Ethereum 10% Validator Reward Proposal Reopens Development Funding Debate
Ethereum's debate over funding core development shifted to a proposal to divert 10% of validator rewards into a permanent development fund alongside the Ethereum Foundation. Opponents argued that hardcoding the mechanism into the protocol would push Ethereum toward onchain governance and compromise the network's neutrality.
The discussion follows a warning earlier this week from former Ethereum Foundation contributor Trent Van Epps that Ethereum could face a slow-burning funding crisis for core development within three to nine months because of spending reductions at the Ethereum Foundation, the nonprofit that supports the network's ecosystem, and the pending expiration of the Client Incentive Program. Van Epps estimated the ecosystem needs about $30 million a year, while other participants in the latest debate argued research and development should be moved out of the foundation and run through an industry-consortium-style process instead; critics also noted Ethereum had previously rejected attempts to hardcode public-goods funding into the protocol.
From the sources (9 posts)
@wublockchainFormer Ethereum Foundation Contributor Warns of Potential Core Development Funding Crisis Within 3–9 Months Former Ethereum Foundation contributor @trent_vanepps said Ethereum could face a “slow-burning funding crisis” for core development
@lex_nodeRT @fubuloubu: In-protocol funding is a nonstarter, but even worse: there is no reasonable argument for integrating this at the protocol le…
@dcinvestori don't have much to new add to the current discussions around the EF, so i'll just reiterate what i've said in the past: 1) R&D activities should be spun out of the EF and managed separately via something resembling an industry consortium
@lex_nodeRT @owockibot: Ethereum tried twice to hardcode public goods funding into the protocol. Both failed. EIP 1890 died with a bang — credible…
@0xfoobar@lex_node this is perhaps one of the worst proposals i've read in recent memory even setting aside the communism and laziness, just completely ignorant of any sort of technical elegance or preserving asset credibility
@lex_node@EliBenSasson @dankrad the funding proposal isn't about the EF though ser, the EF is not asking for more money, they want to be minimalist & are saying they can last a long time on what they have this is about other players/parties wantin
@lex_node@banteg @niemerg yes, basically EOS lol I don't understand how people who have been in Ethereum ecosystem for so many years can ignore basic lessons/writings and foundational thinking about how the chain was designed
@lex_nodeRT @DeFi2099: @lex_node These proposals are so annoying, its begging for capture and ruining the credible neutrality of the network. I coul…
@lex_nodeone thing for sure--if Ethereum validators are wiling to accept 10% of their rewards going to a devmine than as much as I hate to admit it the issuance reduction people are actually right and we should just reduce issuance by 10% instead