ইতিহাসের বইয়ে ক্রিপ্টো 📚 📚 "ইথেরিয়ামের DAO হ্যাক ও হার্ড ফর্ক (2016)" প্রথম প্রধান DAO প্রকল্পের $50 মিলিয়নের হ্যাক ইথেরিয়াম সম্প্রদায়কে বিভক্ত করে, ইথেরিয়াম ক্লাসিককে জন্ম দেয় এবং প্রমাণ করে যে কোডই আইন… যতক্ষণ পর্যন্ত সম্প্রদায় অন্যথা ভোট না দেয়। 2016 সালে, The DAO ইথেরিয়ামের প্রধান পরীক্ষামূলক প্রকল্প হিসেবে চালু হয়: একটি ডিসেন্ট্রালাইজড বেঞ্চমার্ক ফান্ড, যা সম্পূর্ণরূপে স্মার্ট-কনট্রাক্ট কোড এবং টোকেন-হোল্ডারদের ভোট দ্বারা পরিচালিত হয়। এটি কেবলমাত্র কয়েক সপ্তাহে ~$150 মিলিয়ন ইথার (একটি অত্যন্ত বড় ক্রাউডফান্ডিংয়ের) সংগ্রহ করে। প্রস্তাবটি ছিল সহজ এবং বিপ্লবী: "কোডই আইন।" মানুষ, বোর্ড, বা বাঁচানোর কোনো ব্যবস্থা নেই—শুধুমাত্র ইথেরিয়ামের উপর চলমান অপরিবর্তনীয় কোড। 17 জুন, একজন হ্যাকার The DAO-এর কোডের reentrancy দুর্বলতা ব্যবহার করে, 28-দিনের উত্তোলনের বিলম্বের আগেই ~$50 মিলিয়ন (3.6 মিলিয়ন ETH) "চাইল্ড DAO"-এর মধ্যে চুরি করে। তরুণ ক্রিপ্টো বিশ্বে আতঙ্ক ছড়িয়েপড়ে। ইথেরিয়ামের সম্প্রদায়কে 2টি 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 1547483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647483647 The DAO-এর code-এ reentrancy vulnerability exploit-এর result-এ $55 million (3.6 million ETH) steal-এর result-এ, Ethereum community-এর samne dui option: Option A: "Code is law" follow kore hack-er result-ke accept kora (original chain) Option B: Hard fork kore history rewrite kora, ar stolen fund-der investor-der kache phire dora আলোচনা-এর por, community vote (85% in favor) er result-er upor, Ethereum July 29, 29, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July, July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July July June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June - June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — June — 29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29.29. অথবা: The DAO-এর code-এ reentrancy vulnerability exploit-এর result-এ $55 million (3.6 million ETH) steal-এর result-এ Ethereum community-এর samne dui option: Option A: "Code is law" follow kore hack-er result-ke accept kora (original chain) Option B: Hard fork kore history rewrite kora ar stolen fund-der investor-der kache phire dora. আলোচনা-এর por community vote (85% in favor) er result-er upor Ethereum july 25th-এ hard fork execute kore. Most users and miners migrate kore new chain-e (today’s Ethereum/ETH), jeখানে fund gulo restore kora hoyeche. A minority je bharosha kore blockchain immutable hote hobe se ra unforked ledger-e thake ar Ethereum Classic (ETC) jenmo nibe. Ethish event prove kore diche blockchain governance-e code is law… until the community votes otherwise. It exposed smart-contract risks, spurred better audits and tools, and showed that even "decentralized" systems bend to human consensus when stakes are high. Ethereum post-fork thrive kore, incident-ti crypto-r messy blend of idealism and pragmatism er foundational lesson hoye uporthe. — Ethereum’s DAO Hack & Hard Fork (2016) A $55 million hack of the first major DAO project split the Ethereum community into two: Ethereum Classic and Ethereum. In 2016 The DAO launched as Ethereum’s flagship experiment: a decentralized venture fund governed entirely by smart-contract code and token-holder votes. It raised ~$155 million in Ether in just weeks—the largest crowdfunding haul ever. The pitch: “Code is law.” No humans—no boards—no bailouts—just immutable code on Ethereum. On June 17 a hacker exploited a reentrancy vulnerability in The DAO’s code and drained $55 million (3.6 million ETH) into a “child DAO” before the withdrawal delay. Panic swept the crypto world. The Ethereum community faced a stark choice: Option A: Stick to “code is law” and let the hack stand (original chain). Option B: Intervene with a hard fork to rewrite history and return the stolen funds to investors. After heated debate and a community vote (85% in favor), Ethereum executed the hard fork on