You're more than welcome. It's hilarious to purchase ethers at such a discount. Dump more.

You're welcome too. Dump more. Who needs devs that miss such security holes in Solidity and such roadmaps as DAO failure?

This IS amazing and its the first time I have seen something like this with any coin.  Other coins that have forked killed the old fork.  IMO, they should never have allowed this to happen. Allowing forks to split the currency devalues the currency and hurts investors.  The community voted for the hard fork and that should be the only ETH left in existence.  I think in the long run it still will be but the infighting that is taking place now is embarrassing to the Etherium community - and I think that is the intent of some people. 

For me personally, I could care less.  I take my profits where I can.  But the biggest problem in this entire alt-coin world is the lack of regulation and authority.  From the pumping and dumping to the disinformation and scams, it all makes this entire environment untrustworthy.  This stuff would result in criminal charges if it existed in a regulated investment system.  In this system , people are actually rooting for the thieves, although I think that is limited to thieves stealing from someone else and not them.

err.. nope... not like that.
ETC and ETH still "the same thing" in diferent chains.

Yes, but usually(never) the devs dont leave an OPTION in the new wallet.
If they did, we'd have 100s of bastard-child-coins here.

Also its kinda futile if an exchange doesnt list the "abandoned" chain.

It this case.. all is weird.

See my edit - the option is irrelevant. Just don't upgrade to the "mandatory" fork client and you'll stay on the old chain.

The REASON for the fork matters a lot and in this case it was a reason that many didn't agree with. If it was just a bug fix or e.g. a block size increase then it would be unlikely that anyone would have a reason to oppose that. However messing with the blockchain is a different story. There is no conspiracy but there might be a lesson to be learned here.

you misunderstand let me explain:
the pro forkers said ok the taker has the dao and misused a hole in serurity ( its a bit more difficult then that but lets have it this way for a moment) the devs and investors wanted a fast way to solve it and erase the whole dao. give the ether back and have and this is important NO INVESTIGATION WHO was that . but to do that they say good bye to the unchangeable code. its sort of a rollback becouse a investment went wrong.
the contra forker say that cant be . the code is untouchable.
the thief needs to be reported. dont selll the integritiy of the code for a shortcut for the benefit of investors.

most think if there is an investigation and facts are on the table the taker has to face a punishment for a crime .
but this is important again:
only autorized people like a judge or a suprime court can do that. not the masses not the devs not the miners .

and i guess the devs could have frozen the dao till it is all cleared.

I think hate is a strong word.  I do not hate those who opposed the fork.  I disagree with them and I am also suspicious of their motives.  If you supported ETH before the fork, then you should support it after the community decided to fork.  I think most people felt forking was the right ting to do because they did not want to see the thief rewarded for his theft and to set an example for future thefts if there are any.

Those who were against the fork often said, let the thief keep his stolen goods.  Some even claimed that he didn't actually steal anything.  Now those people are trying to pump up ETC as a means of striking back at the community that voted for the fork.  That appears to be sour grapes or maybe its something more sinister.   In any case, this fork, while allowing ETC to survive, is rewarding the sore losers who refuse to accept the vote of the community. 

In any case, now we have two ETH coins which for anyone supporting ETH would be the last outcome they would want.   

IF your value proposition is "the code is the law", and that code behaves differently than, well, than what ?  What you INTENDED the code to do ?  But where is that written down if the code is the law ?, then the DAO hacker behaved perfectly legit: simply, the DAO code didn't behave as most people somehow thought is should/was supposed/.... to behave, but under "the code is the law" those feelings have no meaning.
If your value proposition is NOT "the code is the law", then 1) the ethereum and DAO web sites were lying because that's what they said to all people  2) smart contracts, and their support, ethereum, have no meaning.

So the DAO hacker is only a thief if 1) you deny the principles on which ethereum and the DAO were built, and 2) you admit that ethereum and the DAO websites have been lying about these principles.


You seem to miss that in crypto, there is (like Ms. Thatcher said so well) "no such thing as a community".  Everybody is free and what is perceived as a community is only a collection of individuals that, for the time being, have sufficiently common goals to work together.  There is no engagement of anybody to "swear an oth of fidelity to the King or to the Community".  There's no such thing as "democratic dictatorship".  The whole point of crypto is individual freedom.  The so-called consensus is only an individual calculation of having more advantages of sticking to the "mean" than to go apart.  If those advantages are preceived to be smaller than to go one's way, then it is normal that one celebrates "independence day" and splits off.


On the contrary, I think it is the best thing that could happen: everybody is now closer to his personal desire than if one had to stick to a single common goal.    This is a great lesson.   One shouldn't in fact be afraid of forking block chains.  Many forks are a good thing, because they can tune better each prong to individual desires, rather than have the common soup for everybody.

On the contrary, I think it is the best thing that could happen: everybody is now closer to his personal desire than if one had to stick to a single common goal.    This is a great lesson.   One shouldn't in fact be afraid of forking block chains.  Many forks are a good thing, because they can tune better each prong to individual desires, rather than have the common soup for everybody.

[/quote]
hmmm a very good point, so if there are more and more forks ( sidechain, clones, of the same thing) the number of new alt would shrink but also the ability to have a chain owned by a few . ownership would be useles. creating something that can be copied is no profitable biz. and the risk of to much power in one hand or a few hands is band too. i think of too big to fail .............