Chief Revenue Officer Frank Spiteri concluded: "In the early days of , we have seen a continuation of last year's demand in digital assets from institutions. We have also seen an increase in investor interest in ethereum. We are encouraged by our client's trust in our team to guide them in their journey through the digital asset ecosystem, and for many, ethereum is an important part of that journey.
CoinShares is Europe's largest digital asset investment house, managing billions of assets on behalf of a global client base. Our mission is to expand access to the digital asset ecosystem by pioneering new financial products and services that provide investors with trust and transparency when accessing this new asset class.
How much do you really understand about blockchain? The remarks come after months of speculation as to whether ether would be deemed a security by U. For example if deemed a security, websites offering trading in the token would have required licenses from federal regulators. It has fallen more than 60 percent since its peak in January. The remarks could lower the barriers for mainstream financial products based on ether, including futures contracts.
O said in a statement. Regulators have focused on initial coin offerings ICOs , online fundraisers where new cryptocurrencies are sold.
It only depends on you. Newest way to storing your Ethereum, is to put your Ethereum into a hardware wallet. Be careful, because there are differences between hardware and software wallets. In a hardware wallet, your Ethereum is absolutely safe. No one could steal your Ethereum unless you lost your hardware wallet.
Hardware wallets are technologically similar to a flash drive. If you damage or destroy this hardware wallet you will lose all of your Ethereum. Be careful as this option is not practical. But it only depends on what type of variant is best for you. Read more: Storing your Ethereum? If you encounter any problems or have some question, you can contact us on this mail address info free-ethereum.
Features Ethereum We will turn off two factor authentication when you request password reset. Email Address:. Please follow this rules when use our website Contact us correctly and don't use strong language. Don't use bot or apps to send automatized request. And other website info about use and condition are other rules.
Sign Up Email. Referer Optional field. Ethereum Withdraw Address. Create a Ethereum address? Terms of service? Sign Up. Login Email. Forgot Password? Features of site. A: Cross-shard communication will definitely be slow at base layer, however there are higher-level mechanisms that can be used to implement fast cross-shard communication on top of a base layer that allows any cross-shard communication at all even if slow.
A: It is somewhat speculative at this point. My best guess is that Ethereum 1. This can be made sustainable by doing two things:. If the community gets tired of Ethereum 1. Another possibility is for Ethereum 1. I don't see this as a practical solution, but I'm open to being convinced otherwise : [Justin Drake].
A follow up: I'll add that if any specific user wants to migrate their application to the 2. The main difference between the eth1 and eth2 systems that users will need to worry about is likely to be rent or equivalents like gas-payment-extended bounded TTLs. Basically, will one shard capture all the defi apps because they can't directly communicate with each other on separate shards? A: I would say if that happens, that will create a large incentive for someone to create a defi dapp that can interact with the other defi dapps through asynchronous cross-shard transactions and launch it on a cheaper shard.
A2: At the start in times of low usage, the economic load-balancing might result in over and under utilized shards. Overtime as usage increases, I expect the economic benefits of deploying and interacting on particular shards will become more tangible and result in a more economically rational distribution across shards. Q: Can we run the same validator on multiple machines - in order to avoid penalties if one machine was compromised?
If yes - what happens when we run a validator on 3 machines, one goes temporary offline, one is compromised, one is OK? A: For small amounts of ETH I'd recommend just running on one machine; unless many other validators get penalized at the same time as you, the penalties are not too large.
If you do want to decentralize your validator, then we have recently made progress toward validation being more multi-party-computation friendly, which would allow you to run a validator as a 2-of In that case, as long as two of the three sub-nodes are functioning correctly you'll be fine.
A2: Yes! Ethereum 2. For example, with a 2-of-3 scheme you have can three computers, each with a share of the validator private key, such that two need to be online at any given time. This improves security as well, because an attacker now needs to compromise two of the BLS key shares. Q: Is there tech from any competitors such as Dfinity or any others that is worth adopting into Ethereum 2.
