Live data from Hacker News

Merge soon

ultrasound.money

61–70 of 137 posts

Re: Merge soon

#61
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes this one of the biggest upgrades in the history of software? How many Ethereum nodes are there compared to, say, iOS or Android or Windows deployments? What’s their hardware diversity? What’s the complexity of Ethereum compared to the aforementioned operating systems?

Your average software update does not put 200B at risk.

Crypto market cap is a made up, manipulated number. The actual amount of dollars in Ethereum is nothing even close to that.

The average Fortune 500 internal software upgrade probably has more real revenue on the line than an Ethereum update.

Imagine that this update fails and Ethereum goes down. Who’s going to actually notice? Traders on exchanges like Coinbase or Binance wouldn’t be affected. The price would crash, sure, but their actual trades aren’t on Ethereum. Crypto is all about perception of decentralization. It’s a story, not a product.

Re: Merge soon

#62
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes this one of the biggest upgrades in the history of software? How many Ethereum nodes are there compared to, say, iOS or Android or Windows deployments? What’s their hardware diversity? What’s the complexity of Ethereum compared to the aforementioned operating systems?

proof of stake is extraordinarily complicated to get right. that's why it took so long. not only is the code changing, but so is the entire incentive structure of a huge virtual economy, running the code in a sprawling, Byzantine, decentralized system, while trying to keep a miner's revolt from sabotaging the whole deal.

and when the simplest etherum contracts with many reviewer eyes allowed for exploits, how is anyone confident that this has been achieved correctly?

Re: Merge soon

#63
My intuition is that PoS isn't economically stable model. In PoW, the miners had interest in stability of prices because their costs were anchored in reality by the mining rig. So once you had expended the real life cost of a mining rig, your interests were to only increase the price of the coin. Whales might have wanted to manipulate prices but they ran the risk of bankrupting miners (many of them were miners).

Now the incentives are perverse. Since prices aren't anchored by real world expenses, the incentives of whale stakers is extreme price volatility, so that they can increase the share of the network they hold. They are free to pump and dump as they please even more than before because there's nothing anchoring them to reality. They get to set the price alone.

Re: Merge soon

#64
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your average software update does not put 200B at risk.

Crypto market cap is a made up, manipulated number. The actual amount of dollars in Ethereum is nothing even close to that. The average Fortune 500 internal software upgrade probably has more real revenue on the line than an Ethereum update. Imagine that this update fails and Ethereum goes down. Who’s going to actually notice? Traders on exchanges like Coinbase or Binance wouldn’t be affected. The price would crash,…

I mean META stock is down 60% YoY and the revenue is the same. Hard to argue what is "manipulated" vs. perception

Re: Merge soon

#65
post #7
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol They will never be silent. The goalposts will move endlessly.

Some people don’t trust the government, other people do. I like a liquid, fungible asset not controlled by the government. Statists don’t. It’s a philosophical debate more than a technical one at this point.

Bitcoin gives individuals the ability to better protect their wealth/savings by storing it in a form where it can easily be hidden (thus protected). It amazes me some people think that's a bad thing.

Re: Merge soon

#66
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes this one of the biggest upgrades in the history of software? How many Ethereum nodes are there compared to, say, iOS or Android or Windows deployments? What’s their hardware diversity? What’s the complexity of Ethereum compared to the aforementioned operating systems?

Your average software update does not put 200B at risk.

How is it at risk? If something goes wrong you can always return to the old chain.

The old chain will continue to exist anyways because some people dislike Proof of Stake.

Re: Merge soon

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, that's just wrong. If you don't upgrade your software your money is not gone.

If you don't upgrade your client software you wont be able to transact w/ the new/forked ethereum network. Ok so maybe "upgrade your software or your funds remain locked" is more accurate. Still not good.

There only needs to be a single miner that uses PoW and you can freely move your funds to other wallets. You can even start the miner yourself.

So no, your funds are definitely not lost. You might be the only one connected to the "network" but wasn't this the promise of cryptocurrency decentralization?

Re: Merge soon

#68
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your average software update does not put 200B at risk.

