Why Ethereum-divided society: the position Ethereum Classic

July 20 Ethereum came hard fork. In accordance with the opinion of the majority of the community protocol was modified without saving backward compatibility with previous software. In fact, the majority decided to migrate to a new blokcheyn, leaving the old to fend for themselves. To date, the miners who chose the new blokcheyn, control more than 95% of the hash output. Fork has put an end to the saga The DAO, and all funds stolen (or, if you prefer, derived) from her attacker about a month ago, will be returned to investors.

However, soon after the announcement of a hard Fork unexpected happened a few days ago was announced a parallel project, received a resounding title Ethereum Classic. His supporters have decided to remain faithful to the original blokcheynu not use fork the code, "abolishing" the creation of The DAO. As stated on the website of the project, "the goal Ethereum Classic - keep the original tsenzuroustoychivy Ethereum" and "provide an alternative to people who disagree with the rescue The DAO".

Although many think that Ethereum Classic - this is some bad joke, around the project it has developed a noticeable activity and it won the support of a small but growing community of users to Reddit and Slack. Buy or sell a "classic" can be broadcast on a decentralized exchange Bitsquare. In addition, miners, controlling about 0.5% hash power Ethereum before section joined to specially created pool Ethereum Classic, to ensure that your "old" blokcheyna.

Arvicco, project coordinator Ethereum Classic, prefers to remain pseudonymous, because in Russia, where he lives, "the legal situation with cryptocurrency uncertain and very volatile." He runs one of the largest Russian-language portals kriptovalyutnyh BitNovosti.com, whose staff also support the popular YouTube channel, involved in producing films, etc.

Bitcoin Magazine contacted arvicco, to learn more about the project Ethereum Classic.

Arvicco, you troll?

No, I'm not a troll. Although, I confess, I am sometimes bluff in his judgments and statements.

You have a relationship to breaking The DAO?

No. I am in no way affiliated with the hacker, whoever he was.

Why then are you so determined to maintain unchanged blokcheyn Ethereum? After all, because of this, the hacker can use the stolen money!

First of all, I want to note that I am here alone. Developments in Ethereum community were dissatisfied with many, but no one did nothing, and then the active miners, traders, designers and just kriptoentuziasty gathered around our site, decide what you need to take the initiative in their hands. Thus was born the idea of ​​the project Ethereum Classic, and now join us supporters from around the world.

We do not appear "out of nowhere", and are well known in the Russian-speaking community of crypto. We have all the knowledge, skills and resources necessary to support the work Ethereum Classic - as long as necessary. I myself am engaged in communications and media, and therefore noticeable more than others - at least in the English-speaking part of the crypto world.

As to why we want to give an attacker the opportunity to spend the stolen ... This is an interesting question that periodically pops up in the bitcoin community and each time causing a storm of controversy. For example, we know the bitcoin address darknet markets, came to replace the Silk Road. Why not bring them to the black list? Do not filter their transactions? Why not freeze funds connected with the burglary MtGox or other well-known burglary and theft?

Many of us - radical decentralization supporters. In short, we believe that blokcheyn system should follow three basic principles: they must be open, neutral and unchanged. None of these properties becomes blokcheyn only unnecessarily raspiarenny database. That just seems to be something revolutionary, but in reality is not of interest as technology and society does not bear good.

Returning the stolen money The DAO, Ethereum Foundation is guided by the noble seemingly objectives "save investors" and "restore confidence in the Ethereum platform", but I'm afraid, is shortsighted. Saving The DAO is contrary to two of the three fundamental principles of decentralization, jeopardizing long-term prospects throughout Ethereum platform.

Many take the position that the incident with The DAO - an exceptional case, which can be attributed to the small age Ethereum. Is hard fork for justice can not be single?

Yes, many people in the community for some reason believe that their principles can be "just once." Alas, this is unrealistic.

Blokcheyn or neutral - or protected from censorship - or not. Blokcheyn or unchanging - and stores a globally recognized version of the story, a continued sequence of events - or not. Blokcheyn that can "change just a little, only once, and only through the democratic process", - it is not blokcheyn. Blokcheyn should not and can not be "protected from censorship, until someone is very important not to lose a lot of investors' money."

You can not be "a little bit pregnant."

Once the precedent is created, influential users will not be difficult to organize the rescue of another project, when - not "if" but "when"! - Another incident happened with smart contract. In addition, after the episode of censorship and confiscation of funds, even for the "fight against crime" and "justice" outside organizations - the courts, law enforcement or other government agencies - will be much easier to impose blokcheyn-system rules.

Where is the line, after crossing that interference with blokcheyna it becomes acceptable - that is the main question is.

Ethereum - it is also a consensus protocol. If users are unable to reach a consensus about the rules changes, nothing prevents them from doing so. Dash goes wherever users want.

Yes it is. Well, according to various estimates, from 20 to 40 percent of the participants Ethereum community are not supporters of hard-fork, and many of them are people with principled position.