A: Part of the job of the research team is to absorb good ideas from research papers and other blockchain projects. I keep a keen eye on technically interesting projects such as Dfinity, Coda, Zcash, etc. Competitors definitely also have good ideas, and learning from each other is part of the game : [Justin Drake]. Q: Do we need to run a full node to also earn from network fees or would the validator client handle this? A: Depends what you mean by "full node".
The design of the sharding system is such that no one needs to run a node that verifies all of the data of all of the shards. A validator client validates the beacon chain and the specific shards that you get assigned to validate, and that is sufficient to earn network fees. A2: The validator client should abstract the necessary tasks to get revenue from the different revenue streams. This includes being a full node for the beacon chain and one shard at any given time, but that's a technicality you don't have to worry about.
It's also the thing that scares me the most about the proposed design;i can see how they would really increase the security of the random sample selection process in addition to RANDAO but manufacturing hw is a costly, difficult endeavor often subject to unforeseen issues and delays. On that note is an economic incentive structure for running a VDF node being considered? VDF announcements to come in February :. The good news is that Ethereum 2.
The current plan is to have VDF hardware ready in , but would also be acceptable. We are already sharing costs with Filecoin on viability studies. The good news is that we only need one VDF evaluator to be online for normal operation, and even if everyone goes down it's not a huge deal. The main negative consequence is that dApps relying on unbiasable randomness will have to wait longer than expected for the random numbers to arrive. A: I don't see what fundamentally prevents them from happening.
The main challenge in practice is just that these verification procedures themselves have a high cost eg. In theory yes, but as I understand recursive zk-STARKs won't make sense from a performance standpoint for most applications, at least in the medium term. Gas limits per block? Blocks per second? A: The current design has a fixed number of shards, at most one block per 6-second slot, and fixed block sizes.
This means that the data bandwidth is capped. The gas limit on the other hand will likely be floating, just like Ethereum 1. A follow up: Though in the current phase 1 spec that's sitting around in draft mode the block size is so far fixed to 16 kB, as keeping it fixed makes the code for proofs of custody, data availability proofs, etc much simpler.
If we want to bump up capacity later increasing the shard count may well be the simpler way to do it. Q: Why should anyone move to the Beacon Chain? How exactly do you envision the move to happen? Specifically, only validator balances exist in the Beacon Chain. User balances and state exist in the shard chains. Validators will move to the beacon chain to seek profit by providing security and resources to network. Note there is a new proposal to have the beacon chain finalize the PoW chain during the transition period so the validators would be able to provide security both to the new shards and the existing chain.
Users will move to the shard chains to participate in the new scalable, sharded landscape. We envision economic activity to begin to move over as the system stabilizes and begins to show clear economic benefits to the users. It is important to note that a user could choose to not move until the eth1. At first, this will just be a single directional deposit for validators only to begin validation.
Once the state execution layer is in the new shards, users will be able to transfer eth directly to the shards from the PoW chain. In the long term, the plan is to roll the PoW state into one of the shards. The current most favorable strategy from our perspective is to fork the PoW state root into a contract along with an EVM interpreter.
Users could then execute txs on the existing eth1. This option is nice because it allows us to cleanly deprecate eth1. A2: Moving to the beacon chain is done by sending ETH to a so-called "deposit contract" on Ethereum 1. People would send ETH to the beacon chain to become an Ethereum 2. Q: How much funds does Ethereum foundation have and are these enough for finishing Eth 2.
More than enough to finish ETH 2. Q: How is the status of a possibly fixed eth supply at some point in the future? Do you think it's likely? Q: Have you looked into hyraxZK. Any thoughts on them being used in the future as the sizes are still very small.
I wonder what they can be used for offchain as well, especially in networking by producing a zk proof of incoming packets that acts as Natural DDOS Protection. Just some thoughts. A: Have not looked into Hyrax specifically, but I am totally not surprised that things like it exist. I'm definitely very happy with the progress the general-purpose ZKP space has accomplished in the last few years; the very concept of general-purpose ZKP is pretty godlike compared to what I imagined was possible with cryptography as a child.
Our general instinct is to find ways to make it possible to get the benefits of many different ZKP schemes with different tradeoffs in ethereum. The simplest way to do this would be to encourage the development of such tech as application-layer or network-layer addons so that it we do not need an agreement at consensus layer about a single ZKP scheme that everyone uses.
