[HN Gopher] Evolution of the Ethereum proof-of-stake consensus p...
___________________________________________________________________
Evolution of the Ethereum proof-of-stake consensus protocol
Author : bpierre
Score : 94 points
Date : 2022-12-24 17:39 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| eloff wrote:
| How difficult would it be to stake Ethereum, supposing you could
| afford a multiple of 32 eth?
|
| I know you can join cooperatives for this purpose, but then it's
| not your crypto anymore and this space is filled with thieves and
| con artists.
|
| It's something I've been kicking around as an idea for a while as
| part of a diversified portfolio, if eth drops to a point where I
| could afford 32.
|
| I'm extremely skeptical of cryptocurrencies, but eth is the best
| of them and the network transaction volume is supposedly in the
| neighborhood with Visa ( something I find hard to believe.)
| yokem55 wrote:
| If you are interested in running what is referred to as a
| 'solo' validator, it isn't that difficult if you already have
| some linux sysadmin experience. There are several good guides
| around setting up the physical hardware, the node software,
| generating the validator key(s), making the staking deposit and
| then running the validator.[1][2][3]
|
| Then there is a very helpful community called EthStaker - they
| have a subreddit at r/ethstaker and a discord (invite should be
| available in the subreddit).
|
| If you want something a little more automated, Dappnode is a
| well regarded web based front-end and the Rocketpool node stack
| makes things very easy to be an operator for their pool using a
| TUI.
|
| There are a lot of options, with a wide range of requirement
| and capabilities.
|
| [1]https://www.coincashew.com/coins/overview-eth/guide-or-
| how-t... [2]https://someresat.medium.com/ [3]https://eth-
| docker.net/
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| In practice: pretty simple. You can do it at home if you have
| decently reliable internet and power.
|
| You don't need five nines of uptime, you need like, two.
|
| You don't get subject to slashing for your node going offline,
| you only get slashed if your node is doing shit out of
| consensus like actively cooperating in double spends.
| hbrn wrote:
| It doesn't seem to be that hard, but keep in mind that staking
| requires you to be actively validating. There are major
| penalties for screwing up (attacking the network), and minor
| penalties even for going offline. You still need hardware,
| network, and electricity to run the validator.
| cmckn wrote:
| > the network transaction volume is supposedly in the
| neighborhood with Visa ( something I find hard to believe.)
|
| I think the PR line is that PoS ETH can "scale to 100,000 TPS",
| but it's currently pushing 15-30 [1]. Visa does much more,
| though various figures are reported from 1,750 to 24,000. So,
| grains of salt and all that.
|
| [1] https://etherscan.io/
| DennisP wrote:
| It's a little more complicated than that.
|
| For one, Visa just does funds transfers. If Ethereum just
| transferred ETH, it could do 700 tx/sec, based on the gas
| limit per block divided by the 20K gas for a simple ETH
| transfer. A lot of Ethereum transactions are more complex and
| use more gas.
|
| Second, second-layer "rollups" already support transaction
| rates up to a couple thousand per second, without losing
| base-layer security guarantees. Essentially they compress the
| transactions on chain. (Actual traffic is much lower than
| that, so far.)
|
| The longer-term plan is to move to rollups in a big way, and
| add a form of data sharding to multiply the on-chain data
| storage. That's where the 100K/sec comes from.
| dmitriid wrote:
| > If Ethereum just transferred ETH, it could do 700 tx/sec
|
| So... Still an order of magnitude less than Visa.
|
| > A lot of Ethereum transactions are more complex and use
| more gas.
|
| How complex are they, are they a significant number, and
| dies this explain the abysmal transaction rates?
|
| Visa aside, on Singles Day AliPay does 1 to 1.5 _billion_
| transactions in _one day_.
