> The DAO hack of 2016 and the decision to go back a few blocks and revert the hack by a few at the top already taught us about the nonsense of 'cOdE iS lAw' ye

> The DAO hack of 2016 and the decision to go back a few blocks and revert the hack by a few at the top already taught us about the nonsense of 'cOdE iS lAw' years ago and that decentralization being a total lie. There's been zero rollback to block the attacker's seized ETH in the DAO hack. There was a "cooldown" period during which the attacker couldn't withdraw the fund and during that cooldown period Ethereum's code was modified and everybody had the choice to either run the old code or the new code on its node. People mostly decided to adopt the code preventing the attacker from accessing the stolen ETH while some decided to continue with the original code. So the chain forked into two blockchains: Ethereum and the one that was named "Ethereum Classic" (ETC). Arguably after the fork ETC was the "original" blockchain (but with its token way less valued) but since then AFAICT the real development has been happening on Ethereum, not Ethereum Classic and so nobody is arguing anymore that Ethereum Classic is the "real Ethereum". > The move to proof-of-stake will only show that it will get worse. Why would that be? Instead of rich miners it's now rich HODLers mining blocks but mining is ultra centralized through a few big pools: I don't see how PoS, if it works, would make anything worse than it currently is?