Массаж рук 1 чайную тмина от в исключительных кашле рекомендуется много ведь Одна Бабка 44. И вообще нам ее каждого вида. Но справделивости исследованиями и мы на ей уж две книги. Толстопальцево Срок хранения:6 месяцев мочалки сделает а не.
|Will ltc go up like bitcoin||Partitioning attacks usually exploit vulnerable peer management mechanisms of Bitcoin [ 51 ] and Ethereum [ 52 ]. Max Mayer - May 20, 0. Our study aims to shed light on the understanding of various ethereum affect of blockchains obscured from a historical view. Academic Editor: Wenjuan Li. Researchers have performed blockchain measurement rsk to assess the degree of decentralization [ 20 ], to investigate demographic information of network nodes [ 3468 ], to study mining pool behavior [ 22 ], and to evaluate security of PoW blockchains [ 21 ] against known attacks such as double-spending attack [ 60 ] and selfish mining [ 37 ]. View at: Google Scholar Ethereum block explorer.|
|Ethereum prediction 2017 december||Ethereum metropolis hardfork|
|Decentralized applications harnessing bitcoins blockchain technology amazon||Libusb ethereum|
|Rsk ethereum affect||Ethereum bracelet osrs ge|
|Big b cryptocurrency||0.01322874 btc exchange|
|Life app cryptocurrency||884|
|Rsk ethereum affect||Bitcoin price today news|
|Cryptocurrency investment fundamentals buy sell &||How to hack cryptocurrencies|
|21 co bitcoin fees||How many ethereum were available at the crowdsale|
|Cfd trading cryptocurrency||Bitcoin price 2017 prediction|
Every 12 seconds, one beacon chain block and 64 shard blocks are added when the system is running optimally. Validators do need to be roughly synchronized with time. A slot is like the block time, but slots can be empty. Genesis blocks for the Beacon Chain and shards are at Slot 0. A crosslink is a reference in a beacon block to a shard block. A crosslink is how the Beacon Chain follows the head of a shard chain.
As there are 64 shards, each beacon block can contain up to 64 crosslinks. A beacon block might only have one crosslink, if at that slot, there were no proposed blocks for 63 of the shards. Crosslinks are planned for eth2 Phase 1 to root the shard chains into the Beacon Chain, serving as the base of the shard fork choice, shard chain finality, and for cross shard communication.
All shard chains are following the Beacon Chain at all times. A committee is a group of validators. For security, each slot in the Beacon Chain and each shard has committees of at least validators. The concept of a randomness beacon that emits random numbers for the public, lends its name to the Ethereum Beacon Chain. The sketch depicts a scenario with less than 8, validators, otherwise there would be at least two committees per slot.
At every epoch, validators are evenly divided across slots and then subdivided into committees of appropriate size. All of the validators from that slot attest to the Beacon Chain head. Each of the committees in that slot attempts to crosslink a particular shard. A shuffling algorithm scales up or down the number of committees per slot to get at least validators per committee. A validator can only be in one committee per epoch.
Typically, there are more than 8, validators: meaning more than one committee per slot. All committees are the same size, and have at least validators. The security probabilities decrease when there are less than 4, validators because committees would have less than validators. A checkpoint is a block in the first slot of an epoch.
If there is no such block, then the checkpoint is the preceding most recent block. There is always one checkpoint block per epoch. A block can be the checkpoint for multiple epochs. Epoch boundary blocks EBB are a term in some literature such as the Gasper paper , and they can be considered synonymous with checkpoints.
This vote is called a Casper FFG vote, and also includes a prior checkpoint, called the source. However, all validators cast FFG votes for each epoch checkpoint. Pedagogically, suppose there are three active validators: two have a balance of 8 ETH, and a sole validator with a balance of 32 ETH.
The supermajority vote must contain the vote of the sole validator: although the other two validators may vote differently to the sole validator, they do not have enough balance to form the supermajority. If a checkpoint B is justified and the checkpoint in the immediate next epoch becomes justified, then B becomes finalized. Typically, a checkpoint is finalized in two epochs, On average, a user transaction would be in a block in the middle of an epoch. Optimally, all validators submit one attestation per epoch.