Q: V said that there are no fundamental problems left to solve. Is this true for only phase 0? If so, how confident are you about the other phases? A: Personally I am confident in all of the current fundamental technologies for all the phases outlined so far Casper FFG and CBC, sharding, erasure coded data availability proofs, proofs of custody, receipt-based async transactions, layer 2 for acceleration, abstraction, rent, "stateless client" verification.
There is definitely still a lot of room around the edges for optimization though. A: Honestly hybrid Casper is a bit of a dead end. The design was highly inefficient because of its "implemented-in-EVM" nature, and it turned out that we could not really benefit from the ease-of-implementability of being done in EVM because we would need to write a lot of special-purpose code to make verification of signatures parallelizable.
So we chose the route that would be somewhat more painful in the short term, but significantly lower headache to actually get to a stable sharded system overall. Since it is a one way transfer to the beacon chain, my understanding is that there will be two tokens: ETH1. A: Will The beacon chain allow tokens to be send. ETH in the beacon chain would not be transferable anywhere!
That will make exchanges harder, although we may see a futures' market. Any comments on this? That said, the rate does scale depending on the number of validators participating. The economics of staking will find the natural equilibrium. That said the main risk here is if we set the target rate too low and the equilibrium lands at a low participation rate and thus low security of the network.
Any marginal rate of return on top of this already intended long-term hodling is a gain for the hodler. Q: How would you and or service providers ensure the eth on the Beacon Chain is the same as that on the PoW chain and vice versa? A key design goal of Ethereum 2. Two-way transfers between the beacon chain and the shards, as well as between shards, should come in phase 2. Follow up point: If you wait until phase 2 for two-way flow, you privilege the very few stakers able and willing to wait an undetermined number of years for access to their money.
Follow up A: y ou privilege the very few stakers able and willing to wait an undetermined number of years for access to their money. Q: For how long is the 32eth locked up when running a validator client? What happens if the machine I'm using gets destroyed or stolen during the lock up period? Can you switch machines?
At least as long as you are a validator. You can switch machines. You need a copy of your private keys in case your machine gets destroyed or stolen. Another thing is the withdrawal key used for withdrawals only. Keep that one in cold storage ideally. Q: Contributing to Ethereum 2. Are there any projects which are some sort of "under water", like only few people working on it.
A: I feel at this point there are enough implementation teams, at least compared to some of the other issues that are underaddressed. Off the top of my head:. What work is being done to mitigate this on Phase 0 and 1 given how much more complex these implementations will be? A: As the phase 0 spec is moving into a more stable place, we are beginning to look into explicitly bringing in third party audits, academics, and formal analysis.
In addition to this, we are currently laying down the foundations of cross client testing and fuzzing akin to eth1. This is a major engineering effort that will require many parties other than our research team to plan, build, test, execute, and maintain. I think it is a major strength that so many independent teams with a diverse set of expertise have stepped up to contribute.
Note, one of the design goals in the spec readme -- "to minimize complexity, even at the cost of some losses in efficiency". We're excited to see new efforts like the "Ethereum Cat Herders" and scheduled release cycles emerging in 1. DePM decentralized project management is hard, but we continue to learn and continue to get better. Q: How difficult will it be for 1. Should developers expect to rewrite their contracts to account for state rent and cross-shard communication?
These naive compilations might be inefficient e. Beyond that, there are some unknowns that might change the approach to certain contract programming modesl. For example, storage fees might call for a new ERC20 contract design in which user balances are stored in separate child contracts so that users become responsible for managing their own storage fees related to their coins. Q: What is the latest view on how the "upgrade" to Ethereum 2.
Does this mean, ETH2. What will be the advantages in daily use compared to EHT1. Why should anyone wait till "the mids" to use ETH2. I publicly made the prediction since July that phases 0, 1, 2 will come in , , respectively. Scaling from shards will come in phase 1 and phase 2. On the topic of timelines, for phase 0 specifically, ideally the spec should be close to final in Q1, cross-client testnets in Q2, security audits in Q3, mainnet launch in Q4.
