4 ms·

I always wondered why there was such a rush to launch the DAO. As opposed to what Ethereum itself did: develop a proof of concept for over a year, then release

I always wondered why there was such a rush to launch the DAO. As opposed to what Ethereum itself did: develop a proof of concept for over a year, then release a beta version and provide bounties for security bugs, all the while collaborating with testers and security researchers to stress the software.

fudged71 10y ago
TheDAO effectively turned into a massive bug bounty, a pot up for grabs.
- infodroid 10y ago
  Indeed an important question that will be decided soon is whether the "hacker" will get to keep the reward pot, or whether the rules of the game will change to deny it.
- drewm1980 10y ago
  I am curious if a huge DAO-like organization could avoid being a target solely by keeping very of its wealth liquid at any moment... i.e. what would have happened if 99.99% of the DAO's eth were loaned out... would the hacker have bothered? (assuming it wasn't an inside job)
SkyMarshal 10y ago
>I always wondered why there was such a rush to launch the DAO. So Slock.it could raise money, obviously. A common complaint right around when Slock.it launched the DAO was that Slock.it planned to offer the first funding proposal on it but only provided a brief 2-week period for review and debate before the voting started. It had the appearance of an attempt at railroading the crowdfunding process for a quick payoff. Fortunately cooler heads uncovered the problems and spoke out, putting the brakes on. Now it's a big learning experience for the ~23,000 people who blindly jumped on the hypetrain and put money into a flawed investment vehicle. You'd think the first 7 years of Bitcoin would have taught people a lesson that this technology is risky, but dollar signs in the eyes tend to obscure hindsight I guess.
- rphlx 10y ago
  > ~23,000 people who blindly jumped on the hypetrain I haven't touched ETH or the DAO personally, but it is unfair to label every investment in them irrational. Over the past 5 years cryptocurrencies have provided multiple opportunities to convert, say, $10k into $100k or even $1M within a year or two; once your networth exceeds a certain amount, risking 1-2% of it on an opportunity like that is arguably wise - i.e. would be worth repeating - even if it does fail spectacularly. It is certainly true that as long as that reasoning delivers 10-100x+ returns to some of the people some of the time, a giant fount of speculative money will continue to moisten a lot of scammers, con artists, and insufficiently-careful SW developers though.
alvarosm 10y ago
It's pretty obvious and simple. Because they want to run away with your money NOW. Ethereum had money already so they could survive while waiting to scam you even more.

fudged71 10y ago

TheDAO effectively turned into a massive bug bounty, a pot up for grabs.

infodroid 10y ago
Indeed an important question that will be decided soon is whether the "hacker" will get to keep the reward pot, or whether the rules of the game will change to deny it.
drewm1980 10y ago
I am curious if a huge DAO-like organization could avoid being a target solely by keeping very of its wealth liquid at any moment... i.e. what would have happened if 99.99% of the DAO's eth were loaned out... would the hacker have bothered? (assuming it wasn't an inside job)

SkyMarshal 10y ago

>I always wondered why there was such a rush to launch the DAO. So Slock.it could raise money, obviously. A common complaint right around when Slock.it launched the DAO was that Slock.it planned to offer the first funding proposal on it but only provided a brief 2-week period for review and debate before the voting started. It had the appearance of an attempt at railroading the crowdfunding process for a quick payoff. Fortunately cooler heads uncovered the problems and spoke out, putting the brakes on. Now it's a big learning experience for the ~23,000 people who blindly jumped on the hypetrain and put money into a flawed investment vehicle. You'd think the first 7 years of Bitcoin would have taught people a lesson that this technology is risky, but dollar signs in the eyes tend to obscure hindsight I guess.

rphlx 10y ago
> ~23,000 people who blindly jumped on the hypetrain I haven't touched ETH or the DAO personally, but it is unfair to label every investment in them irrational. Over the past 5 years cryptocurrencies have provided multiple opportunities to convert, say, $10k into $100k or even $1M within a year or two; once your networth exceeds a certain amount, risking 1-2% of it on an opportunity like that is arguably wise - i.e. would be worth repeating - even if it does fail spectacularly. It is certainly true that as long as that reasoning delivers 10-100x+ returns to some of the people some of the time, a giant fount of speculative money will continue to moisten a lot of scammers, con artists, and insufficiently-careful SW developers though.

alvarosm 10y ago

It's pretty obvious and simple. Because they want to run away with your money NOW. Ethereum had money already so they could survive while waiting to scam you even more.