Vitalik Buterin Debates Over Blockchain Scaling Terminology

[sirty143]

Vitalik Buterin Debates Over Blockchain Scaling Terminology

Amid the rapidly evolving Ethereum ecosystem, Vitalik Buterin has rejoined the debate on the classification of layer-two scaling solutions, putting the spotlight on the security and scalability trade-offs between rollups and validiums. See more for yourself here.

Your opinion is greatly appreciated.

[yhiaali3]

So far, there are no good results for the second layer solutions on the Ethereum network. All the solutions that were presented previously did not succeed in eliminating the main problems that the main Ethereum network suffers from.

Even after the recent upgrade of Ethereum, despite the transition of Ethereum from POW to POS. it did not completely succeed in eliminating the problems of congestion and transaction delays on the mainnet,

Same for the Bitcoin network Layer 2 solutions like the Bitcoin Lightning Network have not been successful in eliminating major network issues such as congestion and high fees.

[ABCbits]

Later in the discussion, Buterin posted on Warpcast where he proposed new terminology to help encapsulate the differences between “strong L2” and “light L2” solutions. Examples of strong L2s were rollups, plasma, and channels; whereas validiums and pre-confirmations were light L2s. This new terminology was met with tepid responses.

This is great idea, not all L2 are equal and they should be classified accordingly. Although looking at post on Warpcast, i prefer old term "security-favoring" and "scale-favoring" which describe difference between L2.

So far, there are no good results for the second layer solutions on the Ethereum network. All the solutions that were presented previously did not succeed in eliminating the main problems that the main Ethereum network suffers from.

Same for the Bitcoin network Layer 2 solutions like the Bitcoin Lightning Network have not been successful in eliminating major network issues such as congestion and high fees.

FYI it's partially because people decide not to use those L2 solutions.

Even after the recent upgrade of Ethereum, despite the transition of Ethereum from POW to POS. it did not completely succeed in eliminating the problems of congestion and transaction delays on the mainnet,

I don't understand you mention PoW to PoS transaction. That alone doesn't change block size or block time which means TPS remain same.

[hugeblack]

The solutions proposed are not true second-layer solutions, but rather a central network which uses zero-knowledge proofs, which instead of being stored in the main Ethereum chain, are stored in separate data chains such as Celestia. Therefore, solutions such as Validiums are separate altcoins and not a second layer.

I see that the trend now is in L2 (Not AI, DeFi, IEO,...etc,) where some chains will store data on the mainnet and claim that it is a second network, which means more spam for the mainnet, which gives them a strong reason to use them.

In short, there are a lot of altcoins that are happy for Bitcoin and Ethereum fees to be high, otherwise the value of these altcoins will decline sharply.

[Faisal2202]

Things have become a little complex for newbies even for people like me who are in crypto for a long time but did not get some knowledge about these layers, but this article has already suggested that Buterin concluded the best way to minimize this confusion, by giving "strong" and "Light" names to the L2. Which is also a good thing.

By the way, I was not aware of the Validium (Light L2) but I think these would be more cost effective then Strong L2, He should have used the word Heavy instead of Strong, as Light is the antonym of Heavy and it would be more easy to remember it but that's not a big problem. Even the names does not matter that much the thing that matters to me the most is, on chain data availability, with the fee of L2 light methods. That's why I want in ETH. 

[Stompix]

The solutions proposed are not true second-layer solutions, but rather a central network which uses zero-knowledge proofs, which instead of being stored in the main Ethereum chain, are stored in separate data chains such as Celestia. Therefore, solutions such as Validiums are separate altcoins and not a second layer.

And everyone knows it that's why some try to rebrand and rename previous definitions to suit the actual needs, which have always grown faster than the response in allowing cheap growth to be was, and so, kicking the can down the way from release to release everyone has still to solve the main problem, much alike every other coin than Bitcoin, and now the biggest issue is terminology now getting  things done 

Financial applications would lose more from application failures; games and social media involve lots of activity per user, and relatively low-value activity, so a different security tradeoff makes sense for them.