|
| Okay. AliPay is an outlier. Klarna does about 2 million
| transactions per day, an average of 23 per second (it's
| significantly higher during peak hours, and lower during
| off-peak hours. Source: worked at Klarna). The transaction
| includes: client lookup (a complicated affair that differs
| from country to country and session to session), credit
| score calculation, order set up, payment (out of a several
| dozen different options) set up... all while conforming to
| banking and local regulations across 45 countries. Anything
| in eth anywhere close to that complexity-wise?
|
| > Second, second-layer "rollups" already support
| transaction rates up to a couple thousand per second
|
| So layer 2 batches transaction into a batch that then gets
| batched on layer 1 into a bugger batch that is then written
| in one go to the blockchain.
|
| Congrats, you've reinvented batch processing.
| pa7x1 wrote:
| Ethereum runs the EVM, which is a Turing complete
| execution environment. It can run things of arbitrary
| complexity.
|
| > Congrats, you've reinvented batch processing.
|
| This is an extreme over-simplification of zero knowledge
| proofs. You would do well in digging deeper what is being
| achieved instead of dismissing it without any
| understanding.
| rafale wrote:
| You are not making an effort to appreciate the opposite
| point if view. An order of magnitude for a young,
| decentralized, trustless and permissionless network is
| quite an engineering feat.
|
| How complex? -> Turing complete. Also there is more to
| L2s than batching. Their aim is to maintain the security
| guarantees of the L1 without sacrificing availability.
| Plus, Zk proofs and merkle trees allow for great data
| compression in the rollup.
| lekevicius wrote:
| You are right, but a better place to follow progress is
| https://ethtps.info/. It shows TPS across all layer-2s.
|
| Current network demand doesn't really require them, but after
| EIP-4844, "100 000 TPS" should be possible.
| patriksvensson wrote:
| Correct, the plan is to scale to that level but currently is
| not doing that. The current L1 (Ethereum Mainnet) + L2
| combined TPS can be seen here https://ethtps.info/
|
| Important to note that Ethereum embraces the idea that L2's
| will provide a lot of the scale and L1 will remain the base,
| main layer of security. So the goal isn't for L1 to scale
| massively, but to be able to support a healthy ecosystem of
| secure L2's which scale in different ways!
| patriksvensson wrote:
| I suggest checking the /r/ethstaker/
| (https://www.reddit.com/r/ethstaker/) community if you are
| interested in staking. I've been staking from genesis block and
| has required very little upkeep. Dive in!
| robocat wrote:
| Over many years, the 32 ETH limit really screws everyone in the
| world who can't afford to stake $40k USD.
|
| Choices are: use custodial staking (share your keys with
| custodian - risky), use non-custodial staking (keeps your keys
| private but has costs e.g. Lido charges 10% of your staking
| rewards), use an L2 coin (risks), use a financial proxy for
| Etherium (ugggh).
|
| I guess running your own node means you can't use a cold
| wallet, so security costs/risks are high?
| yokem55 wrote:
| > Choices are: use custodial staking (share your keys with
| custodian - risky), use non-custodial staking (keeps your
| keys private but has costs e.g. Lido charges 10% of your
| staking rewards), use an L2 coin (risks), use a financial
| proxy for Etherium (ugggh).
|
| Rocketpool is non-custodial, allows you to run your own node
| with about 17.6 eth (16 eth + 1.6 eth worth of their token),
| and then earn a commission from the folks contributing the
| other 16 eth and not running a node. There is a decent amount
| of smart contract risk and risk around the value of the
| token, but it is a generally working protocol.
|
| > I guess running your own node means you can't use a cold
| wallet, so security costs/risks are high?
|
| To answer the security concern - The staking keys can only be
| used for validation activities, and can't be used to spend
| the funds. When depositing the stake, you can specify a
| normal ethereum address where withdrawn funds will go to, and
| that address can be controlled with a hardware or cold paper
| wallet/signer. The worst an attacker who compromised your
| node and took your staking keys could do is get you slashed
| (a little more then a 1 eth penalty in normal circumstances),
| which would be of no benefit to them.
| robocat wrote:
| > The worst an attacker who compromised your node and took
| your staking keys could do is get you slashed
|
| Or maybe do some of the "Byzantine validator" attacks in
| the paper?