As a rule of thumb, launching in December is hard because of the holiday season. So November and January would be my two best guesses for phase 0. From the article above, this is what I understand as the timeline of Ethereum 2. Given the above timeline, is it fair to say that DAPP's have to wait at least 4 years before they can run their smart contracts on top of Ethereum 2. A: Hi! That article is written by an independent engineer that has been following development so it is not necessarily our 1-to-1 opinion.
I agree that assets and smart contracts won't be available in eth2. At the latest, I expect phase 2 to launch in , but we are building a complex system and can't say for sure what unexpected challenges might arise between now and then. Thanks :. Rust, go, typescript, etc to aid in writing contracts in these languages. The eWASM team has compiled a ton of info here to understand the project from a high level. Q: Hi guys, Would you like to implement an optional decentralized identity layer in the future?
A: Decentralized identity systems are definitely very interesting, but imo out-of-scope for blockchain base layers. The good news is that it's a Turing-complete platform, so anyone can build one on top of ethereum 1. A: In my mind the Ethereum 2. I worry that we botch the spec with poor taste in some of the implementation details, or bugs that we miss. A: It is a similar set of incentives as why you would run an eth1.
A2: Financial rewards through ETH inflation. I think Eric Conner has a spreadsheet somewhere. A: We're definitely trying hard to bring the complexity down! That said we recognize that there's still a way to go, and many features of eth2 don't feel neat and clean the way eg. Nakamoto PoW does. Q: Is there any work being done on reducing the size of the blockchain as it grows? A: You mean the current chain or the 2. Since this AMA is primarily about on the 2. The beacon chain state size is bounded, and there are no objects that hang around forever; even validator records disappear once either their balance drops too low or the validators exit voluntarily and then the withdrawal and exit waiting periods pass.
On the shard chains, we're looking at ongoing storage maintenance fees for every byte of storage, "hibernating" accounts that do not pay up at which point their users are responsible for storing and maintaining the data needed to revive those accounts if they need them. A2: If you are talking about the Ethereum 1. I can imagine kiting tumblers that might make this a computationally intractable challenge. A: There isn't really a concept of "challenging transfers" in the current spec, and if you mean plain old fraud proofs then the answer is that if a block that was confirmed into a history turns out to be invalid then the entire history from that point on is invalid and should get discarded.
A: No. You specify the shard you want. You'll chose based on proximity to contracts of interest, and gas prices. Each shard will have a separate gas market. A software implementation of the VDF would likely be useless for production. A software implementation would be useful for testing though. There will be a small incentive for validators to also be VDF evaluators. Other than that we're mostly drawing from external incentives e. The good news is that we only need one VDF evaluator to do its job.
There will be thousands of VDF rigs given for free to the community. Q: Do Quantum Computers pose a permanent threat to ownerless legacy addresses with significant funds and can they cause collisions with old contracts? A: One of the features of Ethereum 2. I expect quantum-secure signature schemes to gradually become more popular.
Burn addresses can easily be made quantum-secure. Do Quantum Computers pose a permanent threat to ownerless legacy addresses with significant funds. Yes, definitely a threat. Ownerless legacy address could be a systemic risk for blockchains such as Ethereum and Bitcoin. Would be interesting to guestimate how much ETH is at risk.
Is there any idea or plan to convert current tokens to ERC like, efficient format? Code isn't Law. A: I'm hoping that Ethereum 2. Starting from scratch is a unique opportunity in Ethereum's lifetime. Definitely would like to see both issues resolved in 2. The other big things I want to "get right this time" is i multisig wallets and ii not having the "ether used to pay for gas to withdraw funds from a mixer contract being a deanonymization vector" issue that makes privacy hard at the moment.
A: At the consensus layer we are trying hard to be friendly to decentralised staking pools. Hopefully we will see those soon after the launch of phase 0. Centralised staking pools—unlike centralised mining pools—are somewhat awkward because you have to trust the operator to behave properly with your funds.
