Ethereum Proposes Fund Recovery and Reveals Underlying Governance Failure
Ethereum Oligarchy
If you are familiar with Ethereum's history, it had a problem with the DAO. Essentially, the contract for the DAO had a bug in it, and cost their enterprise millions and the whole thing to collapse due to bad coding. The Ethereum team then made a radical decision which was to fork the network to avoid the consequences of the hack.
Now, the Ethereum senior team is debating as to whether they should forever be the oligarchs to decide when funds should be restored due to hacks, or other large scale events. In other words, they are debating on whether they should exist as a governing body to decide if a cryptocurrency transaction was valid or not on the Ethereum network.
The idea is that they can impose a system wide upgrade as a 'fix' to a hack. source
Ethereum was developed with lack of planning
To me, this is a symptom of the flaws in Ethereum. Ideally, this decision making would happen on blockchain. If a voting process were required, then that too should exist on-chain to make all decision making processes transparent enough for businesses to plan around. By moving such decision making to an off-chain oligarchy, it makes the entire Ethereum system questionable and non-transparent. In some ways, it is the exact opposite of what blockchain is supposed to achieve.
Yet for businesses to trust a system, there must be dispute resolutions available in case of bugs or hacks.
This is why EOS is the future. ;)
Will Ethereum still go up?
If the cryptocurrency market holds, I expect Ethereum to do fine in 2018. The thing is, once we get into 2019 and businesses start looking at what EOS can accomplish for them, I expect to see many ICO's, and other projects launch on EOS.
Likewise, Ethereum will have more every-day competition arising from the Steem blockchain from the ICO-like market which will launch in 2018.
In the long-long run, I expect better competition to sink Ethereum's dominance, but this may play out over a 3+ year timeframe.
I agree with EOS being the future. Ethereum is done for. They can't even handle a virtual cat game for god's sake.
Well.... isnt EOS based on ETH?
No. The EOS token that is currently launched is on Ethereum. It is a placeholder for when the mainnet launches in June. I don't understand why people fail to understand this still. All it takes is a quick google search.
Wholeheartedly agree: Ethereum has the advantages of being a futuristic tool that is available to build on this year RIGHT NOW as well as that first or early-mover advantage of being trusted and established even as a currency. No longer do you need BTC to purchase most of the AltCoins.
EOS was developed later, with the experience of ETH, to fulfill the promise of Ethereum.
Wow, an upvote from Dan the Man!
Well thanks @dan for the generous up-vote (unless it inadvertently defaulted on 100%). We can assume that it reflects your thoughts on the matter, in fact "to fulfill the promise of Ethereum" ARE YOUR WORDS.
I think your missing the point of a free market. If more people believed that the DAO hacked should not have been forked then ETC would be worth 824 and ETH would be worth be worth 30... or less. That is voting, the market votes with usage.
Ethereum has some amazing updates coming and I would not be writing it off to soon.
Creating an alt-coin fork for every situation that arises on the Ethereum network is not the point of blockchain.
There is a lie that the traditional crypto community around bitcoin has spread, and that lie is "blockchain consensus is governance".
Yet BTC has proven that this is not true... leaving governance up to the blockchain essentially reduces governance down to a few parties, not a wide swath of what decentralized networks promised us.
Blockchain Consensus Governance in practical outcomes puts these people in charge:
All blockchains, including EOS, are ultimately governed by the above system. Yet this type of governance is unclear on who is in charge, it is opaque and non-transparent. It works off an oligarchy of insider deals, politics of varied individuals who hold different levels of influence and power over the system. The list goes on with the flaws.
In other words, these governance entities aught to agree upon a constitution of how a blockchain should be governed. This is what EOS does in terms of node operators.
Governance is not about who can fork a network. The old lie is that the "masses at large" determine which fork wins. Rather, it is a small group of decision makers that decide which fork wins since they hold the influence to which the masses at large follow.
Imagine trying to get a US President elected outside our standard voting process? You could do it. We could have two thirds of the states ratify a constitutional amendment and force it over on the government. Accomplishing this successfully is unlikely. Rather, it's the regular government power holders which are going to influence who can compete in an election. Trying to govern with a blockchain and not a governance system, is basically like trying to re-ratify a new constitution every time a simple change needs to occur.
Blockchain is not a successful governance model. One of the main reasons it is unsuccessful is that it resists change a great deal. It's designed to resist change, rather than being designed to be adaptable according to transparent rules. Those blockchains that do change regularly and update, are being governed centrally and this is what permits the updates to be forced on the network.
What is eosfinex? Is that a sign for EOS?
even with lots of lacks in the system they have come a long way but this could be fixed
I was thinking about this the other day. With centralized systems such as banks and institutions if your credit card is hacked you can dispute the charge and get your money back. But with crypto if you get hacked you are hosed. I have read a little about EOS, what protections are built into it?
Vanilla EOS would be totally unprotected. The way to protect funds in crypto, in general, is to follower certain procedures.
That said, specific systems on EOS can build protections similar to the Steem "power up" protection available on the steem blockchain. If an EOS contract is launched, the contract holders can program that contract in such a way to protect people from immediate asset theft.
Also, each team that launches an EOS contract, has the options available to them to build in safeguards to protect against bugs. Let's say their contract has a bug like the DAO did, built into EOS is the ability for them to manage their contract in such a way to give them options... for example, they could give themselves the transparent right to freeze all funds in the system, preventing withdrawals. There is a lot of safeguards possible.
If their contract-level protection fails, it reverts to the EOS constitution for resolution which may has a standard set of guidelines all participants agree to.
perfect time for eos to march past towards eth ...seems like eth is going to have a real problem in scaling up
EOS to the Moon Ted - probably beyond!
have look into your earlier EOS post's and i now no doubt why you were right at that time too you see the future
decentralize is the way to goooo