The discussion discussion intensifies ethereum after penetration with bybit

The encryption community is divided around the calls for the decrease of ethereum Blockchain after enormous protection Back in bybit.

On February 21, the stock exchange lost approximately $ 1.5 billion of ETH for the infiltrators, which sparked discussions on whether ETHEREUM should intervene to recover stolen money.

What is Blockchain?

Blockchain Return, also known as reorganization, It includes the opposite of confirmed transactions to restore the network to a previous case.

This process usually occurs after a major violation or exploitation of security. Auditors must reach consensus to ignore the affected blocs, which effectively erases malicious transactions.

Despite its potential benefits, decline is still a controversial measure and is rarely used due to its effect on Blockchain and decentralization.

Blockchains works on the principle of installation, which means that the transactions are expected to be final once they are confirmed. Therefore, it challenges the transactions circulating in this principle, raising concerns about the security and reliability of the network.

The encryption leaders collide with the proposal to the lower ethereum

The co -founder of Bitmex Arthur Hayes was voting in calling for a decline to resolve Beit penetration. He referred to 2016 Dao Hate, where Ethereum underwent a difficult thorn to restore stolen money, park.

Hayes has argued that since Ethereum was previously hacked on stability, another intervention should not be outside the table.

“My own view is like a huge ETH bag holder is that ETH stopped being money in 2016 after Dao Hack Hardfork. If society wants to do this again, I will support this because we have already voted not to eradicate in 2016,” He said.

The CEO of Jan3 Samson Mww Backed Return, saying that it can be prevented North Korea is to use stolen money to finance the nuclear weapons program.

However, not everyone agrees. Borovik pseudonym Opposition The idea, on the pretext that the retreat would endanger the credibility and neutrality of the ethereum.

Bitcoin Jimmy Song’s lawyer also rejected this possibility, noting that the BYBIT penetration cannot be compared to 2016 DAO exploitation. A song confirmed that Dao penetration allowed a 30 -day intervention, while The premit attack has already been completedMake decline in an impractical.

“I know people expect Ethereum to review the chain, but I think it is already chaos to do so clean”, Song Add.

Meanwhile, the supporter of Ethereum Adriano Feria presented an alternative perspective. He said that bybit could have avoided this position using a Layer 2 (L2) solution With conditional reverse transactions.

According to Feria, Blockchain technology needs some forms of reflection to ensure the adoption of the real world.

“Whether through social recovery or another pre -defined process, not changeable, and transparency, the adoption of the mass in the real world will not work without reflection transactions. Without this ability, transactions activity will inevitably be attracted towards the Tradfi systems that it already provides, Veria. I mentioned.

This discussion raises an essential question for ETAREUM: Should it give priority to influence or interference in extreme cases?

While some believe that the reaction is necessary for an unprecedented loss, others are afraid to undermine the basic principles of decentralization. The next steps for Ethereum are likely to form their long -term credibility and confidence within the encryption space.