Created at 5pm, Feb 4
CadnDataCrypto
0
Proof of Stake: The Making of Ethereum and the Philosophy of Blockchains
bcW869naYNuaqof3PR9LyZIPVEHPvM2IJKGQAVwDYF0
File Type
PDF
Entry Count
744
Embed. Model
jina_embeddings_v2_base_en
Index Type
hnsw

The ideas behind Ethereum in the words of its founder, describing a radical vision for more than a digital currency—reinventing organizations, economics, and democracy itself in the age of the internet.\'A crucial contribution to development of a new technology that will impact all of our lives.” –Laura Shin, host of the Unchained podcast and author of The Cryptopians: Idealism, Greed, Lies, and the Making of the First Big Cryptocurrency Craze“Vitalik Buterin is one of the most influential creators of our generation….Like most of his work, it is sure to become a must-read.”–Camila Russo, author of The Infinite Machine, founder of The DefiantWhen he was only nineteen years old, in late 2013, Vitalik Buterin published a visionary paper outlining the ideas behind what would become Ethereum. He proposed to take what Bitcoin did for currency—replace government and corporate power with power shared among users—and apply it to everyday apps, organizations, and society as a whole. Now, less than a decade later, Ethereum is the second-most-valuable cryptocurrency and serves as the foundation for the weird new world of NFT artworks, virtual real estate in the metaverse, and decentralized autonomous organizations.The essays in Proof of Stake have guided Ethereum’s community of radicals and builders. Here for the first time they are collected from across the internet for new readers. They reveal Buterin as a lively, creative thinker, relentlessly curious and adventuresome in exploring the consequences of his invention. His writing stands in contrast to the hype that so often accompanies crypto in the public imagination. He presents it instead as a fascinating set of social, economic, and political possibilities, opening a window into a conversation that far more of us could be having.Media scholar Nathan Schneider provides introductions and notes.Published in 2022 by Seven Stories Press.

194 part 3: proof of StaKe That is, what we need is something like a game-theoretic concept of common knowledgeor, in less mathematical terms, a widely shared notion of legitimacy. To achieve this kind of common knowledge of neutrality, the neutrality of the mechanism must be very easy to seeso easy to see that even a relatively uneducated observer can see it, even in the face of a hostile propaganda effort to make the mechanism seem biased and untrustworthy. BUILDING CREDIBLY NEUTRAL MECHANISMS There are four primary rules to building a credibly neutral mechanism: 1. Dont write specific people or specific outcomes into the
id: e914fb74a55d8c97ece743c0762c8473 - page: 196
Open source and publicly verifiable execution 3. Keep it simple 4. Dont change it too often Rule (1) is simple to understand. To go back to our previous examples, Anyone who mines a block gets 2 ETH is credibly neutral; Bob gets 1,000 coins is not. Downvotes mean a post gets shown less is credibly neutral; prejudice against blue-eyed people means a post gets shown less is not. Bob is a specific person, and prejudice against blue-eyed people is a specific outcome. Now, of course, Bob may genuinely be a great developer who was really valuable to some blockchain projects success and deserves a reward, and anti-blue-eyed prejudice is certainly an idea I, and hopefully you, dont want to see become prominent. But in credibly neutral mechanism design, the goal is that these crediBle neutrality aS a guiding principle 195
id: 402c8ba3b942326534d9430d0f8989cc - page: 196
In a free market, the fact that Charlies widgets are not useful but Davids widgets are useful is emergently discovered through the price mechanism: eventually, people stop buying Charlies widgets, so he goes bankrupt, while David earns a profit and can expand and make even more widgets. Most bits of information in the output should come from the participants inputs, not from hard-coded rules inside of the mechanism itself.
id: c20d5a506bc3cdfcea818a43f35b4190 - page: 197
Rule (2) is also simple to understand: the rules of the mechanism should be public, and it should be possible to publicly verify that the rules are being executed correctly. Note that in many cases, you dont want the inputs or outputs to be public; my article On Collusion goes into the reasons why a very strong level of privacy, where you cannot even prove how you participated if you want to, is often a good idea. Fortunately, verifiability and privacy can be achieved at the same time with a combination of zero-knowledge proofs and blockchains.
id: e0e86ce8e9f79b152eac03493fe05fbd - page: 197
How to Retrieve?
# Search

curl -X POST "https://search.dria.co/hnsw/search" \
-H "x-api-key: <YOUR_API_KEY>" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"rerank": true, "top_n": 10, "contract_id": "bcW869naYNuaqof3PR9LyZIPVEHPvM2IJKGQAVwDYF0", "query": "What is alexanDRIA library?"}'
        
# Query

curl -X POST "https://search.dria.co/hnsw/query" \
-H "x-api-key: <YOUR_API_KEY>" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"vector": [0.123, 0.5236], "top_n": 10, "contract_id": "bcW869naYNuaqof3PR9LyZIPVEHPvM2IJKGQAVwDYF0", "level": 2}'