A Man and His T-shirt
On August 7, 2015, ETH has been listed on a crypto exchange and the Ethereum network was live prior to the listing. According to wikipedia the co founder of Ethereum, Vitalik Buterin has launched the blockchain in 2014. The true Ethereum blockchain is actually the Ethereum Classic as this new one is a fork that was forced due to a hack.
Pretty much similar to what happened to Steem a year ago. Ethereum has managed to score quite a rally in 2017 when it has gone from a mere $10 all the way up to $1,400. Vitalik Buterin holding 333,520 ETH according to his publicly disclosed ETH address was having a fortune of half a billion dollars at that time.
Fortunes in crypto are volatile same as the crypto prices, but all this volatility will reduce itself over time. Most of Etehreum success back in 2017 was fueled by ICOs being launched on its network and the need of such projects to purchase ETH off the market. There have been plenty in this space claiming that Ethereum won't have such a good performance this bull market, but looks like they're wrong.
ETH is currently valued at around $3,300 and my takes is that by the end of the month we will see a close to $5,000 ETH. With Vitalik Buterin holding 333,520 ETH at the current price, the man with funny unicorn t-shirts is now a billionaire. How many 27 years old billionaires do you know?
Probably not many and the thing is that he's probably not gonna be the only one making fortunes in crypto. This industry is expanding at such a rapid pace with mass adoption news coming out almost every single other day. Just recently ebay announced it's taking into consideration adding cryptocurrencies as a payment.
“We are always looking at the most relevant forms of payment and will continue to assess that going forward. We have no immediate plans, but it (cryptocurrency) is something we are keeping an eye on.”
eBay CEO Jamie Iannone source
What's even more interesting about this double citizenship dev that's turned into a billionaire recently is the time span in which he achieved that. Imagine how long did it take Warren Buffet to become billionaire and at what speed is the world of finance evolving.
The ones calling Ethereum dead two years ago have clearly been wrong as most of its performance lately is due to DeFi booming on its chain. I am not a fan of Ethereum and I've had quite some unpleasant experience with it, but nevertheless I can not overlook its importance in this industry.
Crypto is creating a new type of wealth and putting exponential growth in the palm of investors, developers and everyone involved in this space. We're gonna have a whole new breed of billionaires and wealthy entrepreneurs with a background in crypto and sooner than later it will be talked about and used in places we wouldn't even imagined four years ago.
It's just a matter of time until we won't even pair cryptocurrenecies to any government issued currecny, but for now we are doing that and Vitalik is a crypto billionaire and probably the first dev to achieve that. His story is more than encouraging and a proof that there's only one direction for blockchain technology and that's towards mass adoption.
If Ethereum wouldn't have a use case it wouldn't be the second largest cryptocurrency by market cap and Vitalik wouldn't be a billionaire now.
Thanks for attention,
Adrian
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I don't think it's fair to compare the "eth classic" fork with the hive fork, and I also don't think it's fair to consider one branch of a fork to be the "real" branch and the other "fake". Ethereum Classic vs Ethereum, Bitcoin vs Bitcoin Cash, Steem vs Hive ... the only universal truth is that one branch took the brand name and the other branch yielded the brand name. Except for that, it's all a matter of perspective.
Well, there is one big similarity between the Steem and Ethereum fork. In the case of Ethereum, when faced with the DAO-problem, Vitalik behaved like he owned the blockchain. After SteemIt was purchased by Justin Sun, he behaved like he owned the Steem blockchain. I actually think Justin Sun was more right - I think the real WTF was not that the company was taken over, but that the company owned like 50% of the tokens without anyone taking notice of that. I didn't know it. It's for sure not a real decentralized blockchain if all that prevents one party from performing a 51%-attack is a gentleman's agreement.
I've changed to votes weight, it will go x3 for leo
Hugs and thank you for your support!
I'd like to give my perspective on the Ethereum fork.
The DAO-problem was a major problem. The dilemma faced by Vitalik was never an easy problem with one right and one wrong decision, it was a problem with two wrong decisions. Particularly considering that they (already then) had planned Ethereum to become a proof-of-work blockchain, it would be a disaster if a quite big share of the tokens would be owned by some malicious party. What was most shocking (in my opinion) was not that Vitalik decided to revert the transaction, but that he made this decision very quickly, behaving like if he owned the blockchain, and without reflecting that someone would find it controversial - also without considering that this would lead into a quagmire of future dilemmas as shit like this for sure would happen again. Vitalik was wrong, it wasn't his decision - it was the miners decision - of course, most of the miners stood by Vitalik (and those that didn't forked out Classic).
I lost quite much of my faith in Ethereum and "digital contracts" at that point. I may be wrong on it, but I still assume that the bug in the contract was there by accident, not by intention. A lot of people had been investigating the contract, and nobody (except possibly the attacker) noticed that it had a flaw. I did see a lot of risks with TheDAO, but that the funds would simply be siphoned off by an attacker - that risk I didn't foresee at all. Even if I do know a thing or two about software development, and have seen lots of bugs causing security breaches and problems up through my professional life.
Now, if a bug sneaks into a "high profile" contract by accident and a lot of independent reviewers aren't able to see if, now consider if a malicious party intentionally wants to put in a hidden backdoor into the contract. If the contract is complex enough and poorly reviewed, if will slide straight through.
For simple stuff, digital contracts for sure have a potential, but for the more advanced stuff it's probably still better to have a human-readable contract and an arbitration court with real humans resolving conflicts. I have been holding some Ethereum after that, but I never more hodled Ethereum with the same kind of enthusiasm.
That vitalik T-shirt rocks!
Yes, a billionaire's shirt.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta