So I know scalable consensus models are a very 2017-2018 topic, but I wanted to write 3500+ words on them anyways. Enjoy! 0/5 multicoin.capital/2019/07/16/the…
The more I studied consensus models in blockchain-based systems, the more I became convinced that @nic__carter is right: it's #timechain, not blockchain. Bitcoin's timechain provides an easily verifiable, trustless clock to new validators joining the network. 1/5
This timechain allows for a canonical ordering of transactions, but "ticks" very slowly to minimize chain growth and to maximize the possibility that nodes with very poor Internet connections can stay in consensus. This is a design choice made for very good reasons! 2/5
When examined using this framework, other consensus algorithms (e.g. Tendermint, Ethereum 2.0-style sharding) can effectively be simplified down to the following question: how can we safely speed up our network's clock to as fast as possible? 3/5
In the post, I walk through a few consensus algorithms using this model, before arriving at @solanalabs. They recognized the #timechain properties of Bitcoin early, and leaned into it in a very unique way that allows them to speed up their network clock as fast as possible. 4/5
I hope you enjoy the post, and welcome any discussion! This was a fun way to apply my wireless networks background, which have some similarities to blockchain/timechain-based networks that are underexplored :) 5/5
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Apropos of nothing, here's a thread of recently published research focused on #bitcoin and Lightning.
I don't know if these researchers submitted their work to the Science of Blockchain Conference (SBC), or if SBC denied their applications. But it's clear they're researching!
"zk-PCN: A Privacy-Preserving Payment Channel
Network Using zk-SNARKs"
Published Aug 20, 2022 by researchers from Shandong University, Indiana University, Purdue University, and the Singapore University of Technology and Design arxiv.org/abs/2208.09716
"Revoke and Update: A More Flexible Payment Protocol for Payment Channel Networks"
Smart contract platforms have seemingly found PMF with DeFi over the last year. App devs are flocking to said platforms in hopes of launching the next COMP, UNI, SNX, etc. and cashing out life-changing money after a few months of work.
Too good to be true? 🧵
The canonical platform risk case study is Facebook vs. Zynga. Zynga built a $10B company on Facebook's platform, until March 2011 when Facebook cut off Zynga's access to their APIs and cratered their business. venturebeat.com/2016/06/30/fac…
Ethereum's narrative from 2014-2018 was that it existed to fix this problem.
A "world computer" running "unstoppable code" where nobody could pull the rug out from under you like Facebook did to Zynga.
This laid the groundwork for some super vibrant communities of node runners to pop up a la Ring of Fire and Plebnet. These groups are the primordial soup out of which the next wave of LN startups will emerge IMO... lots of tinkering and lots of great memes
Recently, I've been thinking about this chart from @hasufl and @nic__carter concerning the changing #bitcoin narrative. I think the recent focus on NgU has been misguided, and we've lost sight of the true common thread tying all of these together:
One thing I've learned from watching DeFi over the last year is that NgU tech is not unique to #bitcoin. Supply side liquidity crunches can be programmed in a few lines of Solidity.
But true monetary freedom cannot. #Bitcoin is the money chosen by people seeking to be free.
As the FUD machines spin up and market dominance wanes, I think this is very important for us to internalize. #Bitcoin guarantees its adopters that they will be free. Being free does not guarantee being rich. And if freedom is not continually fought for, it will disappear.
So I have a lot of thoughts about this. History is definitely rhyming as we build the Internet of Value today in a similar manner to how the Internet of Communications was built from the 1970s to now. But many people are applying the wrong lessons from the past to the present!
Email (SMTP) was invented in 1982, and was the Internet's (TCP/IP) killer app for 30+ years and arguably still is. When @ChairmanHeath says "Internet" he's prob referring to HTTP, invented in 1989 by Tim Berners-Lee and popularized by the browser, the Internet's second killer app
I can't remember where I got this screenshot, apologies, but it perfectly distills what HTTP brought to the table: more media types beyond text!
Similarly, Bitcoin only transfers BTC, while Ethereum allows for many types of "value" transfer. Pattern matching to HTTP isn't crazy.
So now that we all agree that globally available blockspace is not scalable for actual computation, but is best used for verification of off-chain computation instead, here are some thoughts on Ethereum's approach to scaling vs. Bitcoin's.
First, definitions: 1) broadcast txs: all-to-all gossip comms that succumbs to the scalability trilemma (all L1s) 2) unicast txs: 1-to-1 direct comms that occurs between two peers only (LN) 3) multicast txs: 1-to-many comms between a subset of peers (rollups, sidechains)
Both Bitcoin and Ethereum's L1 use broadcast txs. But because of (IMO) Bitcoin's use of UTXOs vs. Ethereum's use of accounts, Bitcoin has prioritized unicast txs via LN first, whereas Ethereum's initial unicast txs projects have been discarded in favor of multicast txs.