Hacker News Reader

Comment by drcode | Hacker News Reader

To be fair, ethereum is a newer, and more experimental platform- It has many arguable advantages over Bitcoin, but as an etherean I am happy to agree that right now Bitcoin is more established and also may be somewhat more decentralized (given that the ethereum community is giving some deference to the core team at this early stage, in the future this will likely no longer be true)

View on HN

Definitely agree with that. I'm a big fan of Ethereum, just very unhappy about this fork.

I think that until Vitalik pulls a Satoshi, Etheruem will never be as decentralized. This has pros and cons, especially with sharding/PoS around the corner.

I'm not exactly thrilled about the fork either, but I'm happy to support it for the sake of the community.

PoS will be much harder without a fork. I don't care about the DAO holders (disclaimer: I have around 5% of my total Ether holdings locked in the DAO), but due to the issues with PoS I think that a fork would be the best option at this point.

This is mainly an issue because Vitalik endorsed DAO forks- If he had said "This does not justify a fork" I would be 100% anti fork, for the same reasons you describe: Vitalik needs credibility to pull the POS transition through.

Heads up that Vlad (the guy leading PoS) does not share this assessment.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/4rohdy/vlad_zamfi...

I think the problem is less that an attacker can use an economic attack on PoS, and more that Vitalik won't be able to force through an PoS fork to begin with if the community rejects his (possibly misguided) recommendation for a DAO fork.

Well, they did include a difficulty bomb specifically for that reason.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com