the salvaged ETC were able to be recovered, signals were received from the greater community to distribute these ETC in ETH, to continue to support Ethereum projects. Also, a large portion of the community does not have the technical ability to safely work both with ETC and ETH in the same address; therefore, returning part of salvaged ETC in ETH seemed to be the safest for all the parties involved. The first actions from the Swiss structure took place Tuesday August 9th and it preferred to not announce the movement of ETC in advance to avoid speculators taking advantage of the situation. Part of these funds are still on exchanges and the rest of the funds are held in the following accounts:
ETC Multisig: 0x1ac729d2db43103faf213cb9371d6b42ea7a830f
ETH Multisig: 0xd3b0b4fc31ee1f8570c75c19caa93cc1557e538f
BTC Multisig: 3JYwxuaHGKt8rZ9NbTEcyYRXtqkfN5Lz5Y
BTC Multisig2: 3Er3uMqBruv8VnhXUjyRbp2McASUE8t9HA
It has now become clear that this approach will introduce many unnecessary complications and wouldn’t bring certainty to all DAO Token Holders that they would be treated equally and with fairness. The objective evolved from the most desirable outcome (distributing ETH and ETC) to the most efficient and comprehensible distribution solution, that all funds will be made available in ETC to the DAO Token Holders. To achieve this, all exchanges will be asked to return the funds to the Multisig wallets.
We would like to thank the community for their trust and ask for their patience as the responsibility of returning this value to the DAO Token Holders is not an easy task. We are under a lot of pressure, but throughout this process we will continue to do the best that we can to protect the interests of the DAO Token Holders.
All the legal and technical work of the community members and the companies involved, has always been on a volunteer and pro-bono basis. Following our first statement, members of the community have expressed their keenness to donate crypto assets in recognition for the efforts deployed to salvage the ETC from the attackDAOs and to distribute it back to the community. Accordingly, it will be possible to donate when retrieving the funds. We will communicate next with a detailed plan for the distribution.
If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
The DAO hacker does not necessary like the Ethereum or the ETC. He is in for the money. So the price of ETC might crash to zero.
That could be true. We should not pin our hope of the success on the actions of the a single hacker who might not care about other people.
The ETC price is dropped against ETH at the moment. The price has dropped 25% in the last 24 hours. The dump might have started.
I will be sad to see ETC go. The ETC has diverted some hash rate from ETH so I have mined more than expected ETH.
I mined few ETH in the last two days due to the increased difficulty. Maybe the ETC should be kept live for longer.
In several months you will not be able to mine ETH anymore because Vitalik will fork it again and make the switch to Casper POS.
So better for you to start also mining ETC to help secure it so that it will not die.Do you mean there is no plan for the ETC to fork into PoS in the future? If so, I will mine ETC when I cannot mine ETH.
If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
The DAO hacker does not necessary like the Ethereum or the ETC. He is in for the money. So the price of ETC might crash to zero.
That could be true. We should not pin our hope of the success on the actions of the a single hacker who might not care about other people.
The ETC price is dropped against ETH at the moment. The price has dropped 25% in the last 24 hours. The dump might have started.
I will be sad to see ETC go. The ETC has diverted some hash rate from ETH so I have mined more than expected ETH.
I mined few ETH in the last two days due to the increased difficulty. Maybe the ETC should be kept live for longer.
In several months you will not be able to mine ETH anymore because Vitalik will fork it again and make the switch to Casper POS.
So better for you to start also mining ETC to help secure it so that it will not die. If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
The DAO hacker does not necessary like the Ethereum or the ETC. He is in for the money. So the price of ETC might crash to zero.
That could be true. We should not pin our hope of the success on the actions of the a single hacker who might not care about other people.
The ETC price is dropped against ETH at the moment. The price has dropped 25% in the last 24 hours. The dump might have started.
I will be sad to see ETC go. The ETC has diverted some hash rate from ETH so I have mined more than expected ETH.
I mined few ETH in the last two days due to the increased difficulty. Maybe the ETC should be kept live for longer.
If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
The DAO hacker does not necessary like the Ethereum or the ETC. He is in for the money. So the price of ETC might crash to zero.
That could be true. We should not pin our hope of the success on the actions of the a single hacker who might not care about other people.
The ETC price is dropped against ETH at the moment. The price has dropped 25% in the last 24 hours. The dump might have started.
I will be sad to see ETC go. The ETC has diverted some hash rate from ETH so I have mined more than expected ETH.
If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
The DAO hacker does not necessary like the Ethereum or the ETC. He is in for the money. So the price of ETC might crash to zero.
That could be true. We should not pin our hope of the success on the actions of the a single hacker who might not care about other people.
The ETC price is dropped against ETH at the moment. The price has dropped 25% in the last 24 hours. The dump might have started.
If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
The DAO hacker does not necessary like the Ethereum or the ETC. He is in for the money. So the price of ETC might crash to zero.
That could be true. We should not pin our hope of the success on the actions of the a single hacker who might not care about other people.
The ETC price is dropped against ETH at the moment. The price has dropped 25% in the last 24 hours. The dump might have started.
