6 ms·

If they want to change history to help a privileged group of people, they should have a generalized mechanism and process for doing so. If I can prove I acciden

If they want to change history to help a privileged group of people, they should have a generalized mechanism and process for doing so. If I can prove I accidentally lost 1 ETH, let alone millions, I should be able to retrieve it via that same process. I love Lord Vitalik as much as any ETH nerd, but the more he dictates to help his friends, the more it will hurt the ecosystem.

derefr 9y ago
The "generalized mechanism for doing so", in this case, would be the EIP process itself, no? It's a bit like those clients that say of their software, in its requirements, "I want my software to be customizable after-the-fact with any new logic I desire, up-to-and-including the power to completely rewrite the application." Some people try to solve this problem as stated, resulting in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner-platform_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner-platform_effect. Other people recognize what's happening, and just respond with "the customization mechanism is the source code. You can customize it at any time by contracting a programmer to do so for you." The FDIC of the Ethereum blockchain† seems to be—as this example, and the earlier example of the DAO, would suggest—the Ethereum maintainers themselves. The way the Ethereum maintainers propose changes to the consensus protocol to fix problems is through EIPs. So, if there's an Ethereum "natural disaster", the natural thing to expect in response would be an EIP. † (as opposed to the Ethereum Classic blockchain, which has no such entity, which is rather the point of the fork.) You could create another layer atop the EIP process, formalizing specifically the recovery process from a "loss of money" event... but it's really going to boil down to a consensus-algorithm change in the end, so an EIP is going to have to be involved. (Unless you're suggesting that there should be some way, within the Ethereum VM itself, to aribtrate disputes in a way that invalidates the side-effects of previous contract calls? That'd certainly be a trick... especially given that the said "arbitration" would seem to be a human-complete problem, and Ethereum doesn't even have oracle support yet.)
- seibelj 9y ago
  If I can't get my ETH back back when I mess up, then neither should Parity. If the community wants me to get my ETH back when I mess up, then Parity should be able to. I'm not providing a value judgement on whether this is good or bad. I'm saying that it is hypocrisy to let one group get their ETH back over the individual if they have enough political support. But I see your point about the EIP process. Altering history to benefit a group of people is always contentious, so the EIP process is itself a way to do it on a public forum.
  - Dylan16807 9y ago
    It's not hypocrisy to have a threshold of losses before intervening.
    - twblalock 9y ago
      What's a fair threshold? How could a fair threshold be determined and later justified when people push back against it? What is the process for adjusting the threshold if the value of the currency swings wildly? A theft of a single Bitcoin is now a theft of thousands of dollars, but years ago it would have been a handful of dollars. It's easier to say that thefts of any amount should be restored than to deal with all of the politics of picking a threshold. Isn't the Ethereum system designed to avoid politics and the need to trust other people?
      - andybak 9y ago
        > What's a fair threshold? Thresholds are never fair and always arbitrary. However that's not a reason to avoid anything that has an arbitrary threshold. Arbitrary is often better than nothing.
        twblalock 9y ago
        When it comes to money, arbitrary rules are definitely worse than nothing. If I use a system to own or transfer money, I want to know exactly what the rules are. I have no confidence in arbitrary protections. Lack of confidence is what kills economies, companies, and currencies. It’s in every cryptocurrency project’s interest that people who hold the currency have confidence that their rights are protected.
- acover 9y ago
  What do you mean by oracle support?
beefield 9y ago
> If they want to change history to help a privileged group of people, they should have a generalized mechanism and process for doing so. Maybe I am just blind and a luddite, but if such generalized mechanism and process would exisit, what would be the difference to the current government and fiat based system? Admittably, I am astonished that after the DAO mess this smart contract thing is still alive. You can either have code as law, or you can have law as law. Not both. And obviously "code as law" was something these people did not like, so what on earth there is left for smart contracts?
- Analemma_ 9y ago
  There wouldn’t be one (and indeed, there isn’t one): ETH is now just a shitty clone of the current fiat banking system, but with even less transparency and more corruption (and to put the cherry on it, it’s an environmental catastrophe to boot). It’ll be a few more years before the starry-eyed libertarians figure that out though.
  - Dylan16807 9y ago
    You don't see a difference between banks that undo transactions constantly, and a system that might undo one or two a year?
    - tigershark 9y ago
      You don’t see a difference between a regulated system in a state were people are sovereign and one system where the people at the top of it can do whatever they want? It’s kind of sad to see a lot of people enjoying fascism barely 70 years after the most terrible war to date...
      - Dylan16807 9y ago
        > You don’t see a difference I don't know how to reply to this. That's the opposite of what I said. > It’s kind of sad to see a lot of people enjoying I hope you're not talking about me, because I wasn't expressing a preference between entire systems. I was just pointing out a single aspect. (If you must know, I think having a court system is best, but having the EIP system is better than nothing.) It's confusing to see my comment go from a positive score to negative while replies show up all agreeing with me...
berberous 9y ago
"the more he dictates to help his friends" is unfair I think. Isn't this a proposal by a Parity developer? Where does it say that Vitalik endorses this, or that he has either the will or the ability to dictate its adoption?
- DennisP 9y ago
  In fact, the one comment I've seen from Vitalik on this matter was pretty skeptical of any sort of bailout, expressing a desire for these sorts of actions to be increasingly difficult to achieve.

