As a founder of @zksync, I'm all in for scaling Ethereum L1 and figuring out interop between every chain.
I'm bearish based rollups for a different reason: it's an overly complicated Rube Goldberg Machine.
What I mean: all based rollups are essentially a single sequencer that concatenates n chains together; but instead of doing it directly like a simple high-performance chain, it has to deal with political coordination and management of intricate security interdependencies of a dozen of teams. I can elaborate on the technical details if needed.
If we want to scale L1 and directly compete with Solana, let's do it by directly improving the performance of Ethereum clients. Personally, I think that in this case we will fail, because the other camp is much more willing to sacrifice decentralization for higher throughput and lower latency. ETH's strength is in its cypherpunk roots: security, unstoppability and censorship-resistance, that make it the best settlement layer in the world.
If we want elastic, infinitely scalable network of sovereign rollups on Ethereum that can all talk to each other trustlessly, let's enshrine a rollup cluster archtitecture (i.e. shared bridge) directly into L1. It doesn't need to be Superchain or the Elastic Network. Happy to cooperate on this.
If we want the price of ETH to go up, we should stop trying to clinge to the once high, MEV-driven fees. It's just too late, there is no going back. The incentive to control the MEV of a rollup is too high for any OG social pressure to stop people from doing this.
All these attempts to revive ETH's position as a capital asset inevitable lead smart money to analyze chain revenues, and they won't look good compared to the pre-rollup world. It's the reason for ETH/BTC ratio to be where it is.
Instead, we should focus on the fact that ETH is the BTC of the emerging Internet of Value built on Ethereum. There is literally no second best in this economy that can serve as trustless Defi collateral and Store of Value.
I'm saying all of this as an ETH maxi, and my incentives are perfectly aligned. Go check it yourself: all L2 tokens, including ZK and OP, are firmly glued to the price of ETH, with minimal variation.
Clusters of rollups like @zksync and @Optimism use a share bridge to have composability (once ZK becomes fast enough) and interoperability between their chains. However this is not a real solution for Ethereum.
ZKsync has more adoption with institutions and a working ZK solution.
Optimism has more adoption between degens thanks to Base and has more approval from the leadership of Ethereum. It can use riscv zkvms at some point to become a zk cluster.
Ethereum needs a solution to have interoperability and composability across every cluster and rollup. Based just means to use the L1 for the sequencing of the L2.
By definition those that built solutions for their own cluster will be at the beginning against a solution that moves things back to the L1.
The L1 needs to scale, something that is more a political decision than a technical one but it also needs to solve the interoperability between clusters of rollups and specific rollups. This is both a technical, political and economic decision.
I will always be on the side of what’s best for Ethereum. Long term we won’t be able to provide a better solution than Solana and other challengers without scaling the L1 and a cohesive interoperable and composable solution across the L2s.
3,61 N
0
Nội dung trên trang này được cung cấp bởi các bên thứ ba. Trừ khi có quy định khác, OKX không phải là tác giả của bài viết được trích dẫn và không tuyên bố bất kỳ bản quyền nào trong các tài liệu. Nội dung được cung cấp chỉ nhằm mục đích thông tin và không thể hiện quan điểm của OKX. Nội dung này không nhằm chứng thực dưới bất kỳ hình thức nào và không được coi là lời khuyên đầu tư hoặc lời chào mời mua bán tài sản kỹ thuật số. Việc sử dụng AI nhằm cung cấp nội dung tóm tắt hoặc thông tin khác, nội dung do AI tạo ra có thể không chính xác hoặc không nhất quán. Vui lòng đọc bài viết trong liên kết để biết thêm chi tiết và thông tin. OKX không chịu trách nhiệm về nội dung được lưu trữ trên trang web của bên thứ ba. Việc nắm giữ tài sản kỹ thuật số, bao gồm stablecoin và NFT, có độ rủi ro cao và có thể biến động rất lớn. Bạn phải cân nhắc kỹ lưỡng xem việc giao dịch hoặc nắm giữ tài sản kỹ thuật số có phù hợp hay không dựa trên tình hình tài chính của bạn.


