5 ms·

>You are saying two contradictory things. First that those with the most money control Ethereum, and then that transactions can't be controls be reversed No, a

>You are saying two contradictory things. First that those with the most money control Ethereum, and then that transactions can't be controls be reversed No, absolutely not. I'm saying it's controlled by those with the most money, and history has show as that transactions __can__ be reversed when those large players throw their weight around in a too-big-to-fail sort of way. I'm also saying that I don't mind there being a human layer of judgment, but also that it goes very much against the trustless ethos of crypto. And also that the currently layer of human judgement is vastly less accessible to the average crypto hold than it is in traditional banking & finance.

colordrops 4y ago
The reversal was not great, but also just a one time thing that still required the concensus of many entities and widespread code change and deployment distributed across countless nodes. If it was a bad call then it wouldn't have been adopted or would have forked the network in a more serious fashion than ETC. If reversals a regular occurance, then ETH would not be trusted and it would lose traction. It's like comparing an asteroid strike with a car accident. The DAO reversal is a single event and says almost nothing about the general reversibility of individual small transactions. Future reversals are very unlikely now and would have to be some huge event and gather concensus like any other change to the protocol. A singular huge change is just not comparable to credit card chargebacks that can be executed by anyone. Not comparable at all. Chargebacks are part of the CC protocol. Eth has no such mechanism.