As for existing contracts, the entire eth1. Q: Are there any courses or subjects in uni that one should take to help in becoming a researcher? A: I'd say you need to be a good self-learner. Math, cryptography, computer science, programming, economics, networking are all relevant. Q: Of proposed ways to tackle state rent problem, which one is your favorite?
What do you think about resulting complexity from user point of view? The complexity is actually not so much in the rent itself, it's in how it changes the developer experience. The general approach is that application storage will need to be more "modular" and explicitly broken down into chunks associated with specific users, possibly with a fixed amount of "global" storage, plus some short-term storage not assigned to any user that goes away after some fixed amount of time, eg.
Could this be used in lieu of specialized hardware? If so, I imagine this could be a substantial time and cost saving measure in the quest for Serenity. A: TEEs can be used to generate randomness using delay. Unfortunately TEEs is trusted hardware. We need a trustless solution : [Justin Drake]. A follow-up: Though I would add that trusted hardware could be a great thing for individual validators to use to increase their security.
Q: What computer science problems still need to be solved prior to the release of Phase 1? A: For phase 0 we need locally-computable shuffles. For phase 1 we want a custody scheme that is friendly to decentralised pools. Please message me if that sounds like your cup of tea : [Justin Drake]. Q: What happens to the beacon chain in the event of a controversial hardfork on the Eth 1. Will two beacon chains form? If not, what mechanism will the beacon chain use to determine which Eth 1. How will this affect the transition of the Eth 1.
It is my view that this trading pair must remain stable for a successful transition to take place. A: If not, what mechanism will the beacon chain use to determine which Eth 1. By default the beacon chain validators will just use the voting mechanism that's specified in the spec, and whichever chain a majority of the validators support is the chain that the beacon chain will go with. That said, if we want to facilitate a peaceful split, there is a fork versioning feature built in to the beacon chain to make replay protection very easy Q: Why are you not doing "proper" research and submit publications to conferences?
A: Not really an answer to your question, but Ethresear. Q: Let's say that I have some ethereum locked on a time locked contract, will be available after the 2. This question can be expanded to all 1. A: The Ethereum 1. Q: Thoughts on this tweet?
A: Eth 2. Hopefully some nice way to achieve 2 second average block times. Extremely effective cross-shard communication, either at base layer or through a variety of easy-to-use layer 2 systems. Will it be possible for a single DAPP to operate across multiple shards?
Will L2 solutions be the only option? A: A dApp would have to get really big to consume all the resources in a given shard to justify spreading itself over multiple shards. For example, Uber does less than 20 rides per second. A similarly popular decentralised equivalent would likely fit on a single shard, especially when fancy L2 infrastructure is involved e. Q: What is your take on the current state of finding consensus on randomness, in particular the current VDF construction.
While certainly clever, I wouldn't say it is very elegant. Do you think this is due to theoretical constraints or do do you see potential for a 'nicer' way? More general, are there any theoretical problems in this space, relevant to Ethereum 2. Is it the hardware you don't like? If so, would you agree that proof-of-work is an elegant solution? Then think of VDFs as being "proof-of-work 2. It's a paradigm shift from massively-parallel work to inherently-sequential work. I'm not aware of any unbiasable randomness schemes that only have strong liveness, other than VDFs :.
Will you be nearby? Q: Shouldn't the smart contract stated in 4 have the ability of sending just 16 ETH for something as RocketPool v2 work while some consider this to be "centralization" I think it will help a lot the average user and mitigate the risk of the average user? A minimum balance of 32 ETH on the beacon chain is required for activation as a validator.
Q: I see a lot of people talking about nodes running in cloud. Shouldn't ETH find a way to actually discourage this? If everybody is running nodes in cloud that means we have possible single point of failure, which is against what I think we are trying to achieve and what enterprise customers are looking to eliminate. A: "Partial slashing" and the quadratic leak during times of no-finality actually financially encourage diverse validator setups. Your potential losses are much smaller when your slashable message or validator down-time are discorrelated.
