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

The Problem with Ethereum

tomerstrolight.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 321 posts

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#41

Post by Tenoke »

latchkey wrote: post #33
FeepingCreature wrote: post #5

Is there any network where the inflationary half-life of the currency is something like a week? I've been looking for something like that since I heard that Bitcoin was deflationary. (I was excited about Eth until I learnt its currency had persistent value...)

This week with EIP-1559, ETH has been deflationary several times now... more fees have been burnt than emitted within a block. It is quite fascinating to watch. https://etherchain.org/burn

Even with EIP-1559 ETH is not projected to be deflationary.

We're getting 0.15-1.1 ETH burned per block, while just the static reward is 2 ETH.

https://etherchain.org/burn

https://bitinfocharts.com/ethereum/

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#42

Post by redisman »

DenseComet wrote: post #6

Seems like one of the core arguments of this is that the the core devs have pushed the difficulty bomb multiple times because they've missed their original timelines for switching to PoS without any repercussions. It seems to me that this is actually the correct thing to do. I'd rather the core devs take their time and iron out the issues instead of being incentivized to play fast and loose with a system that manages…

Every software project ever has been behind schedule

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#43

Post by chrisco255 »

h0l0cube wrote: post #31
DenseComet wrote: post #6

Seems like one of the core arguments of this is that the the core devs have pushed the difficulty bomb multiple times because they've missed their original timelines for switching to PoS without any repercussions. It seems to me that this is actually the correct thing to do. I'd rather the core devs take their time and iron out the issues instead of being incentivized to play fast and loose with a system that manages…

There's a little more to the argument: > This time the working class has their pay reduced from 4 Eth to 3 Eth per block, a 25% pay cut. Miners now earn 40% less per block than at the time of the community’s constitution, which promised that code was law, and which the ruling class later said they would break only once, for what was an especially good reason. But the code is law promise has now been broken so many ti…

Miners for Ethereum are incredibly profitable and benefit enormously from side-channel MEV (miner extractable value) payouts that tip them for transaction ordering. In doing so, they extract value from users making trades. In addition, a reduced issuance in crypto tends to lead to the underlying asset appreciating in value, as noted by the Bitcoin stock-to-flow model in the wake of each halvening.

The "code is law" is not some universal absolute. Blockchains have always been forkable. But a chain can't have a contentious fork without a cost and it becomes costlier and riskier to do later in a chain's life.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#44

Post by latchkey »

Tenoke wrote: post #35
fastball wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual core idea seems to be that the core devs can do whatever they want without cooperation from miners, which is... the opposite of true.

Miners were very opposed to EIP-1559 and in the end when the talks failed they mostly just ignored them. It's kind of true.

Not true at all. There was never any real consensus among miners on this front.

As a very large miner, I was always for 1559 because I understand the underlying mechanics.

The miners who I watched were just kind of bandwagon on the theme of "wait, I'll earn less cause you're burning my fees"?

Which in reality isn't entirely the case (price and usage have gone up, along with the lack of wallet support).

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#45

Post by abecedarius »

DenseComet wrote: post #6

Seems like one of the core arguments of this is that the the core devs have pushed the difficulty bomb multiple times because they've missed their original timelines for switching to PoS without any repercussions. It seems to me that this is actually the correct thing to do. I'd rather the core devs take their time and iron out the issues instead of being incentivized to play fast and loose with a system that manages…

Another point that's underemphasized in the piece: forkable governance with voluntary participation is very different from the scenarios that go with a "ruling class".

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#46

Post by [deleted] »

agumonkey wrote: post #15
dash2 wrote: post #7

"Something here seems awfully similar to the system that crypto-currency was meant to fix. It was meant to eliminate rulers. It was meant to make everyone accountable for their actions. It was meant to reward the intelligent, the hard working and the capable, and not reward the incompetent, or the makers-yet-breakers of promises. However, this repeat of the broken old system seems to be playing out again." One respon…

Also, humans or not, in any given system, there will be people in position to analyze and take advantage of subtle / indirect / emergent effect of that system. Be it better brains, more funding to try strategies, it will happen.

[deleted]

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#47

Post by secondaryacct »

ineptech wrote: post #21

This is overlong and pretty florid, but its conclusion (that a long record of forked changes, each being good for big ETH holders but bad for miners, is roughly equivalent to the self-dealing of wealthy insiders in the traditional financial world) doesn't seem wrong.

Anyone who thought differently when crypto appeared was most likely young and naive. If a system deal with effort credit, some will find ways, whatever rule you think they follow, to get more credit for less effort.

There s no solution, it s the basic of energy limitation: you have an enormous incentive to conserve energy until we can get so much more than we require with so little spending that it becomes irrelevant. But then, we ll find ways, probably, to spend so much energy that we ll reach the limit again.

A bit like in the 2000s when you kept doubling your disk drive space every year and still kept filling it at exponential rate :D

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#48

Post by chrisco255 »

Tenoke wrote: post #35
fastball wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual core idea seems to be that the core devs can do whatever they want without cooperation from miners, which is... the opposite of true.

Miners were very opposed to EIP-1559 and in the end when the talks failed they mostly just ignored them. It's kind of true.

They brought the miners onto the weekly cat herders (the name for core dev weekly sync) meeting they hold. I watched the stream. They listened to the feedback, some other miners that were for it including Stakefish were present. The arguments weren't strong at all from the miners that were opposed and in the end, they dropped it.

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#49

Post by muzster »

void_mint wrote: post #17
tpae wrote: post #11

It takes a lot to build a community. The way that article portrays it ties more into an allegory. Let's not forget that every participant is there voluntarily, and if they are genuinely suffering, they will choose to move on. Ethereum is a powerful connecting force that brings trust within the internet.

> Ethereum is a powerful connecting force that brings trust within the internet. I've got a bridge to sell you when you're ready

Off Topic:

In case anyone is not familiar with the phrase : "I've got a bridge to sell you when you're ready"

(1) A con artist who sold a bridge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_C._Parker

Not to be confused with :- (2) Rumoured that the wrong 'London' bridge was sold to Arizona (vs Tower Bridge) https://www.history.com/news/how-london-bridge-ended-up-in-a...

It could be argued that both apply - but I'm not getting into that argument !

Re: The Problem with Ethereum

#50

Post by ctchocula »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #5

Is there any network where the inflationary half-life of the currency is something like a week? I've been looking for something like that since I heard that Bitcoin was deflationary. (I was excited about Eth until I learnt its currency had persistent value...)

Dogecoin is inflationary, but not to the extent you are looking for [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogecoin#Currency_supply

Post reply on HN