Some ◊33,637 ($15.4 million) have almost unanimously voted for a delay of the difficulty bomb and a reduction in issuance in ethereum.
60%, at 20,000 eth, have voted for a removal of the difficulty bomb and a reduction of issuance to 2 from the current 3 eth per block, known as Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) 1234, while 40% want to reduce it further to just one eth.
One eth is voting for just the removal of the difficulty bomb, while no one is voting for an increase in issuance.
The above four options are the current 4 EIPs on the table. Realistically, the fourth one can be discarded. The first one doesn’t seem to have much support. The second one is probably the one that should be adopted. While the third one might be a bit too risky.
It is arguably unnecessary at this point to go to one eth when that’s planned anyway once Hybrid Casper goes out sometime potentially next year which will reduce issuance to a total of 0.82 eth per block.
As such, a reduction to 2 eth as a transitory method to prepare for that reduction to ◊0.82 might make sense in any event regardless of the vote which has only 25 addresses voicing their opinion.
The risk might be that the reduction lowers mining profitability and thus potentially lowers security, but eth nearly halved its issuance last year from 5 eth to 3 eth without any noticeable change in security.
Miners might reasonably ask why they’re being “punished,” and our answer would be because they strangled the cryptokitties by not raising capacity in December and recently they needlessly allowed the network to be congested when orphan rates (uncles) were relatively low despite the network hitting its gas limit.
Obviously there are some cute small home miners and we have sympathy for them, but in the big picture they’re probably not even a blip compared to the huge GPU farms in China where they appear to not care one bit for ethereum’s network or its capacity so doing not one thing to lower uncle rates.
The more reasonable answer is perhaps that keeping miners slightly uncomfortable should assist in the eventual transition to no miners at all which hopefully begins next year.
Rather than doing it abruptly, the slow reduction in issuance should make any transition easier as it is gradually implemented.
Some, mainly miners, argue that if issuance is to be reduced then there needs to be a fork to get rid of Asics, but arguably ethereum doesn’t have any proper Asics and an Asics fork can be very dangerous as we saw with Monero which experienced a 51% attack in May following a plunge in their hashrate after an Asics fork.
For Monero that might have not mattered much, but ethereum is in a completely different league so such fork might be a distraction at best.
Nor is it really needed. Eth miners, soon enough, won’t be a thing, so focusing on the transition to stakers would probably be a better use of time than tweaking what is planned to be thrown away anyway.
That all said, we’ll have our own polls and of course you’re free to comment below as well to let us know of your views and opinions.
Should Ethereum Reduce Issuance?
- Yes (89%, 17 Votes)
- No (11%, 2 Votes)
Total Voters: 19
Should Ethereum Fork Asics?
- Yes (53%, 9 Votes)
- No (47%, 8 Votes)
Total Voters: 17