3 ms·

I lost a lot of faith in DAO and the whole code as contract when the proponents abandoned it as soon as they lost substantial money. When someone found a way to

I lost a lot of faith in DAO and the whole code as contract when the proponents abandoned it as soon as they lost substantial money. When someone found a way to make a lot of money from the DAO contract, instead of congratulating them for using the letter of the contract to make money, the owners of the DAO suddenly started calling it theft and hacking and changed the protocol to make recover their money. Basically, DAOs are just a way of trading a well established legal system to settle disputes for one where whoever controls the protocols settles disputes in their favor.

casi18 6y ago
The blockchain always runs under social consensus. It is here for people not machines. Code isnt law, never has been, never will be. Because it would be insane to live in that world. When bitcoin accidentally overflowed and created 184billion bitcoin, it was forked away a few hours later because that isn't what the majority agreed upon. Same with ethereum, the majority decided something and it becomes the agreed state, as it does with every block. Its strange we still have to explain this 5 years later.
- atweiden 6y ago
  A fairer comparison would be to that of MtGox, three years earlier, in which approximately 10X as much money was stolen from early Bitcoiners, but which did not result in any clawback of funds. Conversely, in the “billion bitcoin bug” situation, no funds were stolen from anyone — 51% of mining power merely chainforked to a non-buggy version of the network. FWIW an identical situation could happen today on Bitcoin via a 51% attack, but it probably would be rejected in exactly the same way and for exactly the same reasons. In both the MtGox and Ethereum DAO incident, the underlying network was functioning normally; but only one resulted in a clawback of funds from a sovereign entity. Notably, Ethereum had been advertising itself under the banner of “unstoppable applications” up to that point. Seemingly it’s a case of “unstoppable applications, not unstoppable applications”.
- beambot 6y ago
  The DAO hack was "corrected" because it was big & loud, but countless others (esp small-time players) have been wronged without resolution. That seems to be a problem with the DAO... there's no mechanism to resolve small-time disputes if it doesn't rise to the consciousness of the masses (even if they would agree with such resolutions if pressed). By way of analogy: It's kind of like escalating Google customer service tickets through HN frontpage exposure. Our existing legal system "solves" this through the Judicial branch of government. The social consensus (Constitution) created a decentralized (but hierarchical) way to remediate wrongs both big & small. What is the DAO equivalent?

casi18 6y ago

The blockchain always runs under social consensus. It is here for people not machines. Code isnt law, never has been, never will be. Because it would be insane to live in that world. When bitcoin accidentally overflowed and created 184billion bitcoin, it was forked away a few hours later because that isn't what the majority agreed upon. Same with ethereum, the majority decided something and it becomes the agreed state, as it does with every block. Its strange we still have to explain this 5 years later.

atweiden 6y ago
A fairer comparison would be to that of MtGox, three years earlier, in which approximately 10X as much money was stolen from early Bitcoiners, but which did not result in any clawback of funds. Conversely, in the “billion bitcoin bug” situation, no funds were stolen from anyone — 51% of mining power merely chainforked to a non-buggy version of the network. FWIW an identical situation could happen today on Bitcoin via a 51% attack, but it probably would be rejected in exactly the same way and for exactly the same reasons. In both the MtGox and Ethereum DAO incident, the underlying network was functioning normally; but only one resulted in a clawback of funds from a sovereign entity. Notably, Ethereum had been advertising itself under the banner of “unstoppable applications” up to that point. Seemingly it’s a case of “unstoppable applications, not unstoppable applications”.
beambot 6y ago
The DAO hack was "corrected" because it was big & loud, but countless others (esp small-time players) have been wronged without resolution. That seems to be a problem with the DAO... there's no mechanism to resolve small-time disputes if it doesn't rise to the consciousness of the masses (even if they would agree with such resolutions if pressed). By way of analogy: It's kind of like escalating Google customer service tickets through HN frontpage exposure. Our existing legal system "solves" this through the Judicial branch of government. The social consensus (Constitution) created a decentralized (but hierarchical) way to remediate wrongs both big & small. What is the DAO equivalent?