[capsulecorp]

>He can’t do it today.

I'd argue he CAN indeed do it again today. Perhaps not in the exact way as the DAO fiasco, but lets be clear, the fundamental transgression was selling one story "the code is law" and then not abiding by that law when it affected him and his friends aversely.

So can he still commit such an egregious breach of trust in this timeline, despite having done it before? Absolutely, though that and the DAO instance may indeed look different from one another.

[X6S1x6Okd1st]

Do you have any original sources of Vitalik promoting the idea that "the code is law"?

[capsulecorp]

Yes I do, here's the one I found at the top of a google search, I'm sure you can find plenty more.

https://twitter.com/vitalikbuterin/status/118851166038788915...

[X6S1x6Okd1st]

Huh given the context (especially given that this was post DAO hard fork) I read that as vitalik saying that "Code is law" is a principal, not necessarily saying that "code is law" is a principal held by himself/Ethereum.

[capsulecorp]

I don't think you read that very well. His response is to Samson Mow (CSO of Blockstream) claiming that Vitalik was "Pivoting to 'Principles are law' from 'Code is law?'". This is because anyone who is even remotely familiar with Ethereum/Vitalik knows how many times Vitalik has said he believes "Code is Law".

Vitalik goes on to defend against Mow's claim that he is "pivoting" by saying that it is indeed a principle. It's extremely clear with basic reading comprehension that Vitalik is claiming that as a principle of his.

Not sure how you extracted the meaning you did. If I'm being honest, you seem to not really be researching the subject in good faith, as a simple google search will turn up many times he's either stated he believes that in text or even video.

You are welcome to believe what you'd like to though, I unfortunately don't have the time to do your research for you, nor do I care to change your mind. So cheers and good luck!

[X6S1x6Okd1st]

Well I suppose that's that.

For what it's worth I have passing familiarity.

Taken from wikipedia:

> The people who continued with Ethereum Classic advocate for blockchain immutability, and the concept that "code is law" against the pro-fork side (Ethereum) which largely argued for extra-protocol intentionality, decentralized decision-making, and conflict resolution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethereum_Classic#Code_is_law

Ethereum Classic clearly believes in code is law, that's not the chain that Vitalik works on.

[capsulecorp]

Nope Vitalik believes code is law, just like any simple google search will show you. You just seem to be avoiding that all all costs. Strange really, wonder what your true motives are, good luck buddy!