Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork • Hacker News Board

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#11

Post by nullc » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 10:25 AM UTC

beefield wrote: post #8

So. the intent of the DAO was _not_ specified in the code unlike claimed by all the hype. If I was a potential investor, I would be extremely curious to find out where the intent of DAO nowadays _is_ defined.

The website says: (https://daohub.org/explainer.html)

By Creating DAO tokens through interaction with The DAO’s smart contract code, you expressly agree to all of the terms and conditions set forth in that code. If you do not understand or do not agree to those terms, you should not Create DAO tokens.

[...]

The DAO’s smart contract code governs the Creation of DAO tokens and supercede any public statements about The DAO’s Creation made by third parties or individuals associated with The DAO, past, present and future. The software code currently available at https://github.com/slockit/dao is the sole source for the terms under which DAO tokens may be created

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#12

Post by nullc » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 10:28 AM UTC

What about customer ETH in Kraken's possession on the other chain, assuming it persists. Will they return it to customers or keep it for themselves?

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#13

Post by objectiveariel » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 11:10 AM UTC

allthetime wrote: post #10

captainmuon wrote: post #5

I don't understand the rage of some people against this decision. Cryptocurrency should be about free association of individuals and not about blindly following a flawed protocol that just happened to be the first implemented. If the consensus or vast majority vote is to upgrade the protocol, then that is what should be done. If everybody decides to stop using etherium and issue IOUs in the value of the currency they…

That's the thing though, they aren't changing the protocol, they are just reversing the transactions that fed the DAO. The DAO was flawed, not Ethereum, and now Ethereum's stability and promise of immutability are being sacrificed so that a bunch of people (including the lead devs of ethereum) who made a bad, uninformed investment don't have to lose their money. The 'consensus' was not by a vast majority either, unle…

Could you please let us know where you got that 5% figure from? I thought (according to the latest post on Ethereum's blog https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/15/to-fork-or-not-to-fork/) that the voting was done just on http://carbonvote.com/

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#14

Post by kbody » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 11:32 AM UTC

objectiveariel wrote: post #13

allthetime wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing though, they aren't changing the protocol, they are just reversing the transactions that fed the DAO. The DAO was flawed, not Ethereum, and now Ethereum's stability and promise of immutability are being sacrificed so that a bunch of people (including the lead devs of ethereum) who made a bad, uninformed investment don't have to lose their money. The 'consensus' was not by a vast majority either, unle…

Could you please let us know where you got that 5% figure from? I thought (according to the latest post on Ethereum's blog https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/15/to-fork-or-not-to-fork/ ) that the voting was done just on http://carbonvote.com/

Actually it's ~3.5%. Meaning about 3.5% of the total ETH supply has been used to vote.

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#15

Post by captainmuon » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 11:41 AM UTC

allthetime wrote: post #10

captainmuon wrote: post #5

I don't understand the rage of some people against this decision. Cryptocurrency should be about free association of individuals and not about blindly following a flawed protocol that just happened to be the first implemented. If the consensus or vast majority vote is to upgrade the protocol, then that is what should be done. If everybody decides to stop using etherium and issue IOUs in the value of the currency they…

That's the thing though, they aren't changing the protocol, they are just reversing the transactions that fed the DAO. The DAO was flawed, not Ethereum, and now Ethereum's stability and promise of immutability are being sacrificed so that a bunch of people (including the lead devs of ethereum) who made a bad, uninformed investment don't have to lose their money. The 'consensus' was not by a vast majority either, unle…

Well, but the vast majority is carrying the decision by following the fork / rollback, right? If just 5% of there network does the fork, shouldn't the 95% be able to continue with the old version (and the fork would become effectively worthless)? At least that's how it would work with bitcoin.

If the system allows 5% of users (or computing power) to make arbitrary changes, then that is the problem.

If I'm correctly informed, the cause was not a bad investment, but a bug/loophole in the contract that allowed people to steal etherium. (Of course you could take the code-legalistic position and say whatever the original code did, was the contract, even with bugs, and if people invested, they accepted these bugs as part of the agreement. But then I raise you this: the features of etherium that allow people to make changes to contracts are also part of the agreement! So if you say they shouldn't have invested in a buggy contact, tough luck, then I can say tough luck you invested in a malleble system :-))

If there was a bug (unexpected functionality) in the specification, then a certain quorum of users should be able to change the spec to match group expectations, even retroactively. I consider that to be a feature, not a bug.

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#16

Post by captainmuon » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 11:43 AM UTC

kbody wrote: post #14

objectiveariel wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you please let us know where you got that 5% figure from? I thought (according to the latest post on Ethereum's blog https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/15/to-fork-or-not-to-fork/ ) that the voting was done just on http://carbonvote.com/

Actually it's ~3.5%. Meaning about 3.5% of the total ETH supply has been used to vote.

Do we know much of the user base / computing power that corresponds to? And how many users abstained from voting?

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#17

Post by jonnycowboy » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 2:38 PM UTC

beefield wrote: post #8

So. the intent of the DAO was _not_ specified in the code unlike claimed by all the hype. If I was a potential investor, I would be extremely curious to find out where the intent of DAO nowadays _is_ defined.

Seems like a good way to start a lawsuit...

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#18

Post by beefield » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 3:23 PM UTC

nullc wrote: post #11

beefield wrote: post #8

So. the intent of the DAO was _not_ specified in the code unlike claimed by all the hype. If I was a potential investor, I would be extremely curious to find out where the intent of DAO nowadays _is_ defined.

The website says: ( https://daohub.org/explainer.html ) By Creating DAO tokens through interaction with The DAO’s smart contract code, you expressly agree to all of the terms and conditions set forth in that code. If you do not understand or do not agree to those terms, you should not Create DAO tokens. [...] The DAO’s smart contract code governs the Creation of DAO tokens and supercede any public statements about Th…

> you expressly agree to all of the terms and conditions set forth in that code. If you do not understand or do not agree to those terms, you should not Create DAO tokens.

Now it seems to me that there are plenty of people who have neither understood nor agreed with the terms and conditions, and explicitly decided that the code was not the intent of the DAO. So, the question remains, what is the intent of the DAO? If the old code was not the intent, we have no reason to believe that any of the future versions would be either.

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#19

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 3:29 PM UTC

beefield wrote: post #8

So. the intent of the DAO was _not_ specified in the code unlike claimed by all the hype. If I was a potential investor, I would be extremely curious to find out where the intent of DAO nowadays _is_ defined.

Or, the hard fork is a classic breach or contract, made difficult to remedy by the nature of the platform.

Re: Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork

#20

Post by buttershakes » Fri, Jul 15, 2016, 3:37 PM UTC

I couldn't be more opposed to this decision. It's a terrible precedent to set, and I think fundamentally undermines the ideals behind the Ethereum network. The DAO should live or die by its own code. A hard fork should only be done to save the Ethereum network itself because of a critical flaw.