• Breaking News

    Tuesday, October 27, 2020

    Home Unlabelled Ethereum The polymarket for who will win the 2020 U.S. presidential election has had over $700k in volume, and is still going

    Ethereum The polymarket for who will win the 2020 U.S. presidential election has had over $700k in volume, and is still going

    October 27, 2020

    Ethereum The polymarket for who will win the 2020 U.S. presidential election has had over $700k in volume, and is still going

    The polymarket for who will win the 2020 U.S. presidential election has had over $700k in volume, and is still going

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 10:44 AM PDT

    Introducing OpenZeppelin Defender: the first operations platform for Ethereum with built-in security. Ship faster with lower risk to users ��

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 06:23 AM PDT

    Cryptotesters Podcast with Matthew Finestone from Loopring on the Layer 2 Landscape and the future of Loopring

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 01:42 PM PDT

    "EIP 1559 Overview: Upgrading Ethereum's Fee Market" - Tim Beiko

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 08:22 AM PDT

    EthHub Weekly #137: EIP-1559 grant funding, update on Virgil Griffith, PayPal adds crypto support, Polymarket raises $4mn, Immutable X now live for NFTs, PoolTogether launches v3 and has Ethereum built its own jurisdiction?

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 01:46 PM PDT

    district0x Dev Update - October 27th, 2020

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 09:45 AM PDT

    NFTwriter: Axie Infinity Empowers Players with Axie Infinity Shards (AXS) Tokens - William M. Peaster

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 06:30 PM PDT

    Harvest Flashloan Economic Attack Post-Mortem

    Posted: 26 Oct 2020 08:39 PM PDT

    Streamr CEO Henri Pihkala speaks with Outlier Ventures about his journey to build the infrastructure that makes real-time data more usable and valuable than it is today. Listen here!

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 11:42 AM PDT

    Widespread understanding of L2 scaling tradeoffs is critical, here's an ELI5.

    Posted: 26 Oct 2020 09:22 PM PDT

    With numerous L2 solutions coming online, there's a very clear need for the industry to begin having open, widespread discussions around the tradeoffs that we're making by choosing one solution versus another. These decisions have consequences, and unfortunately, it's not enough for projects alone to understand the difference at this point in time; early adopters must as well.

    It should be disclosed that I work for Immutable, who is developing a ZK Rollup scaling solution for NFTs. We've tried to eliminate bias in this post and be clinical in describing the differences between all solutions, but I encourage everyone to do their own research and engage in thoughtful discussion. This post is also centered around NFTs, but is equally applicable to other tokens.

    Everyone who uses, mints or trades NFTs on Ethereum knows that scaling is the key challenge facing the industry right now. The uniqueness of NFTs, a key part of their desirability, is also the very thing that makes them expensive and illiquid to trade on a blockchain with a limited capacity. Many teams are working extremely hard to give players and studios what they want: scalable, instant, and trustless minting and trading of NFTs. The purpose of this post is to help users and developers compare and contrast the various scaling strategies that have been proposed and built. The properties of these solutions usually have a direct impact on the security of your assets: if you're an NFT holder, it's important to understand where they are being stored!

    Alternative Blockchains (Tron, Flow, EOS)

    Alternative blockchains, which make different design decisions to ETH to prioritize throughput, are commonly proposed scaling solutions. This includes projects like Tron and EOS, which support general-purpose applications, as well as projects like Flow, which are targeting NFTs specifically. In general, the blockchain trilemma still applies: the only fundamental scaling boosts come from a reduction in security or decentralization or both. Nevertheless, this is a decision that comes down to individual applications: what makes sense for users of one game may not make sense for another.

    However, with the rise of layer 2 solutions built on ETH, the key advantage of these alternative blockchains (scalability improvements) is under threat. Ethereum remains the largest smart contract blockchain in the world. It has built up enormous network effects and is the platform of choice for users and developers alike. It has significant ecosystem support: exchanges, wallets, fiat providers - even regulators are very familiar with Ethereum and how to interface with it. Building all this infrastructure from scratch while trying to compete with Ethereum's momentum will be a daunting challenge.

