Topic: Ethereium Classic is a reminder of why Bitcoin must never hard fork - page 2. (Read 3254 times)

I heard some developers will not support the ETC. So the ETC price has dropped about 40% in the last few days.

both of you are only relating two things that has no relationship with each other. bitcoin and ethereum rise and falls has nothing to do with each other.

ETC is being pumped because why not, it is the hot topic of these days and there is a lot of profit in it.
but BTC has experienced a drop because of the bitfinex hack and neither BTC rise nor its fall has anything to do with ethereum and its price.

The bitcoin price dropped 20% in the last few months. The ability to pump the ETC has reduce a bit.

I heard the rise of the ETC is due to the pump by the bitcoin owners. So they like the hard fork of the coins.

Very interesting, hardly full disclosure to say the least

from:  https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/20/hard-fork-completed/

Edit 1: The "enemy" here is the Dark DAO.
Edit 2: On July 20th, 2016 12 Million ETH were worth approximately 145 Million USD. The seizure of funds was done with no due process of law. It remains an open legal question where this seizure of funds was even lawful or even if the "DAO Hacker" was legally in the right. Can someone please point out to me a court of law in a competent jurisdiction that has actually ruled on the matter.  
Edit 3: Even the US Government is not immune from this attack if they are branded "the enemy" as this old thread illustrates. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=306809.0;all

OK look I agree that under the right circumstances a hard fork can be beneficial but it all depends on full disclosure, what was the announcement for it (i know im very behind here and trying to understand) Im reading through this thread and reading things about "trying to hide a particular set of transactions"

does anyone know the official reason from the devs for a hard fork?

Brilliant analysis.  We've explored the limits of block chain technology and its failure to deliver immutability, we've seen the first successful sustained 51% attack, and a genuine fork at the same time, in not even 2 weeks time.

I fully agree with you, and for a long time I've been arguing that anonymity is a necessary component, exactly because you can't identify the enemy.

Every Alt coin is only as good as the Devs who pick it up, no? I'm a little new to the altcoin world but my perception is why fork unless you have the devs plans in advance to capitalize on it?

I have to disagree. What has happened with the Ethers, ETH/ETC has nothing to do with the situation in Bitcoin. Bitcoin has successfully hard forked on one or more occasion and may well do so in the future. The reason there has not been a hard fork in Bitcoin over the blocksize issue is that nobody has proposed a real solution to the blocksize scaling issue that actually works over the long term. Without such a solution the necessary consensus in the Bitcoin community is simply not there.

What makes the Ethereum hard fork different and a very dangerous precedent is that this hard fork was not about significantly improving Ethereum or about fixing a vulnerability in the Ethereum code. These are situations where immutability of coin ownership on the blockchain is preserved, It was about reversing a particular set of transactions. The prevention of this kind of transaction censorship is why Bitcoin was invented in the first place. If one reads Satoshi's original Bitcoin paper https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf this becomes readily apparent.

What Vitalik has done here is actually prove Satoshi wrong, since a highly distributed Proof of Work blockchain is not enough to prevent this kind of attack. This attack worked because it used persuasion rather than force. It relies on manufacturing a clearly identified  enemy and then persuading the majority that attacking this enemy is in the majority's best interest. History has many examples where this approach has led to war, genocide etc. A critical component of this attack is that the majority must be able to clearly identify the enemy and then launch the targeted attack.

ETC is just as vulnerable here as the pre fork ETH. Consider for example if the enemy was a "really evil" bank that had just been bailed out by the taxpayers at great expense. In that respect so is Bitcoin and any in the clear blockchain, including Litecoin for example. One solution worth considering here is to blind the censor by using an anonymous blockchain. For example it is next to impossible to pull of this kind on attack in Monero, in spite of the fact that Monero has hard forked in the past and is scheduled to hard fork in the future. What the Ethereum hard fork has done here is make the case for anon coins much stronger.  

Edit: The answer here is not to prevent a hard fork, it is instead to prevent a hard fork that only targets specific transactions.

You might be right. The big Ethereum holder will keep the ETH alive. It is in their best interest to do so.

All systems are rigged from the stock markets to crypto currencies. There is too many early btc stakeholders in ETH to let it die, they will keep the market propped up and hope for the best. There is no real price discovery in the alt coin market.

Once the hacker dumps the price will likely go up a long way

Amen to that !

Ethereum's fork is awesome, that's the real decentralization and empowerment.

Some people agree with fork, some don't, now everyone has their own chain, no one dictates the rules to each other.

I see ETC becoming the dominant chain paving the way for a big block bitcoin hard fork, both these events will shift power away from the cental planners and miners back to the users.

After the big ETC holders who are the large owners of the ETH as well dump the ETC, the ETC price could drop.

Where did you hear about that? That will be an interesting development if that is true. But I would doubt that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmzuRXLzqKk

Yeah he does seem like an idiot from what I've read.


I heard he's going to use the funds to help develop and increase his net worth. Why did you hear differently?