Blockchain forks are peeled off layer by layer: checks and balances among miners, exchanges and users ensure the decentralization of the system

Peeling off blockchain forks layer by layer

The Ethereum hard fork was quickly declared a success, but consensus has many complex layers and I don’t think we have completed the fork. This hard fork has profoundly tested the vitality of the fork.

Deciding to fork:

After The DAO was hacked and lost an estimated $50 million, Ethereum developers had a difficult decision to make: Should they fork the blockchain and kill The DAO? Or should they let The DAO attackers abscond with the funds?

This is a classic trolley problem in ethics, where Ethereum developers chose the lesser evil, as most people would do.

The trolley problem of The DAO attack: if you don’t pull the lever, people will lose their funds.

My initial advice to Ethereum developers was to do nothing.

The most real lesson from The DAO attack should be to re-examine Ethereum’s Solidity language and fix the underlying vulnerabilities that still exist today.

What makes the Ethereum fork even more intriguing is that Bitcoin also has a similar trolley problem. This variation of the problem has a fat man on the bridge that can be pushed onto the tracks to save the people.

The trolley problem of the Mentougou attack: if you don’t push the fat man off, people will lose their funds.

It is also possible to fork the Bitcoin blockchain and recover the funds lost in the Mt. Gox disaster, but for Bitcoin developers and the community, this option is not even worth discussing, strongly indicating that no one in the Bitcoin system has the power to roll back Bitcoin allocations .

People lost money, but eventually the market recovered.

In a fork, who has the ultimate power?

The U.S. Constitution divides the government into legislative, executive, and judicial branches to ensure that no single person or group gains too much control . All three branches serve the people.

The blockchain situation is similar. We have miners, exchanges, and developers. These three entities ultimately exist to serve users.

Typically, when people think about forks, they only think about miners. Most people think that miners decide which fork of the blockchain will survive. This is partially true, but not completely.

In a hard fork, developers and exchanges also hold power in their own ways. Developers can change the hash function for miners. Exchanges can support only one fork, reducing the market value of a particular fork.

The real power resides in the hands of the users. Ethereum Classic (ETC), a fork that is not supported by Ethereum developers and major exchanges, is refusing to die. If users want to buy/use ETC, then exchanges will support ETC. Miners and exchanges will adapt to user demand, not resist.

The checks and balances among developers, miners, and exchanges are the key to truly keeping this system decentralized.