Steem Soft Fork 0.22.5 #3618
Steem Soft Fork 0.22.5 #3618
Conversation
|
Why you are make it public? You don't need approval from anyone right now, after hostile takeover... so why you pretend you care about openness and decentralization? |
|
You could have just deleted the code you absolute fucking idiots. Was this soft fork reversal done by a three year old? Ladies and gentlemen, these idiots left "malicious code" in their Blockchain when it could have literally just been deleted. What a bunch of dumbasses |
|
They hired a new dev: welcome to hell Joe Smith |
|
They could have just used the existing branch on the steemit repo for 0.22.x. These idiots are retarded. Good luck for any dev work to be accomplished on Steem going forward with these quality devs lmao |
I think he'll be okay. |
|
@noisy it obviously needs to be public, otherwise users cannot trust the nodes for their transactions (exchanges for example). Close-source and blockchain doesn't really go well together you know |
|
Code being "public" on GitHub provides NO VERIFICATION that code is actually being ran in production. You might know this if you were actually a developer @skzap |
|
yeah the code on open source platforms may not reflect what code people run on servers at all |
|
@skzap you realize they could have used the existing code on the repo to revert the fork right? I know you are a dumbass but you aren't that dumb I suspect. There is zero reason for this code to remain in production except for the fact that these idiots responsible don't know Blockchain programming. |
|
The code change is obviously retarded. A good dev rushing would have taken a shorter route too. But hey, in the end it does the same thing doesn't it, and it works? Probably good enough for people running it, and they have witness votes majority, so be it ... Those are the risks of DPOS |
|
They have witness vote majority for fraudulently using customer funds on exchanges. And there isn't 20 witness servers, there is a single witness server with 20 witnesses configured to it. What a wonderful stable and secure blockchain they provided. |
|
Is this the Chinese fuckery comment section I've heard about? Is it CCP approved? |
|
@netuoso, I encourage you to stop being so rude to people. You undermine your own efforts. Be kind, especially and foremost to the ignorant. That's also not what "fraudulently" means. |
|
@sneak It's good that you seem to have moved on from your previous approach of telling Steem users to 'die in a fire' while working for Steemit inc. |
|
@sneak lmao have you found god recently? You are still a joke don't fool yourself. |
said someone who contribute much less effort |
|
This is the software equivalent of June Fourth in the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Although at least thousands of young students weren't murdered and ground to a bloody pulp under the treads of tanks in this instance. |
|
You could have just used the 0.22.1 code, even a 5-year old could have figured that out. A straight line is the shortest distance between two points. |
|
actually who is the one have access to gihub repo? who decides if this pr pass the request? is it vanderberg? |
|
Gavin, Gavin!
|
This soft (hard) fork undoes the changes of 0.22.2 and unlocks everyone's stake after the hardfork time.