Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ethereum 2.0 launches

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 639 posts

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#421

Post by chemeng »

brandonmenc wrote: post #323
joeblau wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a Bitcoin advocate, I just recognize the value the invention provided and I recognize that this whole cryptocurrency space relies on it being successful for long enough for anything else usurp it. If Bitcoin got hacked right now, everything crashes with it. Compared to Bitcoin, there are consensus mechanisms that are a lot faster (3 orders of magnitude), cheaper (almost free transaction cost), near instant fi…

> there are consensus mechanisms that are a lot faster (3 orders of magnitude) Correct me if I'm wrong, but this still falls far short of like, VISA.

PoS and Sharding on ETH (part of ETH2) should theoretically allow it to surpass VISA's transaction bandwidth. (Visa Currently reported to be around 65k Tx/s, though average volume is somewhere in the 1-5k Tx/s)

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#422

Post by pitaj »

konschubert wrote: post #216
thebean11 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your take on off chain solutions like lightning as a solution to the high tx fees?

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.

What about BCH, where they're increased the block size so many smaller transaction fees can still build up to a large reward for miners?

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#423

Post by woah »

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 wrote: post #407
nootropicat wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Security deposits of attackers in ethereum are slashed, up to 100%, in case of an attack. The value at stake can potentially grow into hundreds of billions, much more than any PoW chain can hope to accumulate in mining revenues in its entire existence. Last but not least, there's no way to delete PoW attacker's gpus, but hostile stake is always going to be slashed. Asic pow chain can be forked - once - to a gpu pow,…

> Security deposits of attackers in ethereum are slashed, up to 100%, in case of an attack. What defends against the attacker configuring his nodes to just not relay the blocks which slash his deposits, by having a majority in the network connectivity, and thereby convincing victim nodes that he in fact is the victim of false slashing because the victims will only discover the slash-claims much after the attackers "v…

You seem to assume that the attacker has control over the entire internet.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#425

Post by phyalow »

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 wrote: post #412
rauljordan2020 wrote: post #246

Eth2 dev here, maintainer of https://github.com/prysmaticlabs/prysm , one of the implementations currently running the blockchain written in Go. This has been a monumental effort. There are 3 other implementations in mainnet, and consensus is running perfectly. Few other protocols in blockchain have more than one dominant implementation. The beauty of eth2 comes from its efficiency in signature aggregation: https://t…

Hey, I tried figuring out what the most recent official Ethereum wallet is, but the wallets which the website lists all seem like third-party ones. The previous official wallet's repository says "Mist and Ethereum Wallet have been deprecated.". Is it true that the Ethereum foundation isn't providing a wallet software anymore? Why is that? I would consider it as quite unsolvable as a user to determine which of the 24…

Just use Metamask!

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#426

Post by ryebit »

eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 wrote: post #407
nootropicat wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Security deposits of attackers in ethereum are slashed, up to 100%, in case of an attack. The value at stake can potentially grow into hundreds of billions, much more than any PoW chain can hope to accumulate in mining revenues in its entire existence. Last but not least, there's no way to delete PoW attacker's gpus, but hostile stake is always going to be slashed. Asic pow chain can be forked - once - to a gpu pow,…

> Security deposits of attackers in ethereum are slashed, up to 100%, in case of an attack. What defends against the attacker configuring his nodes to just not relay the blocks which slash his deposits, by having a majority in the network connectivity, and thereby convincing victim nodes that he in fact is the victim of false slashing because the victims will only discover the slash-claims much after the attackers "v…

Not OP... but one big difference between PoW and PoS is that:

when a PoW block is mined, there's no way to know how much hidden equipment is out there mining a parallel chain, which could suddenly appear and take over with more accumulated work. You hope the malicious actor doesn't have 51%, but there's no way to actually prove that they aren't out there.

with PoS on the other hand, the set of validators who are voting on a block is known many blocks in advance. so say a malicious validator has X% of the voting power on a given block: he can't refuse to relay the other votes, because it will be obvious to all other nodes that he only speaks for X%, and what he's broadcasting lacks quorum, because the other (100-X)% votes are missing.

Whereas the other (100-X)% group will be actively broadcasting that they're slashing his stake; and if (100-X) has quorum, those votes will be accepted as valid by all the nodes on the network, regardless of what the malicious actor decides to broadcast.

TLDR: under PoW, silence is assumed to be absence of dissent, since number of miners out there is unknown. Whereas under PoS, silence still allows proving lack of quorum (since the voters are known well in advance), so censorship doesn't let a malicious validator legitimize their vote.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#427

Post by eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 »

pietjepuk88 wrote: post #419
eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, I tried figuring out what the most recent official Ethereum wallet is, but the wallets which the website lists all seem like third-party ones. The previous official wallet's repository says "Mist and Ethereum Wallet have been deprecated.". Is it true that the Ethereum foundation isn't providing a wallet software anymore? Why is that? I would consider it as quite unsolvable as a user to determine which of the 24…

With the advent of hardware wallets, and so many competing wallets/interfaces out there (tailored to different user bases), I feel it makes little sense for the Ethereum Foundation to pour their own (human) resources into this. They will support the ecosystems as necessary though, e.g. Metamask got funding way back in 2016.

> I feel it makes little sense for the Ethereum Foundation to pour their own (human) resources into this.

Well, they received $ 18.3 million in crowdfunding [1], so I would dare to say it's not only "their" resources but also the resources of the community which they're spending, isn't it?

Given that the central thing a user needs to use a cryptocurrency is the wallet it would seem a bit weird to collect $ 18M from their users to develop a cryptocurrency and then not develop the software which the users need to use the currency?

I mean they're a non-profit organization, if they don't hand anything out for the $ 18.3 M then they have profited quite a bit by taking in money but not delivering effectively usable goods from it?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-funded_crowdfu...

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#428

Post by eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 »

phyalow wrote: post #425
eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, I tried figuring out what the most recent official Ethereum wallet is, but the wallets which the website lists all seem like third-party ones. The previous official wallet's repository says "Mist and Ethereum Wallet have been deprecated.". Is it true that the Ethereum foundation isn't providing a wallet software anymore? Why is that? I would consider it as quite unsolvable as a user to determine which of the 24…

Just use Metamask!

Thanks, what distinguishes it from the other 23?

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#429

Post by centimeter »

wrinkl3 wrote: post #394
rauljordan2020 wrote: post #246

Eth2 dev here, maintainer of https://github.com/prysmaticlabs/prysm , one of the implementations currently running the blockchain written in Go. This has been a monumental effort. There are 3 other implementations in mainnet, and consensus is running perfectly. Few other protocols in blockchain have more than one dominant implementation. The beauty of eth2 comes from its efficiency in signature aggregation: https://t…

I remember Satoshi's old posts where he claimed that Bitcoin Core was the only viable full implementation of the Bitcoin protocol since it had too many quirks to be efficiently standardized and reimplemented. I wonder if that's still true.

There are a number of alternative full node implementations, such as btcd.

Re: Ethereum 2.0 launches

#430

Post by woah »

nikolay wrote: post #330

One question - why didn't Bitcoin drop to zero? I know, VHS survive and Betamax didn't, but unlike Betamax, Ethereum is pretty popular for everything, not just for low-class commodity speculation.

There still isn't a lot of real-world use of crypto. Even all the DeFi stuff on Ethereum, while innovative, is derivatives on speculative crypto assets.

As long as speculation is the main thing going on in crypto, BTC is king, since it is purely speculative, has the best name recognition, and doesn't try to hide that fact.

Post reply on HN