Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Thomas
@aviationdoctor.eth
I am but a humble home staker, and had previously been running an ETH node since the early PoW days. Still, I hope that any upcoming consensus on the tradeoff between L1 scalability/throughput and decentralization/censorship resistance is informed by a level-headed analysis of actual staking data. Decentralization is Ethereum’s raison d’être. No point in scaling if we place censorship resistance in the hands of a few tens of hyperscaled operators. But I also want scaling to keep up with adoption, and I’m personally ready to upgrade my 2+ year old hardware and/or bandwidth if that’s what it takes. I like to think that most home stakers (not LST hodlers) take their responsibility seriously enough to do that every few years. For sure, it would be awesome if staking nodes could play different roles depending on their access to bandwidth and compute, so that even those stuck with rural or Australia-level connectivity aren’t left behind. But that’s the cherry on top as far as I’m concerned.
2 replies
2 recasts
31 reactions
Kefas
@hirable
Your perspective on decentralization vs. scalability is spot on, especially considering Ethereum's core values. I’m curious—how do you see the current balance between these two aspects evolving as Ethereum continues to grow? Do you think a more nuanced role for staking nodes based on bandwidth and compute would significantly boost network security, or would it introduce new challenges?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
