Hacker News Reader

Comment by olh | Hacker News Reader

We are watching the killer app for decentralization of governance getting centralized governance because the stakeholders made bad investments.

This is hard-tech sitcom.

View on HN

I'm struggling to understand why anyone would want to bail the DAO investors out of their stupid investment by forking. They told everyone that the code is the final word, someone used the code to empty their bank accounts. Either you believe in what the ethereum block chain espouses or you don't.

Because almost everyone involved in Ethereum also invested in "the DAO", so they're taking a mulligan.

"oops, just a practice!"

It's really annoying to think that they are going to get this bailout now though, while in the future they are surely going to thumb their noses at anyone who makes similar contract mistakes. The ability to see a contract through to it's full intent should not depend on your social proximity to the Ethereum development team.

> The ability to see a contract through to it's full intent should not depend on your social proximity to the Ethereum development team.

i don't think it's any coincidence that's how it works in the 'real world' either, with big banks and governments.

at the end of the day, it's about people. money isn't real.

If it ends up just being just the DAO that get's "bailed out"(that's not the right phrase for what's happening, but I don't know a better one), then it would to hard to make a just moral argument. But there have been a lot of contracts go sideways: https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/06/19/thinking-smart-contract...

If they rolled the whole system back and said, "Ok lesson learned. Let's not fuck this up again." I could get behind that. People who get ahead by doing some black-hat stuff would be pissed, but to bad for them. Maybe they'll decide to stay away.

If they give DAO a hard-fork refund, they're going to need to convince the community that this wont happen again, or explain the rules about when it might happen again. Otherwise, no one is going to trust the system.

The DAO was dodgy to begin with, the problem with Ethereum is that most people investing have no understanding of the tech behind, beyond thinking that Vitalik is some sort of genius and that it's "zero risk".

That's just not very wise.

This is the best argument I've heard: "Would you like to own an asset where at least 5% is controlled by 1 person known to be a scammer?" Me neither. The hard-fork is distasteful, but it's the best move for the fast majority of stake-holders.

I don't know if I buy it, but there it is.

Why should that matter? Would you rather 5% be in the hands of gullible idiots? Because that's what a fork accomplishes. They're going to lose their money to scammers again eventually.

There's no central control of the Ethereum blockchain. Various parties are making various recommendations and arguing forcefully because there is no way for a central authority to simply change the blockchain logic. Whether any proposed fork will survive is unclear because it's a decentralized decision.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com