July 25th. Most users and miners migrated to the new chain—today’s Ethereum (ETH)—where the funds were restored. A minority who believed the blockchain should be immutable stayed on the unforked ledger—birthing Ethereum Classic (ETC). The event proved that in blockchain governance: code is law… until the community votes otherwise. It exposed smart-contract risks, spurred better audits and tools, and showed that even “decentralized” systems bend to human consensus when stakes are high. Ethereum thrived post-fork; the incident became a foundational lesson in crypto’s messy blend of idealism and pragmatism. — Ethereum’s DAO Hack & Hard Fork (2016) A $55 million hack of the first major DAO project split the Ethereum community into two: Ethereum Classic and Ethereum. In 2016 The DAO launched as Ethereum’s flagship experiment: a decentralized venture fund governed entirely by smart-contract code and token-holder votes. It raised ~$155 million in Ether in just weeks—the largest crowdfunding haul ever. The pitch: “Code is law.” No humans—no boards—no bailouts—just immutable code on Ethereum. On June 17 a hacker exploited a reentrancy vulnerability in The DAO’s code and drained $55 million (3.6 million ETH) into a “child DAO” before the withdrawal delay. Panic swept the crypto world. The Ethereum community faced a stark choice: Option A: Stick to “code is law” and let the hack stand (original chain). Option B: Intervene with a hard fork to rewrite history and return the stolen funds to investors. After heated debate and a community vote (85% in favor), Ethereum executed the hard fork on July 25th. Most users and miners migrated to the new chain—today’s Ethereum (ETH)—where the funds were restored. A minority who believed the blockchain should be immutable stayed on the unforked ledger—birthing Ethereum Classic (ETC). The event proved that in blockchain governance: code is law… until the community votes otherwise. It exposed smart-contract risks, spurred better audits and tools, and showed that even “decentralized” systems bend to human consensus when stakes are high. Ethereum thrived post-fork; the incident became a foundational lesson in crypto’s messy blend of idealism and pragmatism. — Ethereum’s DAO Hack & Hard Fork (2016) A $55 million hack of the first major DAO project split the Ethereum community into two: Ethereum Classic and Ethereum. In 2016 The DAO launched as Ethereum’s flagship experiment: a decentralized venture fund governed entirely by smart-contract code and token-holder votes. It raised ~$155 million in Ether in just weeks—the largest crowdfunding haul ever. The pitch: “Code is law.” No humans—no boards—no bailouts—just immutable code on Ethereum. On June 17 a hacker exploited a reentrancy vulnerability in The DAO’s code and drained $55 million (3.6 million ETH) into a “child DAO” before the withdrawal delay. Panic swept the crypto world. The Ethereum community faced a stark choice: Option A: Stick to “code is law” and let the hack stand (original chain). Option B: Intervene with a hard fork to rewrite history and return the stolen funds to investors. After heated debate and a community vote (85% in favor), Ethereum executed the hard fork on July 25th. Most users and miners migrated to the new chain—today’s Ethereum (ETH)—where the funds were restored. A minority who believed the blockchain should be immutable stayed on the unforked ledger—birthing Ethereum Classic (ETC). The event proved that in blockchain governance: code is law… until the community votes otherwise. It exposed smart-contract risks, spurred better audits and tools, and showed that even “decentralized” systems bend to human consensus when stakes are high. Ethereum thrived post-fork; the incident became a foundational lesson in crypto’s messy blend of idealism and pragmatism. — Ethereum’s DAO Hack &