Given that the merge reduces the electricity cost for new Ethereum by ~1000x, won't the price just tank in a race to the bottom?
The Merge
21–30 of 414 posts
Re: The Merge
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Proof of work is the only way to get acceptable security properties for a monetary system. Proof of stake suffers from the "nothing at stake" problem, leading to grinding attacks etc.
> Proof of work is the only way to get acceptable security properties for a monetary system. Every country's financial system: ahem. The U.S. dollar doesn't require giant energy-hungry server farms to be secure.
Re: The Merge
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Proof of work is the only way to get acceptable security properties for a monetary system. Every country's financial system: ahem. The U.S. dollar doesn't require giant energy-hungry server farms to be secure.
The U.S. dollar is backed by a military many times more energy intensive.
Re: The Merge
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quote The Merge will reduce Ethereum's energy consumption by ~99.95%.
Does the merge come with any real world benefits? Besides now not needing the yearly power consumption of Belgium. Like... Can i buy bread and milk with this thing any time soon?
Re: The Merge
#25> The Merge will reduce Ethereum's energy consumption by ~99.95%. That's something Bitcoin needs ... or even better get rid of it altogether. https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption/
Bitcoin is never going to change from PoW... That's the point of the system, Bitcoin is unchangable, unlike Ethereum. But you are free to create your own PoS cryptocurrency. If some PoS system offers the same security features as Bitcoin, people will just switch from Bitcoin to that.
Re: The Merge
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Proof of work is the only way to get acceptable security properties for a monetary system. Every country's financial system: ahem. The U.S. dollar doesn't require giant energy-hungry server farms to be secure.
Granted, it is not a server farm, but the US military isn't exactly carbon neutral.
Re: The Merge
#27Given that the merge reduces the electricity cost for new Ethereum by ~1000x, won't the price just tank in a race to the bottom?
All the tokens and contracts that use Ethereum will still need to pay gas fees and now instead of miners earning ETH, stakers will.
Re: The Merge
#28Quoted post unavailable.
Re: The Merge
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Proof of work is the only way to get acceptable security properties for a monetary system. Every country's financial system: ahem. The U.S. dollar doesn't require giant energy-hungry server farms to be secure.
The U.S. dollar is backed by a military many times more energy intensive.
Doubtful
Re: The Merge
#30Alternatively, proof-of-stake (PoS) guarantees the security of the network in a different way. In PoS, anyone with 32 ETH can deposit that ETH to become a validator, a node that participates in the network's consensus algorithm. Finalizing a block requires 2/3 of all active validators to sign off on it. Should a malicious actor try to tamper with the underlying protocol by using a large number of validators to revert a finalized block (the equivalent of a "51% attack" in PoW) their funds are slashed — meaning they lose a portion of their staked ETH. This makes attacks extremely expensive; it would be like a PoW system where if you use your mining hardware to attack the network then your hardware catches fire and is destroyed.
PoS does not require the same energy-intensive hardware as PoW. Any relatively recent consumer hardware should be capable of running the software required to operate a 32 ETH staking node. If you deposit more than 32 ETH, you will be assigned multiple "validator slots" by the protocol, but you will still be able to run them from a single computer, though hardware requirements go up the more you stake. Most estimates put the expected energy savings from the switch to PoS to be around 99%.
If you have any additional questions please let me know!