If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
The DAO hacker does not necessary like the Ethereum or the ETC. He is in for the money. So the price of ETC might crash to zero.
That could be true. We should not pin our hope of the success on the actions of the a single hacker who might not care about other people.
If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
The DAO hacker does not necessary like the Ethereum or the ETC. He is in for the money. So the price of ETC might crash to zero.
Anyone could claim theyre "the attacker" and that they either dump / support ETC to manipulate the price. And he only atacked dao to get rich, not because he has a kind heart and cares about eTC, don't be naive and stupid. I mean, i do expect alot of messages from hacker / manipulators to try and manipulate the price further by telling something and doing the opposite, like chandler guo guy who threatened to atack ETC and then mined on it because the difficulty was so low, it was profitable. Better play lottery than invest in ETC, you'll never have inside information about the manipulations ahead.
The point of this post I agree with. Yes, it is every man for himself in trading in the cryptosphere. Any newbie that comes here in the forum is a sheep among wolves. Some of them get skinned alive but others adapt and get out a better investor but has become more cynical and skeptical.
Anyone could claim theyre "the attacker" and that they either dump / support ETC to manipulate the price. And he only atacked dao to get rich, not because he has a kind heart and cares about eTC, don't be naive and stupid. I mean, i do expect alot of messages from hacker / manipulators to try and manipulate the price further by telling something and doing the opposite, like chandler guo guy who threatened to atack ETC and then mined on it because the difficulty was so low, it was profitable. Better play lottery than invest in ETC, you'll never have inside information about the manipulations ahead.
Does it also mean that double spend is allowed as if you have 51%+ mining power, you can do whatever you want?
Everything is allowed. That's fundamental in the "trustless" world. It is a Darwinist fight.
If not, then you need only to put in sufficient safeguards so that any mischievous action is difficult enough for it to be able to be taken to court and justice, and you wouldn't need to spend 400 million dollars a year on wasting PoW on bitcoin for instance. Much less PoW would be sufficient to limit the number of attacks to a reasonable number so that "justice" (whatever power game THAT is) can handle it.
It is the difference between putting a lock on your door to make life more difficult for a burglar, but the real protection against burglars is the law and police, on one hand, and an old sea pirate hiding his treasure on an island in the Pacific, with no legal protection at all.
That is right. You can ask for the 400 confirmation instead of 6 confirmations to determine a transaction is valid.
That will make the transaction too slow. So basically the coin cannot be used a any kind of normal business.
Many Ethereum developers have stated that they will support the Ethereum ETC only. So there will be less development for the ETC.
Maybe the ETC supporters will have enough money and employ developers to do the development.
If the DAO hacker declare that he will not dump his coins, the price of ETC will rise a lot. And he will have enough to support the development.
Does it also mean that double spend is allowed as if you have 51%+ mining power, you can do whatever you want?
Everything is allowed. That's fundamental in the "trustless" world. It is a Darwinist fight.
If not, then you need only to put in sufficient safeguards so that any mischievous action is difficult enough for it to be able to be taken to court and justice, and you wouldn't need to spend 400 million dollars a year on wasting PoW on bitcoin for instance. Much less PoW would be sufficient to limit the number of attacks to a reasonable number so that "justice" (whatever power game THAT is) can handle it.
It is the difference between putting a lock on your door to make life more difficult for a burglar, but the real protection against burglars is the law and police, on one hand, and an old sea pirate hiding his treasure on an island in the Pacific, with no legal protection at all.
That is right. You can ask for the 400 confirmation instead of 6 confirmations to determine a transaction is valid.
That will make the transaction too slow. So basically the coin cannot be used a any kind of normal business.
Many Ethereum developers have stated that they will support the Ethereum ETC only. So there will be less development for the ETC.
Maybe the ETC supporters will have enough money and employ developers to do the development.
Does it also mean that double spend is allowed as if you have 51%+ mining power, you can do whatever you want?
Everything is allowed. That's fundamental in the "trustless" world. It is a Darwinist fight.
If not, then you need only to put in sufficient safeguards so that any mischievous action is difficult enough for it to be able to be taken to court and justice, and you wouldn't need to spend 400 million dollars a year on wasting PoW on bitcoin for instance. Much less PoW would be sufficient to limit the number of attacks to a reasonable number so that "justice" (whatever power game THAT is) can handle it.
It is the difference between putting a lock on your door to make life more difficult for a burglar, but the real protection against burglars is the law and police, on one hand, and an old sea pirate hiding his treasure on an island in the Pacific, with no legal protection at all.
That is right. You can ask for the 400 confirmation instead of 6 confirmations to determine a transaction is valid.
That will make the transaction too slow. So basically the coin cannot be used a any kind of normal business.
Many Ethereum developers have stated that they will support the Ethereum ETC only. So there will be less development for the ETC.
Does it also mean that double spend is allowed as if you have 51%+ mining power, you can do whatever you want?
Everything is allowed. That's fundamental in the "trustless" world. It is a Darwinist fight.
If not, then you need only to put in sufficient safeguards so that any mischievous action is difficult enough for it to be able to be taken to court and justice, and you wouldn't need to spend 400 million dollars a year on wasting PoW on bitcoin for instance. Much less PoW would be sufficient to limit the number of attacks to a reasonable number so that "justice" (whatever power game THAT is) can handle it.
