Why do people call the TheDAO incident a “bailout”? — Oped
TheDAO was one of the first and largest ICO on the Ethereum network. The smart contract was meant to act as a VC fund where ICO participants would get DAO tokens and voting privileges to fund projects. These projects would go through a curated process before being white-listed for votes.
The Ethereum network was working as normal, a decentralized blockchain free of censorship and third-party interference. The ICO smart contract was not secure and a lot of Ether was siphoned out of the ICO by a user.
The ICO investors were displeased with this unpleasant incident. It’s generally common sense in a decentralized blockchain that users are completely responsible for their actions. Just like Bitcoin, you are completely responsible for your private key and whom you send money to.
Some debating took place to-fork or not-to-fork.
to-fork: Interfere with account balances to give-back the ICO investors’ irresponsibly spent Ether.
not-to-fork: Do not interfere with account balances.
Eventually, the to-fork proponents forked and hard-coded the bailout addresses in the network. This can also be described as an irregular state change that required a fork. This forked chain retained the ETH (Ethereum) brand.
The not-to-fork or original Ethereum blockchain rebranded as ETC (Ethereum Classic).
Was the context of the DAO bailout? Well, sounds like it to me.
My opinions are my own.
Published at Tue, 06 Aug 2019 00:14:18 +0000
Bitcoin Pic Of The Moment
✅ Marco Verch is a Professional Photographer and Speaker from Cologne. ? This image can be used under Creative Commons 2.0. Please link to the original photo and the license.
By verchmarco on 2019-03-29 18:13:40