Diversity in setup includes -- node software, validation software, local server vs cloud provider and which cloud if using cloud , geographic region, etc. To guard against this, I should setup my validation node locally or on a less used cloud provider. A2: We do have a way! It's called "partial slashing" and the idea is that, if something goes wrong, the more people did something wrong the more everyone gets penalised. So there is an incentive to avoid correlation with other validators, and hence avoid centralisation.
Q: Can you foresee ever having to move Eth 1. A: The current plan is to incorporate the eth1. Note that this will just be a state root and an EVM interpreter along with eth balances. Users will be able to call into this contract by providing merkle witnesses of the required state.
Q: I'm a new developer looking into Ethereum, where would you officially recommend I look to develop with an eye toward future proofing? A: A key consideration to future proof your contract code for Ethereum 2. It's known as "storage rent" and "storage maintenance fees". Q: What do you guys think of the Avalanche consensus mechanism and could it play a role in the ETH roadmap further into the future?
A: Avalanche is interesting to me because it's a fresh approach. Looking forward to seeing how it plays out with Bitcoin Cash. Successes there can be ported to Ethereum via L2 infrastructure. Q: Is sharding smart contracts theoretically possible? How would one go about that? Q: How does eth 2. A: The key security guarantee of sharding comes from frequently shuffling validators into randomly-sampled committees known as "crosslink committees".
The hope is that this fast shuffling resists bribing attacks, in both the "honest majority" and the "slowly-adaptive rational majority" security models. Am I thinking about this wrong? A: Every shard gets security with the same notional value.
Value validator collateral gets spread evenly across shards. This seems inefficient to me. Depending on how the distribution of value shakes out across shards, potentially materially inefficient? A: This seems inefficient to me. Oh I see! Interesting point. We consider every shard equal, and provide high security for all shards. The breakdown of even a single shard namely, an unavailable or invalid crosslink would likely be catastrophic for the whole system.
Q: Will the Beacon Chain require its own nodes? Is this basically a brand new chain that has only one connection to ethereum: Proof of Burn? In many ways this is akin to the FFG contract and sharding contract proposals that were previously deprecated but the organization breaks clean from the EVM to allow for a radically new design and increased efficiency. If they run the beacon chain, they can then sync whatever shard chains they want.
The connection at first is just an economic connection -- use the existing economics and community to seed validation in the beacon chain. Beyond that, we expect the beacon chain to be used to finalize the pow chain in the short to medium term. In the end, there are a number of proposals to either fork the eth1. Q: How does Eth 2. If people run nodes at home on consumer hardware with a normal internet connection they can be taken offline easily with DDOS attacks or am I interpreting this wrong?
A: It is the responsibility of a validator to remain online to fulfill their responsibilities and gain rewards. A validator's inactivity penalties are also minimized if their being offline is dis-correlated from other validators. This incentivizes to utilize different node and validation software from the majority so that in the case of a ddos attack vector against a particular node implementation, your offline losses are minimized.
The validator's protocol level identity and it's node's network identity are completely decoupled. This allows for a validator to create any type of obfuscated network setup that serves their purposes. I expect many tools and best practices to arise for home validators in the coming months. Q: What are your thoughts on formal verification of smart contracts?
Will this be possible with Ethereum 2. A: Formal verification of smart contracts is awesome and super valuable IMO. Formal verification will be possible in eth2. I believe the WASM semantics are already available in K which will provide some good opportunities for contract verification.
Opening up more languages by using WASM will also allow for utilization of more restricted languages that are more amenable to FV. Q: What are some good cypherpunk books that you would recommend to people getting interested in this space?
Or just good book recommendations in general. A: I don't read many books nowadays. I mostly consume academic papers, whitepapers, podcasts, videos, blog posts, Reddit, Twitter, etc. Basically will there be resharding? If so, how is resharding done? How are you solving the fast state syncing problem if nodes need to be reshuffled around shards? Right now crosslink committees are shuffled every epoch 6.
Crosslink committees are critical, hence why there are shuffled fast. See this answer also. Q: You said in a comment some days ago that there are basically no unsolved problems of Serenity Phase 0 left. Which problems of Phase 1 and 2 are still left to be solved? A: The short answer is there are no big fundamental problems for phases 0, 1, 2. The more detailed answer is that for phase 0 we need locally-computable shuffles. For phase 2 we need to figure out sustainable storage.
