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

The Merge

ethereum.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 414 posts

Re: The Merge

#121

Post by nr2x »

WFHRenaissance wrote: post #30

Ethereum in its current state is using proof-of-work (PoW) to ensure consensus amongst the thousands of nodes in the network. While PoW is reliable and secure, it is also extremely energy intensive. To produce each block on the network participants are required to use powerful and energy-hungry GPUs to solve a complex mathematical problem. Alternatively, proof-of-stake (PoS) guarantees the security of the network in…

What is the reward in PoS? Like, is it worthwhile for me to buy 32 ETH? Do I get more ETH for being a node?

Re: The Merge

#122

Post by pessimizer »

smashem wrote: post #62
Victerius wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, back up a little. Crypto miners mine crypto in order to become rich. With national currencies, this is impossible. Citizens cannot create their own currency, and that's a good thing. If money could be easily forged, it would either be worthless, or a speculative instrument, like every crypto in existence. National governments are the source and the only legal creators of money. Crypto mining also makes the bloc…

> National governments are the source and the only legal creators of money. And those closest to the money printer benefit. And hint, the average joe is furthest from the printer. The future of the average joe is stolen via currency debasement and inflation, but those closest to the printer get richer.

It's people who hold debt who are robbed by inflation, not people who are in debt. The entire political program of the people closest to the money printer is to reduce inflation (and to lower government debt without changing the balance of payments, which by necessity shifts that same debt to individuals.)

Re: The Merge

#124

Post by dorkwood »

> 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

Where does it go? Is it destroyed?

Re: The Merge

#125

Post by pessimizer »

Loveaway wrote: post #44
Victerius wrote: post #13

Earlier 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.

Fiat currencies are backed by huge financial sectors. If all you need are numbers in a database, what are all those towers in NY for?

There's nothing about crypto that shows it wouldn't have exactly the same size of a financial sector in addition to proof of work, so the two aren't doing the same things.

Forget fiat. When money was gold in a vault, that's proof of stake, not proof of work. For proof of work, you'd have to disintegrate the gold. I wouldn't put my trust in a dollar backed by the absence of gold.

edit: I think maybe bitcoin enthusiasts think that value is a sort of spirit, and that if you kill something valuable, then through a huge mass ritual you can direct that spirit into another vessel. Proof that you once had money, and further proof that no one else has that money, should be enough for people to treat you as if you currently have money.

Re: The Merge

#126

Post by ww520 »

WFHRenaissance wrote: post #117
rakoo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the explanation! I have a few questions: - how does the punishment work ? Do all nodes see that a malicious actor changed the chain and write the bad ideas in some ledger meaning "these nodes just lost X ETH" ? - But if the malicious actor owns 2/3 of validators, what does he care what other nodes do ? They effectively control what block is accepted - is there an advantage to run more than one validator, i…

1. Punishment mechanisms here are kind of complicated, but in short, you're punished for mainly 2 reasons: being an offline validator, or for an attestation violating. Slashers are entities that enforce the two above rules. If a slasher determines that you're node is down, or that you're committing an attestation violation (i.e. that you're signing more than one attestation in a given epoch mainly). The slasher actua…

What are the checking mechanisms that 2/3 of the nodes are not colluding together? In other words how do you prove someone owning 51% or 2/3 of the network?

Re: The Merge

#127

Post by ww520 »

entrep wrote: post #88
rakoo wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the explanation! I have a few questions: - how does the punishment work ? Do all nodes see that a malicious actor changed the chain and write the bad ideas in some ledger meaning "these nodes just lost X ETH" ? - But if the malicious actor owns 2/3 of validators, what does he care what other nodes do ? They effectively control what block is accepted - is there an advantage to run more than one validator, i…

> - But if the malicious actor owns 2/3 of validators, what does he care what other nodes do ? They effectively control what block is accepted As I understand it, anyone who owns that amount of ETH would probably be interested in contributing to the trust of the Ethereum blockchain.

Fund can be borrowed. As attested in last the couple months, billions of funds were borrowed to bet on the market one way or the other. Borrowing a billion dollars to subvert the network for a short duration sounds like a feasible strategy.

Re: The Merge

#128

Post by [deleted] »

Loveaway wrote: post #44
Victerius wrote: post #13

Earlier 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.

Fiat currencies are backed by huge financial sectors. If all you need are numbers in a database, what are all those towers in NY for?

[deleted]

Re: The Merge

#129

Post by BoGs83 »

dorkwood wrote: post #124

> 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 Where does it go? Is it destroyed?

It allows any nodes to validate the validator, they can call out anyone out by doing their own computation for the transaction. If they find a bad actor the stake that bad actor put is lost and goes towards the "whistle blower" node in their wallet.

It is based (on my reading of it) on the notion that there are many more good actors then bad. I wonder if you can get in a situation where someone spams bad actors and fudges all the transactions.

Re: The Merge

#130

Post by [deleted] »

latchkey wrote: post #94
bluquark wrote: post #90

This reminds me of the nerve-biting period up to the James Webb launch. The devs put off this transition for so many years trying to plan for every contingency, but we still can't be certain they didn't miss a crucial flaw. In a system where the only thing holding back malicious actors is technical constraints, it only takes one bug or one misaligned incentive for a vicious cycle to take down the entire Ethereum ecos…

It is order of magnitude easier for them to make changes after launch since the code and developers are here on earth and not floating in space.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN