> I sort of assumed this DAO thing was intended in this spirit, as an experimental stab on the path to robust contracts.
With millions of dollars in prizes if you could exploit it?
My hope is that the people putting millions of dollars into it are well off people who are OK with putting their spare money into something obviously risky and experimental.
Edit: If this is not how it is, I'd be interested to know who is putting money into the DAO, sociologically speaking. I hope nobody's investing their life savings in it.
My impression is that the DAO people are early adopters mostly from the Ethereum Foundation itself, so the "150 million dollars" number that is bandied about would be mostly paper profits from a much smaller investment. It doesn't mean they ever had 150 million dollars in actual money between them, or any practical way to get it.
With millions of dollars in prizes if you could exploit it!
There are bugs in critical shared software infrastructure like Linux, libc, OpenSSL, and so on as well and not just a few minors ones.
Why would it be any different for "bespoke ethereum contracts"?
I sort of assumed this DAO thing was intended in this spirit, as an experimental stab on the path to robust contracts.