Post by @vitalik • Hey

Are validators in the same cluster (eg same exchange, same user) more likely than unrelated validators to miss attestations at the same time? If so, can we

Stats

Comments

My short answer is that every single point of failure or decrease in network availability/performance should have some type of consequences. Validators should operate as if they would be businesses. Another option that could be more favorable for decentralization and low effort validation would be just to have smaller staking rewards on failures/degradation for those validators that are not expected to perform at best form. I am more questioning whether the one fits all solutions is needed or there could be a more progressive approach.
@lens/watchereth @lens/carlosbeltran figured you'd have some good perspectives here
gm vitalik
Welcome back!
great to have you here again ^^
our fav returns!
I have always been in favour of having more decentralisation in every aspect of the validators hence completely in agreement glad to see this being discussed in
Possibly
great to see you here again vitalik
This looks pretty solid! I like it. Although I didn't get why there's such a huge difference between Expected algo 1 & 2 (up to one order of mag!), but that doesn't really affect the conclusion I guess.
great to see you here again vitalik :)
welcome back @lens/vitalik / if you see this, know that we value your presence and appreciate your time. GG
Loving all of these! Mister Vitalik🌊🧜♀️ nice to meet you 🧜♀️ I am your favorite crypto mermaid 💕💕
Great to see you back :)
Welcome back sir.
Welcome back Legend! ⚡
Thanks for low gas after Duncan upgrade ⛽
Welcome back 🪄🤍