191–200 of 205 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How long can this go on until you stop believing it's a bubble?
Do bubbles become less of a bubble a certain point? What problems does it solve? It has no real use.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/oac9lc/the_charle...
I asked this months ago and did not get any convincing answers. Ethereum is currently decentralized because of the initial POW distribution. Won't there be centralized aggregators of eth so some point in the future a handful of POS nodes control a disproportionate amount of power? Is it so hard to imagine that coinbase or some other exchange accumulates enough eth to sway transaction validation? Seriously, please ans…
https://vitalik.ca/general/2020/11/06/pos2020.html >For certain kinds of 51% attacks (particularly, reverting finalized blocks), there is a built-in "slashing" mechanism in the proof of stake consensus by which a large portion of the attacker's stake (and no one else's stake) can get automatically destroyed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it more centralized than PoW? I see multiple factors that hamper decentralization: - Fixed costs that act as barrier of entry - Economies of scale that lead to centralization - Geographic factors (operation costs being different in different parts of the world, regulation/taxation, supply chain...) This is how I see each factor playing out in both scenarios: - Fixed costs: PoS runs on consumer-grade hardware,…
In practice exchanges end up holding most of the crypto, and they will decide how to use the crypto in PoS. With PoW it looks like miners/pools will quite rarely work as exchanges, so the powers tend to be separated. With PoS, it looks like exchanges will basically run Ethereum, and it look something like Blockstream Liquid, where group of exchanges basically mint the blocks.
Where is censorship resistance when the on ramps and stakers become centralized?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are coins like Monero that are ASIC-resistant and can only be mined with CPU, not GPU.
Incorrect. Monero can be mined using GPUs, and that is the dominant way it is mined. Source : Mined Monero on an R9 290X until a few months ago.
Since then the PoW is RandomX which heavily favors CPUs. I'm 99% sure there is no GPU in existence that can profitably mine Monero since then, assuming your electricity isn't free.
Can someone explain to me how PoS is not centralized? The whole point of crypto and the blockchain is decentralization, no? I feel like crypto/blockchain will end up looking nothing like how it was intended, and be regulated to the point that it's just the next iteration of the traditional banking system, where the current power holders continue holding the power. Maybe I was naive to ever think it would be any diffe…
PoS should be less centralized than PoW as I understand it. At least in Ethereum if you stake your 32 ETH then you get transactions to validate assigned to you randomly. You don't need a purpose-built rig with a ton of hash power to compete so smaller players are incentivized to participate, leading to a far greater incentive to run a node.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In practice exchanges end up holding most of the crypto, and they will decide how to use the crypto in PoS. With PoW it looks like miners/pools will quite rarely work as exchanges, so the powers tend to be separated. With PoS, it looks like exchanges will basically run Ethereum, and it look something like Blockstream Liquid, where group of exchanges basically mint the blocks.
To add onto this, is it so hard to imagine the US gov't asking coinbase, gemini, etc to stop payments from "terrorists" and block their transactions? Where is censorship resistance when the on ramps and stakers become centralized?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ethereum is so enthusiastic about hard forks (or in ETH speak, upgrades) that they have the difficulty bomb which works like the debt ceiling. It's necessary to do a hard fork/upgrade every so often. Meanwhile bitcoin is so against hard forks/upgrades that they can basically only do soft forks and currently do that by a 90% voting agreement by miners. Bitcoin can not even increase the blocksize, the sure as hell aren…
So the personal beliefs of users decide the technical future of the project. Personal beliefs and culture can change rapidly, or become overshadowed by new users. It just means that Bitcoin is only unchangeable because of the current whims of current users - nothing fundamental.
Is this different than saying that the US laws that we admire are held up by the whims of the electorate?
But yes, I guess nothing fundamental because software is malleable, and even then there's still has to be the decision to treat it like it has value. A gold bar or dollar bill means nothing either if the whims of all humans were to change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How many stakers actually have enough to win blocks though. Just as in PoW miners make blocks in proportion to their hashpower, PoS stakers win blocks in proportion to their stake > What is the impact of shorting on PoS - what happens when I borrow enough ETH to win blocks, deliberately mis-verify TXs, and screw up consensus. Well, you can't "mis-verify TXs", everyone can check your work to see that all of the tran…
Semantics on "mis-verify," maliciously verify same-nonce transactions if you prefer. Using the below language to discuss a threat model vs. implications of my tinfoil hat existing or not... 5B USD for an attack isn't a major barrier though to an actor looking to attack ETH, though. Are you implying that it is? For reference, some of the crypto-lenders have around 15B USD-equiv under deposit, and they're fairly small…
Well 5B USD may not be an impossible sum for some corporations and nations, but for some actors this is a barrier, yes.
I'm not necessarily trying to say such an attack is out of the question, I'm just trying to elucidate the question of the difference between PoS security and PoW security. I'm not convinced that your argument about the possibility of a covert accumulation of staking power does anything to distinguish PoS from PoW. You could just as easily invest that 5 Billion to build a chip fabrication plant, use that plant to covertly build ASICs, and surprise the Bitcoin network with a 51% attack.
I asked this months ago and did not get any convincing answers. Ethereum is currently decentralized because of the initial POW distribution. Won't there be centralized aggregators of eth so some point in the future a handful of POS nodes control a disproportionate amount of power? Is it so hard to imagine that coinbase or some other exchange accumulates enough eth to sway transaction validation? Seriously, please ans…
Ethereum was launched with a 100% 'premine' of 72M coins, printed out of thin air and handed to the founders to keep or sell as they decided.
Since then another 44M have been mined, though it's not clear how much of that mining was also by insiders who influenced the work function's hardware compatibility or protected their hardware investment by controlling when/if the work function was changed or when mining was discontinued.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just a reminder that smaller guys don't have 32 ETH to spare. That's $88,603 USD. Not much for the levels.fyi crowd, but a fortune to most people. Which means, whether you can stake is very dependent on your personal situation - especially geography - much like whether you can profitably mine. Of course staking is still better than mining for many reasons. But it's a somewhat rich person's game.
Staking will still be accessible to those with less than 32 ETH via pooled staking, e.g. Rocket Pool: https://www.rocketpool.net/