Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikkelam | Hacker News Reader

As long as everyone agrees i see absolutely no problem. The entire value proposition of decentralized blockchain is to establish consensus without trust. If everyone agrees to undo a transaction, it seems perfectly fine to me, as that would require the consensus the blockchain already establishes

View on HN

> As long as everyone agrees i see absolutely no problem.

They didn't all agree, though. Now there's Ethereum (the people who agreed with the fork) and Ethereum Classic (the people who didn't agree).

Some agreed, others didn't and they decided to create a fork. Consensus doesn't require everyone to agree, just the majority

You're literally talking across yourself, at least that's how I read it.

Your first comment [1]

> As long as everyone agrees i see absolutely no problem

and now

> Some agreed, others didn't...Consensus doesn't require everyone to agree, just the majority

So you literally just said there is a problem.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27666781

You're being pedantic, it's clear what was meant even if it wasn't properly stated.

It was clear that it was a contradiction even if you don't want to acknowledge it.

Thank goodness we've gotten away from a system where the government can arbitrarily decide to steal my money and towards a glorious future where a bunch of randos on the internet can arbitrarily decide to steal my money. I feel so much better.

(copy-pasting)

The DAO was a very extraordinary event that occurred under very unique and unrepeatable circumstances.

1. Ethereum had just launched. There was a sense of everything being in beta.

2. The Ethereum stakeholder set was very small, so obtaining consensus for such a controversial hard fork was much easier to accomplish than it would be today.

3. The economy on Ethereum was very small, so

a) a hard fork was far less disruptive than it would be today.

b) an undermining of Ethereum's commitment to neutrality/immutability jeapardized far fewer decentralized application projects than it would today.

4. Smart contracts were completely new, so there was a sense that people could be forgiven for their mistakes.

5. The Ethereum Foundation had promoted the idea of a DAO on their website, and several Ethereum founders had promoted the specific DAO that ended up being hacked. These facts made the DAO appear to be more than a completely third party app.

Ethereum is very different today than it was in 2016, and a DAO-scale mishap would never lead to a hard fork again.

One way of reading this comment is that you concur that there's a problem.

One way of reading this coontent is that most don't think there's a problem

Reply on news.ycombinator.com