Back to the Ethereum

Heart of Darkness
We should not refuse to travel, and at the end of all searches should go home and look at everything around for the first time in my life.

This quote TS Eliot became a much more significant in the last few years for me. I had the opportunity to travel to 15 countries, to pass more than 150 thousand. Miles and meet thousands of amazing personalities, and I feel as if returned back where you started with a fresh perspective on things.

Firstly, I think it would be appropriate to start from the first day of my trip. Suffice it vaguely, I remember in June 2014. I had pneumonia and I just left Switzerland after the brutal battles for the future of the project Ethereum. I was on the losing side and heading to England, intending to spend several days of conversation with Michael Parsons, who was generous enough to give me a room in his house as long as I thought about my future. I was not ready so quickly lose their identity.

Just a few days earlier, I was the founder of an outstanding project with a beautiful vision of a decentralized global computer resistant to censorship, as well as the machinations of the troubled power dealers. And then I became sick person with respiratory problems who move to a small house, and do not have any clear goals. It was a dark time for me time. I felt a lack of warm to his attitude and kindness, except for a few precious friends, including my Marlene, I owe everything.

The following months were a great bias in uncertainty. I was considering a return to mathematics, I wanted to continue her studies after which stopped - by the great unsolved problems in terms of number theory (see the excellent series of two articles on this topic Nathanson). I have received several offers to lead the new company - venture capital behind and excellent teams. But, to be honest, my heart was already not lasted to this game.

Climbing Ethereum
I really loved the incredible future that promised Ethereum project, and could not look at it from the growth of not being able to participate. I spent a lot of time sleeping anywhere, flying all over the planet, and fighting the constant exhaustion, trying to put the pieces together, in spite of the deep philosophical contradictions in the team and vision. I had to step back and do other things.

Holding a grudge other founding members of the team, I found solace maintaining the original social contract. And despite my admittedly harsh attitude with respect to the management and use of funds, the contract seemed immutable. Gavin invented new words to conclude that the code - it's the law, and almost every week Acne appeared in some media resources, repeating the need for a smart system of contracts, resistant to censorship.

The world was surprisingly receptive to the vision. Ethereum grew like a weed not only in the brain but also the soil market followers. It was incredibly nice to contemplate commentators overestimate their initial criticism, sharp barbs have forgotten the old expression, and replace them with a more neutral tone. Surprisingly, as the predictions of impending horror and darkness turned into odes of praise at a time when people begin to earn it. Readers who have a lot of time, can read the tweets Jeff Garzika that period.

Bad decisions
I think meaningless exercise to condemn the action in the top Ethereum blog post or justify my hatred lurking in the workshop outlined the arguments. Nothing in this productive can not be other than describing observations that already so evident for many people. I would rather say that the Ethereum core was directly compromised extremely false solution.

Protocol Ethereum nachhat Charles Hoskinson. He does not care about or Gatecoin Bitfinex. He is not concerned about the IRS, SEC, or the Chinese government. This independence is the main advantage. Ethereum - terribly inefficient computer that is probably also the most expensive of all existing computers, about its participants. The reason that we have agreed to pay the price - a guarantee of neutrality computer.

Ethereum project team leaders decided to hold a fork of the protocol in order to destroy the social contract computer neutrality. Return the stolen money nothing to do with, as well as protection from the mythical regulators attacks on Ethereum Foundation. The main thing, it is a paradigm shift from the "code is the Law" to "code is the law, as we do not change your mind."

There was another possibility. I remember when Bitcoin had to quickly make decisions regarding a bug that allows you to create billions of new coins. Problems that can be interpreted unambiguously as a vulnerability in the protocol, breaking the domestic social contract, usually corrected without any objection from the community. I do not believe that the ETC community there are many people who would become resist correcting a glitch in the EVM, allowing to generate the air in huge volumes. It changes affecting the social contract itself is dangerous and always lead to the separation of communities.

For such changes, you must obtain a commitment by the holders of tokens to support the new system. Proof of burn - an excellent mechanism for such a task. With Ethereum, this could lead to a new level. You could write a warranty Proof of burn smart deal that would unite the holders of Ether in the new system, if accumulated a sufficient number of people to participate (eg, 51%). If the bar is not reached within a certain time, the participants would get their money back. Otherwise, the contract would have worked, with the result that all associated tokens have been destroyed, leaving a clear cryptographic proof for the right to recover the coins in the new circuit. Everyone, except the thief, the holders of the DAO, you can give tokens for special purposes.

The purity of this approach gives participants a universal consensus on the new system with a new social contract. Senseless vote without losing the share of tokens is not a consensus - especially when the "turnout" is about 10 percent. It seems that it's just a failed attempt to get a democratic mandate for actions that developers Ethereum would have done in any case. It looks like they did not believe in the possibility that the two chains will co-exist, and therefore pressed through the power of decision.

I do not subscribe to the paradigm in which is recorded that "The law code sometimes." It seems completely senseless. Why spend millions of dollars to build such a machine, if it is not able to guarantee the accuracy of the iron? Why do not I just run code on the server group with a carefully selected trusted intermediaries? Why do not I play in a jurisdiction code execution giving a neutral and stable country like Switzerland? These places usually have moral principles for democratic orders and known conflicts of interest, which was not observed in the current team leaders Ethereum.

Obviously, the mere existence of Ethereum Classic suggests that I am not alone in his disgust and hatred of hard Fork. There are thousands of angry miners, developers, and holders of shares who did not support the action taken by the leadership of Ethereum. They directly express their anger, keeping the original code.

Despite the fact that there is an active consolidation of the people and the whole situation deserves a reappraisal of the decisions that were made in the community in recent weeks, until it is solid, productive ecosystem with a clear vision, a plan of action and the ability to perform something. This is actually the equivalent of kriptovalyutny "cancel the elections", people have decided to withdraw from the post of prime minister, but has not yet chosen a new one.