
Kraken confirms July the 20th #ethereum Hardfork - Ursium
https://twitter.com/stephantual/status/753874489939783680
======
kbody
Ethereum developers really put themselves in a horrible position.

1\. Undisclosed investments on DAO from top ETH devs

2\. The 5% "consensus" on hardfork

3\. The inherent fragility on the implementation design of smart contracts

The whole situation is really messy and Ethereum foundation didn't step up to
think what's best for the future of Ethereum. The most important gripe for me
is that there is still no proper retrospective from the Ethereum organisation
and how will they prevent this from happening again.

All these made really unattractive the use of ETH, not to speak of value
storage of course.

I hope Rootstock will learn from Ethereum's mistakes and do better.

------
captainmuon
I don't understand the rage of some people against this decision.
Cryptocurrency should be about free association of individuals and not about
blindly following a flawed protocol that just happened to be the first
implemented. If the consensus or vast majority vote is to upgrade the
protocol, then that is what should be done. If everybody decides to stop using
etherium and issue IOUs in the value of the currency they held, and use that
as money, also fine. If they decide unanimously to change the protocol to give
one person all the money, so they can build a huge goat idol, then that's the
collective decision.

No doubt the contracts and the protocol will be refined many times until they
convey the intention of the community better.

The beautiful thing about a correctly implemented cryptocurrency is that
single actors cannot act against the majority will of the community. But that
doesn't mean we can't shut down our computers for a minute to reconsider the
rules of the game, if we find a new consensus.

~~~
allthetime
That's the thing though, they aren't changing the protocol, they are just
reversing the transactions that fed the DAO. The DAO was flawed, not Ethereum,
and now Ethereum's stability and promise of immutability are being sacrificed
so that a bunch of people (including the lead devs of ethereum) who made a
bad, uninformed investment don't have to lose their money.

The 'consensus' was not by a vast majority either, unless you consider 5% a
vast majority.

~~~
objectiveariel
Could you please let us know where you got that 5% figure from? I thought
(according to the latest post on Ethereum's blog
[https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/15/to-fork-or-not-to-
fork/](https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/15/to-fork-or-not-to-fork/)) that the
voting was done just on [http://carbonvote.com/](http://carbonvote.com/)

~~~
kbody
Actually it's ~3.5%. Meaning about 3.5% of the total ETH supply has been used
to vote.

~~~
captainmuon
Do we know much of the user base / computing power that corresponds to? And
how many users abstained from voting?

------
alexmingoia
And what happens once another exploit occurs? How many hard-forks will there
be due to the tyranny of the sore-loser majority?

~~~
grabcocque
I was wondering the same thing. Turns out the answer is: probably. Elites will
always bend the system to their advantage to avoid losing control.

It'll be fascinating anthropology though. We've never seen a cryptocurrency
betray its fundamental principles to help a few rich people save face before.

------
beefield
So. the intent of the DAO was _not_ specified in the code unlike claimed by
all the hype. If I was a potential investor, I would be extremely curious to
find out where the intent of DAO nowadays _is_ defined.

~~~
nullc
The website says:
([https://daohub.org/explainer.html](https://daohub.org/explainer.html))

By Creating DAO tokens through interaction with The DAO’s smart contract code,
you expressly agree to all of the terms and conditions set forth in that code.
If you do not understand or do not agree to those terms, you should not Create
DAO tokens.

[...]

The DAO’s smart contract code governs the Creation of DAO tokens and supercede
any public statements about The DAO’s Creation made by third parties or
individuals associated with The DAO, past, present and future. The software
code currently available at
[https://github.com/slockit/dao](https://github.com/slockit/dao) is the sole
source for the terms under which DAO tokens may be created

~~~
beefield
> you expressly agree to all of the terms and conditions set forth in that
> code. If you do not understand or do not agree to those terms, you should
> not Create DAO tokens.

Now it seems to me that there are plenty of people who have neither understood
nor agreed with the terms and conditions, and explicitly decided that the code
was not the intent of the DAO. So, the question remains, what is the intent of
the DAO? If the old code was not the intent, we have no reason to believe that
any of the future versions would be either.

------
buttershakes
I couldn't be more opposed to this decision. It's a terrible precedent to set,
and I think fundamentally undermines the ideals behind the Ethereum network.
The DAO should live or die by its own code. A hard fork should only be done to
save the Ethereum network itself because of a critical flaw.

------
nullc
What about customer ETH in Kraken's possession on the other chain, assuming it
persists. Will they return it to customers or keep it for themselves?