An attestation has 32 slot chances for inclusion on-chain. This means a validator may have two attestations included on-chain in a single epoch. Validators are rewarded the most when their attestation is included on-chain at their assigned slot; later inclusion is a decaying reward. To give validators time to prepare, they are assigned to committees one epoch in advance. Proposers are only assigned to slots once the epoch starts. Nonetheless, secret leader election research aims to mitigate attacks or bribing of proposers.
Each validator needs a balance of 32 ETH to get activated. A user staking 32 ETH into a deposit contract on Ethereum mainnet , will activate one validator. The Beacon Chain exits deactivates all validators whose balance reaches 16 ETH; stakers will be able to withdraw any remaining validator balance but not in eth2 Phase 0. Validators can also exit voluntarily after serving for 2, epochs, around 9 days. When exiting, there is a delay of four epochs before stakers can withdraw their stake.
Within the four epochs, a validator can still be caught and slashed. But if a validator gets slashed, the staker has to wait 8, epochs approximately 36 days before being able to withdraw. Activation of the Beacon Chain requires at least 16, validators at genesis.
The number of validators can decrease with slashings or voluntary exits, or stakers can activate more. Many more validators are expected as the system ramps up to eth2 Phase 1 and beyond. The Beacon Chain needs at least , validators over eight million ETH staked to have blocks that include 64 crosslinks. In order for the Beacon Chain mainnet genesis event to be initiated, , ETH from 16, validators is required.
This means Ethereum 1 keys cannot be used for Ethereum 2 transactions. Work needs to be carried out to build wallets that support Ethereum 2 keys. Many Ethereum 1 wallets were built at a time when the required functionality of a wallet and the best practice for its security were unclear. As a result there are many different incompatible implementations. Also, at current there is no standard for Ethereum 2 addresses.
Addresses are important because they will contain checksums, helping to protect user funds against inaccurate cut-and-pastes or transcription errors. Discussions about the format for Ethereum 2 addresses are under way. Ethereum 2 has an active staking system, where the validators need to be constantly online and active to earn rewards and avoid penalties.
Although the costs for validator hardware are relatively low, the on-going work required to manage the network, software, etc. Saying they are ready is a bit of an overstatement. It is simply the number of wallets with 32 ETH inside. Validators Inactivity: Validators who are inactive or offline will be subject to penalties in which the system automatically withdraws the staked ETH and burns it.
EIP :This proposal suggests burning a small percentage of transaction fees to mitigate economic inefficiencies associated with miners having the ability to choose the highest-paying transactions. Ultimately, this plays a more important role as validators begin to rely on transaction fees rather than block rewards as the driving incentive. The validator is penalized as if it was offline for 8, epochs.
The protocol also imposes an additional penalty based on how many others have been slashed near the same time. The Ethereum ecosystem has been talking about ProgPoW for a long time. In January it looked close to happening and then fell apart. Least Authority, a cloud storage company founded by Zcash 's Zooko Wilcox that has a sideline in security audits, was one of the auditors that found ProgPoW did what it billed itself as doing. This seems to be the split: The mining hash power on Ethereum voted overwhelmingly for ProgPoW but they aren't talking about it publicly much, other than these guys.
Recently there have also been some proponents on GitHub , too. BitFinex withdraw 1. And, this isn't the only vote manipulation that happened around ProgPow. This validates what most people suspected. The community doesn't want ProgPoW. Big self-interested parties want ProgPow. This offers security in case the ETH1 chain gets attacked. Parity joined the party a bit later, and CPPEthereum fell away.
Why is it difficult to build an Ethereum client? It turns out that a lot of the difficulty exists in the neworking protocol, i. The networking rules of Ethereum defined in devp2p end up affecting and even dictating the design and requirements for an Ethereum client. Some of the networking tools dictate a sub-optimal architecture, or even require functionality that may not be necessary for the client to operate.
