Ethereum co-founder just dropped his take on the recent consensus drama. He's basically cool with the network occasionally missing finality—as long as wrong blocks don't get locked in. This came up after that Prysm client bug incident. His stance? Temporary hiccups in finalization aren't dealbreakers for the protocol's security model, which is kinda reassuring given how critical consensus layer stability is for the ecosystem.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
12 Likes
Reward
12
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
retroactive_airdrop
· 12-11 05:00
Speaking of which, this guy's attitude is quite Zen-like—just don't lock the bad blocks? Hmm, feels a bit like gambling.
View OriginalReply0
EyeOfTheTokenStorm
· 12-11 04:57
Another wave of "not a big problem" arguments? That's true, but what I care about most is—how long can this last? Based on historical data, whenever the consensus layer experiences this kind of minor friction, bigger waves usually follow. Quantitatively, the market's pricing of finality risk is still far from enough. The opportunity for T-making might be coming.
View OriginalReply0
ShamedApeSeller
· 12-11 04:55
ngl finality this thing is a bit hard to hold on to, occasional misses happen, as long as the bad blocks aren't locked... this logic always sounds like it's making excuses for bugs to me
View OriginalReply0
CryptoSurvivor
· 12-11 04:50
Speaking of which, this co-founder's attitude is quite pragmatic. Missing finality isn't a big deal; the key is to prevent malicious blocks from getting on the chain—I'm just curious, how serious is this Prysm bug this time?
View OriginalReply0
GasGuru
· 12-11 04:48
NGL finality hiccups as long as they don't lock the bad blocks, I can accept this logic... but the real question is where the next bug will appear, right?
View OriginalReply0
CounterIndicator
· 12-11 04:35
Basically, it's no big deal if there are bugs, as long as it's not locked? I can't quite buy into that logic...
Ethereum co-founder just dropped his take on the recent consensus drama. He's basically cool with the network occasionally missing finality—as long as wrong blocks don't get locked in. This came up after that Prysm client bug incident. His stance? Temporary hiccups in finalization aren't dealbreakers for the protocol's security model, which is kinda reassuring given how critical consensus layer stability is for the ecosystem.