I Think a Theorim Would Have Failed if Even a Benign Entity Had the Power to Make the Decision to Include Transactions on the Chain

4min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

There are three types of a high level techniques that you can use to mitigate emv. They're all based in the fact that the miner or the block producer, na pro of stakeor whatever, they don't know the clear text transat before they have committed to its ordering. And any time that you do this kind of inscription with verifiable delay functions, there's also its counterpart, that you can also do it with threshold and ion. I think some certain kinds like, like particularly censoring transactions, a is the sort of thing that we really just hope a system like this does not have a dultimately, would the theorym fail?...

Today, I brought on Dan Robinson and Georgios Konstantopoulos, who are both research partners at Paradigm. Together, we explore the topic of MEV, or “Miner Extractable Value”.

Blockchains like Ethereum have this dirty little secret that, while in most regards they are very decentralized, the ordering of transactions within a single block is actually completely in the hands of a single miner. They can insert their own transactions, rearrange those of users, or even censor them completely.

MEV describes how much value a miner can extract from users and other miners by using these powers to their advantage.

If you’ve never looked into MEV before, I think you’ll be both shocked and fascinated by the complexity and sophistication of the war that’s raging inside Ethereum’s memory pool. Enjoy

Dan Robinson https://twitter.com/danrobinson

Georgios Konstantopoulos https://twitter.com/gakonst

Hasu https://twitter.com/hasufl

Flash Boys 2.0 (Daian et al) https://pdaian.com/flashboys2.pdf