@dlehenky@dr_pra Okay, so I still cannot get over how suddenly the anti-HF vote has climbed. It is now the MAJORITY and it coincides with a sudden spike in hashrate on the pool. I suspect rented hashrate, possibly by the exploiter(s).
Isn't Dwarfpool limiting votes only to miners who have established mining at some prior point in time? Like in the past month or something? Is that something that should be considered for ethpool & ethermine?
@MrYukonC It almost has to be rented - 20 GH/s!!! Then 2 at 9 GH!! I really don't know what these jokers think they are going to accomplish. Dr_pra clearly states that the pools will ultimately go with the majority network consensus, regardless of whether that coincides with a pool's vote. Trying to influence the fork on a pool seems ridiculous to me.
Yes, there is definitely correlation with the hashrate and No-votes within the last 24hours, could be rented, could be moved from another pool or from solo-mining.
It will be great when this whole thing is over; I'm sick of it. Although, I think it has provided extremely valuable insights into the weaknesses in the contract construction process that will be very beneficial as the network matures. It's all good.
We still reserve the right to act against the voting result in case there are security issues identified in the hard fork code or the pool will end up on the non-winning chain.
so what the hells the point of holding a vote if you are not going to respect it?
Destroying the integrity of the blockchain to bailout some gamblers is suicide.
I used to be a fanboy of Ethereum but I just don't feel the same anymore after the hard fork, I'm losing faith.
Ethereum is a decentralized platform that runs smart contracts: applications that run exactly as programmed without any possibilit[ies] of downtime, censorship, fraud or third party interference.
This is what the ethereum.org website should say but I see that nobody bothered updating the website. I'll submit a github issue later
We still reserve the right to act against the voting result in case there are security issues identified in the hard fork code or the pool will end up on the non-winning chain.
so what the hells the point of holding a vote if you are not going to respect it?
I guess because the pool, and everyone mining on it, can't mine blocks that are worth anything if they're on the minority chain. Kind of a "Duh", but you asked.
We still reserve the right to act against the voting result in case there are security issues identified in the hard fork code or the pool will end up on the non-winning chain.
so what the hells the point of holding a vote if you are not going to respect it?
I guess because the pool, and everyone mining on it, can't mine blocks that are worth anything if they're on the minority chain. Kind of a "Duh", but you asked.
So what's the point of having a vote again if nobody is going to actually respect the outcome? It's pretty fucking stupid if you ask me I just think our community is not respecting democracy
@MrYukonC It almost has to be rented - 20 GH/s!!! Then 2 at 9 GH!! I really don't know what these jokers think they are going to accomplish. Dr_pra clearly states that the pools will ultimately go with the majority network consensus, regardless of whether that coincides with a pool's vote. Trying to influence the fork on a pool seems ridiculous to me.
Ethereum is centralised by 3 pools which controls the majority of power. And their voting system is not honest. Because when miner dont vote he votes NO! "Dont care" = "NO". But pools will use them power to vote YES. So ethereum is centralized, controlled by 3 pools and useless. Visa is much better
@AroundTheBlock_ Why don't you chill a bit. The majority blockchain *could* be the non-fork chain, in which case the pool would follow it. It works both ways. It seems that all the NOHF proponents just can't deal with the idea that most folks don't agree with them, so they run around shouting "conspiracy", "manipulations", "fraud" - no, actually it's just that most folks don't agree with them.
@AroundTheBlock_ Why don't you chill a bit. The majority blockchain *could* be the non-fork chain, in which case the pool would follow it. It works both ways. It seems that all the NOHF proponents just can't deal with the idea that most folks don't agree with them, so they run around shouting "conspiracy", "manipulations", "fraud" - no, actually it's just that most folks don't agree with them.
