4 ms·

a coalition of wealthy interests can trivially dictate the consensus rules with very little to no recourse on your part. Even if the chain splits, they can main

a coalition of wealthy interests can trivially dictate the consensus rules with very little to no recourse on your part. Even if the chain splits, they can maintain their share on both chains, and even suppress the minority chain. In PoW miners risk going bankrupt overnight for egregious behaviour like that. I'd like to see how one defines "slashing" programmatically that is impartial, works algorithmically, and does not have edge cases that can lead to catastrophic failures without handwavy assumptions that every single PoS network has today.

dawnbreez 5y ago
No, no, back up a second. The argument being made in the parent comment is that once there is one entity with enough stake in the network to dictate where it goes, they can just pull out before tanking the network. But my understanding was that you can only have enough stake in the network to make decisions...by having that stake in the network. If you un-stake your crypto and cash out, by definition, you no longer have any stake in the network. If you no longer have any stake, how do you have a controlling stake?
- newaccount74 5y ago
  If you had a controlling stake in the past, couldn't you just rewrite history to make it seem like you still have stake?
delaaxe 5y ago
You can look up how Ethereum's beacon chain implements slashing
- inter_netuser 5y ago
  Yep, isn't it great to get slashed for being DDoSed? Amazing breakthrough, realy. Now ddos blackmail can be actually measured in money. At least you could point to avalanche or something else that's better constructed. Eth is a dinosaur at this point, albeit with the fattest treasury.
  - DennisP 5y ago
    If you go offline the penalties are very small. You can be offline a third of the time and break even. The real penalty happens if you send conflicting messages, and even that's not too severe unless a lot of other nodes do it at the same time.

dawnbreez 5y ago

No, no, back up a second. The argument being made in the parent comment is that once there is one entity with enough stake in the network to dictate where it goes, they can just pull out before tanking the network. But my understanding was that you can only have enough stake in the network to make decisions...by having that stake in the network. If you un-stake your crypto and cash out, by definition, you no longer have any stake in the network. If you no longer have any stake, how do you have a controlling stake?

newaccount74 5y ago
If you had a controlling stake in the past, couldn't you just rewrite history to make it seem like you still have stake?

delaaxe 5y ago

You can look up how Ethereum's beacon chain implements slashing

inter_netuser 5y ago
Yep, isn't it great to get slashed for being DDoSed? Amazing breakthrough, realy. Now ddos blackmail can be actually measured in money. At least you could point to avalanche or something else that's better constructed. Eth is a dinosaur at this point, albeit with the fattest treasury.
- DennisP 5y ago
  If you go offline the penalties are very small. You can be offline a third of the time and break even. The real penalty happens if you send conflicting messages, and even that's not too severe unless a lot of other nodes do it at the same time.