|
| Thank you for the staking keys info - I find it difficult
| to grok crypto systems.
| DennisP wrote:
| They do hope to lower the 32 ETH limit, but it's a scaling
| challenge on the number of stakers.
| krupan wrote:
| The real problem right now is you can't unstake any eth you
| have staked. The developers promise it's coming soon, but
| personally I wouldn't stake any until then.
| latchkey wrote:
| It is in testnet now.
|
| Given that they successfully transitioned an entire consensus
| change and things didn't implode (yet), I'm feeling a bit
| more optimistic that they can do withdrawals.
| pa7x1 wrote:
| https://withdrawalsdevnet1.ethpandaops.io/
|
| Testnets already happening. Q1 2023 on the table.
| [deleted]
| anonymousDan wrote:
| Apart from the solid advice below, I would probably suggest
| practicing cor a while on a testnet to see can you meet the
| required availability requirements.
| krupan wrote:
| Remember that Visa transactions are not equal to
| Bitcoin/Ethereum transactions. A visa transaction is just a
| promise of payment at some future date, probably. That's why
| they can have such a high rate. Bitcoin and Ethereum
| transactions are settled cash in your wallet. Apples and
| oranges.
|
| Bitcoin has the lightning network based on Bitcoin smart
| contracts that can do Visa-like rates of Visa-like
| transactions. I don't know if Ethereum has anything like that.
| DennisP wrote:
| Ethereum does have a Lightning-style network, but everybody
| sorta lost interest when rollups were invented.
| [deleted]
| blue_rog wrote:
| Nitpick:
|
| Why do the first two images after the LMD-Ghost section [1] look
| like they were made on an iPad? All the other images are made
| using proper tools. I didn't realize that the letter in the first
| image was a V because it looked like a N. Feels slightly
| inconsistent.
|
| [1] - https://github.com/ethereum/pos-evolution/blob/master/pos-
| ev...
| dsco wrote:
| Look at that, crypto _is_ beautiful computer science after all,
| and not what the unoriginally critical HN crowd would like you to
| believe.
| tromp wrote:
| If you want to see beauty, look at a blockchain that focusses
| on elegance and simplicity.
| rvz wrote:
| > and not what the unoriginally critical HN crowd would like
| you to believe.
|
| Of course. Just don't listen to the extreme ones, who continue
| to screech and parrot the same old absolutist takes over and
| over again to the media for engagement farming.
|
| The truth is crypto is here to stay, but not all of them are
| going to survive. Only a few projects and cryptocurrencies will
| still be around longer than others and both crypto maximalists
| and anti-crypto absolutists are going to end up compromising in
| the end.
| stiltzkin wrote:
| You would be surprised how developed is Monero.
| andy_xor_andrew wrote:
| This is a really thorough and understandable explanation. Helped
| me fill in lots of gaps I had.
|
| One thought it does raise in my mind, though - this is
| _complicated_.
|
| Bitcoin is simple. The rules are simple. Simple is really good
| when it comes to securing a currency.
|
| This, in comparison... I mean, oof. I get the high-level "proof
| of stake" idea, which (in my mind) has a similar mental
| complexity to Bitcoin's. But all the algorithms that need to work
| to _support_ it... it introduces the idea in my mind that
| _somewhere_ in one of those algorithms is a small oversight. Even
| if that 's not the case, the thought is there.
|
| My opinions on proof-of-stake hasn't changed (seems much better
| than PoW in real-world use for so many reasons) but it does seem
| to erode the beautiful simplicity of proof-of-work.
| tromp wrote:
| > Bitcoin is simple. The rules are simple.
|
| Compared to the likes of Ethereum, Bitcoin is super simple.
| Compared to others, it's still somewhat complicated.
