Ethereum 2.0 launches

Post by sosuke » Tue, Dec 01, 2020, 4:44 PM UTC

T0Bi wrote: post #232

sosuke wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: this complaint is null now! Poo, minimum 32 ETH or at current prices $19k. This reinforces my dislike of staking. Only making the already rich richer. Keeping lesser ETH holders out of the profit. But who am I kidding; if I magically had 32 ETH to stake I'd probably feel differently.

You can use staking pools as well to stake less than 32 Eth. It's the same concept as PoW. If you have a lot of money, you can buy ASICS and stake for yourself (making you richer). If you don't, you'll join a mining pool and earn money relative to your hash power. PoW makes the rich richer as well, that's life. With PoS, you have at least skin in the game (your stake).

Post by hanniabu » Tue, Dec 01, 2020, 4:49 PM UTC

tromp wrote: post #290

flixic wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything I know about cryptocurrencies makes me think you and parent are completely right, and PoW cannot work without inflation (or even with very low inflation, that does not justify the cost of running hardware in the absence of transactions). Just relying on transaction fees should lead to downward spiral of use, where fees are way too high to maintain use, or network security is too low to protect value. I'd l…

PoW can work fine with the inflation rate going to zero, and without relying on transaction fees. All it needs is a constant (or an eventually constant) block reward. An effective zero inflation is already achieved when the new emission merely balances the amount of coins getting lost.

Post by hanniabu » Tue, Dec 01, 2020, 4:51 PM UTC

tromp wrote: post #292

konschubert wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't solve the fundamental cost problem with Proof of Work: - If people pay high effective tx fees, it's shit because, well, it's expensive. - If people pay low effective tx fees (through lightning or block size increase or whatever) then, as soon as inflation ends, the money won't be enough to pay for a sufficient hash rate.

PoW doesn't need inflation to end.

Post by arcturus17 » Tue, Dec 01, 2020, 4:53 PM UTC

earthtolazlo wrote: post #124

arcturus17 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You will not get a satisfactory answer. Cryptocurrencies will only make sense in cataclysmic scenarios or for very niche use cases. Trust systems (of which money is one) work well (some times very well) 99.99% of the time. It’s certainly been useful to some people for gambling - but that use case could’ve been satisfied with a video game, or a physical casino.

I guess it depends on what you mean by cataclysmic scenarios. I can’t imagine many cataclysmic scenarios with working electricity and internet, to say nothing of mass-produced phones/personal computers.

Post by hanniabu » Tue, Dec 01, 2020, 4:57 PM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #133

Sargos wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BTC (2%) and ETH (4.5%) are both inflationary right now and have never been deflationary. BTC will be inflationary until about 100 years from now. ETH is a bit more complex but in about a year when it switches from proof of work to proof of stake the inflation will drop to <1%. When EIP-1559 is implemented next year then most of the transaction fees are burned which will likely drop the inflation rate into the negati…

Deflation = value of money increases. Inflation = value of money decreases. Sargos seems to be confusing ' inflation ' and ' monetary inflation ' (increase in money supply).