Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

coingecko.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 74 posts

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#41

Post by jsprogrammer »

triadicmonad wrote: post #38

The value of money is subjective. Governments drain the value of fiat currency by printing and spending. This causes people to subjectively value the currency less, which makes its market value go down (inflation.) There are several reasons why this is not the case with Eth/DAO: 1) Every fraction of Ethereum is accounted for in the public record. 2) No additional Ethereum was created to compensate the losses of inves…

The ETH wasn't really stolen though. I thought a contract was submitted and then executed?

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#42

Post by sliverstorm »

ubersync wrote: post #35
sliverstorm wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An exploitable protocol weakness sounds like a type of protocol error to me. (But maybe I have entirely the wrong idea of what the attack vector was here)

The bug was in the DAO conrtact, not the Ethereum protocol.

Ok, my bad, I was not up to speed on the whole DAO thing.

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#43

Post by wodencafe »

draw_down wrote: post #32

> Going from ‘The DAO is based on Unstoppable Code’ to ‘if we screw up badly enough, WE WILL FORK YOU’ is a big change that shouldn’t be taken lightly This is what I find so galling. If code is code is code, then the outcome should be what the code says it is. But whoops, we decided we don't like the outcome so let's toss that out.

That's how decentralized open source projects work.

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#44

Post by triadicmonad »

jsprogrammer wrote: post #41
triadicmonad wrote: post #38

The value of money is subjective. Governments drain the value of fiat currency by printing and spending. This causes people to subjectively value the currency less, which makes its market value go down (inflation.) There are several reasons why this is not the case with Eth/DAO: 1) Every fraction of Ethereum is accounted for in the public record. 2) No additional Ethereum was created to compensate the losses of inves…

The ETH wasn't really stolen though. I thought a contract was submitted and then executed?

Do you really find that answer a satisfying resolution?

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#45

Post by mhluongo »

WorldMaker wrote: post #26
aakilfernandes wrote: post #2

Such 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.

«This fork, if it happens, will be proof that Ethereum is far behind bitcoin in terms of decentralization.» Wouldn't a fork imply more decentralization? Multiple active forks would imply multiple actors working to their own agendas towards different objectives/goals and no central fiat to realign their interests. That would certainly sound more decentralized to me. (The block size tangle and the inability for Bitcoin…

Not really, if the fork is orchestrated and primarily by one group (the Ethereum Foundation).

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#46

Post by UweSchmidt »

jsprogrammer wrote: post #41
triadicmonad wrote: post #38

The value of money is subjective. Governments drain the value of fiat currency by printing and spending. This causes people to subjectively value the currency less, which makes its market value go down (inflation.) There are several reasons why this is not the case with Eth/DAO: 1) Every fraction of Ethereum is accounted for in the public record. 2) No additional Ethereum was created to compensate the losses of inves…

The ETH wasn't really stolen though. I thought a contract was submitted and then executed?

Every single word in the cryptocurrency world is a methaphor, including "currency", "wallet" and, apparently, "to steal".

Some cavepeople figured out what stealing is a long time ago. We haven't quite decided if executing a contract code is stealing just yet.

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#47

Post by ubersync »

cloudjacker wrote: post #39
ubersync wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not true. Bitcoin has never reversed a transaction without a signature. The only time you are probably talking about is when someone made a block with a 9 billion bitcoin reward. Even then, they just convinced the miners to start a different chain. Thus, the chain with the 9 billion coins block just died. So yea, no reversal without a signature, ever!

oh without a signature, a completely irrelevant qualifier that I didn't even make as a prerequisite! I'm also referring to the march 2013 hard fork so congratulations you just helped me prove my "multiple times" for the lay man

What happened in March 2013? Which transaction was reversed?

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#48

Post by jsprogrammer »

triadicmonad wrote: post #44
jsprogrammer wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ETH wasn't really stolen though. I thought a contract was submitted and then executed?

Do you really find that answer a satisfying resolution?

I do. Unless someone can show that the DAO was hacked (a system was compromised and common code was modified), the contract appears to be entirely valid and wholly in the spirit of cryptocurrencies.

I don't think Nazis are still around are they? I also don't see how lying to Nazis about Jews has any relevance here?

Personally, I don't trust much that doesn't have a simulator, or at least some kind of test procedure.

Edit: Parent has since removed Nazi references. My post will remain unmodified except for this edit.

Re: The DAO Disaster Illustrates Differing Philosophies in Bitcoin and Ethereum

#50

Post by kang »

aakilfernandes wrote: post #29
swalsh wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's boatloads of value in a decentralized block chain approach to legal organizations.... What's amazing here is the ethereal guys are forging new territory for truly global and potentially leaderless commerce. What's unfortunate is that it's taking the form of a dystopia. Instead of realizing that humans are a factor of the equation, and people doing business in God faith... We're entering a ruthless period wher…

If you want the benefits of a blockchain without the Wild West stuff, why not set up a private chain with an "approver" instead of miners? I'm sure many companies interested in Ethereum are going this route.

Private/Federated blockchains are just applied cryptography, which is not the same as the technology behind bitcoin; blockchain & proof-of-work.
Post reply on HN