The latest interview with Vitalik: After switching to POS, the risk of centralization has been "overhyped"
Original title: "Post-merge and beyond—the next era of Ethereum begins"
Original source: BanklessHQ
Original compilation: Mary Liu, Derrick Chen, Bitui BitpushNews
After the Ethereum merger was completed, Vitalik Buterin (hereinafter referred to as V God) accepted an exclusive interview with Bankless and shared his views on the merger, Ethereum route, pledge, etc. The Bitui editorial department sorted out the key points in the interview for you.
V God:
V God:I feel like you have two questions. The first question is, is there a better form of PoS chain in the long run? The second question is whether there is a better way to transition if our research team spends more time on research.
For the first question, we are still far from the state of the best PoS chain, and there are still many improvements that can be made. The second question, is this the best form of Merge? I think it is. If I had the chance to go back to 2014, I'd probably use a simpler design and move to PoS in 2018. We have now completed some of the goals we set at the beginning, but there are also some security issues that we are working on. So if anything I would change, I would probably say a simpler PoS and merge earlier. Of course, I also hope that other PoW chains will migrate to the PoS mechanism in the next four years.
V God:
V God:It would be best if we could avoid those attacks and disagreements. I think the Layer 2 roadmap can be more optimized, and we can spend more resources on Optimism and Arbitrum.
I think a lot of what we do is "find a hundred wrong ways to make light bulbs". We spent a lot of resources exploring different paths and trial and error. Regarding the matter of capacity expansion, it took us a long time from realizing the matter of capacity expansion to developing a plan, such as Plasma and Rollup, and we also found that there are many people whose purpose is not so complicated, and capacity expansion may not be so necessary for them .
V God:
V God:If we look at the merge roadmap, The Merge has already been done, the unfinished part of the merge includes a post-merge hard fork with withdrawals, which is obviously one of the next big priorities post-merge, which is A very simple hard fork, I think the main debate at this time is to do it at the same time as EIP-4844, or do the fork first, and then do 4844. Distributed validators (distributed validators) are still under development, although not 100% complete, I guess they have made considerable progress (such as validator project DVT aka SSV).
If you look at it from a longer-term perspective, we have achieved some great work on Single Secret Leader Election (SSLE), and the related cryptographic principles have taken shape.
Then there's Single-slot finality, which is a bigger project that I think started really early in the roadmap because people recognize more value and importance of it, and I think Think this is one of those things that we're going to have to have a massive public discussion with the community at some point, because there are huge benefits to single slot finalization, but there are also some costs like what to expect with a deposit size of 32 ETH in the final As a result, we hope to be able to reduce the finality time to a single slot also at 32 ETH or something like that.
Then there's The Surge, where things have apparently been reshuffled, with the new sharding design EIP-4844 taking the edge and basically waiting to be deployed. Next up is The Verge -Verkle Tree (further decentralizing the network, allowing individuals to run nodes), I think a lot of progress has been made in implementing Verkle Trees, the main sticking point right now is the transition from our existing tree structure to Verkle Trees would be a huge development challenge, and there is still debate about how to do it. I think in general, it has been deprioritized over achieving scalability, because scalability is very important to Ethereum.
On The Purge, History Expiry EIP-444 has made a lot of progress, Ban-self-destruct I think we can start deploying anytime, State expiry has been deprioritized a lot due to Proposer Builder separation, basically if you have PBS and If you have Stainlessness, the number of participants who must actually hold the entire state is very small, and ordinary verifiers do not have to hold (state), because ordinary verifiers only need to verify other blocks instead of creating their own blocks, The lower priority of State expiry does give us a lot of freedom to figure out other stuff first, like making the ethereum protocol more concise, getting rid of rlp, cleaning up the block structure, but it might take another year or so to figure that out paving.
V God:
V God:One of the possibilities I can see is that there are some ways to make deposits and withdrawals faster at least under normal circumstances, such as allowing a large number of deposits and withdrawals to occur if the chain is finalized, which would make the experience easier for validators, It will also reduce the incentive to participate in equity pools, and it will be easier to have smaller and more decentralized equity pools, so this is the first one.
The second is that changes to the Miner Extractable Value (MEV) architecture will obviously affect the economics of staking, we will add a Mev smoothing mechanism that basically forces Mev revenue to be redistributed to all ATF validators, while Instead of concentrating on one of them, then this will reduce the variance of staking revenue and also reduce the incentive to be part of a staking pool. So I think the economics of staking will change a lot because of some of the changes that can happen to staking, like I think the long-term dream for ethereum is basically that all a staker has to do is download and verify a bunch of data, and then sign. If that's the case, then things like staking on mobile phones will be very feasible, but I think it's going to take five to ten years to get there.
V God:
V God:I do think this question is overhyped, let's look at bitcoin, three mining pools control more than half of the bitcoin network, five mining pools control 80%, no less than ethereum proof of stake is doing now , a lot of people on the ethereum research team are critical of certain aspects of LIDO, and I know it's important to defend it because I like ethereum, but Lido is definitely not a single centralized player, owner/management as you might imagine If a developer/developer has the ability to pull the plug and become a participant in some kind of attack, it is a protocol that like some quite a few sub-validators, each of us has a few percent of the stake.
Original link
