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

321–330 of 414 posts

Re: The Merge

#321

Post by pa7x1 »

rakoo wrote: post #299
pa7x1 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no actor in charge of surveilling the network. Every validator is. And every validator is incentivized to do so because you get a reward coming from the slash penalty. So everyone is checking on everyone else.

Validators only add transactions to the ledger. What I was talking about is the slasher, which makes sure nodes are behaving correctly.

When a validator adds a block to the ledger it can include evidence of slashable offenses. Including evidence of a slashable offense gets rewarded so every validator is incentivized to include them.

Further reading: https://eth2book.info/altair/part2/incentives/slashing#the-v...

There is no separate notion of a slasher, everyone gets to provide slashing evidence when they build a block. I don't understand why you build such a weak straw-man and the push it forward as if it was the truth without even checking how the system operates.

Re: The Merge

#322

Post by fzfaa »

lottin wrote: post #301
shukantpal wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False. The problem is so complex we have to resort to guessing / brute force to solve it; if it's so easy, give me a closed-form solution so I can become rich.

The fact that there isn't a closed-form solution doesn't make it a complex mathematical problem. Guessing a number isn't a complex mathematical number, it's just guessing a number.

afaik the solution that has to be "guessed" is not random. We just don't know how to get to it without brute force.

Re: The Merge

#323

Post by Elizabeth0147 »

bluquark wrote: post #197
armchairhacker wrote: post #186

Awesome If crypto wasn't contributing causing a crash in the GPU market and contributing even more to climate change, I don't think it would have nearly as much hate as it does. Sure it's largely used for scams and money laundering, but at least it's used for scams and money laundering in a way I can ignore. Right now Bitcoin and Etherium, the leading cryptocoins, are absurdly slow and expensive, on top of causing al…

> at least it's used for scams and money laundering in a way I can ignore. I thought this, and then my mom got scammed. She realized one day later, and the bank was able to recover the portion sent via bank transfer. But they also tricked her into sending money via bitcoin ATMs, and that portion was not recovered.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Merge

#324

Post by [deleted] »

Elizabeth0147 wrote: post #323
bluquark wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at least it's used for scams and money laundering in a way I can ignore. I thought this, and then my mom got scammed. She realized one day later, and the bank was able to recover the portion sent via bank transfer. But they also tricked her into sending money via bitcoin ATMs, and that portion was not recovered.

Quoted post unavailable.

[deleted]

Re: The Merge

#325

Post by WFHRenaissance »

fzfaa wrote: post #322
lottin wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that there isn't a closed-form solution doesn't make it a complex mathematical problem. Guessing a number isn't a complex mathematical number, it's just guessing a number.

afaik the solution that has to be "guessed" is not random. We just don't know how to get to it without brute force.

Brute-force solutions are still solutions :)

Re: The Merge

#326

Post by WFHRenaissance »

lottin wrote: post #303
Josde wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that is true, I think the point that other users are trying to make is that wording it as "a complex mathematical problem being solved" makes it look like that work is doing something useful when it really is not.

It's worse than that, they're aren't solving anything at all. They're taking part in a lottery, in which participants have to guess a number, and the winner gets to update the ledger. Nobody is solving complex mathematical problems.

They’re brute-forcing the solution to a mathematical puzzle.

Re: The Merge

#328

Post by WFHRenaissance »

steve_taylor wrote: post #315
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…

Going by that description (I'm otherwise a n00b), my guess is that only a fraction of validator slots would be active, which means the network could be easily hijacked by a well-funded party who just wants to see the network burn (e.g. central bank of a superpower). Another possible weakness could occur if staking is mostly outsourced (i.e. staking as a service) and one provider overwhelmingly dominates the market. T…

The threat of a 51% attack still exists on proof-of-stake as it does on proof-of-work, but it's even riskier for the attackers. A attacker would need 51% of the staked ETH (about $15,000,000,000 USD). They could then use their own attestations to ensure their preferred fork was the one with the most accumulated attestations. The 'weight' of accumulated attestations is what consensus clients use to determine the correct chain, so this attacker would be able to make their fork the canonical one. However, a strength of proof-of-stake over proof-of-work is that the community has flexibility in mounting a counter-attack. For example, the honest validators could decide to keep building on the minority chain and ignore the attacker's fork while encouraging apps, exchanges, and pools to do the same. They could also decide to forcibly remove the attacker from the network and destroy their staked ether. These are strong economic defenses against a 51% attack.

Staking-as-a-service will operate as a market of diverse options. The network could decide to fork from an outsized dishonest market participant. It would be controversial, but the validity of the network is generally a common incentive for most involved.

Re: The Merge

#329

Post by betwixthewires »

alchemist1e9 wrote: post #233
DennisP wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transactions and state are only on the PoW chain. The PoS chain only runs the staking protocol. When the merge happens, the PoW software (the "execution client") will keep running transactions, but instead of choosing blocks by looking at miner hashes, it will look to the beacon chain to choose them. So stakers will run both the PoS client, and the execution client with the mining function turned off.

PoW software that does no work? More likely Ethereum is about to fork and big question will be does the market value of ETHpow really go to zero quickly.

I'm willing to bet it does. Well, probably never to 0, but close enough.

There's just too many escape valves. If you're a miner, you don't care about what network you're mining, you care about getting the most profit out of your hardware. There are several EVM PoW chains that are established, have been around and are listed and traded somewhere already, and have functioning contracts in them, and beyond that there are other non EVM PoW chains to direct your hardware at if you're running GPUs. It just doesn't make sense for a miner to take the risk of backing a new chain over moving their hash power over to an existing one.

Re: The Merge

#330

Post by betwixthewires »

mattwilsonn888 wrote: post #269
WFHRenaissance wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I veiled a lot of complexity for sure, but honestly that's for the best. If we talked too in-depth about the implementation of most protocols, I'm sure we'd find something to scoff about XD.

I think its for the worst that most people would rather gloss over the fundamental flaws in Bitcoin, Ethereum and most other chains. They are significant and important.

If they're important why did you just gloss over them? What are they?
Post reply on HN