Quote from: nmtrader100 on June 18, 2016, 02:34:56 PM

If he was smart he would get with the major exchanges trading ETH and offer them 1 million USD equivalent each to reject the fork. The exchanges will decide everything, not the miners, exchanges are the only place to make money with ETH. Miners go to the exchanges to move profits. The miners won't move to the new fork if the exchanges are still on the old fork.

Yeah just that you cannot legally give away stolen funds...so the miners would make themselves legally vulnerable.

I can´t believe the logic some people are using:

1. a flaw in the code of something has been found and used to steal funds. This happens all the time. It is the definition of a hack. There is a security gap, a flaw, in some code, and the hacker uses it.
2. some people, just because they hate ETH, claim that this hole in the code is working as designed, and therefore the hack is legal.

That attitude is mental. With the same logic, the BTC malleability hack for example, would have been perfectly fine just like any other (ab?)use of a security flaw in a data processing device worldwide would be.

Roll Eyes

Advice: stop being envious, grab some cheap ETH now. Grin

In any civilised country, there is a legal and civil framework that would never allow such a stupid idea survive in a court of law, common sense tells us that and so does this guy:

http://www.coindesk.com/sue-dao-hacker/

Others have suggested that the hacker can't be liable as they only did what the contract allowed. It's an interesting argument but, simply stated, code vulnerability doesn't equal consent.

As a defense, its pretty weak tea. Theft is theft, off chain or on.

Btw has anyone now verified this guys signature or not? Wink