Of course I would. But that doesn't mean, that I should. Look at my given movie.
And we are not even talking about lives anyway, so the only think is loosing money. I am also invested in both ETH and DAO, but still I know, that its wrong, to make a hard fork. Soft forks, can be maybe considered to put pressure on the attacker to give most of the money back.
But for finding that exploit, he has deserved some money anyway. Companies like Apple, Facebook or Google pay a lot for finding exploits...
If he didn't do it someone else would have have done it later and it would have been even worse scenario...
Yes they pay if you talk of the exploit you found directly to the company, not using it, to stole money, and then if the exploit is confirmed they pay a reward..... this is not the way to manage exploits in the right manner....
There are some, that don't pay enough and the hacker sells it as 0-days,...
Brain is expensive...
In this case is a Cracker (not hacker) and this is not always a good behaviour.....
noone said that. But manners don't count here. Its the fact, that he deserves something...
Deserve something WHAT ? Afther he make a robbery !?!?!?!?! WTF.... !!!!
not additionally. but some of the money for finding the bug. Anyway.
You guys just don't want to see both sides of the medal...
I am fine with any decisions, but I think we run into bigger problems if we hard fork, than if we try to find the consensus with the attacker instead.
After a hard fork ETH will probably have lower value, because then a lot of decentralization priests will be counter ETH.
And if the attacker manages to persuade miners to take his transaction with the 1million eth, the money is still gone, but all of it.
Dealing with the attacker will at least bring some back...
But do what you want.