Crypto market cap is a made up, manipulated number. The actual amount of dollars in Ethereum is nothing even close to that. The average Fortune 500 internal software upgrade probably has more real revenue on the line than an Ethereum update. Imagine that this update fails and Ethereum goes down. Who’s going to actually notice? Traders on exchanges like Coinbase or Binance wouldn’t be affected. The price would crash,…

It's not a made up number any more than a stock's market cap. Is Apple really worth $2.5 trillion? I dunno, seems like a lot, but the market determines what things are worth.

But for the record, there's more than $100B in USD-backed (cash and equivalents-backed) assets on the Ethereum blockchain. Plus billions of dollars worth of on-chain organizations and applications that exist (Uniswap, Aave, Compound, GMX, etc). More than $28B moves on chain every day: https://money-movers.info/

Re: Merge soon

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

proof of stake is extraordinarily complicated to get right. that's why it took so long. not only is the code changing, but so is the entire incentive structure of a huge virtual economy, running the code in a sprawling, Byzantine, decentralized system, while trying to keep a miner's revolt from sabotaging the whole deal.

and when the simplest etherum contracts with many reviewer eyes allowed for exploits, how is anyone confident that this has been achieved correctly?

Because there have been several testnet merges (including a shadow merge of the mainnet) that have been successful and identified issues that have been fixed.

Re: Merge soon

#70
post #16

An open source project pulling off one of the biggest upgrades in the history of software development thanks to efforts of a distributed group of people should be celebrated here. Else, what is the point in calling ourselves "Hacker" News?

What makes this one of the biggest upgrades in the history of software? How many Ethereum nodes are there compared to, say, iOS or Android or Windows deployments? What’s their hardware diversity? What’s the complexity of Ethereum compared to the aforementioned operating systems?

> What makes this one of the biggest upgrades in the history of software?

> How many Ethereum nodes are there compared to, say, iOS or Android or Windows deployments? What’s their hardware diversity? What’s the complexity of Ethereum compared to the aforementioned operating systems?

The code size for the core software of Ethereum isn't huge. It's possible for one person to understand it, and it's much simpler than iOS, Android or Windows. There are many things running on top, but those are supposd to keep running, similar to applications when you upgrade an OS.

But the finance attached to Ethereum is huge. I checked the figures just now.

$194 billion of ETH is being transferred from one blockchain mechanism to a radically different one, in about 40 minutes (estimated). Instantly, in what is effectively a single special transaction.

The consensus algorithm around that transaction is special and complicated, and it will only ever run once. It has been very carefully tested in advance by many teams at different companies, because it coordinates a handover between two robust but very different kinds of consensus protocols that don't normally link up.

It's unusual for another reason: Blockchains rarely merge two existing blockchains into one. Forking is more common, but not merging two different kinds of blockchains.

This is also an open source style software upgrade, because that $194 billion transaction only happens if enough users of the software have chosen to upgrade and run the new software by then instead of the old software (don't worry, it looks like most of them have). The necessary software was only ready to use a couple of weeks ago, and nothing forces people to upgrade, only incentive and getting the news out to them.

Not only is the consensus algorithm different, the p2p networking protocols are also different after the merge. There are many changes, though most of them are running already on one of the two chains being merged together.

Countless third party applications, defi, secondary blockchains and so on running on top are supposed to be able to continue running, seamlessly. There's a lot of those, running from many authors and companies, and some of those have their own financial value that's not even counted in the $194 billion I mentioned above. Their total value is not clear.

Those third party applications have not, in general, been tested on the new system. Nobody can be sure exactly which ones or how many will fall over, because it has not been possible to test them. It's a big like upgrading Windows XP to Windows 10: Applications are not supposed to be affected if the OS authors did it right.

Unlike most software updates rolled out on large networks, which can be done gradually with the old and new running alongside each other for a while, the Ethereum Merge is one single transaction to transfer everything over including protocols, and requires the whole network to do it all at the same virtual time.

Nobody knows in advance which block will contain the transition. Only the statistical conditions for the transition are set, and there is a kind of meta-consensus protocol to ensure the transfer between very different consensus mechanisms is itself going to satisfy special rules of both consensus mechanisms during the handover.

When it's over, the merge code will probably be deleted from client software, because it is only supposed to run once.

There will be future upgrades, as there have been "hard forks" in the past, but they don't appear require such high levels of carefulness and coordination as the merge. That said, maybe things like the planned switch to sharding, state expiry, change of hash tree structure, and zk rollups will be fairly radical too.

Post reply on HN