So, here's a tangential and embarrassing rant I always wanted to make! My blog and tweets are never about financial stuff, but I do morbidly indulge in it on the Into the Cryptoverse telegram channel. My thoughts on short-term markets are often polar opposite to my thoughts on..
...long-term tech, which is what my blogs & twitter focus on.
Into the Cryptoverse users will know I was high on ADA through 2020 till September 2021, and still believe it's due one last pump. I was bullish on SOL all thru 2021, and actually was surprised it took so long.
All the while, I was highly critical of both Cardano and Solana, despite their tokens being my top picks. I know this can be confusing, but here's my general philosophy:
Bull markets have always been ass backwards when it comes to valuing technology.
So, start with the most flawed technologically with the strongest narrative, and then make your way up to the best tech that will be sustainable long term.
As a result, here's the rotation sequence:
ADA -> SOL (single-chain monolithic) -> AVAX/ATOM (multi-chain monolithic) -> NEAR/DOT (sharded, proto-modular) -> MINA/ZK-L1s (semi-modular) -> DA layers (L1s as modular) -> Rollups, DA layers, settlement layers -> Applications
When the bear market strikes, it's curtains for all of crypto, much less so for BTC, ETH, and a few application tokens that accrue value.
This is just a fun thread, please don't take it seriously :) I know I'll regret this already! Will stick to rollups.
To be very clear, I don't take these trades because I value my sanity. Money is infinite, but sanity is very finite. But as markets catch up to reality, I'll gradually consider them. I started (very small) in Nov '21 with some rollup-related projects as disclosed on my blog.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Execution sharding is still kind of monolithic, or as I call them, proto-modular. It was a necessary step, but rollups & DA layers supersede them. I agree NEAR is the best execution sharded chain yet: though I'll point out "ETH 2.0 sharding" no longer exists as John suggests.
With the new sharding design proposed by Dankrad, we will likely never see fraud-proven execution shards on Ethereum. So why is Ethereum abandoning execution sharding? Because fully modular architectures like rollups + data sharding is simply superior in the long term.
Rollups+DAL have several advantages over sharding:
1) Retains atomic composability even if it settles across multiple data shards, while execution shards break composability between each other. So, you can have a super duper rollup with gazillion TPS with full composability.
There's a real usecase for sovereign L1 chains with their own consensus & data availability. Rollups or their primitive predecessors shards/parachains & multi-chain/subnets do not accomplish this.
The answer: a validity proven execution layer(s) with a DAS proven DA layer.
There are multiple ways to accomplish this. Start with Mina and fork Polygon Avail or Celestia. I bet Polygon's next-gen SDKs will look like this - Polygon's ZKRs + Polygon Avail sharing a consensus mechanism.
The great advantage of validity proofs is they can be verified on...
...a different settlement layer. So even if the above is an alt-L1, Ethereum can verify it's full state. As long as this sovereign chain isn't compromised, it basically behaves like a ZKR. To be clear, rollups are superior: their bridges will continue working even if compromised!
Some showerthoughts on what I'd like to see from rollup tokens:
- Vampire attack L1s to oblivion, and yes, this includes Ethereum. Smartly target active users across different L1s. Fewer tokens dropped to the yield farming chasing chain hoppers & high value Ethereum users.
- Have canonical bridges on all L1s being targeted, make it free (or very cheap) to bridge from them
- Leverage token issuance to have transaction fees cheaper than (most) L1s. Need much less subsidies than L1 inflation to get it done due to rollups' inherent long-term advantage
- Permissionless token incentives to developers, paid out to developers determined by activity of their contracts*
- Distribute at least ~70% of the tokens to the community/treasury, and at least ~70% of tokens to active circulation, have a clear long-term plan for incentives
I'm delighted to see a lot of anticipation and excitement for rollups in 2022, but I'm only cautiously optimistic. With some exceptions (Immutable X), rollup teams haven't yet proved they are capable of outcompeting alt L1s on marketing, public relations & business development.
Some would argue they are in beta - but so are Solana, Cardano, Polkadot etc.
I think smart contract rollups - particularly StarkNet & zkSync 2.0 - will need most of 2022 to become a mature product out of beta. Arbitrum will be first, but Nitro & FSS will still take time.
Which is not to say there won't be adoption - but that depends entirely on how well their teams & communities market the rollups, and how their tokens turn out. But true blockchain scalability ready for mass adoption for the very first time - unlikely to happen in 2022.
I have gotten a few questions about value accrual on layers. Hate to break it to you:
- Execution layer: highly competitive, tight margins, a race to the bottom. We can see this from alt-L1s, where the sole gimmick is accruing as little value as possible.
Rollups have a significant advantage as they pay a small fraction or zero of alt-L1s on inflation budgets, but any significant value accrual over that is unclear. MEV mitigation will be an area of innovation, and the rollup with the strongest MEV mitigations will be advantaged.
- Settlement layer: nearly zero for optimistic rollups in the optimistic case; tending towards zero for ZK rollups for anything above 100 TPS. Low-activity ZKRs become recursive rollups (L3s) or sharing proofs.
Showerthought: ZKRs should be loss-leading, with max ~$0.10 transaction fees* for the end user. Verification price capped at ~250 gas. Cost to rollup: $12,000/day, decreasing rapidly with growing activity, with break-even at 3.33 TPS*. From there, tx fees will keep decreasing.
This solves for the chicken-and-egg problem of low activity = high costs and thus low demand. The $12K/day can either come from the rollup team's marketing budget, or from token inflation. For perspective: SOL, DOT, AVAX, ADA etc. are subsidizing >$10M per day - $12K is peanuts!
The way I see it: if a ZKR cannot have 3.33 TPS activity soon, then it's surplus to requirements anyway. So, rollup teams should just consider it a small fraction of what should be much larger marketing & bizdev budgets, even if there's no token.