The majority was in favor of a hard-fork - Democratic hard fork, if you like - this one does not argue. But the majority opinion is easily manipulated in the interests of those who own the money and power, so that the kind of democracy is very far from ideal. It does not protect the basic rights of minorities. I could speak at length on this subject, but it is better to refer you to the works of Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

In short, the reproduction problems of democracy in Ethereum or any other blokcheyne - bad idea.

And yet, such is the nature of this technology. If 60-80 percent of the people are in favor of a hard-fork, they are entitled to a hard fork.

Yes, users can select any of the rules, which want to follow - even in Bitcoin. The only thing that still does not eliminate the restriction of emissions to 21 million coins in Bitcoin - a commitment bitcoin community first principles.

People are free to choose their own community, and until specific Community right declared values, its participants do not have grievances. Anyone who is interested in Bitcoin, almost immediately learns and on the limitation of emissions in it. Thus, joining the bitcoin community, you are tacitly supported by this restriction. This tacit consensus is very reliable, and it is thanks to him that the limit of 21 million bitcoins is saved - no one there even thought to cancel it.

Apparently, Ethereum values ​​from the very beginning were not clearly expressed. Probably, the project founders wanted to attract more supporters, and at a critical time in the community did not have guidelines that would allow him to understand "what is good and what is bad" in relation to the possible actions in response to the crisis The DAO.

In general, as stated on our website,

"We believe in a decentralized blokcheyny available for everybody and protected from censorship. We believe in the original concept Ethereum - in Ethereum as the world computer running smart contracts without the possibility of somehow roll back or block the results of their implementation. We believe in strict separation of duties and responsibilities, leaving room only for these forks, which eliminate the defects of the actual platform, but do not correct the erroneous contracts or serve the interests of any privileged groups. We believe in censorship-protected platform to prove in the real world that she can trust it. "

Not if you want to say that these principles are fundamentally different from the values ​​Ethereum community as a whole?

No, but it seems that too many people in this community are now concerned only the opportunity to get rich quickly, regardless of the consequences - at the time of such people in the community raised the rapid growth rate of ether, and this, in my opinion, is very hurt the project. It is difficult to convey to people the importance of the principles, if they originally did not intend to burden themselves with the study of the history of cryptocurrency, community goals and plans to achieve them, and chased quick ruble.

Maybe they just find the idea of ​​"lifting" the theft of moral? And it would be immoral not to take advantage of this opportunity?

How noble! And if they do not want to return to their rightful owners all the money ever stolen in kriptovalyutnom world?

If you want, then who will decide which of the transactions on blokcheyne is "theft" and what is not? By what law? Who will perform the functions of the police, judges, jurors? Would it be possible to appeal and, if so, how?

If you do not want, why not? Why the theft of funds from The DAO is considered in a special manner, and the rest are ignored? Who do you need to drive and love to drink beer, to expect special attention? If you are returning stolen in one case, on what grounds after created a precedent you are going to deny the future of the plaintiffs?

If the solution to these problems is offered only the proverbial "consensus" or, rather, the democratic process, we do not like it.

You see? Only slightly absorbed in the problem, we present the most stir the hornet's nest, but all of this is easy to avoid if you stick to the principles. Yes, sometimes for the sake of principles sometimes you have to sacrifice something - sometimes hasty investments in poorly tested and unsafe smart contracts.

So, as I understand it, you believe that the supporters of hard-fork their principles or not originally going to stick to them. This is true?

In my opinion, Ethereum Foundation lost its neutrality and began to serve the interests of specific groups. It is no secret that many of the people in one way or another connected with The DAO, invested a lot of money into it and maintain close relationships with insiders from Ethereum Foundation.

Immediately after the outbreak of the crisis The DAO, Stephan Tual (one of its founders) and related people have started a political campaign for the salvation of The DAO at all costs, even though this is clearly contrary to the initially proclaimed the slogan "code is law", the principle of neutrality Ethereum as a platform, and so on. d.

The problem is that the campaign has been very successful - partly due to the fact that many developers, traders, and just ordinary users Ethereum community also invested in The DAO lot of money.

Many are worried about another issue. If a hacker to break into The DAO, had the opportunity to dispose of the stolen money, he could easily bring down the course.

The price of any token reflects the supply and demand balance. Yes, if the hacker decided to sell their coins, it is likely to lead to a single sharp depreciation.

I think that after the fork Ethereum Classic awaits an even greater depreciation, because many supporters fork want to sell your coins. This is normal. Moreover, it is also an opportunity to purchase a classic broadcasting cheaply - to express support for our vision of a platform to diversify investments in platforms for smart contracts, well, or just earn. The reasons may be very different.

fluctuations occur constantly, so the markets are fair valuation of assets. And do not forget that they have attracted investors and traders.

If the rate falls too much, the tokens will not be valuable enough to motivate the miners send hash resources to protect blokcheyna ...

Difficulty adjusted Ethereum pretty quickly. Now, after a couple of hours after the fork, I think that we will achieve quite acceptable half-minute interval between the blocks of a maximum of one or two days, but not weeks, and certainly not months. After that, on this issue will be forgotten.

