Notice: Polkadot has migrated to AssetHub. Balances, data, referenda, and other on-chain activity has moved to AssetHub.Learn more
Kusama validators, sustainability
After talking one by one to some web3 / parity members I decided to raise public awareness of the following topic: TL&DR: Kusama validators are not economically sustainable in the long term. To show it I just placed together expenses and profits of my own validator: https://hackmd.io/@DerFredy/SkH2gWxZP#/ The efects for the network in the long term are difficult to measure/predict. A trend to invest fewer and fewer in the infrastructure would lead to an inestable network. The need to increase up to 1000 validators for parachain activation would also lead the problem get worse. I would love to see some sugestions from the community regarding this topic
Comments (17)
I agree with this The costs do not cover the hardware and even i have been looking at how I cld reduce the costs. I at one stage wanted to several nodes but after evaluating costs and economics it became clear it is not the way to go.
What commission would it take right now for a Kusama validator to be profitable? Historically the problem has been that operators were running Kusama validators at a loss to gain reputation for validating on Polkadot. Now Polkadot is launched, we see a lot less 0% commission validators on Kusama, so maybe things will improve.