While I can agree with this on the surface, there is also the human habit of trying to delegate responsibility to a central entity, so no surprise the lower ranked ones while not true layers will gain more traction  and nobody would give a damn about how they are called as long as they get the job done.

Things have become a little complex for newbies even for people like me who are in crypto for a long time 

It's becoming complex because they went from the start on path of getting a complex solution for something that needed scaling and of course a scalable fixing issue is going to have it's own scalability hurdles, and you patch more and more and more till nobody knows that the f word they are looking at!

[ABCbits]

By the way, I was not aware of the Validium (Light L2) but I think these would be more cost effective then Strong L2, He should have used the word Heavy instead of Strong, as Light is the antonym of Heavy and it would be more easy to remember it but that's not a big problem. Even the names does not matter that much the thing that matters to me the most is, on chain data availability, with the fee of L2 light methods. That's why I want in ETH.

That's good point. "strong" isn't antonym of "light" unless we talk about taste of coffee .

Things have become a little complex for newbies even for people like me who are in crypto for a long time 

It's becoming complex because they went from the start on path of getting a complex solution for something that needed scaling and of course a scalable fixing issue is going to have it's own scalability hurdles, and you patch more and more and more till nobody knows that the f word they are looking at!

That's true. It reminds me that there are at least 5 different standard for token (ERC 20, 721, 777, 1155 and 5679).

[Stompix]

That's good point. "strong" isn't antonym of "light" unless we talk about taste of coffee .

Yeah, just as cool and hot are more the same than opposite when when you talk about a car or a guy for example 
But the usage of strong instead of heavy is common in marketing (damn my uni years), because heavy can also have negative implications unlike strong, you don't want to name some code heavy and more a BBQ sauce!

That's true. It reminds me that there are at least 5 different standard for token (ERC 20, 721, 777, 1155 and 5679).

Well, I'm a bit of maxi, more than a bit actually so I did lose touch with a lot of those things especially token but let me tell you straight that the moment I read those  I was for a moment thinking why are you talking about CPU sockets here?  I didn't think a few years ago I would say something like this but maybe we need standardization as those things are going out of control worse than cables, screws and audio formats. 

[Captain Corporate]

Lol, yeah the chains are a little bit off the mainstream and should be a bit little difficult. I think we should consider the possiblity of just letting the chains be whatever it is in the end. I believe we need to let it be and consider these chains to be a bit more on inclusive side of ETH in the end. This is mainly because scaling ETH means getting bigger and bigger one way or another and at this point we are getting quite bigger with ETH and should be considering it bigger if they keep growing. I know that it may not be all that easy, but we will grow as long as it could continue to keep adding more and more stuff to it. ETH keeps getting bigger with these developments and Vitalik is well aware that bitcoin cant keep growing forever, and it is slower as well. So we should definitely see it grow better

[ABCbits]

That's good point. "strong" isn't antonym of "light" unless we talk about taste of coffee .

Yeah, just as cool and hot are more the same than opposite when when you talk about a car or a guy for example 
But the usage of strong instead of heavy is common in marketing (damn my uni years), because heavy can also have negative implications unlike strong, you don't want to name some code heavy and more a BBQ sauce!

I didn't know marketing people avoid term "heavy". I find it's weird since machinery stuff (like truck or farm battery) usually use term "heavy".

That's true. It reminds me that there are at least 5 different standard for token (ERC 20, 721, 777, 1155 and 5679).

Well, I'm a bit of maxi, more than a bit actually so I did lose touch with a lot of those things especially token but let me tell you straight that the moment I read those  I was for a moment thinking why are you talking about CPU sockets here?  I didn't think a few years ago I would say something like this but maybe we need standardization as those things are going out of control worse than cables, screws and audio formats.

It's not intel CPU socket , go visit https://eips.ethereum.org/erc. Anyway, i don't expect it'll be better where wallet developer will need to support most of them. Meanwhile user would get confused and assume wallet they use support all major token protocol out there.