Yes, hash power blokcheyn Ethereum Classic will be less secure than Ethereum, - at least at first. But he will still have the best heshreytom than 99% of existing altkoynov.

Yes, I do not think that it is threatened. Why would anyone attack him from the miners? Motivation miners is that their advantage just honestly do their job, earning a "classic" broadcast.

Perhaps they want to attack Ethereum Classic miners, supporting hard-fork that had only one blokcheyn Ethereum ...

But is it not profitable reduction of competition in the mining of the ETH? They also get more.

Can Ethereum Classic existence as any harm Ethereum?

I do not think. I've seen similar opinion, but more people believe that the continued support of the initial blokchena - a very good idea. If the minority, having different views, wants to go its own way, what is the point to disturb him?

Even some supporters of the fork perceive Ethereum Classic as a kind of "insurance". If Ethereum Foundation actions will result in a serious crisis, the availability of alternative living, to which you can return, it will be most welcome.

As is known, Ethereum intends to introduce in the future "proof of ownership" technology (PoS). If the hacker will be about 5% ether, does this lead to problems? Are not you worried?

I do not foresee any problems if a hacker will keep their coins when moving to a "confirmation of ownership." Acne Buterin also believes that it is not so scary.

If, as many think, a hacker decides to sell their coins, any problems of this kind generally excluded.

What can you say about the partition itself? Is it possible to perform it safely?

It is difficult to judge the impact of a hard fork. Developers from Ethereum Foundation is truly great, but the code is hard fork had to write very quickly, so that any problems can not be excluded. The network can be divided up "cleaner" of the attempts to eliminate "transaction replay attack" (replay attack), in which the transaction is transferred from one to another blokcheyna.

But there is a strategy to prevent this attack. The easiest way is always to use different keys (and even better, a variety of purses / clients on individual computers) to ETH and ETHC. Do not use the same address on both platforms, that's all.

So far, for the sake of simplicity in this section we are going to focus on issues that require the least user intervention. Ethereum Foundation and other developers are also interested in the fact that the section has passed without any difficulty. Some of them help us.

You say that you support the many people in the Russian-speaking community kriptovalyutnom. And the rest of the world?

In some respects, the classic air is very interesting. In fact, this "incidental coin" (spinoff-coin) Ethereum. They have long been discussed in theory, but more or less serious attempts to create them was not - I mean, it was not until Ethereum Classic!

Ethereum Classic ever since the fork receives numerous user community, which consists of all current users Ethereum. To some of them the opportunity to make transactions on blokcheyne protected from censorship seem important to someone it will be indifferent, but it is clear that it provides a smart traders interesting arbitrage opportunities. Trading can be a classic ether (to start) to Bitsquare, so that the market and we can say it is.

In addition, all the major stock exchanges ether - Poloniex, Bitfinex and Kraken - going some time after the fork to charge users and new, classic and air (ETHC), ie all of their customers will receive their bills on both types of broadcast... And as soon as the exchange will be convinced that the Ethereum Classic is viable and is not going to give up on the idea, and they are allowed to trade on the existing user accounts with ether.

And, of course, all applications will work in Ethereum Ethereum the Classic with 100% compatibility - and otherwise deal with them would not make sense. You can choose which platform best suited to your DAPP - more common, or more protected from censorship.

And the developers? As far as I know, none of the "deserving" Ethereum developers not expressed a desire to join the Ethereum Classic ...

Initially, our main priority will be to maintain full compatibility with Ethereum, so we do not have to worry much about the development. We will be able to use the code from the repository Ethereum, with very few changes. Resources for this we have.

But, of course, if the current developers Ethereum want to join us, they will be accepted with open arms. Despite the fact that our separate ways, we have one goal and the same: the creation of a better future, in which the platform for smart contracts otkrovyut opportunities for truly global social and economic cooperation.

Do you want to eventually "win" Ethereum? Will the Classic and Ethereum Ethereum peaceful and mutually beneficial co-exist?

I do not want to consider what is happening through the prism of the confrontation. Although I am very critical attitude to how the Fund Ethereum Foundation has solved the problem with The DAO, and I think that he made a serious mistake, which worsened the prospects for the platform, I have great respect for most Ethereum developers participants Ethereum Foundation and the community as a whole.

I know that many developers are not too thrilled with this fork, but they did everything that depended on them: Write hard fork the code and provided the community the right choice. Well, we took advantage of this right.

Ethereum Classic - this is not some anti-Ethereum, as many would have us imagine. We are part of a broader ecosystem Ethereum and intend to make a worthy contribution to the development of the project, we just have slightly different hierarchy of values, which, in our opinion, better corresponds to the fundamental principles blokcheyna: openness, neutrality and immutability. We want to make the community richer and the ecosystem, rather than poorer and encourage the community to take Ethereum Classic seriously.

Aaron van Virdum (Aaron van Wirdum)