Ethereum

1/ I believe that the chain temporarily halting for 6-12 hours is a preferable option to penalizing over 80% of the stakers, especially until we attain a sufficient level of client diversity within Ethereum. We've learned over the years that downtimes don't kill chains.

Ex-/coinbase. Creator of Coinbase Wallet & Cipher Browser. Eng Lead $USDC. Advising /polygon Labs, @family, and @tribes. petejkim.twitter

2/ I acknowledge that some may view the potential disastrous outcome as a means to encourage client diversity, but it's important to note that the majority of everyday users rely on third-party services for staking and have limited alternatives.

Aviator, diver, Etherean, nexialist, PhD in aviation ∩ climate science | Host of /diving /ethfinance /eth-staker /geopolitics /science /singapore /thomas

We'd have to disable inactivity leak and rely on social consensus to revert to the correct chain. Of course, this should be strictly temporary (never for long term) until a set deadline, before which we hopefully achieved adequate client diversity. It's not ideal, but it's less terrifying than destroying 20M+ ETH.

But if the supermajority client (Geth) unexpectedly & suddenly finalizes an invalid chain, how does halting the chain afterward help? Sure, you avoid inactivity leaks for a while, but at restart, those Geth nodes can’t get back to the valid chain without being slashed, since they already attested to the invalid chain