Ethereum may now be more vulnerable to censorship — Blockchain analyst

CointelegraphPublicado em 2022-09-16Última atualização em 2022-09-16

Resumo

Ethereum’s upgrade to proof-of-stake (PoS) may make it more vulnerable to government intervention and censorship, according to the lead investigator of Merkle Science. 

Ethereum’s upgrade to proof-of-stake (PoS) may make it more vulnerable to government intervention and censorship, according to the lead investigator of Merkle Science. 
Speaking to Cointelegraph following the Ethereum Merge, Coby Morgan, a former FBI analyst, and the Lead Investigator for crypto compliance and forensic firm Merkle Science expressed his thoughts on some of the risks posed by Ethereum’s transition to PoS.
While centralization issues have been broadly discussed leading up to The Merge, Moran suggested the prohibitive cost of becoming a validator could result in the consolidation of validator nodes to the bigger crypto firms like Binance, Coinbase, and Kraken.
In order to become a full validator for the Ethereum network, one is required to stake 32 Ether (ETH), which is worth around $47,000 at the time of writing.
A pre-Merge report from blockchain analytics platform from Nansen earlier this month revealed that 64% of staked ETH is controlled by just five entities.

Source: NansenMorgan continued to say that these larger institutions will be “subject to the whims of governments in the world,” and when validator nodes identify sanctioned addresses they can “be slashed rewards and then eventually kicked off the system,” with businesses prevented from interacting with them.
Either you will comply and you will siphon off that sort of interaction […] or you run the risk of being fined, being scrutinized, or potentially being sanctioned yourself.
Vitalik Buterin spoke about this risk in an Aug. 18 developer call, suggesting one of the forms censorship could take is validators choosing to exclude or filter sanctioned transactions.
Vitalik went on to say that as long as some validators do not comply with the sanctions, then these transactions would eventually be picked up in later blocks and the censorship would only be temporary.
On Aug. 8 crypto mixer Tornado Cash became the first smart contract sanctioned by a U.S. government body.
In reaction, various entities have complied with the sanctions and prevented the sanctioned addresses from accessing their products and services.
The development has had a large effect on the Ethereum community, with EthHub co-founder Anthony Sassano tweeting on Aug. 16 that he would consider Ethereum a failure and move on if permanent censorship occurs.
I want to be very clear on this:
If the Ethereum base-layer ends up engaging in *permanent* censorship then I will consider the Ethereum experiment a failure and I will move on.
Thankfully, I believe the Ethereum community is strong enough to fight off base-layer censorship.
— sassal.eth (@sassal0x) August 16, 2022

Leituras Relacionadas

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

Vitalik Buterin's recent algorithmic stablecoin proposal envisions using an option-like mechanism to create a stablecoin without the liquidation risks inherent in traditional collateralized debt position (CDP) models. The design splits one unit of ETH into two components: a 'stable' leg (P) that maintains value up to a certain strike price, and an 'upside' leg (N) that captures any appreciation above that price. Together, they always sum to one ETH, eliminating the need for debt or liquidation mechanisms. From an options perspective, the stable leg essentially functions as a synthetic, covered call position. However, significant challenges exist. For the stable asset to maintain its peg, it must continuously roll deep in-the-money call options, leading to potential rollover slippage, predictable trading paths vulnerable to front-running, and liquidity issues. Crucially, the system's scalability depends on a constant demand for the upside leg—a form of leveraged ETH long position without funding rates or liquidation risk. It's unclear if such persistent, specific demand will materialize from speculators or market makers who have simpler alternatives like perpetual swaps. The author, drawing from experience with Rysk, argues that DeFi options have struggled as standalone trading products due to complexity and fragmented liquidity. Their potential lies instead as foundational infrastructure underpinning more complex financial primitives like stablecoins, structured yields, or index products—transforming from a direct product into a core pricing and risk distribution engine for the next generation of on-chain finance.

marsbitHá 1h

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

marsbitHá 1h

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbitHá 4h

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbitHá 4h

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbitHá 4h

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbitHá 4h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片