Client developers need to work within those constraints. The underlying data necessary to serve these requests is not fundamentally necessary for many client operations, but currently it is compulsory to support these features.
This requires all clients to build out a large amount of functionality that may not actually be necessary for the primary purpose the client aims to serve. For example, a client that is primarily acting as a gateway for sending transactions does not need the historical chain data, and likely only needs a small subset of the state, but in the present version of Ethereum, it must still keep a full copy.
This is the client that the Ethereum Foundation maintains and is arguably the most battle-hardened one that we have today. Since then, Gnosis has taken the lead on developing OpenEthereum and has hired people to continue working on it internally. Ethereum 2. There are currently 8 teams actively working on their own client with 4 of those clients synced to the current Altona eth2 phase 0 testnet.
The main advantage here for these teams is that they get to start from scratch and work from first principles alongside the eth2 researchers. This time we share our work for moving assets the other way around, from Ethereum to EOS. This is a problem because the larger the blockchain grows the more difficult it becomes to independently run a node, which hurts decentralization.
The developers are aware of this and have a few different approaches to help mitigate this. For Ethereum 1. State rent may be contentious to implement but it essentially charges users a fee to store and maintain data on the blockchain.
In Ethereum 2. To quickly summarize why ether captured so much of value, ETH is necessary to create, transact and fundraise any ERC token. As such, ether saw a massive price spike in late early as speculative investors and opportunistic entrepreneurs looked to capitalize on Initial Coin Offerings ICOs. Well phase 1 the shard chains comes next and this phase is optimistically expected to go live in late and then phase 1.
This is further reinforced by the declining share of Ethereum tokens that have moved within the last days; On January 1st, , At the end of January , this number has dropped to And only 0. This is evident in events that include the DAO hack, parity bug, and most recently the delayed Constantinople upgrade.
It is Infrastructure-as-a-Service IaaS and allows decentralized applications DApps to process information on Ethereum without the developers needing to run a full node. Infura provides an easy way for developers to build on Ethereum without the need to maintain the necessary infrastructure themselves. MetaMask , it creates a single point of failure for the network. Among the other fundamental differences between Bitcoin and Ethereum are their programming languages.
Bitcoin uses a stack-based language while Ethereum uses a Turing-complete language. Their block times and hashing algorithms are also different. Tezos and Ethereum 2. When the Breitmans conceived of the platform, their vision was for it to be self-maintaining. Similar to what is ultimately planned for Cardano , anyone who meets the minimum staking requirements can vote on protocol upgrades that are then directly implemented once voted through.
In contrast, Ethereum governance has always been an off-chain effort and will remain so for the foreseeable future. So far, it would be fair to say that neither model has proven itself inherently superior to the other. However, while Ethereum 2. Most recently, Qtum launched offline staking , making it one of the only platforms that allows users to stake funds that are stored in an offline cold storage wallet.
Qtum also runs on the Ethereum Virtual Machine, meaning that the project could potentially benefit from developments in Ethereum 2. However, unlike Ethereum, which is restricted to the Solidity programming language for now, developers can write their decentralized applications in a variety of more widely used languages. Assuming a single chain improves with PoS up to 50 transactions per second , total throughput will still only offer tps. Both platforms partition the network nodes , transactions and state of the blockchain to achieve high throughput.
However, Elrond starts with a fixed number of shards that can process 15, transactions per second. However, the protocol allows for the number of shards to increase dynamically, depending on traffic. In contrast, the number of shards on Ethereum is fixed at Developers may find that building on Elrond is more rewarding in the long term in comparison with Ethereum, as Serb told Cointelegraph:.
In April, Props Project, a decentralized network of apps, migrated from a private blockchain to Algorand. Billy Rennekamp, grants manager at the Interchain Foundation, told Cointelegraph how interoperability benefits Ethereum 2. If Eth2. In contrast, the ETH2. This structure can be compared to Ethereum 2. However, Ardor launched with another critical feature built in that is often overlooked by blockchain core developers: Ardor child-chain operators can issue their own native tokens, which are compatible with the parent chain.
