The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
1–10 of 74 posts
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#2Such a fork would be more difficult in Bitcoin due to their political/financial (not necessarily technical) decentralization. This fork, if it happens, will be proof that Ethereum is far behind bitcoin in terms of decentralization.
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#3Such a fork would be more difficult in Bitcoin due to their political/financial (not necessarily technical) decentralization. This fork, if it happens, will be proof that Ethereum is far behind bitcoin in terms of decentralization.
> Such a fork would not be more difficult in Bitcoin
Did you mean to say that it _would_ be more difficult?
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#4Such a fork would be more difficult in Bitcoin due to their political/financial (not necessarily technical) decentralization. This fork, if it happens, will be proof that Ethereum is far behind bitcoin in terms of decentralization.
> Such a fork would not be more difficult in Bitcoin Did you mean to say that it _would_ be more difficult?
yup. fixed, thanks!
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#5Such a fork would be more difficult in Bitcoin due to their political/financial (not necessarily technical) decentralization. This fork, if it happens, will be proof that Ethereum is far behind bitcoin in terms of decentralization.
I disagree. The ability to reach consensus within a community does not necessarily imply centralization.
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#6Perhaps the next big of development the Ethereum guys need to build is a decentralized court system.
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#7>> "it seems that funds can still be reverse under certain circumstances"
Maybe it's me, but ideas like being able to reverse funds do not belong in crypto currencies. If risk is presented, escrow the transfer, buy insurance, etc.
Why are people so unwilling to take responsibility for themselves?
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#8I wonder how this would look today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11641111
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#9Smart contracts that can be modified post-hoc, through consensus or (after a precedent was made that it is possible) legislation or a judge are not smart.
Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum
#10Such a fork would be more difficult in Bitcoin due to their political/financial (not necessarily technical) decentralization. This fork, if it happens, will be proof that Ethereum is far behind bitcoin in terms of decentralization.
I disagree. The ability to reach consensus within a community does not necessarily imply centralization.
Genuine question:
As a self-described fairly intelligent tech person, the blockchain and its working is still fairly magical to me, so answer me this:
Would it be theoretically possible for big players on the market (read EvilCorp) to push the market over to a fork by convincing enough of its cronies to make the switch?
I'm assuming what you mean is that market consensus is (at least) 51% of the market accepting the fork as "the truth" in terms of value by making further business there instead. Or would it not even require 51% but merely (for example) 20% of the capital that covers 80% of the transactions?
I also assume anyone that wanted could still stick to the former blockchain as long as it has other participants to deal with?
Am I wrong in expecting a synecdoche to the current "real world economy" within cryptocurrency that it loses its democratization when the top X% can force for example a fork?