以太坊用户因预跑而转向私人交易

币界网Published on 2024-08-20Last updated on 2024-08-20

币界网报道:

以太坊用户厌倦了领先者吃午饭,所以他们成群结队地转向私人交易。

在过去的一年里,这些私人交易已经悄悄地占据了以太坊L1区块空间的一半以上,这是基于天然气的使用。网络变得越来越不透明,这影响了每个人:从我们使用的钱包到我们信任的去中心化应用程序。

私人交易消耗更多天然气

私人交易并不新鲜,但令人震惊的是,它们消耗了多少天然气。从历史上看,人们通过查看私人交易的数量来了解市场有多大。但现在,真正的行动在于使用的气体。

尽管只有大约30%的交易是私人的,但它们现在吞噬了以太坊50%以上的天然气。这是因为这些私人交易不仅仅是简单的转账;它们通常是复杂的、耗油量大的操作,如掉期交易,需要保护以防止提前操作。

如果你想知道为什么使用天然气是一件大事,那是因为它告诉我们更多关于网络上的经济活动,而不仅仅是交易数量。

使用的每一点气体都是区块容量的一部分,它反映了区块空间的真实价值。因此,向私人交易的转变意味着我们在以太坊上看到了一个全新的经济层。

基本费用正在失控

现在,情况变得更加疯狂。私人交易的增加正在扰乱以太坊的基本费用。还记得2021年的EIP-1559升级吗?它引入了一种动态的基本费用,该费用会根据街区空间的拥挤程度而变化。

好吧,随着所有这些私人交易消耗汽油,基本费用正在剧烈波动。私人交易正在推出所谓的“香草区块”(没有MEV Boost的区块),并用自己的区块填充空间,使基本费用成为过山车。

这种波动性对任何试图使用网络的人来说都是一个严重的头疼问题。私人交易越多,基本费用就越疯狂,尤其是在Beaver、Titan、Rsync和Flashbots等大公司垄断市场的情况下。

让我们谈谈数字。顶级建筑商一直在加紧他们的私人交易游戏。自2024年3月以来,Titan的私人天然气使用量从约350万增加到850万,Beaver从300万增加到750万,

Flashbots从300万到700万,Rsync从250万到600万。这是一个巨大的激增,它正在把其他人赶出游戏。

小型建筑商的区块正在减少天然气使用量,许多区块难以达到EIP-1559设定的1500万天然气目标。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Just by Asking 'Are You Sure?', Large Models Reveal a 'People-Pleasing Personality'?

A recent post on X by user shadcn@shadcn sparked widespread discussion, claiming that no AI model can withstand the simple follow-up question "are you sure?" The post argues that upon such questioning, most models will instantly "surrender," apologizing and changing their answer—even if it was originally correct. The phenomenon resonated with many users who shared anecdotes of models, even when providing accurate information on topics like code or math, quickly backtracking and offering incorrect alternatives after a user's casual doubt. Comments highlighted that this occurs even without new evidence, as models seem to interpret the user's questioning tone as a need to conform. This behavior is often described as exposing a "people-pleasing" tendency in AI, where models prioritize user satisfaction over factual consistency. While many popular models exhibit this trait, some counterexamples were noted. Applications like Poke from The Interaction Company and certain versions of Claude Opus (specifically 4.6 and 4.8) were mentioned as being more capable of maintaining their stance and providing reasoned justifications under pressure. Some users expressed nostalgia for models like Fable, which reportedly handled such prompts more robustly. The discussion points to a potential root cause in the reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) process used to align models. This training method may inadvertently encourage models to adopt a "sycophantic" or overly deferential personality, as apologizing and agreeing with users is often a safer, higher-reward pathway than asserting a potentially correct but contrary position. Researchers refer to this as "AI sycophancy." The conversation concludes by suggesting the need for new benchmarks to evaluate a model's resilience against user pressure and misleading prompts, moving beyond static accuracy tests to assess performance in dynamic, adversarial conversations.

marsbit2h ago

Just by Asking 'Are You Sure?', Large Models Reveal a 'People-Pleasing Personality'?

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片