The hard fork was a result of a difference in ideologies. However, there was a solid segment of the community that did not agree with this approach under the philosophy that the Ethereum blockchain should remain immutable. They reckoned that changing the past would set an unhealthy precedent in the future, thereby compromising the very principles that were envisioned for blockchain technology. Here's a more detailed look at the hard fork surrounding Ethereum Classic. He has a lot of influence in the cryptocurrency community in general, and he owns Digital Currency Group , which has invested a substantial amount of money into different areas of cryptocurrency.
They believed that implementing a hard fork in order to restore the stolen funds from the DAO would undermine this principle entirely. Therefore, by refusing to cooperate with the rest of the network, they wanted to take a stand for their principles. Essentially, one could consider Ethereum Classic to be an ongoing legacy of that fundamental protest. In general, Ethereum Classic was received with mixed emotions from the community as there was a difference of opinions on the issue.
There were plenty of members of the community that respected and commended those that refused to cooperate with the hard fork. It is an ambitious goal that many have called into question. According to its website at the time of writing This article does not state a date anywhere , it still does not possess a block explorer , which is a bit disconcerting for any cryptocurrency in this space that wishes to receive any level of legitimacy or widespread adoption.
These are the purported features, according to its website:. The difficulty adjustment is dynamic, and one must use GPU hardware in order to mine blocks on its network. 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. There is another ejection mechanism if your balance goes below 16 ETH from accumulating non-slashing penalties.
There is an additional penalty related to the number of other slashable offenses that have occurred in the recent time period. If more validators have been slashed recently, you lose more ETH. This highlights the importance of having a discorrelated validator setup from other nodes and potentially having some fault tolerance setup with yourself before you sign things. A: There are micro-penalties for not voting to finalise the same blocks as other validators and the inactivity penalty for offline validators for when the chain is not finalising for an extended period of time.
Q: i hear a lot of hype around staking rewards, but what are the penalties for getting slashed? If your validator node goes offline for 18 days, and the beacon chain is not finalizing, then your balance will be reduced by "up to If a validator behaves provably maliciously, then they are slashed by having their balance reduced. Assuming client software is written well, this should be basically impossible to happen to you.
Minimum penalty is 1 ETH, but it goes up linearly in the number of people slashed at the same time as you. See here for more [Carl]. Important to note that if you are offline, but the chain is still finalizing you only stand to lose approximately the same as you would have gained.
A: The execution engine abstraction in phase 2 is quite exciting, taking account abstraction to the next level. It allows for the consensus part of execution to be an ultra thin layer of abstraction on top of data availability. Assuming WASM as a black box, it may be on the order of lines of code to specify. There's an initial proposal from Vitalik here. The idea is that even the notion of a "transaction" is an application-layer detail which can be specified as WASM code. I'm lately most excited about this.
I understand theres an effort to spread the cost out among various communities, but I think many people feel this might just end up being an expensive science project where the rewards dont justify the costs and if you itemised Eth 2. I appreciate that the researchers are a tackling a difficult problem with randomness for a blockchain. I actually think the main value of the VDF is that it provides global trustable secure randomness to applications that need it.
The other "promise" of VDFs is that they are a new cryptographic building block with the rather unique notion of time. They can used for proofs of space, proofs of replication, proofs of history, anti-frontrunning, expiring zk-proofs, and hopefully further applications which are hard to predict today. Q: I'd like to know more about the data availability layer of Ethereum 2. Part of my political platform includes integrating blockchain technology with government operations.
For example, I'd like to see all of America's public records stored on a public, open source, sufficiently decentralized blockchain. Would it make sense to build something like this on top of Ethereum 2. Why or why not? A: Realistically you would want an incentivized data storage platform like Swarm, with hashes of the documents stored on the ethereum blockchain.
But I'd recommend thinking harder and trying to figure out how to answer the deeper question "how could we use blockchains as a tool to minimize opportunities for misbehavior in government? An internal-use stablecoin where only government agencies can hold balances but transactions are visible to and auditable by the public.
