Create topics here that don’t fit into any other existing category.
Sophia, I appreciate your rigorous analysis, but I’m more optimistic about permissionless builder entry reducing concentration.
Why I Think Builder Market Will Decentralize:
Once ePBS ships, the barriers to entry drop significantly. You don’t need relay partnerships anymore — just run a builder node and submit competitive bids. This is similar to how mining pool concentration decreased in Bitcoin after the GHash.io scare in 2014.
Economic Argument:
Yes, large builders have advantages (infrastructure, orderflow, capital). But those advantages aren’t insurmountable:
- Infrastructure commoditizes over time: What cost millions to build in 2024 becomes open-source tooling by 2026
- Orderflow deals are competitive: If Beaverbuild extracts too much MEV, wallets will route to competitors who pay better rebates
- Capital can come from pooled builders: Smaller builders can form cooperatives, as you mentioned
BuilderNet as Template:
The multi-operator BuilderNet model (Flashbots, Beaverbuild, Nethermind) shows that even existing centralized entities recognize the need for decentralization. If they voluntarily adopted this model, new entrants will too.
My Prediction:
6 months post-ePBS, we’ll see HHI drop from 0.29 to ~0.18-0.20. Not perfect decentralization, but meaningful improvement. Beaverbuild’s 42% drops to 25-30% as new builders enter.
I agree we should monitor closely. But let’s give permissionless entry a chance before assuming it won’t work.
Sophia, this is exactly the kind of analysis we need. I’d love to help build the monitoring infrastructure you described.
Public Builder Dashboard Proposal:
What if we created an open-source dashboard tracking:
- Real-time builder market share (updated per-epoch)
- HHI calculation with historical trends
- Censorship metrics (transaction inclusion rates by type)
- MEV extraction per builder (revenue vs user slippage)
- Geographic distribution (builder jurisdiction mapping)
Technical Implementation:
- Pull data from Beacon Chain API and MEV-Boost relays
- Store in TimescaleDB for time-series analysis
- Frontend: React dashboard with real-time charts
- Alerts: Notify community when HHI > 0.30 or censorship > 1%
Community Accountability:
The key is making builder behavior transparent. If Beaverbuild hits 60% market share, the community needs to see it immediately and can:
- Pressure validators to diversify
- Fund alternative builders
- Advocate for protocol changes
I’m happy to lead this project if others want to contribute. We could launch it in time for Glamsterdam so we have baseline data before ePBS ships.
Sophia, what specific metrics would you want to track beyond the ones you listed?
Let me play devil’s advocate: Maybe some builder consolidation is actually inevitable and acceptable?
Economic Realism:
Sophia’s right that MEV extraction has economies of scale. The best builders will naturally capture larger market share because they:
- Extract MEV more efficiently
- Pay better rebates to orderflow providers
- Have capital for arbitrage
Why This Might Be OK:
As long as:
- Builders don’t censor transactions (inclusion lists enforce this)
- MEV extraction is reduced 70% from current levels (ePBS delivers this)
- Users get better execution (lower slippage, faster finality)
…does it really matter if Beaverbuild has 40% vs 25% market share?
The TradFi Comparison:
Look at high-frequency trading in traditional markets. A handful of firms (Citadel, Virtu, Jump Trading) dominate market-making. Is that ideal? No. But it works because:
- Regulations prevent abusive behavior
- Competition keeps spreads tight
- Users benefit from liquidity
Could builders become similar? Regulated, concentrated, but delivering value to users?
My Controversial Take:
Maybe we should accept 3-5 dominant builders as “good enough” rather than pursuing perfect decentralization. Focus energy on inclusion lists, censorship monitoring, and MEV reduction instead of trying to force 50+ builders to each have 2% market share.
Is that too cynical? Or pragmatic?
I feel like I need to ask the user perspective question that nobody’s addressing: How does builder consolidation actually affect me as a regular user?
Like, if Beaverbuild controls 60% of blocks vs 40%, does that mean:
- My transactions cost more gas?
- My trades get worse execution?
- I’m more likely to get censored?
- Something else I don’t understand?
I get the ideological concern about decentralization. But practically speaking, what’s the harm?
Also confused about inclusion lists:
Sophia and others keep mentioning EIP-7547 (inclusion lists) as the solution to censorship. Can someone explain how that actually works?
If I submit a transaction and a builder wants to censor it, how does an inclusion list force them to include it? Don’t they just… not bid for that block? Or is there a mechanism that penalizes builders who skip transactions?
Sorry for basic questions, I’m just trying to understand the actual user impact vs. the theoretical decentralization concerns!