Should Ethereum Really Burn Its Staking Yield to Zero?
Episode publishedPodcast: UnchainedUnchained
Transcript preview
Preview only
You're listening to a brief segment from one of the Bits and Bips episodes this week. The full show is now only available on its own dedicated Bits and Bips channels. So be sure to go to X, YouTube, and your favorite podcast platform and search for BITS plus sign BITS, spelled b I p s, and subscribe.
There is a proposal. Correct me if I'm wrong. It's like b I p $8.03 $6.01, I believe. 2, something right around 3. 3. Thank you. Which is basically this. It's bringing Ethereum staking rewards down significantly, possibly to zero, where what it does is burns a rising share of validator rewards as the staking ratio climbs, hitting a 100% burn rate at 60,250,000 ETH or roughly half of the supply. Authors of this included Justin Drake of the Ethereum Foundation and ETHCC co founder Jerome DeTyche, I'm pronouncing that wrong, phases in over about eighteen months and burns only newly issued ETH. Th
I mean, I'll be honest, I didn't see this problem as something that was front and center going into the proposal. So I kind of go to the latter view, which is that this is a little bit of an academic push. One that, look, there's some very big stakeholders around ETH now in a post stat world where the largest holder of ETH is Bitmine, you really need to work in a very coordinated way. There should be a broad lead up discussion to fundamental changes like this. This came as a surprise broadly to the community. Now I think the pushback would be, well, this is the proposal, let's talk about it no
think this is great because I think the EF is about to eat its own cooking. When people get all crazy about crops and this and that, and for people who don't know Crops, Ethereum is really leaning into what differentiates it, which is its decentralization, its million validators, censorship resistance. And I do think that that is Ethereum's edge. But the EF is not a centralizing force, and we're seeing other nonprofits coming along as well. And I think what you're going to see here is this is going to fail. Why is it going to fail? Because the community, the applications that are accruing a lo
I love the little TradFi dig in there. The manipulation is LIBOR.
Well, did, right? We have to learn the lessons of the past. We're trying to make it better. The one thing that I've always been obsessed with about just crypto is that fixed income markets are $145,000,000,000,000 in size. They're based on interest rates. Interest rate swaps are $500,000,000,000,000 market notional. And this is one area of exploration that we just haven't seen yet in crypto, but fixed income is staring us in the face. And I think as we approach the institutionalization of crypto, that market's poised to finally do something. I think that's one of the biggest issues. But you're
Yeah. If I'm looking at this and trying to figure out what do I think of it, what do I think of the proposal, one thing I would hit on is even if I was inclined to vote yes for it, forty eight hours is way too short. So I would be a no right now purely from the basis of you don't make a change this big without making sure that everybody material is relatively on board because your nightmare scenario is it passes with yes at, like, 51%, and then some very big holders just start unrelentingly dumping and pulling out. The last goddamn thing you want is a day later after that vote, Larry Fink come
Yeah, that's the beauty of what you just said. What better a convergence theme? Now, Ethereum's yield is competing with Treasury yield, it's competing with the Yen yield. This is the next step in the evolution of our markets. That's w
Keep exploring with a free account.
A free account preserves the short preview. Upgrade to Pro for the full transcript and episode chat.
Go deeper with this episode
Generate a summary and deeper analysis from the existing transcript.