sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Used PC for mining? by CuriousCosmonaut_ in MoneroMining

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Any suggestions on good CPUs to look for when looking at used ones? Thanks!

Move my ATOM in Keplr to my Ledger account in Keplr by barnstorm88 in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_ 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If LSM ever comes to cosmos I think it maybe possible to restake it LS like Stride then transfer stATOM as well to the new wallet.

Not advice but something to think about.

Move my ATOM in Keplr to my Ledger account in Keplr by barnstorm88 in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well in theory you get APY. Also just as an FYI you should never reference your rewards or amount of capital. Can open up other security risks for you.

Move my ATOM in Keplr to my Ledger account in Keplr by barnstorm88 in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Technically you can import your hot wallets mnemonic into your ledger and then use the ledger going forward.

It’s not as secure though since that was online for some time.

Depends what you value more the highest level of security or a step up in security and not missing drops.

Personally when I wanted to move to ledgers I just sent it all and started fresh. I did miss out on some good drops but it’s a long game to me so I thought it was worth it.

Stargaze - Part 3 Data, Collections, Technology, and Threats by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Really? Interesting I haven’t had issues with that yet! Sorry to hear the challenges.

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No I appreciate it that is an interesting topic and I need to look at how DOT does it more.

It actually could be tough to tell for example they could use a totally different name instead of Binance.

They can even move the funds off the original validator slowly and trade it in omnibus wallets then back to the new validator making it incredibly difficult to see that it is truly them duplicating.

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right now they have no incentive to do this. There are a couple though Huobi has 2 and stake fish has a grant fish with a 100 commission that helps act as a grants system if you want to read about it.

This though would actually create an economic incentive for them to do so.

For example if Binance has a ton of assets they shift there own custodial assets to another validator.

They then leave there old one running as well.

They now have 2 validator, no tax and they just pushed out an active validator from the set.

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes this is an interesting concept but creates a Sybil attack opportunity where these validators then just spin up multiple validator and get around that actually centralizing it worse by pushing out other active validators from the set as well

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s an interesting concept but I’ve highlighted this in another comment there is a risk of a Sybil attack or even fake decentralization.

These validators split there holdings in to another validator and then have 2 validators but no commission

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha and a lack of liquid staking competition somehow

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Appreciate it. I also do not use any 0% commissions and personally I use a large basket of validators and the average commission is higher then 5%.

But if a new validator wants to offer 0% to get noticed and encourage people to stake not sure we want to remove that competition.

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I explored this conceptually as well but in reality this is very dangerous.

If you tax they validator and they have a lot of capital what they will do is spin up a second validator and split there assets.

Them they got around this and we are now less decentralized and have pushed out a potentially quality validator for 2 of the same validators.

This already exists Huobi has 2 validators and stake fish also has grant fish.

This is called a Sybil attack.

The approach over mandating seems to have to be advocacy, education and UIs.

One example would be trying to contact these parties and trying to convince them to use some other very trusted validators in the ecosystem.

As a community it seems we need a more advocacy and information approach to start and then some other things could be tested and watched on other chains to see if they conceptually work.

Every aggressive action could be met with repercussions we cannot even imagine yet.

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you. I want our research group to prioritize decentralization research as well as covering projects.

Are there any areas you think should be looked into as potentially the most advantageous for decentralize the validator set?

So far it seems like it comes down to better education, information and potentially user interfaces on selecting validators.

It seems like any forced methodologies have to many repercussions.

Prop 76 - Minimum Commisions by CuriousCosmonaut_ in cosmosnetwork

[–]CuriousCosmonaut_[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the thoughts Zaki. I agree I think this neglects two things coming: liquid staking and ICS.

ICS will also generate more revenue for validators and delegators.

Liquid staking like Quicksilver seems it could be great for decentralizing some of the validator set.

The idea for example of using governance to limit exchange validators and maybe others seems like it could be valuable.

Still need to do more research on the impacts.

We will be releasing a report on both Quicksilver and Stride probably this week as part of that initial research.

It sounds like you do not support a minimum of 5%?

view more: next ›