|
| While the use of PoW for consensus is super simple (most
| cumulative difficulty wins), Bitcoin script is a huge source of
| complexity in itself, with tons of warts. As it turns out, you
| don't need script to do payments, multi-signatures, atomic
| swaps, discreet log contracts, bidirectional payment channels
| etc., i.e. nearly all of the functionality that script is used
| for. All those can be done with so-called script-less scripts
| [1], which is mostly creative use of Schnorr signatures.
|
| Bitcoin's emission is not that simple either with the reward
| halvings every 4 years. A fixed block subsidy (i.e. pure linear
| emission) is not only simpler, but arguably fairer too,
| avoiding a concentration of wealth on early miners/adopters,
| and leaving later generations more than mere crumbs.
|
| [1] https://suredbits.com/schnorr-applications-scriptless-
| script...
| bawolff wrote:
| > Bitcoin script is a huge source of complexity in itself,
| with tons of warts.
|
| It might add a lot of implementation complexity, but in terms
| of conceptual complexity, it's pretty easy to understand at a
| high level.
|
| I also don't find bitcoin halving complex to understand
| either. Whether its good is a separate question.
| xiphias2 wrote:
| Actually the implementation of the script language is super
| simple, just a few hundred lines of code (EvalScript
| function in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/
| src/script/in... ).
|
| I think it's quite well written and worth a look.
| nkuttler wrote:
| > A fixed block subsidy (i.e. pure linear emission) is not
| only simpler, but arguably fairer too, avoiding a
| concentration of wealth on early miners/adopters, and leaving
| later generations more than mere crumbs
|
| Yet Ethereum had a premine of around 60M, roughly half of all
| existing coins today. Later emission seems negligible
| regarding fairness.
| tromp wrote:
| Pure linear emission implies starting from zero. I agree
| coins with pre-mines limit fairness from the outset.
|
| In terms of fairness of coin distribution, 100% PoS <
| Ethereum < Bitcoin < Pure Linear Emission.
|
| PoS effectively ends the distribution of new coins, with
| everybody able to stake to just preserve their share of the
| pie.
| krupan wrote:
| The complication is a huge red flag for me. Enormous. Red.
| Flag. What are we missing in all that complexity? What perverse
| incentives and unintended consequences are hiding in all that?
|
| Also, you can't even unstake your eth. The developers promise
| it's coming soon, but right now, you can't.
| tromp wrote:
| Sadly, there are very blockchains that focus on simplicity.
| Most seem to think that more features is better.
| leashless wrote:
| The Avalanche PoS mechanism is a lot more straight forwards. I
| prefer its aesthetics.
| lekevicius wrote:
| I'm curious! What are its trade-offs?
| tylersmith wrote:
| The primary one is that in the presence of byzantine faults
| it goes for consistency over availability, however the
| Avalanche ecosystem generally prefers that choice.
| gukov wrote:
| Bitcoin is Notepad, Ethereum is becoming MS Word.
| louloulou wrote:
| Bitcoin is a money, Ethereum is becoming a Rube Goldberg
| machine to obfuscate the fact that it was issued as a
| security - where the issuers were paid WITH MONEY.
| jrm4 wrote:
| Yup. I've always said that Bitcoin is the grey brick
| cellphone or the Model T; the famous proof-of-concept that
| nonetheless ends up getting overtaken by better tech.
| jrm4 wrote:
| This seems like it would be _extremely_ simple for tech folks
| to understand.
|
| Strikes me as strongly analogous as to why each of us doesn't
| run our own email server? Which is, when email was first
| invented, may have not seemed like a bad idea, but in terms of
| scale something like federation works better?
| heinrich5991 wrote:
| Permalink: https://github.com/ethereum/pos-
| evolution/blob/c51c4cee300e6...
| 2Gkashmiri wrote:
| how do you get started with "smart contracts"? all the
| "tutorials" always end creating your own crypto and that's it....
|
| i need something basic, like alice and bob contract to sell 100
| watermelons for 1 BTC and sarah is the arbitrator in case they
| have a problem... something like this.
|
| or a smart contract to validate a sale of a house for 2 BTC.
