The terms of The DAO Creation are set forth in the smart contract code
existing on the Ethereum blockchain at
0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413. Nothing in this explanation
of terms or in any other document or communication may modify or add any
additional obligations or guarantees beyond those set forth in The
DAO’s code. Any and all explanatory terms or descriptions are merely
offered for educational purposes and do not supercede or modify the
express terms of The DAO’s code set forth on the blockchain; to the
extent you believe there to be any conflict or discrepancy between the
descriptions offered here and the functionality of The DAO’s code at
0xbb9bc244d798123fde783fcc1c72d3bb8c189413, The DAO’s code controls and
sets forth all terms of The DAO Creation.
Asking the whole Ethereum community to support the hard forking fix , is clearly dictated by private interest of a minority in recovering lost investment, and as such is contrary to what Ethereum is designed for.
A hard fork of the Ethereum code would make sense if the Ethereum protocol was discovered to hold a flaw. ( like it was the case in bitcoin early days )
In the DAO case, the Ethereum protocol is sane and plainly demonstrating what it is designed for. It is the The DAO contract that was badly written, and it is perfectly working badly , just as what the design was signed for by investors.
The proposed hard fork can not be considered legit, in my opinion, specifically if you place yourself in the position of those who invested money or energy in the Ethereum project, but not in the DAO, as it would most certainly lead to to a major loss of trust in the concept, and a almost certain and already started fall of the market prices.
The DAO investors should just take the lesson and begin reading what they sign for and invest in, and the DAO team should take their responsability and not have the whole crypto currency ecosystem and community pay the price for their mistake.
In the end my feeling is that things tend to happen too fast in a society where buzz, hype and short term interest make people take poorly thought decisions.
I hope this will not be the case for the Safe project, which holds much deeper hopes and potential paradigm changes, imho.
Well, comparable in the sense that the common user won’t understand how it was possible thus didn’t see it coming. I don’t say I can demonstrate a plausible scenario, how would I? There isn’t even an implementation of Safecoin. All I say is that with a reward that is granted for an action that can become orchestrated is a potential for exploits.
True ,yeah i get what you mean in the technical aspect of it and even the possible exploits there is already known factors that counter such exploits , not completely but dampen their effect. Some even pay and reward unsuspecting people holding the files that will be retrieved cutting effectiveness .
Not having doubts is particularly what lead people to lose huge amounts of investment. I don’t see how Ethereum development wasn’t carried out with rigor and critical review. It is the nature of complex projects to have a higher potential of bugs and flaws. In this case it wasn’t even a bug, but a functionality that hasn’t been considered sufficiently. To stop being critical means acting against the idea of decentralisation.
I can see pay the producer being exploited with dishonest requests up to the point where the payments fall to the price of bandwidth. Beyond that it presumably becomes self defeating for the attacker?
The agreed set of rules is decided by consensus, which doesn’t necessarily need to remain static.
The system is based on a blockchain, and if the blockchain consensus is updated to prevent an unforeseen malicious abuse of the code, then consensus is maintained, and it is this consensus, not a specific set of code, that sets the rules. The attacker used the system knowing that the consensus is what rules the network, so they too would have to accept any coordinated action by consensus of the network is fair play.
Choosing to act in self defence only demonstrates resilience, dynamism, and problem solving ability. It will also only happen if the community is working together and gets a consensus. If the community thing the attacker deserves the funds / DAO holders deserve to lose them, then that will be what happens.
Sitting by and doing nothing while an attacker walks off with a huge amount of Eth would be daft, unless taking action were not possible. In this case, action is possible.
Sydney? Then we can’t be sure but this name pops up::
Australian Craig Wright claims he is bitcoin founder Satoshi Nakamoto
Wright, 45, is an Australian IT and security consultant, who described himself on a now-deleted LinkedIn page as a “senior management executive information security specialist”.
Until recently he was the director of more than a dozen companies, some involved in cryptocurrency, until he divested himself of 12 of them in the space of a week in July 2015.
Wired and Gizmodo published investigations in December claiming to reveal Wright’s identity based on leaked transcripts, emails and financial records. Wright declined to comment on the stories, which were the subject of scepticism among some of his contemporaries.
The same day his north Sydney home was raided by Australian federal police in connection with a tax investigation, unrelated to bitcoin.
No, you’re right, it was said he (Wright) and his family moved to London. But he is better suited than Michael Jackson to pull this caper off. I’m not that serious but the signing of the Pastebin-messages and the indignant tone in there made me think of him and the fuzz around him last month?
It didn’t happen yesterday, but today it touched 4.9 cents. Ethereum briefly dipped below $10 today. Blood in the streets… And it’s probably not the end either. If this is the Mt Gox moment for Ethereum, Ethereum will need a few years to recover, I’m sure. Meanwhile we could see $2.50 or lower for Ether, and the complete pulling of the plug for DAO.
It was said before here, but I also would like to stress it out: So glad that the Safe Team is following a slower trajectory with a lot more testing.
