Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
A PoS simplification proposal: make a design that only requires 8192 signatures per slot (even with SSF), making the consensus implementation considerably simpler and lighter. https://ethresear.ch/t/sticking-to-8192-signatures-per-slot-post-ssf-how-and-why/17989
3 replies
22 recasts
199 reactions
Ruj89
@ruj89
I can't quite understand the second approach: which profit strategy leads an entity to choose between high cap and low cap? To me, it seems that a zero penalty risk is regardless the most profitable choice and the most susceptible to attacks.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Freddy Mertens
@freddymertens
How would this not decrease the censorship resistance of the chain? What kind of decentralised meritocratic system of selecting validators is there? Because if there isn’t one I don’t see how this doesn’t make ethereum less censorship resistant?
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Spencer Graham 🧢
@spengrah.eth
Do you have a current intuition about which of the approaches you'd lean towards? My first blush reactions: (1) removing solo staking feels wrong (2) is interesting in a sort of house-senate way, but that is by no means a perfect model (3) would want to see more research on the actual security level
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Love is to Give
@edge
cool
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Jogundas Armaitis
@jogundas.eth
Thanks a ton for reacting to the LST threat and also acknowledging all the other nasty attack vectors like P2P DOS etc. To me, the crux of the matter is that original ETH PoS was economically uncompetitive and thus attracted idealists. With LSTs that's no longer the case.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Aair Wu
@aair
I’m a noob. But does it cut gas fees on mainnet?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
