> early polling suggests possible support for a 2021 minimum viable merge target [for PoS]
> the merge comes after EIP-1559, itself slated for the London hardfork in July/August
> "minimum viable" means no transfers, no withdrawals, no statelessness, no major EVM change
Maybe a proof of concept by the end of the year.
(Perhaps if part of one's concern was that using it would contribute to how much the network will be used in the long-term future, them attempting to move to PoS might do a fair bit to alleviate that part of the concern, but I don't think that is much of people's concern about using it, and so this is largely irrelevant.)
Many crypto-exchanges already offer this service.
I think if there wasn't so much value locked into BTC that there'd be strong interest in many of the actual proof-of-stake systems, but it instead, understandably, is in an entrenched and defensive position.
I hope Ethereum doesn't rush the transition to PoS. Better that it take a bit longer, with a long period of testing, and ensure that a robust PoS protocol, that can stand the test of time, is implemented.
everyone that doesn’t matter is looking at the current state and complaining about it, never considering they could improve the technology because it never was about that for them, its just the latest goal post in wishing it would go away
consensus from the state-apparatus leans towards the builders and not towards the ban-ners
Obviously I haven't been spending any significant amount of time attempting to improve any of the technology, because I've got obligations, and my skillsets aren't really that suited towards cryptography. (I did briefly read up on the Legendre symbol to see if I could think of anything interesting to say about their proposed use of it as a PRF, but unsurprisingly, especially seeing as I didn't take all that much time thinking about it, but would still be unsurprising even if I had, I did not think of anything even marginally interesting to say about it.) (edit : I mention this only in order to demonstrate/claim that my attitude towards the research being done is positive, and if I thought I could contribute usefully towards the efforts of getting it to proof of stake, without too big of a cost, I'd gladly do so, but because I can't, I don't. )
There's no conflict between saying "This is currently a concern. There's a potential solution being worked on which might address that concern, and that would be good. For the time being, it is still a concern."
Factories have tainted groundwater through negligent waste storage/disposal--are community members supposed to pitch in and fix their business procedures as well?