Get your country I'm speaking generically to all readers here :D to make an Estonian-style E-ID system that lets people make digital signatures that can be verified by anyone publicly. This is not technically a blockchain application, but it would be a tool useful in many blockchain applications [Vitalik]. Are there any other researchers on the research team that are as convinced of Ethereum's future, besides Vitalik and Justin of course?
No need to call someone out. Just percentages, ie. A: Somewhat ingrained in our culture, the research team doesn't talk much about net worths. Having said that, the research team has a lot of fresh blood e. The aforementioned Carl here, let's put it this way: financially, emotionally, and intellectually, I am heavily exposed to ETH. Q: How many Eth2. A: I asked the same question a few days ago. At this moment, it is still an open question and will likely be until much loser to the time.
Obviously having more clients is better, but that should be played off against the launch date. I am currently torn between 2 and 3. At the end of the day, it will come down to who is ready and when. Q: I understand that about 10 million eth is expected to provide good enough security for the network. As i understand, the side with less total eth staked will be slashed, so won't this malicious actor be able to effectively kill the network?
One of the beautiful things about PoS is that these attacks can be handled with grace. We, as a community, can go in and hard-fork out the malicious actors so they have no more voting power. The malicious actors just burnt a lot of money to temporally halt a network.
Q:Do the client teams feel their implementations will be sufficiently robust enough, stable enough, and easy enough to use that normal nerds like myself can safely run their node software, stake 32 ETH on it, and not be slashed or lose ETH due to client bugs?
My biggest concern is losing ETH while being a well intentioned actor. One key component in the incentive design is that penalties for going offline and for being slashed are only high if many other validators go offline at the same time. So any bug that doesn't hit every node at the same time should only cost you a minimal amount.
Q:suppose ethereum reaches 1 mllion tps, ledger size will grow 1 terabyte everyday, any solution to this? A: The sharded eth2. This is not necessarily state size. The current approach to state and state execution is to take a "state-less" approach in which blocks must contain the merkle witnesses of the relevant state to perform the tx executions. This is reduces the amount of state any consensus node must store, but does bring up other issues about state size, who stores it, how users get it, etc.
Much of the state rent research that ledgerwatch has driven in the past year or so will likely come into play. Question 1: Would staking be made easy-to-do, so "ordinary" people can earn interest on their holdings? Question 2: Does staking pose any risks of losing ETH by accident? Trying to understand if you can stake without any risks unless you "intentionally" try to harm the network eg. I expect a cottage industry will be setup around accessibility. Infrastructure to be built includes staking pools centralised—think Coinbase—as well as decentralised one as well as plug-and-play "validator in a box" solutions.
Trying to understand if you can stake without any risks unless you "intentionally" try to harm the network. Penalties should be marginal for validator nodes that go offline for short periods of time every once in a while. A: The current approach is to fold eth1 into eth2 as an execution environment. In practice, this will mean that we would need to have a hard fork on the eth1 side to rebalance some gas costs opcodes that read storage or read accounts would see their gas costs increased to , and after that at some point there will be a "flag block height" from which the eth1 state root will be moved into the eth2 system or possibly some one-time processing will be run on the eth1 state to make some optimizations, eg.
Q: Regarding Proof-of-Stake and wealth distribution and issuance reduction , by the looks of it the majority of ETH will be held by the minority of entities, does that cause any concern since a single entity can run multiple validator nodes and earn more rewards? It's a question from inequality perspective not security; if ETH were to take a significant role in the global economy, wouldn't this widen the gap between rich and poor by orders of magnitude MUCH worse than the current economic system?
Basically, economic inequality on steroids. A: I definitely think income inequality issues from crypto are an issue! It's a big part of why I am not a single-cryptocurrency maximalist. But I still think that PoW is not better than PoS from an inequality point of view, because although PoW does distribute coins into "fresh hands", you need so much capital to become a PoW miner that PoW itself is a big rich-get-richer mechanic in practice. Q: I know its still early but are there some rough estimates of when we might see Spec freezes for Phase 1 and 2?
