Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement • Hacker News Board

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#101

Post by nly » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 8:54 AM UTC

vvpan wrote: post #40

tomc1985 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand, why is spinning metal not good enough? For the large amount of storage required it seems like it would be a good idea.

Sometime in 2017/18 it has been found that one of the biggest bottlenecks for the network were propagation speeds and that those were largely weighed down by disk writes. Thus pretty much the whole network switched to SSDs and things improved tremendously. Some other networks have implemented stateless clients and Ethereum has been working on going in that direction for a while with a lot of effort being dedicated to…

Doesn't make sense. Most people have faster spinning rust write speeds than they do internet bandwidth. Unless the client is generating a lot of data client side, how can writes ever be a problem? Just buffer appropriately

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#102

Post by cryptica » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 9:03 AM UTC

I never understood why people like Ethereum. It's one of the worst cryptocurrencies in existence.

They've been working on staking and sharding for years and have shown no results on those fronts. This update is insignificant. This is not normal. There is something seriously wrong with the development process. IMO, they have been infiltrated by saboteurs and their project has become corrupted.

Unfortunately, this is not something which can be fixed. The corruption exists at every level of the project; all their developers and miners are happy to have an inefficient blockchain as it allows miners to collect high fees. The leaders of the project want to stretch out development as long as possible so that they can drain the Ethereum Foundation's coffers at a rate which won't attract the attention of regulators. The top developers are corrupt and just want to increase their salaries and get promotions by collecting dirt and using extortion instead of delivering results. They hire new people who they believe can be corrupted to join their side... As someone who works in the blockchain industry, I can say that it's a total mess in there. The more valuable the project, the more corrupt it is.

Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Money is power. Ethereum is money. QED.

They will never deliver anything meaningful. Never.

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#103

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 9:06 AM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #91

Eth isn't yet a grown up ecosystem when one party can push for a major network change like this, and there not be any question that it'll go through. Democracy where one party wins every vote isn't really democracy. Benevolent dictator works for software projects, but not for currencies.

[deleted]

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#104

Post by casi18 » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 9:21 AM UTC

ur-whale wrote: post #93

liquidise wrote: post #2

EIP 1559 is a substantial change to the handling of gas fees on the network. In addition to making gas fees be 2 parts (base and "priority" fees), this includes a provision for "burning" the base fee, reducing the overall ETH supply. From the code itself: # miner only receives the priority fee; note that the base fee is not given to anyone (it is burned) Models i have seen suggest this will not make ETH deflationary,…

ETH supply equation was already hard (some would say impossbile) to predict. It looks like this is making things worse. Will anyone ever be able to answer the question "what will be the max number of ETH in circulation on date X?" ?

The answer is easy and has always been the same: The amount will be what we have all collectively decided is the right amount to keep the system alive and secure. Minimum Viable Issuance.

The only certainty in life is change. Saying "we will have x amount on date y" isn't helpful for developing coordination tools that will actually last into the future. Isn't it much better to have a system where we can say "this is how issuance will respond to these different possible futures".

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#105

Post by casi18 » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 9:33 AM UTC

londons_explore wrote: post #91

Eth isn't yet a grown up ecosystem when one party can push for a major network change like this, and there not be any question that it'll go through. Democracy where one party wins every vote isn't really democracy. Benevolent dictator works for software projects, but not for currencies.

I dunno, remember Parity (who were very big players and leading devs in eth at the time) wanting a fork to recover contract funds and it was plainly rejected by the rest of the community.

That said im also not really sure what you would be asking for as a change to the process? Anyone is welcome to join the discussions, propose changes, defend them, code them. What would make it "grown up" and mature in your eyes? Also what "one party" are you talking about, a person? organisation? There are multiple eth client teams, and London has been one of the most discussed hard-forks there has been, 1559 has been in discussion and development for a few years now.

Im genuinely interested what would have to happen for you to see it as democratic? is it a question of sybil resistance? funding for teams?

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#106

Post by delaaxe » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 9:35 AM UTC

nestlequ1k wrote: post #72

I understand some of the upgrades going into the London fork, including EIP-1559, but I don't understand "the merge". Does it mean that some kind of sharding will be in place, and the currently useless PoS chain will be able to communicate with the PoW chain?

The merge won’t include sharding

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#107

Post by lvs » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 9:37 AM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #12

hanniabu wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The deflationary aspect isn't speculated to kick in until after the merge to PoS when the issuance drops significantly. Regardless, I don't believe it will be deflationary long term. It will likely just last a year before it reaches an equilibrium.

The loss of coins means it will likely be massively deflationary over time. I don't have the numbers for ETH but off hand I believe 20% of all BTC has been lost already, since just 2009. That's an annualized 1.55% effective supply deflation rate during a period where new supply was quickly generated. Basically every random walk down the timeline leads to 100% of coins lost in the course of time. This is of course sep…

Dogecoin, on the other hand, has a static issue rate in the reward schedule. I believe it was totally accidental and not at all by design, but it is plausible that it will reach an equilibrium with coin loss in the next few years.

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#108

Post by delaaxe » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 9:40 AM UTC

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #82

zeven7 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the hell should I trust the miners more than the leadership? You say this like the leadership is this big, scary, shadowy group. The Ethereum leadership is one of the main reasons I invested in the coin. I love the leadership, and I trust them to make good decisions for the ecosystem.

'Ethereum leadership' did a rollback once, so there is zero reasons to believe they won't do this again if this will be in their interests. You see, 'code is a contract', but then it isn't.

In “their” interest, as in, in the interest of thousands of people that got rug pulled because of a hack

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#109

Post by tobltobs » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 9:55 AM UTC

RoboTeddy wrote: post #86

jl2718 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of that complexity is still in the priority fee. There is still zero incentive to include base-fee-only transactions.

Not quite: under typical Ethereum chain conditions, you can include a small constant-sized priority fee to encourage miners to include your transaction. (This is really simple, and can be a default which most users are never even aware of.) This priority fee is free money for the miner; the only reason they would not include your tx is because it would make their block slightly larger, which would make it propagate o…

High gas prices are often caused by bidding wars between front-running bots. This upgrade will not stop this dynamic.

Re: Ethereum London Mainnet Announcement

#110

Post by tobltobs » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 10:02 AM UTC

delaaxe wrote: post #108

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Ethereum leadership' did a rollback once, so there is zero reasons to believe they won't do this again if this will be in their interests. You see, 'code is a contract', but then it isn't.

In “their” interest, as in, in the interest of thousands of people that got rug pulled because of a hack

Code is law ... until it doesn't suit my interest.