You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Smart Contracts in a Free Society
Losses of this magnitude are more likely to attract government attention than anything else. Crypto is still in it's early adoption phase and a failure to correct as needed now will seriously undermine confidence in the entire crypto ecosystem moving forward. In the end it seems likely that the biggest loss will not be the theft, it will be the $300-$500 million in losses absorbed by small traders.
I don't support or oppose a fork, but I see this as being dangerous either way. To not fork would cause huge harm, and to fork might too. Blockchain based smart contracts are a huge leap forward. This is how much science works, a series of micro adjustments until the optimal outcome is achieved.
I don't think a fork causes as much harm as a no fork. I mean say we decide under no circumstances should there ever be a fork because immutability is more important than reliability or safety? In that case if it's 50 years into the future, and the blockchain connects to us via brain to computer interface, in that cyborg future do we want to be hostages to a blockchain AI which might not allow us to fork even if it's in our best interest?
It should be up to each individual to determine which chain they trust, which programmers they trust, which community they want to be involved in or associated with, and forking in my opinion should be something anyone can propose at any time and let the market decide if it's in the best interest of the community or not.
A hard fork might not be an ideal. Immutability might be the ideal. But we have practical concerns which might outweigh the ideal and if at any time a blockchain goes against the self interest of the community it serves then we should be able to fork or choose a new block chain. If all the trusted programmers, exchanges, businesses, advocates, and most faithful supporters put their trust somewhere else then it's their choice where to put it.