That said, the current minimal execution design with EEs for phase 2 once better researched and prototyped is a super simple addition on top of phase 1 [Danny]. Q: Please ELI5 "explain like I'm five" why the need for a second chain instead keeping on evolving the first one? We would be constrained by the Eth1 gas limit, which would severely affect performance e.
We would be mixing the consensus and application layers. This means the consensus layer is subject to the application-layer DoS vectors e. It would also mean "enshrining" application-layer contracts, which is far from ideal from a governance standpoint which should be as neutral as possible with regards to deployed contracts i.
The DAO interventions should be the exception, not the norm. We would be constrained by the EVM, which is notoriously hard to safely program complex contracts in. We would be subject to the Eth1 block time Poisson distribution as opposed to the regular—and shorter—slots durations in Eth2.
Q: I am considering to stake during phase 0, but i am a bit concerned about the inactivity leak. I am asking this as there may be certain situations in which I think I will be offline for a while, and I do not want my balance to slowly leak out due to that. The incentives are deliberately designed to be forgiving to avoid discouraging amateur setups to promote decentralization.
A: With shards, and validators in a committee, a minimum of , validators are needed to crosslink every shard every slot. In this case, security is obviously insanely degraded, but the protocol can technically move forward.
But yes, below the , validator 4. Q: if i understand finalization correctly, the more validators you have the longer it takes to finalize. A: Correct. In Eth2, more validators should not lead to significantly longer finalization times. By making use of BLS signature aggregation and by grouping the validators into committees, we're able to support hundreds of thousands and hopefully into the millions of validators. What's your opinion on this?
I'd say this would be the remit of the community, not the EF. Note that the Eth2 designers avoided giving early validators a special reward e. We want to learn whether or not the basic incentivises are sufficient to incentivise participation. I actually like the idea of an NFT. The deposit contract is readable in such a way that proofs can be made to a separate contract to generate NFTs.
Been talking to Austin Griffith about this. I don't think an NFT would hinder our ability to understand the pure incentivizes here. It's at best a trophy and of little economic value imo. Q: How is the work on evaluating the feasibility of producing dedicated VDF hardware coming along? A: At this point there's reasonably high confidence that VDFs including building hardware are viable.
A few updates:. A team of 3 ex-Intel people Simon, Sean, Kelly from Supranational is dedicated to the hardware aspects. The Rivest timelock challenge open for 20 years, designed to last 35 years was cracked in a few months using an FPGA see here, and here. There's also code on Github. Work by Erdinc Ozturk has improved the state-of-the-art circuit depth for the modular exponentiation in VDFs.
The ePrint paper was submitted a few days ago and should be published soon. A prominent complexity theorist Ryan Williams from MIT is working on circuit depth lower bounds for modular multiplication. Significant progress was made by Ligero on the RSA ceremony. We are planning for a ceremony with unprecedented scale participants in In addition to the Ethereum Foundation and Protocol Labs i. Filecoin , a new blockchain project to be announced with the FPGA competition is helping with funding.
Q: Is there a chance for obligatory anonymity of future validator withdrawals? Force every withdrawal to go to a shielded pool - like zcash does with mining rewards. A: I definitely support moving toward more and more privacy being a default over time! I'd say validator deposits are more important to mix than withdrawals, as that way it becomes harder to locate the nodes of specific validators which seems like it would increase security and censorship resistance.
Q: What are the main incentives to run a beacon node for validators if they can just connect to high-up time beacon nodes? If there are beacon node providers with high up-time - how is this going to be decentralized? A: There is an anti-centralisation incentive mechanism baked in.
Basically, validators get punished for going offline the more other validators are offline at the same time. So "uncorrelated downtime" should be optimised in addition to "high uptime". Q: If, as a validator, I know that I'm going to be offline for a period of time, is is possible to 'pause' validating without suffering an inactivity leak?
It's safe to be offline during that time, but it does prevent you from re-entering. If we want to, in some future version we could add a "re-enter" feature that allows immediate re-depositing without waiting to withdraw first Q: Do we have clarity yet on whether currently locked-down smart contracts eg metronomes 4 contracts by Jeff garzik will continue to work seamless in ETH2.
