4 ms·

> The problem is that on ethereum it's not possible to censor a deployed contract. It is possible, via a hard work. Similarly as it was possible to transition

> The problem is that on ethereum it's not possible to censor a deployed contract. It is possible, via a hard work. Similarly as it was possible to transition from PoW to PoS. The question is, if there is political will for that. Clearly changing the protocol rules is possible has it has been done with ethereum in the past, including for censorship reasons (in the earlier hard fork the reason was to cancel a hack).

toomuchtodo 4y ago
It is delightfully ironic to see code as law slowly chipped away by Law until law is code and you’re back to finance business logic on a slow distributed computer fabric.
- everfree 4y ago
  It's too early to say that definitively, imo. As a counterexample to the DAO hack, the parity multi-sig hack of 2017 resulted in over $160M worth of ether being frozen on-chain. There were calls to hard fork Ethereum to return it, but the hard fork was never tenable. That was barely a year after the DAO hack and fork. Personally, I believe there is a zero chance that a hard fork based on Tornado Cash becomes viable. It's not nearly a big enough issue for enough users to care (and exchanges, and wallet software companies, and stakers). Why would the 90% of users who don't use Tornado Cash risk helping the other 10% perform some fork, knowing that the fork would add fuel to the mutability argument and set more precedent for mutability?
  - josh2600 4y ago
    A hard fork based on tornado cash isn't likely, but what if miners refuse to process blocks that have tornado transactions in them? What happens then?
    - everfree 4y ago
      Not much. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32814082 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32814082
bombcar 4y ago
At some point the law can say "you must do this" and ethereum can either go underground or comply. The countries can higher blockchain experts as well as anyone else can, and word the laws as needed.
- Daishiman 4y ago
  It is ridiculous how most crypto people fail to understand that the government can compel you to do a bunch of things and if the blockchain doesn't allow they don't just shrug their shoulders and move on with their lives.
  - vlovich123 4y ago
    How come Apple isn’t compelled to develop an OS that bypasses their own encryption or put in back doors? I’m not asking a rhetorical question. I’m genuinely confused as to the underlying legal principle about what’s being enforced here?

toomuchtodo 4y ago

It is delightfully ironic to see code as law slowly chipped away by Law until law is code and you’re back to finance business logic on a slow distributed computer fabric.

everfree 4y ago
It's too early to say that definitively, imo. As a counterexample to the DAO hack, the parity multi-sig hack of 2017 resulted in over $160M worth of ether being frozen on-chain. There were calls to hard fork Ethereum to return it, but the hard fork was never tenable. That was barely a year after the DAO hack and fork. Personally, I believe there is a zero chance that a hard fork based on Tornado Cash becomes viable. It's not nearly a big enough issue for enough users to care (and exchanges, and wallet software companies, and stakers). Why would the 90% of users who don't use Tornado Cash risk helping the other 10% perform some fork, knowing that the fork would add fuel to the mutability argument and set more precedent for mutability?
- josh2600 4y ago
  A hard fork based on tornado cash isn't likely, but what if miners refuse to process blocks that have tornado transactions in them? What happens then?
  - everfree 4y ago
    Not much. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32814082 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32814082

bombcar 4y ago

At some point the law can say "you must do this" and ethereum can either go underground or comply. The countries can higher blockchain experts as well as anyone else can, and word the laws as needed.

Daishiman 4y ago
It is ridiculous how most crypto people fail to understand that the government can compel you to do a bunch of things and if the blockchain doesn't allow they don't just shrug their shoulders and move on with their lives.
- vlovich123 4y ago
  How come Apple isn’t compelled to develop an OS that bypasses their own encryption or put in back doors? I’m not asking a rhetorical question. I’m genuinely confused as to the underlying legal principle about what’s being enforced here?