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

Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

chainparrot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 179 posts

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#71

Post by terrio »

ahtihn wrote: post #51
Taek wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, its not genuine to say Eth has 400,000 validators as many of them are the same entity. It's a similar story for nodes as well. A ton of the reported nodes are actually running on AWS and ultimately its a fairly worthless metric. For a while the crypto community valued node count as a meaningful number for measuring decentralization, and naturally from that moment forward people have been fully shameless about ru…

> A ton of the reported nodes are actually running on AWS So? That doesn't mean anything, Amazon doesn't control the nodes just because they are running on its infra.

Guess what would happen if Amazon would just block certain type of traffic.

US gov or the CIA/fbi just forces AWS to do so.

Since Snowden not unreasonable.

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#72

Post by mhluongo »

ahtihn wrote: post #51
Taek wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, its not genuine to say Eth has 400,000 validators as many of them are the same entity. It's a similar story for nodes as well. A ton of the reported nodes are actually running on AWS and ultimately its a fairly worthless metric. For a while the crypto community valued node count as a meaningful number for measuring decentralization, and naturally from that moment forward people have been fully shameless about ru…

> A ton of the reported nodes are actually running on AWS So? That doesn't mean anything, Amazon doesn't control the nodes just because they are running on its infra.

Depends on the custodial setup!

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#73

Post by SilasX »

jgarzik wrote: post #31

Answer (12 yr crypto dev & veteran): Number of nodes is a poor metric that is easily gamified (pumped up), presenting an artificial picture. If a blockchain's economics purposefully incentivizes nodes, then number-of-nodes is entirely subsidized, in one common example. Further, the "Sybil" factor - which one party controls many nodes - and other centralizing factors - e.g. 90% of nodes are on Big Cloud - also complic…

>Number of nodes is a poor metric that is easily gamified (pumped up), presenting an artificial picture. If a blockchain's economics purposefully incentivizes nodes, then number-of-nodes is entirely subsidized, in one common example.

I'm not sure that this dynamic would compromise the metric's usefulness. A cryptocurrency can only offer such incentives in-protocol if it's made the currency have real-world, persistent value. So any ability to bribe users to run nodes would itself be a validation of the cryptocurrency's success/influence/etc.

(That is, being paid 1000 ScamCoins a week to run a node won't be much of an incentive if they're only worth trillionths of a penny each.)

I do agree your next paragraph identifies a real problem though:

>Further, the "Sybil" factor - which one party controls many nodes - and other centralizing factors - e.g. 90% of nodes are on Big Cloud - also complicates the number-of-nodes use as a simple metric and useful comparator.

It's definitely hard to identify how truly independent the nodes are.

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#75

Post by beaned »

Taek wrote: post #20
coconut08 wrote: post #2

Wait isn't each collection of 32 eth considered a separate validator no matter the source? If that's the case then wouldn't that mean that coinbase and other exchanges make up the massive overwhelming majority of those validators? If that's the case is it really good faith to claim that there are 400+ thousand validators and then arbitrarily put ethereum in first place?

Yes, its not genuine to say Eth has 400,000 validators as many of them are the same entity. It's a similar story for nodes as well. A ton of the reported nodes are actually running on AWS and ultimately its a fairly worthless metric. For a while the crypto community valued node count as a meaningful number for measuring decentralization, and naturally from that moment forward people have been fully shameless about ru…

Is this measurable? Is it possible to tell which nodes are running in the cloud, and count them?

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#76

Post by wyldfire »

mandarax8 wrote: post #44
TakeBlaster16 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> estimated cost of 51% attack Someone already built that one here: https://www.crypto51.app/

Is it 'illegal' to attempt a 51% attack?

It seems very likely it would be considered theft or fraud.

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#77

Post by mbesto »

throw101010 wrote: post #56
mbesto wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Answer (0 yr crypto dev & veteran): I start a new coin call $FOO. I release 1,000,000 coins. I sell one coin to a friend for $1,0000, and keep the remaining 999,999 coins for myself. The market cap is now $100M. > Number of nodes is a poor metric that is easily gamified (pumped up), presenting an artificial picture. You can game either one.

Firstly I don't understand who you are "answering" to, the GP didn't talk about Market Cap as a relevant metric. Secondly, Market Cap is only relevant when reported by popular metrics websites which vet their data sources a little... nobody relevant is listing your coin anywhere, sorry if it disappoints you. Thirdly, I'm sure that in your first year as a veteran you will learn to care for coins/token which have liqui…

> Firstly I don't understand who you are "answering" to, the GP didn't talk about Market Cap as a relevant metric.

No but they were clearly refuting the alternative suggestion (nodes) was game-able. That was my point.

> Market Cap is only relevant when reported by popular metrics websites which vet their data sources a little

> you will learn to care for coins/token which have liquidity/volume either on reputable CEXs or in tokens/networks with a good track record on DEXs.

This is hilarious, because your idea is that:

- It's a popular metrics website

- You believe they are vetted

by a centralized web site, is the exact antithesis of cryptocurrencies. What happened to decentralization?

> You can't really game liquidity for long without risking your capital.

Sure, but why is that relevant here? We're not talking about liquidity as being the relevant metrics, we're talking about market cap.

Market cap is such a hilarious concept for cryptocurrencies because it converts everything to a fiat, which, again, is the antithesis of cryptocurrency.

> I know this is HN, so I would expect less low brow criticism... but who am I kidding this is about cryptocurrencies, rules don't apply.

Meeting low brow comments with low brow comments, chapeau!

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#78

Post by mbesto »

mgraczyk wrote: post #60
vlovich123 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet so many instances of crypto coins that did this. I’m pretty sure they all had public books. The challenge isn’t I sell one coin. It’s wash trading. You create sufficient volume from multiple different anonymous accounts continuously. That’s impossible to decipher because ownership is impossible to untangle.

This only works if the exchange is in on it. That has happened many times but it's much harder to do than faking node activity.

It's much easier to fake the initial activity, then start to have "real" users pile on. The only value I created in my ICO was that I created fake demand and the lemmings followed.

Re: Blockchains by number of nodes/validators

#79

Post by drexlspivey »

password1 wrote: post #37
TakeBlaster16 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> estimated cost of 51% attack Someone already built that one here: https://www.crypto51.app/

These numbers are really low, I think I'm missing something otherwise I don't understand why 51% aren't a common issue.

That's just how much electricity it will cost you to sustain the attack for 1 hour. You still need to find the hardware. You'll also need to find someone to accept your transaction (that needs to be bigger than those 2 costs combined to make it profitable) and give you cash in return. Then you can defraud them keeping the cash and coins by reversing the transaction.
Post reply on HN