Tweet

polynya

4 Oct, 4 tweets, 4 min read

@KyleSamani

@KyleSamani @Evan_ss6 @latetot Mentioned - "this is not just about Ethereum". Rollups maintain full composability across multiple DA sources - incl multiple data shards & even non-Ethereum DA (volitions). Long-term, one zkR can/will outscale Solana by up to ~10x with full composability and better UX, (1/4)

@KyleSamani

@KyleSamani @Evan_ss6 @latetot And necessarily, zkRs have superior composability and liquidity (de)fragmentation properties, with initiatives like dAMM & Pooling, than between L1s or sharded networks (which Ethereum is no longer - they're only for data to feed rollups). It's better UX across the board. (2/4)

@KyleSamani

@KyleSamani @Evan_ss6 @latetot The right comparison is StarkNet vs Solana, not Ethereum vs Solana. One StarkNet instance can outscale Solana, and you can have multiple StarkNet "shards" which can be very tightly coupled, sharing liquidity and other interoperability, and with SHARP share provers. (3/4)

@KyleSamani

@KyleSamani @Evan_ss6 @latetot Whereas Solana is bound by it's one instance - and moving to other L1s will have much worse UX. In the short term, Solana and Polygon PoS are fine solutions, but in the long-term, the monolithic design will prove to be worse in every way - except for some niches. (fin)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @epolynya

polynya

@epolynya

3 Oct

Just showerthoughts as a non-expert on data availability for validiums: what if we could take StarkWare's adamantium concept and structure it into a permissionless DAC? Users can choose (& vote for) their preferred DA provider(s) or do it themselves.

ethresear.ch/t/adamantium-p…

Now, the voting may make it sound like DPoS, but you don't actually need to come to consensus. As long as an n number of DA providers (by vote) sign off, the validium can transition. If the validium freezes, you only need to trust your preferred DA provider or yourself.

Essentially, you have a baseline DAC that sign off state transitions - except instead of being permissioned it's voted in by governance. On top of that, you add a 1-of-N trust layer with adamantium. I could be wrong - but we're now approaching OR type trust assumptions.

Read 5 tweets

polynya

@epolynya

26 Sep

https://twitter.com/aeyakovenko/status/1441904519877566466

This is the "cost of validator censorship", not decentralization. Validators merely provide a service to the network, i.e. ordering and signing transactions - it's non-validating full nodes that enforce consensus rules. Covered here: polynya.medium.com/security-layer…

Decentralization is:

https://twitter.com/aeyakovenko/status/1441904519877566466

- Ease of running full nodes. If users must trust a validator set, then it's not a trustless network - you're just another bank with a new set of bankers, as Gavin Wood put it.
- A wide token distribution with high monetary premium to increase difficulty of validator censorship.

I'd also add that Solana and monolithic chains are highly inefficient, requiring thousands of nodes for minimal security. Long term, validiums will be a fraction of the cost. A succinct ZKP can verify millions of transactions, while DA layers can have 1-of-N security models.

Read 6 tweets

polynya

@epolynya

25 Sep

https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/1441614091441819650

This is very myopic - in the long term all of this is false.

- Rollups & volitions can and will be fully decentralized and inherit the security and decentralization properties of whatever is the most secure and decentralized security layer. Hermez is already there.

(1/5)

https://twitter.com/el33th4xor/status/1441614091441819650

- Anything any centralized monolithic chain can do, a volition can necessarily do orders of magnitude better, in every way.

- Volitions remain fully composable across multiple data availability sources.

- zkRs & volitions let you withdraw immediately, ORs have bridges.

(2/5)

- zkRs/volitions have significantly superior liquidity sharing properties than monolithic chains. E.g. liquidity is fractured between Avalanche and Ethereum, or C-chain and D-chain. However, with initiatives like dAMM, you can share liquidity between StarkNet and Loopring.

(3/5)

Read 5 tweets

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Share this page!

polynya

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @epolynya

polynya

polynya

polynya

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?