|
| or a partnership deed for a business between alice and bob with 3
| clauses
| saurik wrote:
| https://cryptozombies.io/ ?
| bmelton wrote:
| For Solidity-based tokens, learn Solidity to be able to know
| the syntax for creating your contract.
|
| After developing the contract, use something like Truffle Suite
| to validate that the contract is good, and add a testing suite
| around it.[1]
|
| Find a test net for the coin that you're developing for and
| create an account. Generally testnets will allow you to have
| "play money" to work with. This will allow you to learn how to
| deploy your contract to the testnet (which is functionally
| identical to mainnet)
|
| Deploy it there, test it further. Write apps around it with
| tools like web3.js or eth.js as appropriate.
|
| Buy some currency for the applicable mainnet and deploy your
| contract to mainnet just as you did with testnet, only this
| time it'll cost actual currency to deploy -- this will vary
| wildly by network and token and such.
|
| This guy's videos are pretty helpful:
| https://www.dappuniversity.com/articles/the-ultimate-ethereu...
|
| Different tokens have different protocols and such. The above
| works for Eth and Eth-based tokens. Cardano is Haskell-based,
| and refers to smart contracts as programs, and the process is
| wildly different. Some other tokens use Rust, or other
| languages, but the BASIC outline I've laid out is basically the
| same no matter which (except for Cardano, which may be the
| same, I have no idea.)
|
| [1] - https://trufflesuite.com/
| sschueller wrote:
| Anything that connects to the physical world makes little sense
| at the moment as it defeats the purpose of such a smart
| contract.
|
| What you can do is anything that is related to moving ETH or
| ERC tokens/NFTs between addresses.
|
| So an example that you see often is a Kickstarter type
| contract. This contract collects ETH from many sources over a
| period of time but will only pay out to the payout address if
| the minimum is reached in that time period. Otherwise all the
| funds are returned. This contract is fully autonomous and can
| be validated to do what it is supposed to do. You don't have to
| trust a single company like Kickstarter to follow the rules or
| not cancled your compain. The project being a scam or not
| compleeting is another story.
|
| So in other words what you can do in a smart contract are
| financial constructs that are zero trust.
|
| The reason many scams happen is also in part that people are
| not checking that the contracts are solid and prevent rug pulls
| etc.
| cortesoft wrote:
| I don't understand the benefit of that... in the end, you
| have to trust the person you are sending the coins to to do
| what they say the will. This is true regardless of the smart
| contract. The only thing the smart contract does is guarantee
| that at least other people are also getting scammed.
|
| Come to think of it, though, it doesn't even guarantee that.
| The person who created the contract and will get the funds if
| the minimum is reached could always just send ETH from one of
| their other own accounts to trigger the threshold.
| dmitriid wrote:
| > that people are not checking that the contracts are solid
|
| Ah yes. It's the people's fault that they don't check code in
| esoteric programming languages running on esoteric VMs using
| made up words for everything.
| boomerango wrote:
| If you are interested in learning more about the space, look
| into Chainlink oracles.
| fwip wrote:
| > Anything that connects to the physical world makes little
| sense at the moment as it defeats the purpose of such a smart
| contract.
|
| Which is why they're useless except for implementing
| complicated financial schemes. Which, in practice, are mostly
| scams.
| leashless wrote:
| This is not true. Let me quote the UK's Head of Civil
| Justice:
|
| 6. The theory is to dispel the myth that blockchain is a
| fringe technology used only by those wanting to risk their
| livelihoods or possibly make their fortunes on volatile
| cryptoassets like Bitcoin.
|
| 7. The blockchain is now at a stage in its development
| equivalent to where the internet was in or around 1995. The
| internet was unstoppable in 1995 and blockchain technology is
| unstoppable now. It will become ubiquitous in all major
| industrial and financial sectors, simply because it allows
| for the immutable recording of data, thereby reducing
| friction in commercial and consumer transactions and
| obliterating the scope for dispute as to what has occurred.
