Motivation behind the Ethereum’s One-Cpu-One-Vote Rule: A look at original paper
In 2014, Satoshi Nakamoto published a seminal work entitled “Ethereum: a scalably public blockchain and decentralized app platform.” In this original research, Nakamoto has compared two different voting systems for decentralized applications (DAPPS) above the Ethereum blockchain. A system, called One-CPU-One-Vote (1/1V), allocates the voting power to the largest bidder, while the other, called One-IP-ADDRESS-One (1/I/V), distributes votes based on a unique public key.
In this article, we will deepen the motivation behind the choice of 1/1V over 1/I/V in the Ethereum protocol and explore what makes an attractive solution for decentralized applications.
Original paper
The original work of Satoshi Nakamoto compared the performance and feasibility of two voting systems: One-CPU-One (1/1V) and One-IP-ADDRESS-DOTE (1/I/V). The 1/1V system allocates the voting power to the largest bidder, while the 1/I/V system distributes votes based on a unique public key. Nakamoto’s purpose was to evaluate which system will be more suitable for decentralized applications.
Comparison
In the original work, Nakamoto compared the performance of both systems using different values, including transaction speed, block creation time and gas efficiency. According to its analysis, 1/1V has exceeded 1/I/V about the general flow rate and the time of creating the block.
Why 1/1v?
So what motivated Nakamoto to choose the One-Cpu-One-Votes system on the One-IP-Adress-One-Vote system? The key reasons for this decision were:
- Scalability : One-Cpu-One-Vote has been designed to be more scalable than 1/i/v. Nakamoto noted that in high traffic scenarios, the 1/1V system could manage a larger volume of transactions without significant performance degradation.
- Efficiency : In terms of gas efficiency, Nakamoto found that 1/1V exceeded 1/I/V. This is due to the fact that the One-CPU-one-vot system was able to more effectively allocate the voting power, reducing the need for complex calculations and optimizations in the 1/I/V system.
- Security : Nakamoto believed that the security of a decentralized application is primordial. He claimed that the One-CPU-one-vot system has provided better security by minimizing the manipulation or exploitation potential.
Why an IP address vs. a processor?
Nakamoto’s choice between 1/1V and 1/I/V can also be attributed to the reasons why he chose not to use an IP address as a unique identifier. The original work explained that:
* IP addresses are ephemeral
: Nakamoto stressed that IP addresses were passing because they can change over time. This made it difficult to track the voting history of a user on different blocks.
* IP addresses can be widespread : The use of IP addresses as unique identifiers have also raised concerns about security and potential spoofing attacks of IP addresses.
Conclusion
The motivation behind the Ethereum Unu-Cpu-Un-Vot Rule is rooted in scalability, efficiency and security. By prioritizing the high transaction flow on low gas costs and optimizing the votes for better performance, 1/1V exceeds its counterpart, 1/I/V. As the decentralized application ecosystem continues to increase, understanding the basic motivations of decision makers such as Satoshi Nakamoto can provide valuable information on design decisions that shape our digital infrastructure.
In this article, we explored the original work published by Satoshi Nakamoto and we deepened for the reasons based on the choice of one-cpu-one-vot against a single-t-ads-un-vot in Ethereum’s protocol. By examining the performance values and security considerations presented in the original work, we can obtain a deeper understanding of how 1/1V was designed to meet the needs of decentralized applications.
