Are they safe?
Are they decentralized?
Are they finally valid solutions for scalability problems?
What are the best and worst rollups and why?
I am surprised how little people know about rollups and it's really hard to collect practical information about them.
arbitrum is the clear leader
some good reading:
medium.com
l2beat.com
zkrollups are good in theory but for some time will need to be specialised
Currently non of the above.
But the idea is that long term (3+ years) they'll be the ultimate solution, especially zero knowledge rollups.
AVAX is the only feasible choice, forget the poopoo-peepee scams OP.
user i like arbitrum but until they launch a token nothing matters.
They haven't launched a token because they know they aren't ready to handle even light demand, They're smart and probably less greedy than Optimisim team tho so they've my respect for it.
Also there's a serious problem with decentralising Rollups, They might provide you security but i'm not aware of any valid theoretical solution for concentration of single entities (sequencers), This kind of centralisation is also highly susceptible to liveness attacks.
Decentralisation is all that crypto offer, Security is just a bonus, Until rollups nail it in implementation then i don't think the hype is justified desu.
I didn't ask. Fuck off!
Avalanche is nice, and subnets are nice too. But if the C-Chain won't maintain network robustness in 3+ years (When Rollups are ready) then it'll be irrelevant because only robust networks will make sense as settlement layers, Well, "irrelevant" only if the Rollup paradigm really take place as the *only* scaling philosophy.
Avalanche is on the right path tho, Hope that they won't screw it up and make the trade offs they shouldn't take to increase capacity (like most chains do).
This guy its the only one ITT who cares, fuck all of you retards, but to you I have one thing to say.
ZK-Rollups are too expensive for arbitrary smart contract execution. They are affordable when the circuits are very simple, as in the case of swaps and simple payments transactions, but they are impossibly expensive and unworkable for non-trivial smart contract execution. Even breakthroughs like PLONK don't bring them anywhere close to being able to support the types of complex contracts that can already be run on Arbitrum with no modification. Do you understand how the proofs are generated in systems like zksync? Do you know the prover pods are centralized? Do you know what challenges they must overcome to decentralize the provers? Currently the zksync team eats all the cloud compute costs associated with the prover pods. What is to stop me from asking them to generate lots and lots of very expensive proofs? They must censor me or they must find a way to make the users pay the costs of generating the proofs. And what about security? If I'm paying for and generating my own proofs, is the zksync team going to trust and store my proof in their private database? How do they decentralize that? There are some major, probably insurmountable, obstacles for zk rollups to overcome if they want to be a place where devs can execute any general purpose EVM-compatible smart contract.
Like woah dude totally cool I am down with this like barely legal sweet underage token Optimism it's like so cool and would totally rock a pizza night with you and other cool devs in an EPIC exposed RED BRICK barcade and we all play MARIO KART BING BING WAHOO
*Cue STAR WARS THEME*
It is a period of Civil War between the reigning Layer Two solutions. The Trans Rebel Alliance, working in secret from within the MEV mafia, has sided with the totally cool and awesome Optimism Devs to peacefully extract the maximum amount of MEV from users to safely deliver HRT to children all over the galaxy and defeat the evil CIS Empire
L2 is a retarded solution to scalability. It's a fantastic solution to VERY SPECIFIC things but not scalability. Right now we have 100 million services, now imagine 100 million L2s trying to settle/bid for blockspace on ETH L1, no matter how big you make the blocks (danksampling = big blocks) Ethereum will never scale, EVER.
The whole value pop is GONE. Ethereum should be €3. It has no value long term.
Only chains which solve scaling L1 can survive. Explain to me which can.
Ed is that you? I thoroughly enjoy when you btfo zkrollups
*sigh* not this again, Ed Feltonium blowing the fuck out of ZKs is an ASSUMPTION we have been over this
huh is that what you think is it Chud? good thing there is NO ONE to SPAM ZKs because the Spammers work for ETH and ZK guys work for ETH so there is NO ONE to spam the blockchain and NO this NOT an assumption
BING BING WAHOO!
meds
Imagine the feltonator ever being wrong about anything
why dotn you roll up your own
>Also there's a serious problem with decentralising Rollups, They might provide you security but i'm not aware of any valid theoretical solution for concentration of single entities (sequencers), This kind of centralisation is also highly susceptible to liveness attacks.
does this not solve it?
blog.chain.link
Huh well I'll stick with cool Star Wars themed Optimism pizza nights with grassroots punk devs chud
you have much to add but you're talking to an audience of about 5 speaking in this cant
>you have much to add but you're talking to an audience of about 5 speaking in this cant
huh is that what you think Chud?
Chainlink fss retard
No, no, no, they all suck. MEth-heads are just hyping up the latest failure of an eth scaling solution in a long line