3 ms·
There's already a solution to this: https://eth.wiki/concepts/proof-of-stake-faqs#what-is-the-nothing-at-stake-problem-and-how-can-it-be-fixed https://eth.wiki/
by dstaley 5y ago
There's already a solution to this: https://eth.wiki/concepts/proof-of-stake-faqs#what-is-the-nothing-at-stake-problem-and-how-can-it-be-fixed https://eth.wiki/concepts/proof-of-stake-faqs#what-is-the-no...
- gruez 5y ago>This can be solved via two strategies. The first, described in broad terms under the name “Slasher” here and developed further by Iddo Bentov here, involves penalizing validators if they simultaneously create blocks on multiple chains, by means of including proof of misbehavior (ie. two conflicting signed block headers) into the blockchain as a later point in time at which point the malfeasant validator’s deposit is deducted appropriately. [...] The second strategy is to simply punish validators for creating blocks on the wrong chain. Which one does ethereum use?
- dstaley 5y agoI believe Casper (Ethereum's PoW protocol) uses the second strategy.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Dzugaru 5y ago> That is, if there are two competing chains, A and B, then if a validator creates a block on B, they get a reward of +R on B, but the block header can be included into A What if it can't (we do ETH 2.342 variant (which doesnt cost us anything contrary to PoW forks) with modified header and later it wins)?