I'm against HF after reading this. It's clearly there's some kind of witch hunt going on against all anti-HF posters
@AroundTheBlock_ OK. Everyone has a choice, but your reaction speaks directly to my comment. The NOHF supporters are the ones over-reacting to the simple truth that "most folks don't agree with them" - that's not a witch hunt, that's just different people having different opinions on the issue, and - one more time - "most folks don't agree with them". Do you always call it a witch hunt when your opinion on a matter happens to be in the minority?
@AroundTheBlock_ OK. Everyone has a choice, but your reaction speaks directly to my comment. The NOHF supporters are the ones over-reacting to the simple truth that "most folks don't agree with them" - that's not a witch hunt, that's just different people having different opinions on the issue, and - one more time - "most folks don't agree with them". Do you always call it a witch hunt when your opinion on a matter happens to be in the minority?
when is the ethereum website going to be updated to reflect the HF changes? it's no longer an immutable system, and we can see the votes don't even work properly since everyone just does whatever profits them
It baffles me how Ethpool can have such large support on the No side. What people on earth are thinking it's ever a good idea to give the hacker the funds over the Ethereum Ecosystem investors. How can anyone justify that a theft of millions affecting thousands of people is okay. As someone said, "If I leave my bicycle at a street cafe, is it okay to run away with it if I didn't use a pad lock?" ~90% of all miners haven't even voted. Please don't be the bystander in this crime. I urge every single one of you to step up and inform any friends who are miners and spread awareness to get them to all vote!
It baffles me how Ethpool can have such large support on the No side. What people on earth are thinking it's ever a good idea to give the hacker the funds over the Ethereum Ecosystem investors. How can anyone justify that a theft of millions affecting thousands of people is okay. As someone said, "If I leave my bicycle at a street cafe, is it okay to run away with it if I didn't use a pad lock?" ~90% of all miners haven't even voted. Please don't be the bystander in this crime. I urge every single one of you to step up and inform any friends who are miners and spread awareness to get them to all vote!
it's not theft when you've made a contract that says code is final arbitrator.
the "attacker" wrote a code which ran exactly like it was designed to.
"code is law" and along with it comes all the downsides that these idiots couldn't forsee
@Asymmetrical Have you read the whole thread, or at least today's posts? I think there's some information provided that might help answer you query.
Thanks, I just took a more thorough look, though if it isn't the hacker causing that suspicious 20 gh/s vote, then I wouldn't understand why any miner with that much mining power would be voting no. Imagine if the hard fork doesn't go through....this isssue isn't put to rest, millions are officially stolen from the ethereum ecosystem, lawsuits start, hacker can now dump, and so forth. No sane miner with that much hashing power that responds to financial incentives should be doing this unless he had a hidden agenda.
@Asymmetrical Yes, it could very well be that the attacker and his allies are mounting a concerted effort to try to prevent the fork from happening. Remember, the attacker publicly stated to his whole motivation is to bring down Ethereum, because he's in love with BTC (paraphrase, of course).
We still reserve the right to act against the voting result in case there are security issues identified in the hard fork code or the pool will end up on the non-winning chain.
so what the hells the point of holding a vote if you are not going to respect it?
LOL ITS A VOTE WHERE THE OUTCOME IS ALREADY DECIDED BEFOREHAND.
@AroundTheBlock_ OK. Everyone has a choice, but your reaction speaks directly to my comment. The NOHF supporters are the ones over-reacting to the simple truth that "most folks don't agree with them" - that's not a witch hunt, that's just different people having different opinions on the issue, and - one more time - "most folks don't agree with them". Do you always call it a witch hunt when your opinion on a matter happens to be in the minority?
when is the ethereum website going to be updated to reflect the HF changes? it's no longer an immutable system, and we can see the votes don't even work properly since everyone just does whatever profits them
@Asymmetrical Have you read the whole thread, or at least today's posts? I think there's some information provided that might help answer you query.
