pull down to refresh
1 sat \ 3 replies \ @k00b 17 Apr \ on: Stop Calling It MEV · BlueMatt's Blog bitdevs
Partitioning benign from malignant MEV is really helpful. I still need a better, step by step example of how MEVil leads to abnormal centralization. Is it because MEVil can only be conducted when there's a sufficient level of centralization, tipping the scale against smaller miners?
It is when a miner needs to pay top developers to develop software that maximizes fee revenue from transaction selection. Versus using free open source Bitcoin Core.
reply
Needing to fund devs for fee maximization puts smaller miners at a disadvantage because they can't fund devs. After enough time passes with such a fee gap, smaller miners go extinct.
Did I get that right? Sorry if this is obvious, but for some reason the point seems very subtle to me.
reply
Yes, correct. Small miners would need to rely on 1 or a handful of entities that were specialists. This would be a very strong centralization effect on bitcoin and would effectively create permissioned bitcoin mining as you'd need to register with one of these entities in order to be competitive as a miner.
Then, these handful of entities could effectively dictate the rules of bitcoin in the future and censorship-resistance would be lost.
Hard to see how bitcoin would have much value if only a few entities had this much power.
reply