Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • Feb 28 2019 19:45
    @Arachnid banned @merkle_tree_twitter
  • Feb 17 2019 00:56
    @jpitts banned @Aquentson_twitter
  • Apr 09 2018 04:14
    @holiman banned @JennyJennywren_twitter
  • Oct 21 2017 19:12
    @Arachnid banned @Musk11
sassal
@sassal
yeah i was going off the march date
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
It should be around 16 second block times.
20 second block times will be around 18 days later, so in 23 Days from now.
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
I thought the ice age wasn't for another 6 months or something, which is why we aren't bumping it in Istanbul?
20 second blocktimes within a month feels like worth addressing in Istanbul.
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
Blocktimes have been been faster, as well as the difficulty is different
so it is showing up earlier than expected
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
I would recommend a fork right after istanbul. We only have 14 days until Istanbul launches.
Hudson Jameson
@Souptacular
Why would you reccommend it happening so soon?
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
Depends on the groups tolernace for longer block times.
  • in 5 days - 16 second blocktimes
  • in 23 days - 20 second blocktimes
  • in 47 Days - maybe 25-30
Hudson Jameson
@Souptacular
I remember us polling the community sort of using reddit and twitter a while ago when we asked "what is the highest block times you are willing to endure", but I'll have to find the links tomorrow.
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
  • November 25th - - 16
  • December 13, 2019 -- 20
  • January 6, 2020 -- 25-30
The next period would be the end of january
Hudson Jameson
@Souptacular
My opinion: The community would be able to handle 25-30 second block times max. So if we can have a fork happen mid January that would be ideal :/
sassal
@sassal
i remember 30s block times... that was not pretty
+1 @Souptacular
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
I see two options. Fork fast and only change the number. Or, Fork a little slower and fix the ice-age mechansim so this doesn't happen again.
Mid january would fit either of those options imo
Hudson Jameson
@Souptacular

I have heard differing opinions as to:
a) Why the ice age was originally added to Ethereum.
b) What that means for the chain today.

So I hope we can quickly rehash those opinions as a community to see if we even want it anymore.

James Hancock
@MadeofTin
Yes
Hudson Jameson
@Souptacular
I don't know where I stand on the issue.
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
I believe in the intention, but not in the mechansim.
sassal
@sassal
given that eth2 is being deployed as a separate chain, i lean towards the ice age being unnecessary and something that could be removed without much consequence
but i dont know the current consensus around it in the community
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
The ice-age means that any contentious fork would need to be proactively made. And not retrofit onto any previous ethereum fork. It effectively bricks the legacy chain, and the only way to resurrect it is to make an update to client code.
Hudson Jameson
@Souptacular
@sassal @econoar can we include the explanation as to why we have the difficulty bomb and not just how it works in the EthHub article? I can then point people there when I ask them what their opinion is on it.
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
with the deploying of ETH2, i don't think we want old versions of Eth1 being shadow deployed. Better to leave all chains before us dead.
sassal
@sassal
@Souptacular can do
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
Shadow meaning, just grab an old version of Geth and start mining on it.
sassal
@sassal
@MadeofTin but can't someone just fork out the ice age if they want to deploy a shadow eth1?
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
Yes, but they have to actively do that. And then broadcast that they are doing it.
The forks aren't just laying around for anyone to pick up again
sassal
@sassal
this is true
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
The other historical reason was to give us a sense of urgency in deploying forks. Not necessary anymore. imo
Better to have a bricking mechanism that behaves predictably to fullfill the first case imo.
sassal
@sassal
yeah, i guess we just need to make sure to fix it so something like this doesn't happen again
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
A Fork should be an active choice a community makes. As you said "fork out the ice age" is something that a group can choose to do.
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
Around the same time last year I did some research on alternative difficulty adjustment algorithms. A bricking mechansim could easily be built in.
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
I'm a fan of removing the ice age entirely. SEPARATELY, I think the ice age should be deferred if it remains.
As a dapp developer and user, 30 second blocktimes are notably more impactful to users than 15s block times.
Not only because chain throughput is halved, but also just responsiveness.
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
The problem with the iceage is that it is really difficult to predict, not that it exists.
It involves simulating blocktime changes due to difficulty changes and relys on assumptions of changes of hashrate in the future.
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
You also have to simulate finding blocks which that is a Poisson_Point_Process https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisson_point_process
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
I have lobbied in the past that the ice age (if retained) should be a function of time, not a function of difficulty (or something along those lines, it has been a while).
Meaning, the chain targets a certain block production speed based on current absolute timestamp.
And then difficulty is used to adjust the system to target that block production rate.
James Hancock
@MadeofTin
Even a blockheight would be fine.
Micah Zoltu
@MicahZoltu
Would be better than current process yes. I generally am against using blockheight when you mean timestamp, and vice versa.
In this case, the intent is to target a timestamp, so we should use a timestamp.