Thread by @RyanSAdams

A topic that deserves way more discussion: composability

Composability in the context of smart-contracts, Eth 2.0, network effects, and constellation chains.

And, are we killing composability in our scaling approaches?

First, what is it?

A smart contract performs a specific function, but is also a building block. Composability is the ability to string together these blocks to build new things

Want a tokenized S&P500 asset? Ok. How? Use an Augur mkt hedged w/ 0x-powered sETH dydx derivative wrapped in Set bundle

The trustless tokenized S&P example above is real, composed in a weekend at a recent hackthon: devpost.com/software/primo…

Yep. A weekend

Complexity out of simple building blocks

Imagine a world of dozens, maybe hundreds of smart-contract based financial primitives interacting with one another—each more valuable with use (network effect) & decreasing in risk with longevity (Lindy effect)

A permissionless, programmable, & composable financial system

Composability, I’d argue, is Ethereum's killer feature

So what’s the issue? Well, Eth 2.0 doesn’t have intershard composability nailed. Atomic, synchronous cross-shard transactions are under research, maybe not in Serenity

The S&P example? Maybe only possible in the same shard

And it's not just an Eth 2.0 gap. There seems to be an inherent tradeoff between scalability & composability. Here’s Gavin Wood when pressed on the subject of composability in PolkaDot:

Yes, It’s possible that middleware solutions mitigate the composability-scaling tradeoff. It’s also possible 2nd layer execution engines or new research bring synchronous transactions to Eth 2.0

I'm not discounting the progress & research already underway, it's promising

But, if it turns out composability is the killer feature, Eth 1.0 may have a long lifespan—it's just really hard to beat in this area

All this to say, let's prioritize not procrastinate composability in our scaling plans--it may be far more important than we realize