以太坊社区拒绝回滚网络以否定$ 1.4B bybit hack的想法

据称，周五，加密货币交易所BYBIT被朝鲜的拉撒路集团（Lazarus Group）入侵，该集团从交易所（ETH）中排出了近14亿美元的Ether（ETH）。

Major cryptocurrency exchange Bybit was allegedly hacked on Friday by North Korea’s Lazarus group, which drained nearly $1.4 billion in ether (ETH) from the exchange.

据称，朝鲜的拉撒路集团（Lazarus Group）在周五遭到了主要的加密货币交易所交易所Bybit的侵犯，该集团从交易所（ETH）中排出了近14亿美元的Ether（ETH）。

Following the news, BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes – who also claims to be a major ether (ETH) holder – wrote a post on X to Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin on whether he will “advocate to roll back the chain to help @Bybit_Official.”

此消息之后，Bitmex联合创始人Arthur Hayes（也声称是主要的Ether（ETH）持有人）在X上写了一篇有关以太坊联合创始人Vitalik Buterin的帖子，他是否会“提倡“倡导”链条来帮助 @ @ bybit_official。”

Meanwhile, in an X spaces session, Bybit CEO Ben Zhou revealed that his team had also reached out to the Ethereum Foundation to see if it was something the network would consider, adding that such a decision should be based on what the network's community wants.

同时，在X空间会议中，Bybit首席执行官Ben Zhou透露，他的团队还与以太坊基金会联系，以查看网络是否会考虑的事情，并补充说，这样的决定应该基于网络社区的需求。

Hayes's post immediately provoked a fierce reaction from the Ethereum community, which was firm in its belief that it wouldn't happen. Some even questioned whether the BitMEX founder was joking. CoinDesk reached out to Hayes over X to clarify his comments.

海耶斯的帖子立即引起了以太坊社区的激烈反应，这坚定地认为不会发生。一些人甚至质疑Bitmex的创始人是否在开玩笑。 Coindesk通过X与Hayes联系，以澄清他的评论。

Ethereum members, like the core developer teams, are vastly against “rolling back” the network because it would override core elements of decentralization. If Buterin decided on his own that it would happen, then that would be seen as the end of Ethereum’s ethos, which heavily involves various developer teams and other community members when it comes to the health and state of the blockchain.

像核心开发人员团队一样，以太坊成员非常反对“回滚”网络，因为它将覆盖权力下放的核心要素。如果Buterin决定会发生这种情况，那么这将被视为以太坊精神的终结，在涉及区块链的健康和状态时，这大大涉及各种开发人员团队和其他社区成员。

“Rolling back the chain would give ETH no purpose,” said user @the_weso in a post on X. “What's the point if you can just change rules.”

用户@the_weso在X上的一篇文章中说：“回滚链条将无目的。

Some outside the Ethereum community pointed to the 2016 DAO hack as an example when $60 million in ETH was stolen. The network went forward with a hard fork, splitting the old network into two, and the new chain continued on as Ethereum.

以太坊社区以外的一些人指出，2016年的DAO Hack是一个例子，当时6000万美元的ETH被盗。该网络用硬叉向前走，将旧网络分为两个，而新链则继续作为以太坊。

However, that hard fork was not a “rollback.” It was known as an “irregular state transition.” Ethereum technically can’t “roll back” the network because it relies on an account model, where accounts hold users' ETH.

但是，硬叉并不是“回滚”。它被称为“不规则状态过渡”。从技术上讲，以太坊无法“回滚”网络，因为它依赖帐户模型，其中帐户持有用户的ETH。

At the time of the hack, developers upgraded their nodes to a new client or software. Those who didn’t upgrade their nodes were still on the old chain, which became known as Ethereum Classic.

在黑客攻击时，开发人员将节点升级到新客户或软件。那些没有升级节点的人仍在旧链上，该链被称为以太坊经典。

When the nodes upgraded to the new software, the stolen ETH could move from one Ethereum account address to the next.

当节点升级到新软件时，被盗的ETH可以从一个以太坊帐户地址转移到下一个。

“The 'irregular state change' that they implemented at the time of the DAO hard fork was this: they airlifted all the ETH in the DAO smart contracts out to a refund contract that would send you 1 ETH for every 100 DAO tokens you sent in,” wrote Laura Shin of Unchained in a post on X.

“他们在DAO Hard Fork时实施的'不规则状态变化'是：他们将DAO Smart合同中的所有ETH空运到退款合同中，将为您发送100个DAO TOKENS的退款合同，您发送的100个ETH 。”