4 ms·

I was wondering how Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin is able to walk around without a security detail, going on extensive backpacking trips, what if someone ste

I was wondering how Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin is able to walk around without a security detail, going on extensive backpacking trips, what if someone steals his keys? He’d just fork the entire blockchain. Normal users don’t have that luxury.

q-big 4y ago
> He’d just fork the entire blockchain. > Normal users don’t have that luxury. Everybody else can fork the entire blockchain, too. The difference is that if a "normal user" does such a fork, hardly anyone does care. The central difference rather is that the trust and authority that Vitalik Buterin holds - if he does a decision, it is accepted by and large. The question that you should rather ask is: why do so many people involved in Ethereum have so much trust in Vitalik Buterin's authority and decisions?
- chrisco255 4y ago
  Main reason is Vitalik is one of the brightest minds in crypto. He's a 10 year veteran of the space and a genius. But no, even Vitalik could not get a split off fork done unless it was something with major security implications for the whole Ethereum ecosystem.
  - UncleMeat 4y ago
    So genius that both EVM and Solidity have huge unforced footguns that have caused gazillions of dollars in damage.
    - chrisco255 4y ago
      It's not that bad. Solidity does not protect against crypto economic errors. No language does.
      - UncleMeat 4y ago
        Yeah but most languages don't handle things like exceptions, inheritance, and reentrancy so incredibly weirdly that people consistently write basic logical errors when using these concepts.
- yokem55 4y ago
  There are numerous instances where Buterin's suggestions have not been just accepted at face value. He's an influential voice, but is no dictator.
faraggi 4y ago
This is such an ignorant and factually wrong comment.
- walls 4y ago
  He literally did this after the DAO hack.
  - jjulius 4y ago
    I'm as "fuck cryptocurrency/NFTs" as the next guy, but that's not accurate. As others have said, forks require community consensus, not just the decision of a single individual. Regarding the specific fork you're referring to (italicized emphasis is mine): >It was initially unclear as to whether the fork would be executed. Though it was proposed by Ethereum developers, they did not have the unilateral power to implement the change. Miners, exchanges, and node operators also had to agree to update their software. After more heated debate in public forums, on July 20, 2016, at block 192,000, the Ethereum hard fork was implemented. https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/the-dao-hack-makerdao#section-the-dao-hack-remedy-forks-ethereum https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/the-dao-hack-makerdao#sec...
    - walls 4y ago
      The crucial question, to me, is: would the fork have happened if Vitalik had not been part of the DAO? I don't think there's any chance he would have entertained that. There have been many large ETH compromises since then, and the idea of forking for any of them would be considered outrageous.
      - yokem55 4y ago
        One of the main reasons it went through is because there was 'only' one losing party - the hacker, and multiple winning parties (developers and investors in the DAO). A couple years later when the parity mutlisig was hacked such that the funds (150K eth from an ICO) were 'permanently locked', the proposal to unlock the funds via hardfork was rejected. More or less specifically because it would only benefit a very small subset of parties, while leaving the frozen funds in place meant the rest of the chain benefited from the effective reduction of eth supply. Since then no one else has seriously proposed forks to move funds out of protocol.
chrisco255 4y ago
No. Any fork requires a consensus among the community. While it was possible to fork Ethereum for the DAO hack in 2016 (note the DAO hack had affected 30% of all ETH in circulation), a lot has changed in the Ethereum ecosystem since then and break-off forks do not happen willy nilly. Besides all of the applications that need consistent state to make sense (such as USD-backed stable coins), you need a coalition of developers, miners, and community members to back it. No one in their right mind carries their private keys on a backpacking trip.

q-big 4y ago

> He’d just fork the entire blockchain. > Normal users don’t have that luxury. Everybody else can fork the entire blockchain, too. The difference is that if a "normal user" does such a fork, hardly anyone does care. The central difference rather is that the trust and authority that Vitalik Buterin holds - if he does a decision, it is accepted by and large. The question that you should rather ask is: why do so many people involved in Ethereum have so much trust in Vitalik Buterin's authority and decisions?

chrisco255 4y ago
Main reason is Vitalik is one of the brightest minds in crypto. He's a 10 year veteran of the space and a genius. But no, even Vitalik could not get a split off fork done unless it was something with major security implications for the whole Ethereum ecosystem.
- UncleMeat 4y ago
  So genius that both EVM and Solidity have huge unforced footguns that have caused gazillions of dollars in damage.
  - chrisco255 4y ago
    It's not that bad. Solidity does not protect against crypto economic errors. No language does.
    - UncleMeat 4y ago
      Yeah but most languages don't handle things like exceptions, inheritance, and reentrancy so incredibly weirdly that people consistently write basic logical errors when using these concepts.
yokem55 4y ago
There are numerous instances where Buterin's suggestions have not been just accepted at face value. He's an influential voice, but is no dictator.

faraggi 4y ago

This is such an ignorant and factually wrong comment.

walls 4y ago
He literally did this after the DAO hack.
- jjulius 4y ago
  I'm as "fuck cryptocurrency/NFTs" as the next guy, but that's not accurate. As others have said, forks require community consensus, not just the decision of a single individual. Regarding the specific fork you're referring to (italicized emphasis is mine): >It was initially unclear as to whether the fork would be executed. Though it was proposed by Ethereum developers, they did not have the unilateral power to implement the change. Miners, exchanges, and node operators also had to agree to update their software. After more heated debate in public forums, on July 20, 2016, at block 192,000, the Ethereum hard fork was implemented. https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/the-dao-hack-makerdao#section-the-dao-hack-remedy-forks-ethereum https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/the-dao-hack-makerdao#sec...
  - walls 4y ago
    The crucial question, to me, is: would the fork have happened if Vitalik had not been part of the DAO? I don't think there's any chance he would have entertained that. There have been many large ETH compromises since then, and the idea of forking for any of them would be considered outrageous.
    - yokem55 4y ago
      One of the main reasons it went through is because there was 'only' one losing party - the hacker, and multiple winning parties (developers and investors in the DAO). A couple years later when the parity mutlisig was hacked such that the funds (150K eth from an ICO) were 'permanently locked', the proposal to unlock the funds via hardfork was rejected. More or less specifically because it would only benefit a very small subset of parties, while leaving the frozen funds in place meant the rest of the chain benefited from the effective reduction of eth supply. Since then no one else has seriously proposed forks to move funds out of protocol.

chrisco255 4y ago

No. Any fork requires a consensus among the community. While it was possible to fork Ethereum for the DAO hack in 2016 (note the DAO hack had affected 30% of all ETH in circulation), a lot has changed in the Ethereum ecosystem since then and break-off forks do not happen willy nilly. Besides all of the applications that need consistent state to make sense (such as USD-backed stable coins), you need a coalition of developers, miners, and community members to back it. No one in their right mind carries their private keys on a backpacking trip.