Is Ethereum A Trojan Horse?steemCreated with Sketch.

in cryptocurrency •  3 years ago  (edited)

product_image_full_209931.png



From the very beginning I was suspicious of the Ethereum project. Being a member of the cryptocurrency community since 2011, I was able to witness the birth of many projects, and was able to learn the signs of projects that were designed to rake in money rather than provide actual utility. The real question is who is the money being raked in for? Around 2013-2014 there started to be a lot of new coins that catered to mass audiences rather than the standard of the crypto-nerd of the past that really gave birth to the community. This came with the added benefit of mass adoption, but came at the cost of creating a user base that was largely ignorant of how these systems worked, why they were created, and simply didn't care about anything other than easy profits. Additionally there were the corporate and banking system ties from the start that also made me extremely uncomfortable as they are in a position to profit most from reining in control of any free money systems like truly distributed cryptocurrencies.

One of the first signs that something was not right with Ethereum was the fact that it promised everything under the sun. There were so many functions on its promised list of accomplishments, I knew it would never happen, and if it did there would be massive issues. As any coder or system designer will tell you, the more complicated you make a system the more glitches and vulnerabilities you will have. And Ethereum has plenty of those.

Then the DAO hack came, and I was hopeful that people would come to their senses a little bit and pull back on the irrational exuberance. Of course a lot of people lost money. Then they forked the blockchain, spitting in the face of immutability which is a core tenet of the idea of the blockchain and why it exists. Of course for a short time the user base stepped back, but then everyone got back on the train, and sure a lot of profit was made, but at what cost? Still there remains a growing list of unresolved vulnerabilities known in the Ethereum network that people continue to ignore, putting large sums of money at risk.

To this day it grows and grows, more and more people putting more and more of the cryptocurrency market cap into this corporate and bank controlled coin that changes the blockchain when it feels it is convenient, still having a whole host of vulnerabilities. After all of this I think to myself, what if Ethereum is the banking system's response to cryptocurrency? What is this is part of their plan to wrestle control of this revolutionary independent money system away from the people and put it back in the hand of the money masters?

How could they accomplish this? Consider this scenario. Ethereum keeps growing and growing, until it consists of the majority of the total of the cryptocurrency market cap. Suddenly one of these previously known vulnerabilities is exploited, and billions of dollars suddenly exit the crypto-sphere. Not only would this drag the value of every other coin down, but then this failed flagship would now become the symbol of how cryptocurrency is a failure. You have all seen the media frenzy every time Bitcoin has a rally and then corrects. Every time Bitcoin is over. The CEO of Bitcoin is dead, etc...

Imagine the chaos that would result from a planned collapse of Ethereum. Best case there would be a massive market wide correction allowing corporate and banking systems the ability to suck up controlling interest of all the most important blockchain systems effectively wrestling control of it away from regular people that make it the distributed system it is. Worst case cryptocurrency once again becomes a niche market and never recovers in its previous form, and simply exists as a blockchain version of the existing money system. Once again... it is all blamed on the “hackers”.

Where have we seen this narrative before? Practically anywhere the status quo system needs a boogeyman to pin its failures on. In fact a lot of people suspect that when the global banking system does inevitably collapse, several large scale hacks will be staged in order to pin its failure on hackers rather than having to admit the system itself failed. The result? Well I guess we just have to crack down on internet freedom! No more anonymity, more regulation, more control. It is all for your protection! The narrative is being crafted as we speak. “Anonymous”, LulzSec, “Russian” hackers, WannaCry, the groundwork is already being laid, and legislation is already being introduced in response.

Could Ethereum be the systems trojan horse? Could it be used to introduce overreaching, market strangling control over the cryptocurrency world? Could it devastate the total market cap over night? Could it wrestle controlling interest of the majority of the market away from the real user base? The answer to all of these questions is absolutely yes it could. Will it happen this way? I leave that up to your judgment. Just remember who told you so.






Please don't forget to up vote and follow!
To read more visit http://www.truthbesold.com/index.php






Original Image Source: bw-1651cf0d2f737d7adeab84d339dbabd3-bcs.s3.amazonaws.com/products/product_96716/product_image_full_209931.jpg

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Thanks for the link! Certainly a lot of salt just for making an observation eh? Interesting that this managed to get Cliff High's attention, I am a fan of his work.

  ·  2 years ago (edited)

@ericarthurblair, I think you do have something here. I've thought for a while that the compromise Ethereum made in response to the DAO hack, has opened them up to become the de-facto 'World-Coin' of the current money-masters. That compromise revealed Ethereum to be a system that was 'politically responsive'.