    Sidechains (Matic, Ronin, xDai)

    Sidechains are separate blockchains that run parallel to Ethereum. They have their own miners (often called validators and operators), their own consensus algorithm, and their own bridge to transfer assets to and from the main chain (in this case, Ethereum). Users deposit by locking their assets in a mainnet smart contract. To withdraw back to Ethereum, users initiate an exit on the sidechain, then provide a proof of the exit once it is included in the side chain's history.

    Sidechains are very effective at general computation, and all EVM contracts can be ported directly to run on the sidechain, enabling ETH-like interoperability between contracts on each sidechain, as well as application-level logic. This makes them a common choice for NFT scaling, as applications can migrate with low overheads and development time.

    However, sidechains, like alternative blockchains, usually relax Ethereum's security and decentralization in order to reach their desired scale. Users should be careful not to assume that their ETH assets, while in a sidechain, are just as secure as they are on mainnet: they are only as secure as the consensus algorithm of the sidechain. For sidechains with a limited number of operators and a vulnerable consensus algorithm (i.e. most of them), this could result in the complete theft or ransom of all user assets stored in the sidechain.

    Sidechains also often require additional tooling to be built to support the requisite level of UX.

    Plasma Chains

    Plasma chains are a type of sidechain which avoids the security problems described above (at the cost of some scale) by publishing the roots of each plasma chain block on mainnet Ethereum. This ensures that (in theory) plasma chains directly inherit the security of the parent blockchain.

    However, they have a significant disadvantage in that withdrawals from the plasma chain can take up to 2 weeks, as there is a requirement for a challenge period ('exit game') where users can report fraud. This dramatically impacts the UX of the system for users - explaining to mainstream gamers the complex reason they can't access their assets immediately is an unenviable task.

    State Channels (Efinity, Raiden)

    State channels are a general purpose scaling solution which are most useful in interactions between a defined number of participants in a closed system.

    State channels require an opening and closing transaction on-chain, but all the intermediate states are sent directly between the parties (who both sign to indicate assent). Imagine a game of tic-tac-toe where we each sign off on each other's moves. If either of us claims we won unjustly, the other can produce the contradictory signature and force an on-chain arbitration.

    Importantly, state channels need 100% availability of all the participants involved, or one user could publish an old state and claim it as the latest. If we're sending NFTs backwards and forwards between us, you can see the damage that might cause. The participants can use someone to represent them if they go offline, but this third-party could be bribed or attacked (particularly if one entity is fulfilling this function for the entire ecosystem).

    Rollups

    Rollups "roll up" large numbers of transactions into a big batch, then generate a "proof" for that batch. Using this proof, rather than checking each trade individually, we're able to check the entire batch at once. Generally, users will deposit their assets into a smart contract on-chain, and their assets will be made available for instant trading in an off-chain environment. Users can subsequently withdraw back on-chain under certain conditions (usually waiting for a withdrawal batch to be published). These systems often allow the 'operator' of the system to censor transactions by not including them in batches, but give users the option to withdraw those assets back on chain to preserve user custody.

    Rollups are the latest of the scaling technologies described in this post to reach "production-grade". Last month, Vitalik Buterin declared that "the Ethereum ecosystem is likely to be all-in on rollups as a scaling strategy for the near and mid-term future".

    Optimistic Rollups (Optimism)

    Optimistic rollups are "optimistic" because they assume that the proof provided for each transaction batch is valid. During a pre-defined challenge period (usually 1-2 weeks), anyone can challenge the submitted proof and assert fraud - these are therefore called "fraud proofs". The advantage of optimistic rollups is that they easily support general computation: you will be able to copy/paste your mainnet Solidity code.

