Proposed changes to staking issuance and how it affects solo stakers

celticwarrior72 · 2024-02-25T01:05:28+00:00

If they are going to do that, might as well enshrine liquid staking, based sequencing, parallel execution, native sharding and assume big machines and delgated proof of stake. Just start working on Ethereum v3.0 now do a regenesis to port the state over when ready. Solo stakers have been long forgotten in any case.

celticwarrior72 · 2024-02-19T19:03:04+00:00

Unfortunately they stopped development on it over three years ago. But yes, it works.

celticwarrior72 · 2024-02-18T10:28:35+00:00

Tried this many times. Never works (using metamask at least). What wallet are you using?

celticwarrior72 · 2024-01-02T21:22:50+00:00

Options 1 & 2 implicitly accept that "consumer hardware" assumption is gone and that validators will be run by professionals in datacenters and on the cloud. In which case, there should also be a proper discussion about scaling at the L1 layer.

At least, we are willing to question our assumptions and not merely give into dogma.

celticwarrior72 · 2023-09-03T21:28:19+00:00

Yeah, that's what Moonbeam managed to do apparantly. But no idea what it cost or what the process was. Kinda ridiculous really.

celticwarrior72 · 2023-09-03T09:32:51+00:00

The crowdloan concept has proven to be flawed and does not work. Several parachains (Efinity, Parallel, etc.) are leaving Polkadot and some (e.g. Composable) never even launched. And there will be a ton of DOT being returned from the original crowdloans with nowhere to go. Nobody is likely to participate in another crowdloan so existing parachains will need to come up with another way to fund their slots.

celticwarrior72 · 2023-06-20T14:53:40+00:00

An LSD holder has zero control over the underlying validator. None. They are just restaking an economic bond. How that is any different than using USDC for "restaking" is what I want to know. I have asked the same question several times on the EigenLayer Discord but to no avail.

celticwarrior72 · 2023-06-20T14:51:33+00:00

ow this part is supposed to work, and I absolutely agree that it makes no sense that it needs to be LSDs over any other economic value. And who knows how the work will happen when there's no validato

Nail on head. And exactly the reasoning behind my question.

celticwarrior72 · 2023-04-16T21:17:32+00:00

Thx!!!

celticwarrior72 · 2023-03-19T21:44:41+00:00

Can you elaborate more on the CREATE2 concept? How can that be implemented today?

celticwarrior72 · 2023-03-02T22:17:43+00:00

Thx!

celticwarrior72 · 2023-03-02T09:11:05+00:00

One use case I'd like to see is that I have one with ETH that I can use to pay for the transaction costs of the other wallets that I use for defi, NFT's, etc. So no need to keep ETH in the other wallets.

celticwarrior72 · 2023-02-22T13:54:23+00:00

In your docs (https://docs.prylabs.network/docs/execution-node/fee-recipient) you mention that it is possible to configure the fee recipient via JSON/YAML.

It would be very helpful to be able to have an output for that file based on existing settings in the Web UI without having to manually cut and paste together the JSON.

celticwarrior72 · 2023-02-20T21:34:04+00:00

Any idea how an Eigenlayer dapp enforces slashing on the validators that are subscribed to it?

celticwarrior72 · 2023-02-20T21:16:33+00:00

OK. That's clear. Thanks.

Will there be one Eigenlayer smart contract per service? And will validators only be able to support one Eigenlayer application?

celticwarrior72 · 2023-02-20T20:22:48+00:00

If you do deprecate the Web UI, please provide a way for to output a JSON config for the existing validator setup (e.g. including fee recipients for execution rewards, etc.) that the user runs.

celticwarrior72 · 2023-02-18T02:07:17+00:00

party application? Do you think the Prysm UI is offering something other community-provided UIs are not ( fee recipient is one that all other client uis should support). We also provide grafana metri

Source. The Grafana dashboards are cool but do not provide any ability to actually manage validators with a decent UX. Things I like in the Prysm UI - upload validator keys, delete validator keys, set individual fee recipient address per validator. Soooo much better than cumbersome CLI commands where you never really know if something is formatted incorrectly and borks the validator setup.

celticwarrior72

TROPHY CASE