|
| 8. As the Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice in
| England and Wales, I hold an office that pre-dates modern
| trade in derivatives and reinsurance, even steam engines,
| powered flight, and certainly the internet. I am particularly
| and obviously concerned about the reputation and development
| of English law and the jurisdiction of England and Wales.
|
| 9. Many people do not realise that English law governs
| trading in EUR600 trillion of OTC derivatives annually, in
| EUR11.6 trillion in metals trading, in PS250 billion in M&A
| deals, and in PS80 billion in insurance contracts every year
| - just to take a few examples. My hope is that English law
| will prove to be the law of choice for borderless blockchain
| technology as its take up grows exponentially in the months
| and years to come.
|
| https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-
| content/uploads/2022/02/Speech-M...
| shkkmo wrote:
| This seems like a non-sequitor. It is not clear what you
| are disagreeing with or what point you are trying to make
| with that quote, besides that a top UK lawyer is pro-
| crypto.
| dinkumthinkum wrote:
| I don't think this makes the case that you are claiming.
| Smart contracts are not the equivalent legal contracts,
| it's a very good word. As for #6, I think people are more
| interested in more complicated rug-pulls involving NFTs
| then just trading BTC.
| charcircuit wrote:
| Start here https://remix.ethereum.org. This IDE lets you test
| smrt contracts in an emulator. You can get a quick overview of
| solidity here https://learnxinyminutes.com/docs/solidity/ and
| the docs are here https://docs.soliditylang.org/en/latest/
|
| >alice and bob contract to sell 100 watermelons for 1 BTC and
| sarah is the arbitrator in case they have a problem...
| something like this
|
| You create an owner variable that is used to show who can
| withdraw from the smart contract and is set to 0 at the start.
| You add 2 methods. The first is a method that is only usable by
| Sarah that lets her change the owner variable. The second is a
| withdraw function that is only usable by the owner. You can
| even enforce that the owner can only be set to Alice or Bob if
| you want.
|
| Bob deposits 1 wrapped BTC. If Alice gives him the watermolens
| Sarah sets Alice as the owner. If Alice doesn't Sarah sets Bob
| as the owner.
|
| >a smart contract to validate a sale of a house for 2 BTC.
|
| You don't need a smart contract for that. Every transaction
| already gets validated by the network.
|
| >a partnership deed for a business between alice and bob with 3
| clauses
|
| This depends on the clauses but you would put all the company
| assets into the smart contract and then write methods that let
| you spend those assets while not violating those clauses.
| throwaway98797 wrote:
| give crypto zombies a try:
|
| https://cryptozombies.io/
| Arnavion wrote:
| I only have a surface-level understanding of smart contracts,
| but you'd need an oracle for the off-chain validation part of
| the three situations you mentioned, and
| https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/oracles/ seems to have
| some contract examples.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| hm creating your own crypto token is a smart contract, its just
| a standardized set of classes, modify the classes and see what
| happens
|
| anyway try scaffoldeth.io
|
| you compile the tutorial website first and then build a bunch
| of common smart contract scaffolding
|
| note this is the EVM ecosystem so it would be impossible to
| conflate example in pure BTC, smart contracts are playing
| catchup in BTC ecosystem. There are a couple competing attempts
| there, very little scaffolding. There are many orders of
| magnitude more activity in the EVM ecosystem than there are in
| bitcoin ecosystem/UXTO model smart contracts.
| montenegrohugo wrote:
| What's the hangup with normal tutorials? There's a plethora of
| tutorials online.
|
| People recommend ethernauts[1] and cryptozombies[2], but I
| found those quite slow when I was learning. Most useful for me
| was reading existing implementations of smart contracts, and
| learning from there.
|
| M1guelpf wrote these a while ago, might be helpful examples:
| https://github.com/m1guelpf/lil-web3
|
| happy to chat if you need help
|
| [1] https://ethernaut.openzeppelin.com/
|
| [2] https://cryptozombies.io
| golgappa wrote:
| [flagged]
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-24 23:00 UTC)