derefr 9y ago

The "generalized mechanism for doing so", in this case, would be the EIP process itself, no? It's a bit like those clients that say of their software, in its requirements, "I want my software to be customizable after-the-fact with any new logic I desire, up-to-and-including the power to completely rewrite the application." Some people try to solve this problem as stated, resulting in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner-platform_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner-platform_effect. Other people recognize what's happening, and just respond with "the customization mechanism is the source code. You can customize it at any time by contracting a programmer to do so for you." The FDIC of the Ethereum blockchain† seems to be—as this example, and the earlier example of the DAO, would suggest—the Ethereum maintainers themselves. The way the Ethereum maintainers propose changes to the consensus protocol to fix problems is through EIPs. So, if there's an Ethereum "natural disaster", the natural thing to expect in response would be an EIP. † (as opposed to the Ethereum Classic blockchain, which has no such entity, which is rather the point of the fork.) You could create another layer atop the EIP process, formalizing specifically the recovery process from a "loss of money" event... but it's really going to boil down to a consensus-algorithm change in the end, so an EIP is going to have to be involved. (Unless you're suggesting that there should be some way, within the Ethereum VM itself, to aribtrate disputes in a way that invalidates the side-effects of previous contract calls? That'd certainly be a trick... especially given that the said "arbitration" would seem to be a human-complete problem, and Ethereum doesn't even have oracle support yet.)

seibelj 9y ago
If I can't get my ETH back back when I mess up, then neither should Parity. If the community wants me to get my ETH back when I mess up, then Parity should be able to. I'm not providing a value judgement on whether this is good or bad. I'm saying that it is hypocrisy to let one group get their ETH back over the individual if they have enough political support. But I see your point about the EIP process. Altering history to benefit a group of people is always contentious, so the EIP process is itself a way to do it on a public forum.
- Dylan16807 9y ago
  It's not hypocrisy to have a threshold of losses before intervening.
  - twblalock 9y ago
    What's a fair threshold? How could a fair threshold be determined and later justified when people push back against it? What is the process for adjusting the threshold if the value of the currency swings wildly? A theft of a single Bitcoin is now a theft of thousands of dollars, but years ago it would have been a handful of dollars. It's easier to say that thefts of any amount should be restored than to deal with all of the politics of picking a threshold. Isn't the Ethereum system designed to avoid politics and the need to trust other people?
    - andybak 9y ago
      > What's a fair threshold? Thresholds are never fair and always arbitrary. However that's not a reason to avoid anything that has an arbitrary threshold. Arbitrary is often better than nothing.
      - twblalock 9y ago
        When it comes to money, arbitrary rules are definitely worse than nothing. If I use a system to own or transfer money, I want to know exactly what the rules are. I have no confidence in arbitrary protections. Lack of confidence is what kills economies, companies, and currencies. It’s in every cryptocurrency project’s interest that people who hold the currency have confidence that their rights are protected.
acover 9y ago
What do you mean by oracle support?

beefield 9y ago

> If they want to change history to help a privileged group of people, they should have a generalized mechanism and process for doing so. Maybe I am just blind and a luddite, but if such generalized mechanism and process would exisit, what would be the difference to the current government and fiat based system? Admittably, I am astonished that after the DAO mess this smart contract thing is still alive. You can either have code as law, or you can have law as law. Not both. And obviously "code as law" was something these people did not like, so what on earth there is left for smart contracts?

Analemma_ 9y ago
There wouldn’t be one (and indeed, there isn’t one): ETH is now just a shitty clone of the current fiat banking system, but with even less transparency and more corruption (and to put the cherry on it, it’s an environmental catastrophe to boot). It’ll be a few more years before the starry-eyed libertarians figure that out though.
- Dylan16807 9y ago
  You don't see a difference between banks that undo transactions constantly, and a system that might undo one or two a year?
  - tigershark 9y ago
    You don’t see a difference between a regulated system in a state were people are sovereign and one system where the people at the top of it can do whatever they want? It’s kind of sad to see a lot of people enjoying fascism barely 70 years after the most terrible war to date...
    - Dylan16807 9y ago
      > You don’t see a difference I don't know how to reply to this. That's the opposite of what I said. > It’s kind of sad to see a lot of people enjoying I hope you're not talking about me, because I wasn't expressing a preference between entire systems. I was just pointing out a single aspect. (If you must know, I think having a court system is best, but having the EIP system is better than nothing.) It's confusing to see my comment go from a positive score to negative while replies show up all agreeing with me...

berberous 9y ago

"the more he dictates to help his friends" is unfair I think. Isn't this a proposal by a Parity developer? Where does it say that Vitalik endorses this, or that he has either the will or the ability to dictate its adoption?

DennisP 9y ago
In fact, the one comment I've seen from Vitalik on this matter was pretty skeptical of any sort of bailout, expressing a desire for these sorts of actions to be increasingly difficult to achieve.