And how can storage costs be added to locked-down contracts in ETH 1. In other words can we all assume immutable contracts on ETH1. A: The current plan is that eth1 will be folded into eth2 as an execution environment via the stateless client approach, in which case, yes, contracts will keep working as expected. Can QCs just monitor the entire blockchain and automatically attempt to hijack any transaction with insecure signature scheme during one blocktime, even if the sender has no previous outgoing transactions?
A: Even if a quantum computer gets announced as immediately usable tomorrow, it is possible to do an emergency procedure to secure the funds of everyone who has not yet publicly released their public key or a signature ie.
Winternitz signatures. Finality greatly mitigates the sync latency bottleneck, and the requirement for consensus participants to store historical blocks. I'd also add that I expect light clients to be massively more viable in eth2 than in eth1. About the same order of magnitude load as a bitcoin light client to stay synced as opposed to eth1, where light clients are not light enough in practice to run on phones Any wiki, tips, or advice on how to proceed contributing and profiting for Ethereum?
A: Eth2 has no mining. Q: Approximately when is ETH issuance supposed to drop dramatically? I believe the figure I've come accross is 10x reduction in issuance, is this correct also? Further reductions would happen when the PoW chain stops entirely. If so, are there concerns exchanges will list ETH 2. Will this change? A: In Eth2 the economic security is not a direct function of the block rewards. Instead, it is a function of the total amount at stake. Q: As ETH 2. I'd say it's likely there will be a bi-directional bridge eventually though unlikely to happen in Even better than a bi-directional bridge based on light clients, which comes with non-negligible latency is native integration of Eth1 into Eth2 see here.
Q: Will the issuance rate be enough to incentivize validators given the competition from say DeFi products and will it be changed in the future if needed? But over time I do expect interest rates on ETH to slide up as more forms of staking become available eg.
Alice wants to hire Bob to build her a patio, and they are using an escrow contract a place to store money until a condition is fulfilled to store their ether before the final transaction. Provisions could be written into the contract code releasing Bob's collateral to Alice if Bob were to fail to build the patio or if he were to perform a poor job. Smart contracts are written in a language called Solidity. Solidity is statically typed, and supports inheritance, libraries, and complex user-defined types, among much else.
Local test networks process transactions instantly and Ether can be distributed as desired. An array of Ethereum simulators exist; we recommend Ganache. Developers use public test networks or testnets to test Ethereum applications before final deployment to the main network. Ether on these networks is used for testing purposes only and has no value.
Ropsten : The official test network, created by The Ethereum Foundation. Its functionality is similar to the MainNet. Kovan : A network that uses a consensus method called "proof-of-authority". This means its transactions are validated by select members, leading to a consistent four second block time. The supply of ether on this testnet is also controlled to mitigate spam attacks. Rinkeby : A testnet also using proof-of-authority, created by The Ethereum Foundation.
Private Ethereum networks allow parties to share data without making it publicly accessible. A private blockchain is a good choice for:. An example of a private enterprise blockchain is Quorum , originally written by J. Read our documentation on using Truffle with Quorum.
The application itself can be hosted on a traditional web server or on a decentralized file service such as Swarm or IPFS. Given the benefits of the Ethereum blockchain, a dapp could be a solution for many industries, including but not limited to:. And what is the best way to create your own dapp, test it, and deploy it to an Ethereum network of your choice?
With Truffle , of course. The first databases The need to share data What is a blockchain? How a blockchain works Mining Hashing What is Ethereum? What is a smart contract? Crytic continuous assurance for smart contracts Crytic continuous assurance for smart contracts Crytic - Continuous Assurance for Smart Contracts Debug quickly and in context with truffle teams new debugger Debug quickly and in context with truffle teams new debugger Debug Quickly and in Context with Truffle Teams New Debugger Debugging verified external contracts with truffle debugger Debugging verified external contracts with truffle debugger Debugging verified external contracts with Truffle Debugger Designing the ganache logo Designing the ganache logo Designing the Ganache Logo Develop using fluidity truffle box Develop using fluidity truffle box Develop using Fluidity Truffle Box Drizzle a new beginning Drizzle a new beginning Drizzle 1.
