1/ Another week, another Rollup on Ethereum launched. Short thread about what is Metis Andromeda Rollup from @MetisDAO πŸ§΅πŸ‘‡
2/ If you are more interested in a project vision, especially "DACs", roadmap, etc... you can find more strategy and marketing-oriented resources on the web, this is a quick peek of what was deployed and launched on the 18th of Nov
3/ Metis under the hood is another fork of @optimismPBC - expect more of these to come in the future. The main difference is that @MetisDAO plans to launch multiple "instances" of L2 rollups
4/ All of these L2 chains will share the same L1 smart contract infrastructure and the plan is that they will be "natively" interconnected. So the original @optimismPBC contracts are enhanced to support multi-instance deployment
5/ Each of these "instances" may have their own specific fraud verifier, depending on actual needs. Each may have different fraud proof window. It's all highly customisable and will be managed by the @MetisDAO
6/ The current deployment, Metis "Andromeda" is the main, "default", L2 chain that is deployed and launched first. Similarly to other Optimism-based rollups, currently there is no on-chain fraud proof system (this system is still being actively developed by the @optimismPBC team)
7/ But rather then just trusting centralised Sequencer, Metis allows for any staked (with $METIS token) Validator to challenge the state root submitted by the Sequencer. Once challenge is submitted, other Validators need to "vote" on what is the correct state root
8/ The full "consensus" logic is pretty simple and anyone interested can inspect it here github.com/MetisProtocol/…
9/ If the challenge is "won", Sequencer is slashed and state root is reverted. It's worth noting thought that until proper L1 fraud proof system is deployed, the security of users' funds entirely depend on the honesty of Validators checking the Sequencer's commits.
10/ Congrats to @MetisDAO for the launch and good luck with growing the ecosystem. It is clear that multi-rollup, modular ecosystem with Ethereum L1 as a settlement layer is quickly becoming a reality πŸš€

β€’ β€’ β€’

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

Keep Current with bartek.eth | πŸͺ±πŸ•³οΈ ing

bartek.eth | πŸͺ±πŸ•³οΈ ing Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

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

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @bkiepuszewski

24 Nov
1/ Have you noticed an impressive TVL increase on @bobanetwork, which quickly climbed up to #2 on @l2beatcom ? Quick 🧡 on what is this rollup (and what it is not) that you may not have heard about before πŸ‘‡ Image
2/ So, TL/DR is that πŸ§‹ is an @optimismPBC fork, but with a token, $BOBA. And if you are thinking that the massive and quick TVL increase is due to $BOBA airdrop and liquidity mining, you might be right
3/ They seem to be following @optimismPBC so close, that they upgraded to OVM 2.0 on the 28th of Oct, actually before @optimismPBC did themselves (on 11th of Nov) 🀯
Read 7 tweets
20 Nov
1/ After seeing so much confusion about upcoming data sharding in Ethereum, here's my take on why you will soon see massive increase in tx throughput on Ethereum and how this is achieved πŸ‘‡πŸ§΅
2/ The main factor limiting Rollup scalability today (both Optimistic and ZK) is the fact they both use tx calldata to store L2 txs on L1 and the size of calldata is limited by L1 block size. Hence ideas such as Validium or zkPorter (blog.matter-labs.io/zkporter-a-bre…)
3/ These ideas are nice, but they introduce additional security assumptions, such as "Data Availability Committees" with their own tokenomics. What if there was a way to somehow make L1 validators to be such a committee ?
Read 10 tweets
12 Nov
1/ What are your favourite blockchain myths ? Can you add sth to this list of my personal favourites (in no particular order) ? Which one you disagree with ? Myths and Truths below: πŸ‘‡πŸ§΅
2/ M: There is no extra social layer in blockchains, consensus is programmed into the software and blockchains are truly immutable
T: Users can decide to change consensus rules, fork the blockchains, change history
3/ M: Users will prefer immutable, code-is-law, blockchains over blockchain that changes former consensus rules
T: If programmed consensus rules seriously clash with what is understood to be the social consensus (the intent) users prefer a forked blockchain (ETH vs $ETC)
Read 16 tweets
13 Oct
1/ Let's try to dispel the biggest confusion about Optimistic Rollups and their 7-day fraud proof window. Imagine you have 1000$ DAI and send it to Alice. Then you send it again to Bob. Obviously you expect that first tx confirms, the second reverts with "out-of-balance" error πŸ‘‡
2/ Clearly Alice should now have 1000$ DAI and not Bob, provided that the *sequence* of txs are as above. Now, Sequencer posts both transactions to L1 in a batch and also posts a state root (a magic number). L1 does not do anything fancy, except recording these.
3/ If Sequencer is honest, the state root "confirms" to L1 that it's Alice that has $DAI on L2 and not Bob. So Alice can withdraw that $DAI to L1, i.e. release them from L1 deposit contract. Not Bob. But how L1 can be sure that L2 Sequencer is honest ?
Read 9 tweets
23 Sep
1/ The second, after censoring, aspect of L2s is what users need to do if L2 operator stops pushing new state roots on L1 @l2beatcom πŸ§΅πŸ‘‡
2/ You can read about the censoring in the previous thread here:
3/ Pushing state roots is crucial so that users can withdraw their funds from the bridge. And to be able to do it, you need to provide Merkle Proof of your balance against that state root on L1
Read 12 tweets
22 Sep
1/ How important is Censorship Resistance for L2s ? Applications can censor individual users based on where they come from, or whole dApps could be rendered useless if Rollups censored all incoming txs to them. What are the possible solutions right now ? πŸ‘‡@l2beatcom
2/ @arbitrum and @optimismPBC allow users to "force" their transactions via L1. This is perhaps inconvenient for the end users, but it is a very generic mechanism that works for all dApps on a Rollup. And dApps don't need to do anything, it's just there. And it works
3/ @StarkWareLtd based L2s (@SorareHQ, @dydxprotocol, @deversifi, @Immutable) also have force transaction mechanism, but they are application specific. Namely, they allow you to force only certain tx (typically withdrawal request). It's as if each dApp had to implement it on L1
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

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

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(