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

46% of ETH POS post merge is just two addresses

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 49 posts

Re: 46% of ETH POS post merge is just two addresses

#22

Post by charcircuit »

lawn wrote: post #8

I tend towards the theory that POS is more centralizing than POW, and the question is will it stay decentralized or end up with one address (or rather one entity) controlling 50%? With POW a miner needs to continually provide new investments to be competitive, with new and more effective hardware and electricity. But with POS you can just keep your coins in one place, and it will keep building up with no new investme…

>But with POS you can just keep your coins in one place, and it will keep building up with no new investments at all (except running a node, a relatively small cost).

But everyone else will also be building up which means that your relative size will be the same.

Re: 46% of ETH POS post merge is just two addresses

#26

Post by encryptluks2 »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #2

This will probably get lower over the next few days but it still doesn't look very distributed compared with the existing Banking system. It's hard to tell the difference between ETH running on infrastructure maintained by Binance, Binance, and FTX etc and USD going between JPMorgan, Citi, and Goldman. I read a statistic that over 50% of the Ethereum Mainnet is on AWS (but can't find it now) - hopefully that isn't al…

I agree but there people are likely overpaying. Heck, it should be Hetzner or OVH.

Re: 46% of ETH POS post merge is just two addresses

#27

Post by encryptluks2 »

taolegal wrote: post #25

funny how they just ceded true decentralization to Bitcoin & the usual detractors will miss out due to deep-seated prejudices you may as well just use a central bank or traditional database, POW is unlike the rest and for good reason

Bitcoin ceded true decentralization to mining farms a long time ago.

Re: 46% of ETH POS post merge is just two addresses

#29

Post by admax88qqq »

mrits wrote: post #15
lawn wrote: post #8

I tend towards the theory that POS is more centralizing than POW, and the question is will it stay decentralized or end up with one address (or rather one entity) controlling 50%? With POW a miner needs to continually provide new investments to be competitive, with new and more effective hardware and electricity. But with POS you can just keep your coins in one place, and it will keep building up with no new investme…

From a centralization perspective there isn't much difference between POS and POW. Miners are becoming corporations that can be bought and sold.

Sure there is.

The continued investment required for PoW is the difference.

If a PoW coin ever becomes centralized, it can become decentralized by new parties investing in more hashing power.

If a PoS coin ever becomes centralized, then it stays centralized. You can't just "buy" more stake unless the 51% player agrees to sell you some.

It really seems like PoS is the rich get richer without having to expend any effort. They stake their coins (costing nothing) and get rewards. If you have more coins to stake than others on average, you'll win the block rewards more often than others, increasing your ownership share.

In PoW, because computers are constantly getting faster/more efficient, your existing mining hardware depreciates with time and you have to continue to invest to maintain your dominance.

Post reply on HN