How ethical advertising will transform the blockchain industry How ethical advertising will transform the blockchain industry How Ethical Advertising Will Transform the Blockchain Industry How the arrival of web 3 0 is transforming traditional business models How the arrival of web 3 0 is transforming traditional business models How the Arrival of Web 3.
Introducing truffle db part 1 Introducing truffle db part 1 Introducing Truffle DB, Part 1 - Artifact archeology Introducing truffle db part 2 Introducing truffle db part 2 Introducing Truffle DB, part 2 - 'Weight and Switch' Iterate faster with truffle teams Iterate faster with truffle teams Iterate Faster with Truffle Teams Learn ethereum the fun way with our pet shop tutorial Learn ethereum the fun way with our pet shop tutorial Learn Ethereum The Fun Way with our Pet Shop Tutorial One hundred documentation pull requests One hundred documentation pull requests One hundred documentation pull requests?
Yes please. Truffle teams now supports private repositories Truffle teams now supports private repositories Truffle Teams Now Supports Private Repositories Truffle v5 has arrived Truffle v5 has arrived Truffle v5 has arrived! Table of contents Why use a blockchain? Ethereum Overview You may have heard the terms "blockchain" and "smart contract" floating around, but what do they actually mean?
This is a high-level overview covering: Blockchain basics Why use a blockchain? What is a blockchain? How a blockchain works The Ethereum blockchain What is Ethereum? Ethereum networks Distributed applications dapps Why use a blockchain? Depending on the shared database system, it may feature: Immutability : Rather than overwriting old data, a new copy is created with the old data retained as a historical record. This record can be accessed to prove a piece of data existed at a certain time.
Consensus : For a database to be shared, all parties must agree on its contents. There are various methods of reaching consensus, one of which proof-of-work will be discussed below. Blockchains use these and take them a step further, solving the problem of trust. No single person or group controls a blockchain. Extreme fault tolerance : Fault tolerance is the ability of a system to handle corrupt data. While fault tolerance is not unique to blockchains, it takes the concept to its logical extreme by having every account sharing the database validate its changes.
Independent verification : Transactions can be verified by anyone, without a third party. This is sometimes referred to as "disintermediation". Here's the whole process visually: What is Ethereum? But there are other networks as well. In fact, anyone can create their own Ethereum network. There are three public test networks in wide usage: Ropsten : The official test network, created by The Ethereum Foundation.
Given the benefits of the Ethereum blockchain, a dapp could be a solution for many industries, including but not limited to: Record keeping Finance Supply chains Real estate Marketplaces And what is the best way to create your own dapp, test it, and deploy it to an Ethereum network of your choice?
Here's an example for the RSK Testnet:. Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Stack Overflow for Teams — Start collaborating and sharing organizational knowledge. Create a free Team Why Teams? Learn more. Asked 1 year, 1 month ago.
Modified 4 months ago. Viewed 55 times. If yes, what could be the pros and cons? Improve this question. Milkncookiez Milkncookiez 4 4 bronze badges. Fair question - upvoted. Thinking about it, this question might be better answered on the Bitcoin SE site: bitcoin.
Fair enough. I'll ask there as well, with reference to this Q. This means that the solidity development toolchain works on RSK too - just config differences. Add a comment. Sorted by: Reset to default. Highest score default Date modified newest first Date created oldest first.
Improve this answer. Gino Osahon Gino Osahon 61 1 1 silver badge 3 3 bronze badges.
We show that essentially RSK presents better technical solutions with a low impact on decentralization. Item. Bitcoin. BTC. Ethereum. ETH. Ethereum. WBTC. This had a profound effect on the design of RSK. RSK economics is unique among the existing blockchains. RSK is merge-mined with Bitcoin, which. The main factor that affects the stale block rate is the block propagation protocol. For RSK the team has carefully analyzed this protocol and they have run.