以太坊新EIP引发DeFi社区强烈反对

Bankless Nation, there is a new EIP in Ethereum land that has caused much nashing [music] of teeth. Uh to help me go through some of the news and get some of the reactions, I've got Stonnie from A and Mike from Etherfi. Stonnie. Mike, welcome back to Bankless to you both.

Thanks for having me. Great to be here.

So stake targeting is the EIP stake tapering. Uh this is around ETH issuance. So it's an ETH monetary policy debate. There is a proposal out there from six Ethereum researchers and developers over in EF land. The EF the ivory tower of the EF. And the concern in this EIP, the problem that this EIP is trying to address is that there is no constraint on the amount of ether that will be staked to Ethereum. So the idea is that there's no cap on the incentive to stake more ETH.

Right now there is about 34% of all ETH is staked and the worry that this EIP has is that that will slowly march increasingly close to 100% because there's no reason for it not to. There is more Ether issued in some in total the more ETH is staked to Ethereum. And the concern here is that with that vanilla ether in the Ethereum financial ecosystem, the DeFi ecosystem slowly gets replaced by staked ETH derivatives. Uh things like staked ETH from Lido, our ETH from Rocketpool or with Mike, we have Ether's E staked ETH derivative as well.

So there's no ether, vanilla ether as we know it disappears and and turns into the derivatives and the researchers are concerned about that being the dominant equilibrium inside of the Ethereum ecosystem. Another concern that this EIP has is that Ethereum is overpaying for security. We simply don't need 100% of ETH staked or even more than 50%. something around 30 to 40% of ETH staked to Ethereum provides ample security according to the opinions of these researchers.

Uh this proposal was introduced last week. Everyone hates it. I would say everyone outside of the EF does not like this EIP.

Even people inside of there are people

even Yeah. Even some people inside of the EF. Yeah. Yeah. And so that's why I have Stonnie from A and Mike from EtherFi here on the show to get some of their reactions and to elevate their voices about the problems that this EIP uh creates for them and for the broader DeFi and builder ecosystem. Maybe Stonny, I'll just go with you since a came before EtherFi. Uh Stonyie, what was what was your reaction upon seeing this proposal out of the ES?

Look, I think it's a um you know, it is an interesting topic to um evaluate and and you know, if you ask the question of uh whether uh we're basically uh paying are we paying sufficient sufficiently overpaying for uh security. Um and I think that's a really uh legitimate uh question to ask. Um that is for sure. I think that um Ethereum has been built uh on security and also on the idea that you have a resilient uh network uh an ecosystem and anyone who is bu a builder for example like me and Mike uh are choosing Ethereum because of that uh security um and and what it provides uh essentially and and and that is the the sort of like a core uh value proposition.

So, so paying for security is is is big part of that. Um, I think that the uh the the real sort of like uh uh uh objective of of this proposal uh is is basically uh somehow to affect uh the Ethereum the the the ETH price and and get it up. So, I know we're in a in a qu of like um uh bearish uh markets uh and being for a while. So in this kind of a situations we see various proposals and ideas floating around about you know how do we get the ET price up and and this is this proposal um uh while it's sort of uh things like uh while it's the mechanisms are around that um uh ET staking um and whether it should be capped um and and the uh issuance particularly on on on the staking and reducing the yields that stakers are getting um and and that way influence that's uh there is less issuance and and better pricing better appealing uh better appeal for Ethereum as an asset and I think that's uh what are the actual uh uh consequences of the proposal um aren't actually achieving uh that first of all it really destroys the uh concept of solo staking because it reduces the cash flows for solo stakers uh creates also uh very unpredictable tax consequences.

So you know and the question is then if someone gets a $500 bill for staking uh they can even go into negative as well. So it really uh reduces the opportunity to come as a solo staker. And then the second uh biggest issue there is the uh institutional side. So obviously institutions want predictability uh they want a cash flow component uh especially when they're building uh financial products and and distribution and and this is one of the uh key areas why a lot of institutions come in because they have this uh component there and third really um important is is defi.

So uh Ethereum is built on D5 rails. uh whether uh EF uh wants to acknowledge that uh now or never uh that is the real fact. um everything that is on Ethereum that is successful is about uh DeFi and that is totally fine because you know what Ethereum can really do is replace the financial system um in in in in overall and and and build on resilience resilient rails uh that ether provides um the security and and there's a lot of argumentation that if we reduce the yield on on on it staking uh you can go to places like a and defy and you know get yield there but A lot of this yield is actually being based on uh uh Ethereum uh staking.

And if there's no yield on uh on it on DeFi, what it means is that um it as an asset becomes a funding leg. So what does what is a funding leg actually means is is basically when you do a carry trade, you want to borrow a cheap asset. Once you borrow that, you sell the asset to actually uh to an asset that can be productive and then you can you can basically uh earn on that um asset. And a really big example is the biggest carrier trade in the world which is the Japanese yen carrier trade.

So Japanese econ economy hasn't been doing well for the past decades. Uh yen has a very low or zero uh interest rate. So what typically uh is is done in this carry trade is basically yen is borrowed uh uh just just to replace with another leg uh that actually creates uh cash flow. So this is the sort of element that uh comes when you reduce the productivity of it it as an asset and and also by reducing the yield and those are sort of my um there's bunch of things about the the process and and whatnot.

So like I think the question of this whole topic is important but I think the consequences are uh extremely negative for solo stakers institutions and uh DeFi that that that actually build the the Ethereum house

Mike from the Ether uh sector of Ethereum. What were the biggest flags that were raised in your eyes when you saw this proposal? Uh man honestly like every aspect of it I felt was um uh was kind of frustrating. Um you know first of all it was proposed with you know a matter of days uh leading up to the meeting where where these proposals were discussed for inclusion and in the next hard fork. Uh, and so I, you know, one, I'm sure there's all kinds of arguments about why, uh, you know, why it came in so late, but it just, it certainly didn't create a good impression that this thing was, it created the impression that this thing was trying to get sort of squeezed in without, uh, without much debate, which, you know, in fact had the opposite effect uh, uh, as a as a result.

So, so that was um, uh, frustrating. A lot of people were frustrated by by that. Uh the other uh part of it was and Stanley you alluded to this is that it was in a bizarre way proposed as a way to benefit solo stakers when very straightforwardly this hurts solo stakers. Solo stakers are individual node operators on Ethereum who are running their own little node you know at home. They have the highest cost basis because there there's no economies of scale.

They they have their own machine. They have their own