Thanks, I just took a more thorough look, though if it isn't the hacker causing that suspicious 20 gh/s vote, then I wouldn't understand why any miner with that much mining power would be voting no. Imagine if the hard fork doesn't go through....this isssue isn't put to rest, millions are officially stolen from the ethereum ecosystem, lawsuits start, hacker can now dump, and so forth. No sane miner with that much hashing power that responds to financial incentives should be doing this unless he had a hidden agenda.
@AroundTheBlock_ there is a difference between the intention and the reality of code. If you read the comments and code for TheDAO, it is patently clear the recursive call was not intended to be possible. And, the "attack" required a significantly modified client to create the transaction that drained Eth from TheDAO - it is NOT possible with a stock client.
Interesting your comment about "Ethereum is a decentralized platform that runs smart contracts: applications that run exactly as programmed without any possibilit[ies] of downtime, censorship, fraud or third party interference." I'll take a moment to point out just how wrong you are in your pokes at this:
Ethereum is decentralized, clearly; TheDAO hardfork is actually proof of this - no one entity can decide to fork, it is a decentralized consensus decition.
TheDAO attack also shows that smart contracts will indeed run "exactly as programmed" - even to a fault!
Is there a possibility of downtime? Doesn't look like it. Censorship? Actually, the DoS attack discovered with soft-fork suggests Ethereum is more resistant to miner censorship then any other crypto currency.
How about immutable? Yes, Ethereum's blockchain is still immutable. The hard-fork does NOT remove or revert any transactions, they will forever remain in the blockchain history.
@dlehenky your patience is pretty impressive . Big koodos to you, my friend.
@AroundTheBlock_ there is a difference between the intention and the reality of code. If you read the comments and code for TheDAO, it is patently clear the recursive call was not intended to be possible. And, the "attack" required a significantly modified client to create the transaction that drained Eth from TheDAO - it is NOT possible with a stock client.
Interesting your comment about "Ethereum is a decentralized platform that runs smart contracts: applications that run exactly as programmed without any possibilit[ies] of downtime, censorship, fraud or third party interference." I'll take a moment to point out just how wrong you are in your pokes at this:
Ethereum is decentralized, clearly; TheDAO hardfork is actually proof of this - no one entity can decide to fork, it is a decentralized consensus decition.
TheDAO attack also shows that smart contracts will indeed run "exactly as programmed" - even to a fault!
Is there a possibility of downtime? Doesn't look like it. Censorship? Actually, the DoS attack discovered with soft-fork suggests Ethereum is more resistant to miner censorship then any other crypto currency.
How about immutable? Yes, Ethereum's blockchain is still immutable. The hard-fork does NOT remove or revert any transactions, they will forever remain in the blockchain history.
@dlehenky your patience is pretty impressive . Big koodos to you, my friend.
Comments
Isn't Dwarfpool limiting votes only to miners who have established mining at some prior point in time? Like in the past month or something? Is that something that should be considered for ethpool & ethermine?
the "attacker" wrote a code which ran exactly like it was designed to.
"code is law" and along with it comes all the downsides that these idiots couldn't forsee
ITS A BITCOIN SHILL
Interesting your comment about "Ethereum is a decentralized platform that runs smart contracts: applications that run exactly as programmed without any possibilit[ies] of downtime, censorship, fraud or third party interference." I'll take a moment to point out just how wrong you are in your pokes at this:
Ethereum is decentralized, clearly; TheDAO hardfork is actually proof of this - no one entity can decide to fork, it is a decentralized consensus decition.
TheDAO attack also shows that smart contracts will indeed run "exactly as programmed" - even to a fault!
Is there a possibility of downtime? Doesn't look like it. Censorship? Actually, the DoS attack discovered with soft-fork suggests Ethereum is more resistant to miner censorship then any other crypto currency.
How about immutable? Yes, Ethereum's blockchain is still immutable. The hard-fork does NOT remove or revert any transactions, they will forever remain in the blockchain history.
@dlehenky your patience is pretty impressive . Big koodos to you, my friend.
I AM RIGHT YOU ARE FUCKING WRONG