3 ms·
I stopped supporting Ethereum when they abandoned code is law, and arbitrarily rewrote the rules to protect against the DAO hack. It's fine to protect against
by lawn 6y ago
I stopped supporting Ethereum when they abandoned code is law, and arbitrarily rewrote the rules to protect against the DAO hack.
It's fine to protect against theft, but it's not fine when it's only enforced arbitrarily and only when the core developers themselves are affected.
This is the whole premise behind the irreversibility of cryptocurrencies, that the only fair thing is to never do it, and when you abandon that why not go all the way to a centralized database?
Ethereum is therefore not fit to be a currency, and should be treated as a world computer experiment.
- pfraze 6y agoThey didn't abandon "code is law." They legislated code to deal with a specific problem that they had a state interest to solve. Blockchains do introduce code as law, but if the code can change then they also introduce legislatures (the miners). Those legislatures have voting power equivalent to their % of mining control. The point isn't to make transactions irreversible; the point is to create a system of distributed control in which a decision to revert a transaction requires consensus among the miner/legislators.