🧵 on some of the major smart contract chains, their different approaches, and how HOPEFULLY (for the love of all that is holy) we are moving away from simply "X chain is superior because it did XXXX TPS on a closed environment testnet" #Ethereum#terraluna#Solana#AVAX
As @epolynya has alluded to several times, #TPS numbers are almost meaningless now. Especially anything under 100k.
At the risk of having this thrown in my face 5 years from now, TPS is essentially solved.
This is due to many things but some reasons include:
Now, convos are switching to validator costs, the "inclusivity" of the chain (i.e. permisionless-ness), chain/state bloat, data availability, robustness, uptime, idiosyncratic vs systemic risks, interoperability risks, composability, etc.
I've covered #ETH scaling and rollups quite a bit so won't rehash here.
If interested to learn how the Merge, shards, #EIP1559, PoS, Beacon Chain, and everything else work together, check out this piece #Ethereum#l222@ladyxtel
Let's start with #Terra since it's quite hot lately
Terra Core is built on the #Cosmos Software Development Kit (SDK) making it interoperable with other IBC chains in the #CosmosEcosystem
It's a DPoS chain using the #Tendermint consensus protocol.
While Tendermint Core essentially ensures that transactions are recorded in the same order, across the distributed ledger, the Application Blockchain Interface (#ABCI) is the means by which developers interact with the transactions. @CryptoHarry_
The ABCI is one of the main incentives to utilize the Tendermint Core consensus engine since it’s programming language agnostic in the sense that devs can choose to instantiate Tendermint in whichever programming language they choose. @Remi_Tetot
Terra smart contracts use #CosmWasm technology and are written in Rust, Go, or Assembly. These contracts can execute on other IBC- linked chains.
- "Bonded" PoS
- Proof of History (#PoH) created 10x gains in TPS
- Fantastic "product" right *now*
- Deep pockets and can sleep well knowing @SBF_FTX is in their corner ( and @TusharJain_@KyleSamani and @multicoincap )
But
- "50k TPS", while high now isn't long term
- #Solana's solution to get to 1M+ TPS doesn't exist
-High barrier to become validator
- monolithic design
- "VC chain" stigma
- Suffers under stress (uptime)
- not #EVM- compatible which puts them on an island
And #Avalanche ?
- 3 separate chains, fast finality
- #Snowman Consensus and "sub-sampled voting" are legit
- subnets increase flexibility (more VMs)
- whole-heartedly reaping the rewards of being #EVM compatible 😂
- fair to say "modular" design due to #Subnets
- Subnets look an awfully lot like @Cosmos zones and/or sidechains. There's much to be desired there.
Especially the (unknowable) relationships/interplay between each subnet, their tokens, validators, security, etc. @CannnGurel@jadler0
Subnets are often praised for their customizability that enables "compliance," "KYC'd actors," and "permissioned chains" which I find incredibly uninteresting.
As mentioned previously, there are already 1000s of options if you want a permissioned chain/database.
Similar to my #Terra critique, AVAX is currently being propped up by #Ethereum compatibility and $500M+ in incentives over the years with the latest #AvalancheRush news.
You can buy a lot of users that way.
Ok, this thread ate up way too much of my time. I'll stop here. I look forward to tacking on a few more like #Cosmos, #PolkaDot, #NEAR, and others when I have the time.
Finally, while critical of these projects, doesn't mean they're doomed. And I hold some of them.
1/ 🧵
How and why "data availability (DA)" became the sexiest topic in #Ethereum land, the #l222 space, and for #rollups
2/ Pre-2021 (roughly speaking), DA for most #blockchains wasn't a concern for 2 reasons: 1) most blockchains did not have enough usage to warrant any concern 2) the monolithic approach meant that each (full) node downloaded the entire block to check for availability no problemo
3/ However, this approach has its limitations/drawbacks, and, thus, new solutions like light clients, rollups (RUs), and the modular approach were implemented. @BanklessHQ@TrustlessState@RyanSAdams
2/ Blockchains like #Bitcoin and #Ethereum strive for maximum #decentralization and #censorship-resistance while remaining totally open and inclusive networks. However, they also want to scale to accommodate billions of users.
3/ As they stand right now, their limited capacity to process transactions at the base layer (~7 and ~20 TPS, respectively) are in direct opposition to achieving that goal.
For years, as I have discussed the value prop for seizure-resistant, non-sovereign💲like #BTC with noobies, I have always had to caveat it with "we don't think about it in the Western world too much bc our money, banking system, and law typically work well"
2/ #Bitcoin's value in the Western world has NEVER been more obvious thanks to the last ~ 2 years.
Reminder, it has ALWAYS been valuable to those less fortunate living under authoritarianism or double-digit inflation (over half the world) newsweek.com/half-world-liv…
3/ Now, Westerners are getting their taste:
- 10%+ inflation for many (screw the official #CPI numbers)
- Bank accounts being inexplicably closed @haydenzadams@PeterMcCormack
- Govt freezing funds and threatening companies #TruckersForFreedom
- ~25% M2 debasement in ~2 years
1/ Previously, I covered #L222 zk-rollup projects Starkware and zkSync but looking back, I should have begun with sidechains.
The who, what, why/why NOT, security guarantees, etc.
So, here's a 🧵 discussing sidechains generally and then a bit on #Polygon
2/ In the context of #Ethereum, sidechains are separate, Ethereum-compatible blockchains. Sidechains can be independent #EVM -compatible blockchains as well as application-specific blockchains catering to #ETH users and use cases like @0xPolygon or @Ronin_Network .
3/ Sidechains design themselves to be EVM-compatible so they can essentially copy and paste their code to easily interoperate with Ethereum and all of its infrastructure including wallets, block explorers, and more.
Another deep-dive thread into one of the projects changing the scaling world 🧵...
2/ First, again, some high-level Pros and Cons
Pros with using Starkware products
- Increased TPS compared to ORs (~9,000+ TPS on Ropsten testnet)
- Faster withdrawals (no challenge period), enabling better capital efficiency and liquidity
- #Validiums (discussed below)
3/ Cons
- Developer UX and porting of dApps from L1 to #L2 is more challenging than OR options
- #Cairo language less popular among developers = less talent pool to build on Starkware
- With Starkware's #Validium option, there's a technical challenge in solving DA problem.
1/ CT giving waaay too much shine to these @bitfinex idiots.
Sure, reality TV is fun (I guess) but instead, I’ll try to send the spotlight to a more deserving group: @zksync@the_matter_labs@gluk64
Thread time 🧵...
2/ To begin, some high-level Pros and Cons of zkSync’s approach to zk-rollups (ZKs)
Pros
- Less data contained in each transaction increases throughput and decreases fees (vs L1)
- No withdrawal periods and faster finality
- Inherent (and cheap) privacy (improvements)**
3/ Cons
- Generalized smart contract support (similar to @StarkWareLabs#StarkNet ) is not live or production-ready
- Initial trusted setup ceremony scares some, introduces trust
- New, less battle-tested cryptography **