Are there known cases of miners or other organizations resisting this transition? Will there be people left mining the old proof-of-work chain? Something like Ethereum Classic but for PoW.
Mainnet Merge Announcement
91–100 of 609 posts
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#92Quoted post unavailable.
Absolutely inane response. Most energy used by miners is not clean. And much of the world is either experiencing a large increase in energy costs or, in Europe’s case, an impending energy crisis due to the war in Ukraine.
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apologies if I get this incorrect, I'm an amateur, but I have read about the design - the slashers will likely be few and centralized, but that's not disastrous because the slashers must provide proof of wrong doing to cause someone's ETH to get "slashed". That is, they're likely to be centralized (though they don't have to be! I believe anyone can be one) but they have to prove to everyone that something should be s…
> they have to prove to everyone that something should be slashed in order to do so Who is everyone? Because obviously it can't include the people who just colluded to deceive the network.
Wouldn't it be a percentage of the people? So > 51%?
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's say it like this: In the near future the rules are made by the people with the most ETH and soon after the most ETHs will be earned by the people who make the rules.
The rules have always been made by the ethereum foundation and friends. How many rollbacks and forks have they done at this point?
Just the one I think? Sure there have been network and client issues at times but that goes for Bitcoin as well.
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Miners do make Bitcoin rules though, the entire protocol is a consensus protocol driven by the miners.
Wrong; if miners deviate from the rules, then their blocks are simply ignored by everyone else.
If a group of miners with minority compute power deviate from the rules they are ignored. If a group of miners with majority of compute power deviate from the rules, they become the rules.
This process is how all changes to Bitcoin get rolled out.
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#96Is it incorrect to say that ethereum is now entirely centralized with some extra steps? Like, you have this proof of stake thing, but the only reason it works is because there's just a small number of validators, which is just going to be the ethereum foundation and friends. edit: putting this at the top because nobody is responding on topic. I am NOT talking about the class of people who stake 32 eth to validate nod…
Apologies if I get this incorrect, I'm an amateur, but I have read about the design - the slashers will likely be few and centralized, but that's not disastrous because the slashers must provide proof of wrong doing to cause someone's ETH to get "slashed". That is, they're likely to be centralized (though they don't have to be! I believe anyone can be one) but they have to prove to everyone that something should be s…
Sounds like the police.
Also do they prove before or after slashing?
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they have to prove to everyone that something should be slashed in order to do so Who is everyone? Because obviously it can't include the people who just colluded to deceive the network.
Wouldn't it be a percentage of the people? So > 51%?
But you already have 51% of people lying for their own benefit in this scenario.
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's the opposite. Proof of work is more centralised than proof of stake, because the former has an economy of scale: it's cheaper to add a single miner if you are a big mining operation vs a small mining operation. On the other hand, staking 1 eth is always staking 1 eth.
You can't stake 1 eth yourself. You need to at least 32 eth. Plus you need to make an investment to run your own a validator.
There are staking pools, just like there were mining pools.
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#99How will this affect the revenue and stock prices of major hardware manufacturers? Particularly GPU manufacturers? If the price of GPU's drop due to a large second hand market opening up, would GPU manufacturers be hurt in any way?
Nvidia is down almost 50%... from its high around Jan/Dec. I suspect people saw this coming from a mile away. If you think the effect is likely to be stronger or weaker than the market predicts, bet on it now.
People stopped buying GPUs a while back, it makes no sense to buy a GPU for mining 6 months before the merge
Re: Mainnet Merge Announcement
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's incorrect to say PoW miners can censor transactions. With PoS, the big players control the small players. If the minority doesn't play along, their funds will be slashed by the procotol. If 66% of validators censor you, your transaction will never be finalized. With PoW, the big players cannot coerce the small players in any way. Everyone independently controls their own blocks. If 66% of miners censor you, your…
The part about PoW is falase. If 66% of miners really want to censor you, they will also censor the other 34% of miners if those miners choose to mine a block including your transactions. If 50% (or thereabouts) they can prevent your transactions from every getting confirmed. Sure, the 34% could collude until they happen to produce 6 blocks in a row, but each individual member of that group would make more money by g…
I suppose that is possible, but we're thinking of two different incentive structures.
If 66% of miners censor their own blocks to comply with OFAC, then eventually the transaction will get in.
If 66% of miners not only censor their own blocks, but also collude to continually reorg the chain, then obviously all bets are off, the project has failed, and the exchange rate is headed to 0.
I think the former is infinitely more likely than the latter.