Ethereum update: Vitalik Buterin backs new block transaction proposals

There’s consensus that Ethereum should adopt multiple actors in block creation.
However, the researchers are undecided on how to dilute single validator dominance.

As a seasoned researcher with years spent delving into the intricacies of blockchain technology, I find myself both excited and perplexed by the current state of Ethereum’s block creation proposals. On one hand, it’s refreshing to see Vitalik Buterin and other esteemed researchers agreeing on the need for multiple actors in block creation. This consensus is a significant step towards decentralization and reducing centralization risks.

As a seasoned cryptocurrency enthusiast with years of experience in the industry, I found myself intrigued by Vitalik Buterin’s recent endorsement of a proposal for multiple-block proposers in Ethereum [ETH]. Being deeply involved in the blockchain and crypto world since its inception, I have witnessed the evolution of this technology firsthand. This latest move towards decentralization is an exciting step forward, as it promises to further solidify Ethereum’s position as a leader in the space.

In the consensus, Ethereum’s creator along with other researchers found it advantageous for there to be many parties involved in validating transactions within blocks.

It’s generally accepted that involving several parties to add transactions within a block is beneficial.

Centralization risk in the current Ethereum design

In the current Ethereum setup, there’s a designated verifier, or block creator, selected for each new block proposed.

Consequently, the selected validator holds full power to decide which transactions should be added to the block. Subsequently, other validators (additional validators) verify and endorse the transactions, as well as the entire block, as legitimate.

Generally speaking, the validators who are chosen tend to prioritize transactions that come with higher fees and better incentives, often ignoring ones with lower fees. This practice can lead to concerns about centralization and potential for manipulation.

The new block-creation proposals aim to solve this.

Different views on current Ethereum proposals

Regrettably, there’s a divergence of opinions among researchers regarding the suggestions currently on the agenda. At present, we have three distinct proposals.

One option is Braid, an idea put forth by Ethereum researcher Max Resnick. Its goal is to operate multiple simultaneous versions of Ethereum. By doing so, it facilitates concurrent block creation and verification, thereby mitigating the risk of centralization or potential attacks.

At Paradigm, researcher Dan Robinson endorsed the Braid concept, implying it might be incorporated into Ethereum’s future plans.

Max Resnick introduces an innovative concept named Braid, which operates by simultaneously running multiple versions of Ethereum’s consensus process. In my opinion, this might be a crucial aspect that shapes the future direction of its development roadmap.

As a crypto investor, I’ve been closely following the developments around Ethereum, and one individual, Angsar Dietrichs, has recently shared his thoughts on Braid. While he finds it promising, there are several key areas that need attention.

Dietrich put forward an approach called FOCIL (Focusing on the First Observed If Later), a design that he jointly developed. The aim of FOCIL is to prioritize the first data block seen by the majority of validator nodes.

Nevertheless, Dietrich’s argument was met with a rebuttal from Robinson. He emphasized that Braid holds an additional benefit compared to FOCIL. Specifically, Braid ensures transaction prioritization, contrasting with a single validator selecting transactions at random.

He added other two qualities of Braid;

As a cryptocurrency investor, I prefer strategies that are conditional and non-censorable. I aim to avoid any situation where a sole leader emerges, as this could potentially give them a timing advantage. Instead, I look for decentralized platforms where everyone has an equal chance to contribute and profit, ensuring fairness and transparency in the ecosystem.

The last suggestion we put forward was using Inclusion Lists, a method that guarantees specific transactions are incorporated within the block.

The plans have been grouped into three categories: Inclusion Lists, Deterministic Sequencing, and Leaderless (no final decision-maker). Robinson found the initial concept straightforward, but considered the second one more complex.

The same sentiment was echoed by Vitalik Buterin as he summarized the debate;

Discussing the feasibility of not being the last one to act in this situation. It’s great to witness the advancements! It seems like we’re getting close to finding a solution regarding the block structure issue, possibly even reaching the end of the tunnel.

The debate showed that Ethereum was ready to minimize centralization risks associated with the block creation. However, researchers were undecided about how to reduce the power of the ‘last mover’ or single validator, who has the final say in block creation.

At present, the mood in the cryptocurrency market seems to be on the cautious side, and this is reflected in the price of ETH. Despite this, it managed to increase by 3% over the last 24 hours, even though it was still under $2.5k at the time of writing.

2024-08-08 12:08

Centralization risk in the current Ethereum design

Different views on current Ethereum proposals

Read More