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

Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

blog.ethereum.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#751

Post by x4e »

Siira wrote: post #745
x4e wrote: post #738

People interested in POS should look at Nano [1]. In Ethereum only "validators" validate transactions - those with more than 32 Eth in their own wallet. In Nano "representatives" validate transactions - but individual users vote a representative to represent them (with their wallet balance as a weighting). The difference is that you can have 0.00001 Nano and still have a say over the network. It also removes the need…

> you can have 0.00001 Nano and still have a say over the network. Isn’t that susceptible to sybil (flooding) attacks?

Your voting power is weighted by your balance, so those with higher balances have more voting power, and the representatives with the highest amount voted onto them have the highest amount of control over the network.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#752

Post by roskelld »

kelnos wrote: post #703
leishman wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how everyone complains it's wasteful yet I see absolutely nobody complaining that they have some sort of electricity shortage because of Bitcoin miners.

I don't know what (if any) effect Bitcoin mining has had on electricity prices, but we do have a GPU shortage because of Bitcoin miners. It's a bit ridiculous when regular stores have lotteries to grant you the privilege of purchasing one of a scarce number of GPUs... at regular retail price.

Bitcoin doesn't use GPUs for mining. Bitcoin mining is performed with custom ASIC hardware. GPUs cannot compete as they're not built for purpose.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#753

Post by fredfoobar »

meowkit wrote: post #747
chrischattin wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Ethereum, you need 32 ETH, which is around ~$120k. That's prohibitive a normal person. After EIP1559 goes into effect, it's not out of the question that the price could rise 7x given the power laws at play. What happens when the cost to stake a node is $1M+? What happens 50 years from only the very richest .00001% can afford to run a node? I'm concerned EIP1559 and PoS is a very short sighted implementation that w…

32 ETH was set when it cost much less. That can always be changed if the number or validators is not sufficient to decentralize the network.

Yeah yeah, everything can always be changed in the future.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#754

Post by jtsiskin »

fredfoobar wrote: post #483

Everything in this universe is analogous to Proof of Work, it's the most natural system out there. If there is a base monetary layer for the internet, it should be Proof of Work based (and Bitcoin, because it's got the most work done to improve the technology + network effects).

Can you give an example? Struggling with analogy

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#755

Post by hanniabu »

chrischattin wrote: post #742
vbuterin wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're conflating _consensus_ and _governance_; the two are quite different. It's not PoW vs PoS that allows a chain to resist a coordinated attempt by elites to force a protocol change, it's users personally verifying the chain (and so automatically rejecting chains that violate the rules even if >51% of PoW/PoS nodes support those chains). So no, PoS is not "how our current financial system works". Our curr…

In Ethereum, you need 32 ETH, which is around ~$120k. That's prohibitive a normal person. After EIP1559 goes into effect, it's not out of the question that the price could rise 7x given the power laws at play. What happens when the cost to stake a node is $1M+? What happens 50 years from only the very richest .00001% can afford to run a node? I'm concerned EIP1559 and PoS is a very short sighted implementation that w…

There are discussions to lower the ETH collateral requirements. Right now there is no validator cap so that will lead to issues. The goal is to first set a max validator cap with a rotating validator pool. However, there's still higher priority items to complete first like the merge, unlocking withdrawals, and likely also sharding. Given that, it's liking like this change would come 2 years from now unless priorities change (and assuming there's consensus for such a change).

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#756

Post by roskelld »

meowkit wrote: post #747
chrischattin wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Ethereum, you need 32 ETH, which is around ~$120k. That's prohibitive a normal person. After EIP1559 goes into effect, it's not out of the question that the price could rise 7x given the power laws at play. What happens when the cost to stake a node is $1M+? What happens 50 years from only the very richest .00001% can afford to run a node? I'm concerned EIP1559 and PoS is a very short sighted implementation that w…

32 ETH was set when it cost much less. That can always be changed if the number or validators is not sufficient to decentralize the network.

Genuine question: Who decides that?

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#757

Post by klyrs »

DickingAround wrote: post #726
simias wrote: post #650

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not like cryptocurrencies achieved any of their goals so far anyway. If it's about facilitating pyramid schemes and creating a worldwide casino we might as well do it efficiently and without wasting insane amounts of resources. I'm personally very happy for PoS and hope that it'll be successful, I would be a lot less annoyed with cryptocurrency bullshit if it wasn't so wasteful. With proof-of-stakes it basically…

What do you mean? We totally got what we wanted; we have a deflationary currency we trade for goods and services. I'm 100% serious here; it's been working fine for quite a number of years. The fiat conversion is pretty noisy but BTC on average goes up in value in fiat terms at a fast pace. BTC is easy to turn it into stuff. No one has ever censored my transactions or asked for ID. Even if you buy something really exp…

Transaction fees were north of $50 a couple of weeks ago. Who's buying a pizza with that overhead? Genuinely asking, because I've a bridge to sell

Before the edit window closes... 5 workarounds and counting. Are they interoperable, or is all this a thick layer of bullshit that users need to wade through to spend their "currency"? I see the plurality of "solutions" here indicative of a problem. Yes, you can fix anything with duct tape, but then it gets sticky

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#758

Post by reedjosh »

simias wrote: post #650
leishman wrote: post #574

Proof of Stake is already how our current financial system works. The people with the most money make the decisions. Proof-of-Work is provably resistant to this, as evidenced by the 2017 blocksize debate where almost every large miner and bitcoin company wanted to change the protocol and it was fought off through grassroots efforts. A PoS currency will be controlled by a cabal of US financial institutions, and indire…

It's not like cryptocurrencies achieved any of their goals so far anyway. If it's about facilitating pyramid schemes and creating a worldwide casino we might as well do it efficiently and without wasting insane amounts of resources. I'm personally very happy for PoS and hope that it'll be successful, I would be a lot less annoyed with cryptocurrency bullshit if it wasn't so wasteful. With proof-of-stakes it basically…

Currency competition alone is a major milestone. The USD is the _legal_ tender of the US. As in other currencies are not allowed.

Because digital currency can't just be taken down, those that don't want to live under an inflationary de-facto tax, now have that option.

Re: Ethereum will use around 99.95% less energy post merge

#760

Post by fredfoobar »

vbuterin wrote: post #719
leishman wrote: post #574

Proof of Stake is already how our current financial system works. The people with the most money make the decisions. Proof-of-Work is provably resistant to this, as evidenced by the 2017 blocksize debate where almost every large miner and bitcoin company wanted to change the protocol and it was fought off through grassroots efforts. A PoS currency will be controlled by a cabal of US financial institutions, and indire…

I think you're conflating _consensus_ and _governance_; the two are quite different. It's not PoW vs PoS that allows a chain to resist a coordinated attempt by elites to force a protocol change, it's users personally verifying the chain (and so automatically rejecting chains that violate the rules even if >51% of PoW/PoS nodes support those chains). So no, PoS is not "how our current financial system works". Our curr…

> Our current financial system doesn't give people the ability to independently verify anything at all; it's even worse than the most centralized chains in that regard.

I'm sorry, that sounds incorrect, many people have been "verifying" things independently and sounding the alarm, but nothing happens.

Post reply on HN