That's why there's all this institutional money flowing in now. They know this system can be bent to their will.

ETHEREUM CLASSIC, on the other hand, did Not Make That Compromise.
I respect that, standing on principle.
And that's why I'm building my project on it, not Ethereum.

interesting read. I'll keep some ethereum incase it keeps exploding in value, but this kind of thing is one reason I prefer to be as diverse as possible in my coins portfolio

This post received a 31% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @ericarthurblair! For more information, click here!

Well, we will have to wait until we find out the truth about the Ethereum project. It's interesting to think about it that way. Thanks for sharing this great post, @ericarthurblair!

Thanks for reading!

Bankers coud do that.
We all know, them.
Sneaky ducking banksters !
=]

Indeed. Thanks for reading.

No, it's not a Trojan horse. The central banks and the gubmint are busy socking away bitcoin and ether in large amounts. They can crater both anytime they want just by dumping their holdings. They don't need a trojan horse or a code bug to do this. Casting aspersions on Ethereum itself is counterproductive though.

As I detailed in the article, this could and likely is a multifaceted plan. Using Ethereum to tank the market is not exclusive to also buying up large amounts of Bitcoin and other coins in order to obtain a controlling stake.

Congratulations @ericarthurblair! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of upvotes
Award for the number of comments

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honnor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

If you want to support the SteemitBoard project, your upvote for this notification is welcome!

"Could" is the keyword here. Without presenting a shred of evidence, you need to step up your reasoning.

Remind me where I said any of this was more than potential and speculation...

  ·  2 years ago (edited)

hehe. See my comment I just left.
You give the OP too much credit! Could it really be possible? I'm no expert in the technicals although it seems more risky for the banks to have such an open decentralised system where they might be exposed themselves. A more interesting question to me is to ask whether the motive makes any sense. In his scenario banks would have actually done crypto a favor.

Yes, you are no expert. I however have worked for years in the field. Banks risk nothing because they create money out of thin air. They aren't risking their assets they are risking yours. As the old saying goes, if you can't beat them, join them. In this case take control of crypto and use it to implement a long standing goal of a global cashless digital currency where every penny can be tracked. Crash the market, buy up controlling interest in everything - control everything.

Banks risk nothing and yet you claim they're afraid. Your whole concept is a contradiction.

Mind quoting me where I said that? They risk nothing by creating fiat. They do however risk control of the money system by not taking control of crypto. It is pretty clear you have an agenda here at this point and are just being disingenuous. P.S. Please let me know when you get around to creating your own content (since you are such an expert).

Congratulations @ericarthurblair! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You got your First payout

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honnor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

If you want to support the SteemitBoard project, your upvote for this notification is welcome!

  ·  2 years ago (edited)

Wowwee

This isn't just a conspiracy theory, it's a conspiracy theory that's based on a poor understanding of how the universe works. Finding things suspicious when they're absolutely expected. When crypto went mainstream what did you think it would look like?

All your points can be simplified into two parts,. the conspiracy and the question of what happens if Ethereum goes down.

The second part would be a valid question except not in your case. No one can prove to you that it can't happen by explaining the technicals because you aren't asking a technical question. Anything you can be shown you can say the "bankers" only made it to look that way. After all you've already had to use that logic to even consider this a reasonable idea in the first place.

Just think for a moment... You're saying that in order to defeat Bitcoin/cryptocurrency, the Bankers crafted a cunning plot where it would create a revolutionary system that would skyrocket cryptocurrency into exponential growth and uptake. (not to mention all the Ethereum-like systems since) Essentially you're saying Ethereum is SO GOOD for crypto, it must be a nefarious super villainous plot by the people who want to destroy crypto.

What do you think would have happened without Ethereum?

If you accept that it would only be a matter of time before someone else developed a similar system to Ethereum then obviously you'd need to explain how you'd tell the difference.

If no one else would have ever come up with anything like it then crypto's rise could never have got to what we're seeing now. That's what the banks want, right? So why would they give everyone the plans/idea for this technology?

Essentially even if the "bankers" really were as bafflingly insanely stupid as this (yet are also super genius'!" and they did press a "nuke the ethereum" button. you'd still find they'd end up with a net loss with crypto's aftermath stronger than it would have been without it and now even more strong after it recovered. It would be one of the most self defeating idiotic ideas ever.

The end goal is to restore their control of the money supply. If that happens by crypto skyrocketing or failing doesn't matter as long as they get what they are after, control. You tell me I lack understanding but you have no concept of how boom bust cycles have played out historically to create to engineer just the situation I described in order to grab control of the market and then have it skyrocket. That is not a theory, that is historical fact, and it will happen again because it works.