This document proposes to improve the uniformity of ether distribution
between wallet address 0xAb5801a7D398351b8bE11C439e05C5B3259aeC9B and
wallet address 0x15E55EF43efA8348dDaeAa455F16C43B64917e3c which are
currently experiencing a significant non-uniformity.
As of the date of this EIP, the difference in balance between
address 0xAb5801a7D398351b8bE11C439e05C5B3259aeC9B and address
0x15E55EF43efA8348dDaeAa455F16C43B64917e3c is far from equitable
or uniform, with the former having more than 365,000 ether
more than the latter. The distribution of ether between these two
addresses must be improved in order to protect the Ethereum economy
from centralized control. This will be accomplished by transferring
100,000 ether from the former address to the latter. This is a properly
motivated improvement in keeping with the core Ethereum philosophy of
decentralization.
This proposal is necessary because the Ethereum protocol does not allow
the owner of an address which does not own an equitable amount of ether
to claim their share of ether from an address which owns a dangerously
centralized quantity. Rather than proposing an overly complicated generic
mechanism for any user to claim ether to which they believe they are
equitably entitled, this proposal will take the simple route of a one-time
transfer of 100,000 ether from 0xAb5801a7D398351b8bE11C439e05C5B3259aeC9B
to 0x15E55EF43efA8348dDaeAa455F16C43B64917e3c. This avoids duplicating
the effort of other proposals and provides a net improvement to the
Ethereum project and community.
The balance of 0xAb5801a7D398351b8bE11C439e05C5B3259aeC9B will be decreased
by 100,000 ether. The balance of 0x15E55EF43efA8348dDaeAa455F16C43B64917e3c
will be increased by 100,000 ether. No net change in the amount of extant
ether will occur unless at the time of implementation the former address does not
contain sufficient ether for such a deduction.
The value 100,000 was chosen after careful technically sound analysis of various economic theories developed over the past century. In spite of the fact that it is a convenient round number, it is actually the exact output of a complex statistical process iterated to determine the optimal distribution of ether between these addresses.
Clients that fail to implement this change will not be aware of the correct balances for these addresses. This will create a hard fork. The implementation of this change consistently among all clients as intended by the proposal process will be sufficient to ensure that backwards compatibility is not a concern.
Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.