Q: Before Eth 2. A: Storing data on Ethereum is expensive per byte. Infrastructure like Filecoin may prove to be a good trustless storage solution. For privacy, just encrypt the data. Unfortunately those likely won't be ready for phase 0. Q: Is there some kind of roadmap for the migration from ETH 1.
For true decentralization it is required to get more people on board that understand the full process. A: ETH—at least when Ethereum 2. Fungibility is a key design goal. Q: Where does new client software take lists of peers with their ip addresses and ports? Is there is centralized server?
A: This is an implementation detail. Some clients may have a hardcoded list of "bootstrap node" IPs and ports. A: Nothing final. Ultimately the community will have to make a tradeoff between low inflation and high security. Q: What are the odds that a fully sharded chain including state transitions is feasible? A: Very high. No fundamental problems unsolved. The tricky part is getting everything to fit together cleanly.
Q: Can I use a raspberry Pi to stake when staking is possible? And what do I do with it in the mean time? A: I tend to be critical of that class of systems. A: Yes, there are already a number of experiments in eth1. Check out miximus for privacy and roll up for scalability both by barry whitehat!
Q: Why is ETH 2. A: ETH 2. The reason we have phases 0, 1, 2 is to break things down conceptually, and in terms of incremental releases to limit risk. Q: What work is being done to make the research behind ETH 2. Are there any efforts to translate research specifications into other languages? A: Are there any efforts to translate research specifications into other languages?
Once the spec is more mature I expect the community to pick this up, somewhat similar to how Andreas's books get translated. English seems to be the a lingua franca for research and development. Q: After PoS, if a node gets hacked, can the hacker make the node to lose its stake by confirming false transactions? A: When your validator gets penalised it is automatically deregistered to prevent further damage. We have a mechanism called "partial slashing". The idea is that, if something goes wrong with your validator it only gets penalised a bit if not many other validators also mess up around that time.
So in the optimistic case of a lone hack you should recover most of your funds with your withdrawal key kept secure, e. A: That will likely be unlocked with abstraction which includes gas abstraction. Q: Assuming the number of network nodes remains the same and the network graduates to full PoS A: Rough ballpark figures.
Q: What is the most updated timeline for rolling out PoS? Since Vitalik already said 'research is done', what are developers' incentives to push things forward? Are there any specific measures taken to ensure a smooth transition? A: I expect the beacon chain the core PoS chain to launch late Ideally the spec should be close to final in Q1, cross-client testnets in Q2, security audits in Q3, mainnet launch in Q4. So November and January would be my two best guesses.
Having the Ethereum 2. For example: private eth network run in a shard connected to main eth network from which it takes just security from validators. Private transaction with ZKsnarks shard s. Encrypted data shards. Erc20 like coin launched on ETH 2.
A: Every shard has the same data availability layer, and the option to use EVM2. That's common base-layer infrastructure. At the application layer contracts can be powered by non-EVM2. There's also a huge L2 design around state channels, plasma, cross-shard communication, etc. So at the application layer I expect lots of non-homogeneity across shards, as well as a lots of homogeneity thanks to standardisation. How much thinking is being devoted to the greater infrastructure requirements of Eth 2.
A: PoS enables goodies such as economic finality and sharding. It is also much cheaper in terms of inflation cost for hodlers, as well as ecologically than PoW. Q: What do you feel is the biggest unsolved challenge left in Eth 2. A: I really honestly think that there are no unsolved research challenges at this point. It's mostly "how do we make this thing more elegant and take up fewer lines of code and have fewer edge cases" on the research side.
Better understanding the incentives and various actors that might arise in a stateless and highly abstracted execution model. There is really great work being led by both the EF eWASM team and the Consensys Quilt team to better understand the design space and active build prototypes to vet ideas.
Q: Previously, a release date of January for Phase 0 was informally articulated. Do you feel this date is realistic and achievable? A: Thanks for noting its informality. We need: long-running test nets however that is defined , formal verification of the deposit contract, and clients to be ready for prime time, but right now it looks like everything will come together in time. We also don't want to rush clients into developing buggy software just to be ready by an arbitrary date.
