#以太坊回滚争议

---

The Ethereum rollback controversy has once again ignited a heated debate. This is not only a technical choice, but also a profound questioning of the core concept of blockchain. The cause of the incident is often related to hacker attacks, fund loss or major vulnerabilities, such as the DAO incident that year - a rollback caused Ethereum to split into ETH and ETC, which is still talked about today. Nowadays, whenever similar situations emerge, voices supporting rollbacks always emerge: they believe that this is a necessary means to protect user interests and recover losses. After all, no one wants to watch the hard-earned assets disappear. Supporters of the rollback emphasize that blockchain is a tool to serve mankind, and flexible adjustments to the rules are to maintain fairness and community consensus.

But the voices of opposition are equally sonorous and powerful. They pointed out that the soul of blockchain lies in decentralization and immutability. Once a rollback precedent is set, it is equivalent to giving a green light to "human intervention." This may not only weaken users' trust in the system, but also make Ethereum a laughing stock of "centralization." Imagine if every problem is solved by rollback, what is the meaning of the certainty of smart contracts and the security of public chains? Some even worry that this will become a tool for big Vs and core developers to manipulate the network, which goes against the original intention of the crypto world.

This dispute is essentially a clash between technology and philosophy: pragmatism on one side and idealism on the other. Which side do you support? Do you choose a flexible response of "people-oriented" or stick to the iron rule of "code is law"? Welcome to leave a message to share your views, let's discuss the future of Ethereum together!#Ethereum#Blockchain #Decentralization

---