131–140 of 414 posts
Earlier 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?
No.
Ethereum still cannot be used as a form of payment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is someone out there buying ETH because of the power that went in to mining it? It's more about supply and demand, I think. The supply of ETH does change after the merge, but from what I understand there will be less generated than before. All the tokens and contracts that use Ethereum will still need to pay gas fees and now instead of miners earning ETH, stakers will.
Those with a "stake" of ETH will be gaining $xxxx of ETH for a cost of $x, so why would you not sell for a giant profit?
I don't really understand how Ethereum works very well. They are trying to tweak the ETH generation to make the merge work (see the ultra sound money memes). Just because stakers don't have to work hard doesn't mean ETH will crash.
The whole thing does kind of seem hand wavey and magicky (compared to proof of work, I mean) but I've had a hard time finding resources that explain how it works simply.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. Is there a good place to read more about this hardware requirements as a function of validator slots? A concern in my mind with PoS is what is the incentive to expand the physical hardware footprint of…
The HW requirements increase very very minimally. See this response on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/comments/nk9qzt/multiple_...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> - 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.
What reason would anyone have to believe in their benevolence? It would be safer to believe in and use their greed and self preservation.
How are gas fees going to be calculated, and how do you plan to control spamming the network similar to what you see with Solana?
Block times become exactly 12 seconds, that's it. Nothing else changes: it's the same Ethereum, just greener and very slightly faster!
> 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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Layman’s explanation: POW works by solving a complex mathematical problem. :-)
It’s not the layman’s explanation because the average person doesn’t encounter mathematical problems being solved by a brute force lottery. In high school math, problems are solved by choosing the right formula and plugging in the right variables. Throwing the dice trillions of times isn’t what people imagine when they hear “solving a complex mathematical problem.” That framing is designed to make PoW more acceptable…
Heck, I understand well how POW works, and even I think of it as solving a "complex mathematical problem"... the inherently difficult problem of prime factorization.
Anyways, potayto potahto.
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…
Care to objectively articulate the arguments against switching to proof-of-stake? Why is it controversial?
IMO it's preferable to 'the ones with lucrative energy contracts get richer' but obviously not desirable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who wants to set the over/under on $millions that get stolen? If you can think of a way to measure it metaculus would be interested properly. > Which exchange or fund will lose a vast chunk of its holdings? I'd place this at roughly at 0.01% chance for any major exchange or fund
> I'd place this at roughly at 0.01% chance for any major exchange or fund Over 0.01% of major exchanges and funds have been hacked or scammed this month .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Exchanges hold the most ETH. They are a central collusion point which could cause undue influence on the network.
At least it seems they do not own a lot of the existing Eth.