And to be clear, what I mean is that there's nothing to stop validators from not doing work on your behalf, therefore killing the chain.
Remember when that literally happened to Solana?
Edit: >You should probably understand the basics of how validators work before making a comment on them....
I'd love for you to walk me through, in detail how Ethereum and Bitcoin compile transactions into blocks, since you're the expert.
This is an even better incentive mechanism than a bank salary. It's like if a bank made all it's employees keep all their money with the bank and if they didn't do their job they lose all their savings.
1) My joke was how much work you were having “properly secured” do. It’s a genuine trope called no true Scotsman. Every crypto phenomenon that involves theft “wasn’t decentralized enough” or “wasn’t properly secured”. But then centralized databases are discussed as a monolith.
2. > Ethereum stakers are subject to an Inactivity Leak penalty if they don't do work for the chain.
Sure. That’s an economic incentive. Bank workers get fired and lose salary if they don’t show up.
3. > It's like if a bank made all it's employees keep all their money with the bank and if they didn't do their job they lose all their savings.
Yeah, like getting paid in stock?
Edit: still waiting for the definition of a mempool as well.
> My point is that by the same logic then banks are also trustless.
There's no logical connect with what you're saying at all. Ethereum is "trustless" because nobody can steal ETH from a properly secured wallet, not even the validators.
You should probably understand the basics of how validators work before making a comment on them....