Crypto Community is seeing the consequences of Ethereum (ETH) and Ethereum Classic (ETH) Split



In a few years, we will look back at 9 th July 2018 and we will see it as one of the most tragic days in the history of Ethereum: this is the second day of the 2016 division of Ethereum Classic and Ethereum: on this fateful day, a decentralized exchange known as Bancor was violated, and this led to the its investors to lose more than 23.5 million dollars.

Since that day, Ethereum has continued to decline steadily, despite the fact that it had risen to a maximum of $ 503 per currency on 17 July. This indicates that investors have slowly begun to lose confidence in the systems of smart contracts used on the blockchain, and it is a fact that raises important issues as if the crypt is truly decentralized.

Some investors have even begun to wonder if its systems are strong enough to protect them from bugs and hackers. Andreas Antonopoulos, a cryptocurrency guru, said few words about this particular situation.

Smart Contracts Developers become the New Middle Men?

In a question and answer session published online, Andreas rejects this statement, insisting that the developers of smart contracts are in no way the new intermediaries in the universe of Ethereum. He says that developers can build both decentralized and centralized platforms, and then let their users determine which ones are best.

He goes on to say that if a person chooses to enter into a faulty intelligent contract, then they are the ones to blame. The statement is true as consumers are required to read the fine print before signing any smart contract.

A critical look at some of the biggest scams in history shows that such scams only succeeded because people who were scammed entered a transaction without taking the time to read the fine print.

The good news, however, is that investors have begun to become smarter. Today they take their time to look for an ICO and are no longer willing to accept the old history of bug tabs. Instead, they came to believe that companies like DAO or Bancor were interested in stealing them from the start.

If there is any truth in these statements it is a fact that we could never know. Although developers of smart contracts are not the guardians of Ethereum, not everyone can be considered trustworthy.

Smart contracts have placed people at the mercy of the developer

One of the main problems that most investors have raised from Bancor was that even if the money was stolen from their wallet, the money still belonged to investors. And the fact that Bancor was in no way held responsible for the loss of the $ 23.5 million seemed to incinerate them even more. If it were a traditional bank, any customer money lost through a hack would eventually be repaid.

Source link