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

Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#41

Post by choffman »

rhodey_orbits wrote: post #22

Ethereum brushed off my bug bounty submission and then began this hard fork junk so I documented and packaged my exploit publicly. It hasn't gotten much exposure yet, please have fun with it. "Walking Past Same-origin Policy, NAT, and Firewall for Ethereum Wallet Control" - https://medium.com/@rhodey/walking-past-same-origin-policy-n...

From the Medium blog:

> The cypherpunk, anarchist future wasn’t supposed to be about stronger banking guarantees and wealth redistribution among Reddit users.

I think your interests may fall more closely in line with what the Monero folks are doing. I'm not aware of any other cryptocurrency project with better privacy features. And they're working directly with the I2P developers to get better privacy at the network level(Kovri).

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#42

Post by bergeoisie »

eco wrote: post #39
CydeWeys wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too many of the Ethereum devs had way too much of their currency tied up in the DAO. It's a classic conflict of interest. Don't forget that Ethereum had a significant premine as well (which is very shady in its own right), so the early devs and adopters have a lot of ETH to throw around.

> Too many of the Ethereum devs had way too much of their currency tied up in the DAO. Do you have any evidence of that? I know about the address that was found in both the Foundation wallet and as a DAO holder but I haven't seen any other developer shown to be DAO holders. Stephan Taul would obviously be a big DAO holder as one of the people behind it but he's not with the Ethereum Foundation anymore (having left to…

I'd expect that Gavin Wood has substantial DAO holdings. He might not be a foundation member, but the way that ethcore is acting here doesn't make me think it's operating in an unbiased fashion.

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#43

Post by api »

Bromskloss wrote: post #9
CydeWeys wrote: post #7

This looks really bad from the perspective of trusting the currency to actually retain its value. What if you end up on the wrong fork, and that thousands of dollars in Ethereum you accepted to send out physical goods ends up being worthless? What's the point in saving the DAO if it kills the whole purpose behind the currency?

Won't you own Ether, and everything else, on both branches in the event of a fork?

That's not confusing at all.

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#44

Post by Zagitta »

ikeboy wrote: post #32
Zagitta wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how the softfork worked before it got scrapped. A hardfork literally splits the network in in two, it's basically like creating a new coin shares the previous history.

How does the fact that it was a hardfork invalidate either of the statements above? It's known ahead of time, and if not enough people adopt it then it doesn't get activated at all.

The way it invalidates the above statement is that there's no code that decides whether the fork happens beside what flags the nodes are launched with. At the specific block number the nodes that accept the fork will only validate the hardfork blocks as correct while the nodes that don't support the fork will reject these blocks. Thus two chains will co-exist for an unknown amount of time, not just one or the other.

To some extend what you're saying is true though as it's very unlikely that both chains will remain active/retain it's value and therefore miners on the losing chain will likely move to the winning chain very fast to avoid losses incurred from the cost of power.

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#45

Post by ikeboy »

Zagitta wrote: post #44
ikeboy wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does the fact that it was a hardfork invalidate either of the statements above? It's known ahead of time, and if not enough people adopt it then it doesn't get activated at all.

The way it invalidates the above statement is that there's no code that decides whether the fork happens beside what flags the nodes are launched with. At the specific block number the nodes that accept the fork will only validate the hardfork blocks as correct while the nodes that don't support the fork will reject these blocks. Thus two chains will co-exist for an unknown amount of time, not just one or the other.…

>there's no code that decides whether the fork happens beside what flags the nodes are launched with

That's not what you said above. You claimed that the mere fact that it's a hardfork means that you cannot implement anything to only activate if there's a majority. But it's extremely simple to do so. Just check whether a supermajority or a plain majority of recent blocks have signalled support for the hard fork, and only produce hardfork blocks if they have.

Quoting from the blog post https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/15/to-fork-or-not-to-fork/

>The community tool carbonvote will be used to set the default fork option for Geth. At block number 1894000 the votes will be tallied, and the outcome will determine whether the default is set to fork or not to fork. Then merging the DAO fork PRs will proceed, followed shortly by a release for both Geth and Mist.

So they're only going to merge the hardfork code if they already have the votes.

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#46

Post by microtherion »

JorgeGT wrote: post #18
Gargoyle wrote: post #14

I was a hardcore Ethereum fanboy, but this fork completely turned me off.

"The creatures outside looked from smart contracts to regular contracts, and from regular contracts to smart contracts, and from smart contracts to regular contracts again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

Fiat currency bad, cryptocurrency good!

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#47

Post by Zagitta »

ikeboy wrote: post #45
Zagitta wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way it invalidates the above statement is that there's no code that decides whether the fork happens beside what flags the nodes are launched with. At the specific block number the nodes that accept the fork will only validate the hardfork blocks as correct while the nodes that don't support the fork will reject these blocks. Thus two chains will co-exist for an unknown amount of time, not just one or the other.…

>there's no code that decides whether the fork happens beside what flags the nodes are launched with That's not what you said above. You claimed that the mere fact that it's a hardfork means that you cannot implement anything to only activate if there's a majority. But it's extremely simple to do so. Just check whether a supermajority or a plain majority of recent blocks have signalled support for the hard fork, and…

i did not mean to imply that a hardfork can't be implemented in that fashion, I should indeed have written "the hardfork" instead of "a hardfork" as that's the way this specific hardfork has been implemented, I appologies English is not my native language.

My understanding of that blog post is only what the default value of supporting or not supporting is meaning the hardfork code will be merged in either case and that it's only whether it's active by default that's changed depending on the vote.

Not that it really matters anymore as block number 1894000 has already passed and the code merged with hardfork support enabled by default.

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#48

Post by themgt »

It's just kind of crazy to me the amount of DAO-specific lines of code that have been put into apparently Mist and Geth, e.g. just search "DAO" on these links [1], [2]

How many many man hours have been spent on introducing a single DAO-fork feature into the code? They didn't even build it as a generic "community referendum fork" feature just something specific to this situation? They can say "the community decides" but the community didn't decide to dedicate that amount of dev resources to putting a band-aid on a single community member's fuckup. What a mess.

[1] https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/commit/1b2941cd56d69...

[2] https://github.com/ethereum/mist/commits/0.8.1

Re: Ethereum Wallet and Mist Beta with Hard Fork choice

#49

Post by whazor »

aakilfernandes wrote: post #5
HappyFunGuy wrote: post #3

It's a good thing that smart contracts have allowed us freedom from human error and bias.... I guess we can just call them "contracts." now.

Intersting idea. Perhaps we should have a system of governance of the "contracts" whereby we elect "representatives" who appoint "judges".

Without irony, it would be awesome to have a court system on the internet.
Post reply on HN