If anything, I think BLS standardisation efforts are the most likely to slow us down. We as a greater blockchain community are trying very hard to have a standardised signature scheme for better interoperability between all the chains. There is a high degree of consensus on this already, but establishing a new standard is always a slow process.
The client teams are doing a great job and continuing to push the envelope. I expect exciting progress to be made in the coming months, but I also expect that the last mile might be long. Q: Are the researchers happy with the current state of the economics of Ethereum 2. A: I don't think it's productive for us to worry about the absolute numbers at this point; the network will launch, and either the rewards will prove sufficient or they won't.
The other thing worth worrying about is centralization incentives, but that's difficult to work out "in theory land"; much of the result in practice has to do with how lazy people are. Q: My biggest worry about ETH 2. A: Composability between shards is definitely unchartered territory but there are reasons to be optimistic:.
The shards are designed for homogeneity unlike, say, Polkadot or Cosmos to facilitate cross-shard communication. There are design patterns which abstract away the boundaries between shards. For example, one could consider shards 0 and 1 as a combined data availability substrate for an execution engine which requires more bandwidth. These design patterns will be more easily exploitable in the context of programmable execution engines.
The shards are designed to be friendly to "fast optimistic finality" thanks to shard attestations which are somewhat analogous to block confirmations in the context of Eth1. What this means that is, in practice, the shards may act as one logical blockchain thanks to quick probabilistic finality of individual shards. A: My best guess is early See here. Q: Under the specs there is a " block. A: In order for Eth2 to finalise Eth1, 2 things are needed, Eth2 must vote on Eth1 as is implemented as you point out and Eth1 must change its fork rule to follow the finalised blocks on Eth1.
The latter requirement requires an Eth1 hardfork. It is therefore easier to just have validator finalise the things you mention for now and later on add in Eth1 finalisation. Additionally, it is safer to launch without Eth1 finalisation in case of a Eth2 black-swan event in the early days. A: It got considerably simpler over the last year.
If you do a word count on the spec, it seems to be considerably smaller than the yellow paper at this point. There's a lot of things in eth2 that are much simpler than eth1. But there's definitely lingering complexity and I deeply care about minimizing it. While the research path has been somewhat tortuous and hard to follow, the end product is arguably simple and clean.
Expect more educational material highlighting the simplicity of the current design. I expect phases 1 and 2 to be lines of code combined assuming WASM as primitive. That's just the phase 0 consensus deposit contract, beacon chain state transition function, and beacon chain fork choice rule. Q: Why are there so many teams building eth2. I understand the point of client diversity but don't you think 6 clients seem to be pushing it? Supporting so many clients would also divide the resources in terms of funding.
Which clients do you see as the geth and parity of eth2. I expect specialisation—one can focus on the browser e. Lodestar , resource-constrained devices e. Nimbus , the enterprise e. Artemis , prototyping e. Trinity , etc. A minimum of two production-ready clients are necessary for launch. I expect the first-mover advantage to be strong. We definitely don't want a duopoly! I expect a power law distribution, and it's definitely likely that some of the clients will not survive to see significant usage on mainnet.
My guess on why so many clients showed up to do the hard work is that eth2. I'm pleased that there are so many great teams doing the hard work, but recently, I've been more focused on finding contributors to do value-add work outside of the core client implementation. Formal verification, academic analysis of protocols, testing, light clients, web3 interfaces and developer tooling, validator clients with great UX that plug into any underlying node, etc, etc.
Q: Are the Ethereum 2. For example, will Prism ever get merged to Geth? On Prism: "Likely not. Other than the language Go , Prysm and Geth have very little in common. Q: what happens when I stake 32 eth, and get slashed once?
A: Validators get kicked out when they get slashed.
Starting in January, Gab offered 2 million tokens issued on the ethereum blockchain at a price of $5 each. According to the most recent SEC. Share your videos with friends, family, and the world. Gab Bois is launching her first NFT collection on Nifty Gateway. The series consists of two open editions, three limited editions and one single.