It is the difference between putting a lock on your door to make life more difficult for a burglar, but the real protection against burglars is the law and police, on one hand, and an old sea pirate hiding his treasure on an island in the Pacific, with no legal protection at all.
That is right. You can ask for the 400 confirmation instead of 6 confirmations to determine a transaction is valid.
That will make the transaction too slow. So basically the coin cannot be used a any kind of normal business.
Does it also mean that double spend is allowed as if you have 51%+ mining power, you can do whatever you want?
Everything is allowed. That's fundamental in the "trustless" world. It is a Darwinist fight.
If not, then you need only to put in sufficient safeguards so that any mischievous action is difficult enough for it to be able to be taken to court and justice, and you wouldn't need to spend 400 million dollars a year on wasting PoW on bitcoin for instance. Much less PoW would be sufficient to limit the number of attacks to a reasonable number so that "justice" (whatever power game THAT is) can handle it.
It is the difference between putting a lock on your door to make life more difficult for a burglar, but the real protection against burglars is the law and police, on one hand, and an old sea pirate hiding his treasure on an island in the Pacific, with no legal protection at all.
That is right. You can ask for the 400 confirmation instead of 6 confirmations to determine a transaction is valid.
According to code is law theory, you can do anything wit the codes, you can explore the bugs without being arrested.
No, "code is law" is a specific property of smart contracts, when the code, and only the code, is the contract.
Most, not to say, all, other code running is not a contract, and is supposed to implement intend, can hence contain bugs and exploits (= deviations from intend).
The funny thing is that the people crying about the absurd concept of "code is law" are the ETH guys, who were in fact promoting ETH because.... it proposed smart contracts and "code is law". Nowhere else, code is law. Not even the Ethereum or bitcoin system. There, code is trying to implement intend (of white paper protocol), like everywhere else.
It is hugely, mightily, ironic and funny that people crying "thief", "bug", "exploit", are the ONLY ONES that were touting "code is law" as the superior property of their baby, ethereum ! Nobody else in his right mind was ever considering "code is law".
On the other hand, a 51% attack on a block chain is also a rightful thing to do in a certain respect, because a block chain is supposed to be an emergent property of mutually antagonistic entities. The theory is that the emerging block chain will be immutable and respect the protocol, but that's nothing else but a hope for an emergent property. A 51% attack is nothing else but that hope failing. But a 51% attack is perfectly "legit" in the framework of block chains, as the goal of such a system is that every agent in the system tries to rip off every other agent. If some succeed, that's their good "right". A block chain is simply postulated to be the right thing that emerges from a war zone. If that theory fails (the "51% attack") that's a pity, but not unlegit in a war zone.
It is ironic that they coined the term "the code is law" and yet if it goes against them they throw the concept under the table and roll back the transactions. This made them look like fools trying to act like geniuses. The only fix that can be done is to continue with the original chain.
Indeed, and that with a system that is, by definition, not verifiable, because Turing complete.
The only smart contracts, where code = law can make any sense, are those where the full tree of possibilities can be explored (which means it has to be a tree of reasonable size, and not a graph, hence not Turing complete).
I think smart contracts and code=law can be a great idea, but with SIMPLE contracts that can be totally explored. If the full tree of all possible behaviours can be analysed, then one can be sure that it doesn't contain "exploits" and "bugs" - somewhat similar to the safety analysis of code in airplanes or in nuclear power plants.
According to code is law theory, you can do anything wit the codes, you can explore the bugs without being arrested.
No, "code is law" is a specific property of smart contracts, when the code, and only the code, is the contract.
Most, not to say, all, other code running is not a contract, and is supposed to implement intend, can hence contain bugs and exploits (= deviations from intend).
The funny thing is that the people crying about the absurd concept of "code is law" are the ETH guys, who were in fact promoting ETH because.... it proposed smart contracts and "code is law". Nowhere else, code is law. Not even the Ethereum or bitcoin system. There, code is trying to implement intend (of white paper protocol), like everywhere else.
It is hugely, mightily, ironic and funny that people crying "thief", "bug", "exploit", are the ONLY ONES that were touting "code is law" as the superior property of their baby, ethereum ! Nobody else in his right mind was ever considering "code is law".
On the other hand, a 51% attack on a block chain is also a rightful thing to do in a certain respect, because a block chain is supposed to be an emergent property of mutually antagonistic entities. The theory is that the emerging block chain will be immutable and respect the protocol, but that's nothing else but a hope for an emergent property. A 51% attack is nothing else but that hope failing. But a 51% attack is perfectly "legit" in the framework of block chains, as the goal of such a system is that every agent in the system tries to rip off every other agent. If some succeed, that's their good "right". A block chain is simply postulated to be the right thing that emerges from a war zone. If that theory fails (the "51% attack") that's a pity, but not unlegit in a war zone.
It is ironic that they coined the term "the code is law" and yet if it goes against them they throw the concept under the table and roll back the transactions. This made them look like fools trying to act like geniuses. The only fix that can be done is to continue with the original chain.
Jump to: