2 ms·
That's arguably even worse though, it's the Ethereum Foundation acknowledging the principle that DAO code is law and people deserve the contracts they sign up f
by notahacker 5y ago
That's arguably even worse though, it's the Ethereum Foundation acknowledging the principle that DAO code is law and people deserve the contracts they sign up for is fundamentally nonsense, but taking the position that malicious actions mattered only when early adopters were the people hurt and people behind the Ethereum foundation were personally embarrassed by them.
- CryptoPunk 5y agoI may not have conveyed my point effectively. What I was implying is that the EF may have inadvertedly gave the impression that the DAO had its blessing. If something is presented as part of the official protocol, then people will assume that a hack will lead to a rollback. In general, I think given how ambitious the DAO was, the rollback can be excused. It's hard to stress how new a universal smart contract execution environment were at the time. Until outside of a few extremely niche communities, the idea had never been discussed, let alone experimented on, before Ethereum was introduced. And the DAO was a very complex smart contract, that every one jumped in with intuition about the vulnerabilities of smart contracts.