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

Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

fork.ethstats.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 135 posts

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#31

Post by chejazi »

jude- wrote: post #29
chejazi wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The longest chain always wins. Block height tells you which chain is longer. Am I missing something?

The chain with the most proof-of-work wins.

Fair enough. For clarity:

The proof of work threshold for a block (aka the difficulty) was the same when the fork started. The function that adjusts the difficulty (a function of time-between-blocks) is the same across both forks. It would take considerable time for the non-fork chain's difficulty to adjust to where it can make blocks at pace with the fork chain again. And even if it did, the fork would represent less work due to a lower difficulty.

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#32

Post by bdcravens »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #18
empath75 wrote: post #2

To me, I think this represents a failure of the currency. Either the code is the final word on the contract or not. This process seems to give a cartel of people the power to revoke transactions on a whim. Who would commit to building anything in an environment like that?

That description fits current banking systems just as much.

So if it's not an improvement, why bother?

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#33

Post by sidereal1 »

_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #28
markkat wrote: post #26

I am surprised how so many seem to think this is a bad thing. Ethereum is very nascent, and this was how the community wanted to fix this issue. It was not just about returning DTH, it was about the implications of the allocation of the DTH in the hands of one individual when Ethereum moves to PoS. Obviously the HF isn't ideal, but not forking was potentially much worse. This settles the issue, and allows people to g…

"Anyone can proposed a hard fork update at any time." So there is no difference between me and the core developers?

In the ability to propose a hard fork, no difference. However, you need to be able to convince the majority of miners to vote for your fork and that's where being a core dev has a lot of influence.

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#34

Post by factorialboy »

tankenmate wrote: post #14
echelon wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prior to this fork, I had interest in Ethereum. I don't want to touch it now, out of both mistrust and the feeling that the developers are lacking in ethics. It really feels like a pyramid scheme if they're not willing to let the technology stand on its own. It's really a shame. Maybe some other group will fork the Ethereum code into a new cryptocurrency that can't have the blockchain forked as easily.

Ethereum is a human construct; written by humans, directed by humans, and facilitated by humans (no skynet has come along to do mining). Ipso facto, it is fallible just like humans. You think it is a bad thing that this has happened; I think it is a good thing. Now everyone is aware that the 51% can take control of the chain; you can't pretend any more that the code is the final arbiter, because it isn't. Black and w…

Will ETH hard fork after every fraud / theft / robbery? If not, then the case will be made of conflict of interest.

People behind ETH had a stake in TheDAO and they chose to protect their _dollars_ rather than the platform.

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#35

Post by markkat »

_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #28
markkat wrote: post #26

I am surprised how so many seem to think this is a bad thing. Ethereum is very nascent, and this was how the community wanted to fix this issue. It was not just about returning DTH, it was about the implications of the allocation of the DTH in the hands of one individual when Ethereum moves to PoS. Obviously the HF isn't ideal, but not forking was potentially much worse. This settles the issue, and allows people to g…

"Anyone can proposed a hard fork update at any time." So there is no difference between me and the core developers?

Of course there is. However, as Bitcoin Classic may illustrate, it is possible to leave the core developers working on a defunct chain.

Core developers represent a double-edged sword. They are critical for getting the network adopted, and for adapting the network to new demands, but they can also be a risk due to their influence. By all accounts, the Ethereum core developers have been open and responsive. Not all Ethereum devs wanted this fork. I do think they could be faulted for not strongly advising Slock.it to cap The DAO. That may be one reason why they were amenable to a refund solution.

You definitely should consider the core devs when investing time and money in a blockchain. They have an inertia that influences the system.

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#36

Post by skybrian »

davidgerard wrote: post #25
skybrian wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One way to justify it might be to consider this a beta period. It is still early days for this new currency and perhaps when the system is more robust, they will be able to walk away. But the question is whether that day will ever come, or the currency will always need emergency overrides.

"beta" isn't really an excuse for a clustercuddle involving $150 million.

Maybe it's not an excuse, but it seems like a reasonable explanation. The system clearly isn't ready to handle $150 million but some folks did it anyway.

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#37

Post by pjkundert »

_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #28
markkat wrote: post #26

I am surprised how so many seem to think this is a bad thing. Ethereum is very nascent, and this was how the community wanted to fix this issue. It was not just about returning DTH, it was about the implications of the allocation of the DTH in the hands of one individual when Ethereum moves to PoS. Obviously the HF isn't ideal, but not forking was potentially much worse. This settles the issue, and allows people to g…

"Anyone can proposed a hard fork update at any time." So there is no difference between me and the core developers?

Apparently, the core developers could rally a quorum and gain consensus. Perhaps you could not.

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#38

Post by ianpurton »

No no no no no.

It's too early to measure success. OK, there was a fork. Technical success if you like.

But, at the moment most exchanges are closed to Ethereum trading on either the old or new software.

When they open we will then have a better idea how this will play out.

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#39

Post by ok_craig »

_Codemonkeyism wrote: post #28
markkat wrote: post #26

I am surprised how so many seem to think this is a bad thing. Ethereum is very nascent, and this was how the community wanted to fix this issue. It was not just about returning DTH, it was about the implications of the allocation of the DTH in the hands of one individual when Ethereum moves to PoS. Obviously the HF isn't ideal, but not forking was potentially much worse. This settles the issue, and allows people to g…

"Anyone can proposed a hard fork update at any time." So there is no difference between me and the core developers?

Influence is like money. You have an equal right to pursue it, but no right to some quantity of it. Some people have more of it, others less. If you want more, you're gonna have to work for it first.

Re: Ethereum hard fork successful with mining majority

#40

Post by factorialboy »

Normal_gaussian wrote: post #19
empath75 wrote: post #2

To me, I think this represents a failure of the currency. Either the code is the final word on the contract or not. This process seems to give a cartel of people the power to revoke transactions on a whim. Who would commit to building anything in an environment like that?

The majority of the planet apparently. Of course that cartel has a better track record than this new one, so I also see it as a failure of the currency.

With fiat, there are legislative and legal recourses. Those aren't perfect, but they are something.

With ETH, it's a handful of inexperienced individuals with possible case of conflict of interest.

Post reply on HN