I like Ethereum. I am also invested in it. I can definitely see the potential of the platform they are trying to build. Dapps will be huge someday, whether they will run on the Ethereum platform, nobody knows, its a gamble.
If they succeed it will be huge but as we have seen it's not easy. The DOA hack was a major cluster fuck (although not the fault of the platform). The recent DDoS attacks didn't help with the confidence of the platform either.
But the Ethereum foundation has solved all this in a good way. That gives me confidence as an investor.
The next hard fork is planned in 2 weeks and it should fix the leftover mess of the DDoS attack.
I know more trouble will be ahead but you slowly get immune to it and the price of Ethereum seems to be pretty stable at the moment.
Ethereum doesn't have it's killer Dapp yet. That's a problem because even if you have a potentially amazing platform, if nothing (useful) is build on it, it is worthless.
At the moment there are only two blockchains I actively use. One is Bitcoin, to buy stuff and the other is Steemit to write stuff. I really hope I can put Ethereum in that category as well someday.
I suppose the main point Chris emphasized is that given on some fundamental points that have guided the theoretical philosophy and coding of the project - these types of attacks will inevitably continue... bugs may get fixed as they come up - but there will always be another around the corner, and who knows how grave the consequences could be at some point...
Though on the flipside - perhaps such kinks are a natural part of the development process, and what will determine the long-term outcome is how the approach evolves over time...
Frankly, I don't have the technical expertise to pose any conclusive stance, though I definitely see the potential of Ethereum - IF the security factor is tight...
I don't know the details, so I can't comment on Ethereum specifically except by saying that it looks like a very good concept so it will be sad if it will fail.
What I can say, in more general terms, that if someone who was working on the project say, "It won't scale", that's very bad news. When software doesn't scale, it means that it is very poorly written. It implies that either something is very flawed in the design, or that the company hires bad programmes. Either way, it shows that they are very unprofessional.
I do think they've been working on turning over to a different Proof Of Stake system that may help solve the scaleability issue.
Though I don't understand the more detailed technical matters, meeting the Consensys team and getting some insight to their perspective on the blockchain and what types of projects they're working on did inspire some confidence, reading between the lines to sense there may indeed be some valid reasons Ethereum could be game-changing... and perhaps any comparable type of platform will always have its bugs come up - just as Microsoft's stuff does decades later...
Regarding their professionalism - could present arguments for both sides. On one hand, while they managed to market it well - the leadership seems more like computer geeks than business people, and their rather casual non-chalent response to The DAO occurance... on the other, they have partnered with Microsoft, and there are some pretty impressive developments in the works, such as partnerships for smart cities in China, that would definitely suggest these kids aren't just playing around...
The technic behind Ethereum is revolutionary but they have many problems, i like Ethereum and i am support Ethereum, i belive this is a part of the future!
If Ethereum does drop the ball completely, then another will take its place as dApp leader. Probably Synereo, which looks to have some interesting tech behind it. We'll hear more in 2017 I expect.
valuable information my friend @ rok-sivante thanks for sharing congratulations
I like Ethereum. I am also invested in it. I can definitely see the potential of the platform they are trying to build. Dapps will be huge someday, whether they will run on the Ethereum platform, nobody knows, its a gamble.
If they succeed it will be huge but as we have seen it's not easy. The DOA hack was a major cluster fuck (although not the fault of the platform). The recent DDoS attacks didn't help with the confidence of the platform either.
But the Ethereum foundation has solved all this in a good way. That gives me confidence as an investor.
The next hard fork is planned in 2 weeks and it should fix the leftover mess of the DDoS attack.
I know more trouble will be ahead but you slowly get immune to it and the price of Ethereum seems to be pretty stable at the moment.
Ethereum doesn't have it's killer Dapp yet. That's a problem because even if you have a potentially amazing platform, if nothing (useful) is build on it, it is worthless.
At the moment there are only two blockchains I actively use. One is Bitcoin, to buy stuff and the other is Steemit to write stuff. I really hope I can put Ethereum in that category as well someday.
I suppose the main point Chris emphasized is that given on some fundamental points that have guided the theoretical philosophy and coding of the project - these types of attacks will inevitably continue... bugs may get fixed as they come up - but there will always be another around the corner, and who knows how grave the consequences could be at some point...
Though on the flipside - perhaps such kinks are a natural part of the development process, and what will determine the long-term outcome is how the approach evolves over time...
Frankly, I don't have the technical expertise to pose any conclusive stance, though I definitely see the potential of Ethereum - IF the security factor is tight...
I don't know the details, so I can't comment on Ethereum specifically except by saying that it looks like a very good concept so it will be sad if it will fail.
What I can say, in more general terms, that if someone who was working on the project say, "It won't scale", that's very bad news. When software doesn't scale, it means that it is very poorly written. It implies that either something is very flawed in the design, or that the company hires bad programmes. Either way, it shows that they are very unprofessional.
I do think they've been working on turning over to a different Proof Of Stake system that may help solve the scaleability issue.
Though I don't understand the more detailed technical matters, meeting the Consensys team and getting some insight to their perspective on the blockchain and what types of projects they're working on did inspire some confidence, reading between the lines to sense there may indeed be some valid reasons Ethereum could be game-changing... and perhaps any comparable type of platform will always have its bugs come up - just as Microsoft's stuff does decades later...
Regarding their professionalism - could present arguments for both sides. On one hand, while they managed to market it well - the leadership seems more like computer geeks than business people, and their rather casual non-chalent response to The DAO occurance... on the other, they have partnered with Microsoft, and there are some pretty impressive developments in the works, such as partnerships for smart cities in China, that would definitely suggest these kids aren't just playing around...
I suppose time shall ultimately tell...
The technic behind Ethereum is revolutionary but they have many problems, i like Ethereum and i am support Ethereum, i belive this is a part of the future!
I always said Ethereum would end up behaving like a bastard son after the hard-fork - a complete clusterfuck and a BIG pain in the ass!
If Ethereum does drop the ball completely, then another will take its place as dApp leader. Probably Synereo, which looks to have some interesting tech behind it. We'll hear more in 2017 I expect.