3 ms·
It's a shame you're being downvoted as your post has substance. This is a genuine issue worth discussing. Validators are run by people who fully control if a t
by spicybright 4y ago
It's a shame you're being downvoted as your post has substance. This is a genuine issue worth discussing.
Validators are run by people who fully control if a transaction is valid or not. You either need a ton of GPUs (currently) or a ton of money to have tangible influence over translations.
This isn't even a hypothetical, there's a few massive wallets that are hoarding a ton of eth that will be given more power from the POS transition.
We're relying on "the goodness of their hearts" validator operators and crossing our fingers validators run the same software with the same rules.
Even if you call out sketchy transactions that are close to 50/50 consensus, nothing will happen unless a ton of people have a ton of money on the line like the DAO split.
We need more discussion on how incentives of each party should be to give the most stable network possible.
- michaelsbradley 4y ago> there's a few massive wallets that are hoarding a ton of eth that will be given more power from the POS transition It's not as if they're automatically given more power. Such hoards of ETH would need to be deposited in units of 32 ETH to activate unique validators. You could have a large number of validators that are actually a single computer program participating in the Beacon chain, but that doesn't make too much difference. At the bottom layer, we're talking about the application of an open p2p protocol on the Internet. People can and will analyze the traffic for that protocol, and it will be possible to identify rough shapes and sizes of players in the network. And such analyses won't be long in coming to public blog posts, etc. following the Merge. If decentralization in the network seems at risk, there will be efforts to remedy the situation. Whether they can succeed is another question.