Ethereum Classic appears here to stay. Despite criticism and uncertainty, the blockchain maintains sufficient computational power and market value to sustain ongoing interest and potential growth. The security breach that triggered the original conflict matters less now. When the hardfork occurred, the overwhelming majority of Ethereum participants—operators of mining facilities, businesses, and trading platforms—aligned with the modification. Initial coverage celebrated the fork as a triumph. Then an unexpected competitor materialized. Technically speaking, the designation is backwards. Since Classic represents the unaltered ledger, it would be more fitting to say the modified version diverged from Classic. Yet at that moment, Classic lacked both community backing and mining strength to generate significant momentum. Following some social media campaigns and a manifesto-style document, prominent Ethereum proponents took notice. Mining magnate and venture capitalist Chandler Guo initially declared intentions to undermine the competing chain. With roughly 100GH/s at his command, Guo announced plans for a 51% attack against the unforked network. The announcement itself generated press coverage and grassroots enthusiasm. Believers in "uncensored" systems flocked to the Classic network, dramatically expanding its computational capacity. Then unexpectedly, Guo reversed course. His computing resources—now exceeding 100GH/s—would now buttress the unmodified chain instead. The reasoning remained opaque. We spoke directly with Guo to understand his initial opposition and subsequent reversal.
**Ian DeMartino: Your initial announcement promised an attack. What shaped that thinking?**
Chandler Guo: One principle: don't perpetrate wrongdoing. The fork was fundamentally misguided. Altering a ledger's record is unacceptable. I wanted to act rightly.
**DeMartino: How do you reconcile that with your tweet?**
Guo: Vitalik Buterin is someone I respect. The fork had my backing initially. I opposed the attacker to support Vitalik. Later, I reconsidered. Maybe he made a catastrophic miscalculation. Rewriting the ledger—that's profoundly wrong. I realized I also erred in endorsing the fork. I'm fixing my mistake. I'm now backing ETC.
**DeMartino: Did witnessing increased computational support influence you? Did it signal to you that the network had legitimacy?**
