Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Barnabé Monnot
@barnabe
Here is a new RIG Open Problem on the specification of a Multiplicity gadget in the context of Ethereum’s Gasper consensus. Good problem for a consensus researcher interested in censorship-resistance! https://efdn.notion.site/ROP-9-Multiplicity-gadgets-for-censorship-resistance-7def9d354f8a4ed5a0722f4eb04ca73b
3 replies
10 recasts
19 reactions
pintail
@pintail
What an interesting idea. This is the first time I've read about it. Intuitively it seems as though this only provides censorship resistance if at least 1/3 of nodes are non-censoring, so perhaps not as powerful as inclusion lists for this purpose?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Barnabé Monnot
@barnabe
Hello Mr Pintail! Yes this is a downside I see, but with the ability to do the conditional tipping logic and potentially rewarding cleverly the committee participating in the gadget, you could expect to turn weakly-censoring behaviour into rational participants who want to censor as little as possible
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
pintail
@pintail
I guess the question is whether "weak censorship" really exists. My assumption would be that censoring nodes do so out of a fear of severe legal consequences and so their behaviour would not be altered by small incentives.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
pintail
@pintail
I presume the weightings proposed in the article are based on sound distributed consensus principles, but I do wonder if it would be possible to modify the rule in a way which provides stronger non-censorship guarantees.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