    However, they have significant limitations for scaling NFTs. Firstly, there is no possibility for fast NFT withdrawals - taking your NFT out of the system can require a 1-2 week wait. Secondly, in the event that an optimistic rollup is very successful and contains a significant amount of value, they can become a target for attacks, as the cost of stealing funds from the Optimistic Rollup is unrelated to the size of the potential theft - a penalty for the growth that we and others expect in the NFT ecosystem.

    ZK-Rollup (Immutable X)

    ZK-rollups use "validity proofs" rather than the fraud proofs described above, using either SNARKs or STARKs and plenty of complex mathematics to prove the validity of the transactions in the rollup. Using validity proofs means that once a proof has been accepted on-chain, users have immediate confirmation that those transactions were valid and are now immutable. In an NFT context, this solves both the problems identified with optimistic rollups above: users can withdraw immediately and no-one is able to attack the system, regardless of the amount of funds flowing through the system. In terms of scale, ZK-rollups have been able to reach speeds of nearly 10k transactions per second, and are capable of reaching much higher limits in future.

    The current disadvantage of zk-rollups is general computation: it is more challenging to port smart contract logic directly into the rollup, and therefore only limited functionality is available e.g. transfers and trades. However, with the fantastic work the StarkWare team is doing with CAIRO, zk-rollups will soon have parity in terms of general computation as well.

    What did we choose? Why?

    At Immutable we've been working in the industry for years on games like Gods Unchained. When comparing scaling solutions, we knew we wanted the following:

    • Unlimited scalability
    • Instant transaction confirmation and mainstream-quality UX
    • No compromise on user security
    • Retaining access to Ethereum's ecosystem and network effects

    This made our choice easy: we built Immutable X as a ZK-rollup in partnership with StarkWare. ZK-rollups are the only solution above capable of scale without compromise, and though they still have disadvantages in the area of general computation, those challenges are rapidly being resolved. When you build an application using a scaling solution, you are committing to that solution. We wanted to ensure we backed the winner not just for right now, but for years to come.

    We know the NFT ecosystem desperately needs scalability, and we are as an industry making a rapid transition to L2, even if it's not yet noticeable for end users. The decisions we make now will have security, scaling, and user experience implications for years to come, and I hope we begin to discuss it more as a collective ecosystem in between the degen memes.

    submitted by /u/_perks_
    [link] [comments]

    Vitalik is on Rarible

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 03:59 PM PDT

    B.Protocol is LIVE! A new backstop liquidity protocol for decentralized lending platforms! Liquidators can now avoid gas wars and shift MEV (Miners Extracted Value) to users.

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 09:35 AM PDT

    Ocean V3 Brings Wave of Data Monetization Tools to Ethereum

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 01:39 AM PDT

    How to protect yourself from impermanent loss with Bancor

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 02:24 PM PDT

    ETH still not showing after 2 HOURS with a normal fee?

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 02:01 PM PDT

    I recently purchased some ETH and I can't find it! I know the person sent it to the right address, with a normal fee (0.000512 ETH) - the TXID can't be found and there is no pending transactions to my wallet.

    TXID - 0x0bbce203609e5320605b4b14164d6358298469532583987002e44fed4f43ce0d

    What gives? I'm new to ETH so this is pretty disappointing, even BTC on the lowest possible fee at least showed up as pending.

    submitted by /u/bolognaman132
    [link] [comments]

    How to run project downloaded from github?

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 01:27 PM PDT

    IMF Panel: update of Boomer digital money

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 11:54 AM PDT

    Ethereum will never achieve dominance if it has an ambiguous and unlimited inflation schedule. Agree or disagree?

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 09:12 AM PDT

    3F Mutual - Collective Insurance Against MakerDAO Risks - DeFi Pulse

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 08:09 AM PDT

    Multi-file verification in truffle-plugin-verify v0.5.0

    Posted: 27 Oct 2020 04:47 AM PDT
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment