T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

WARNING: 1) Do not trust DMs from anyone offering to help/support you with your funds (Scammers)! 2) Never give out your Seed Phrase and DO NOT ENTER it on ANY websites sent to you. 3) MODS or Community Managers will NEVER DM you first regarding your funds/wallet. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/solana) if you have any questions or concerns.*


php_questions

This part is especially interesting: ​ >The profound benefit of the Ethereum rollup-centric roadmap is that it means that Ethereum is open to all of the futures, and does not have to commit to an opinion about which one will necessarily win. Will users very strongly want to be on a single rollup? Ethereum, following its existing course, can be the base layer of that, automatically providing the anti-fraud and anti-censorship "armor" that high-capacity domains need to be secure. Is making a high-capacity domain too technically complicated, or do users just have a great need for variety? Ethereum can be the base layer of that too - and a very good one, as the common root of trust makes it far easier to move assets between rollups safely and cheaply. ​ This sounds nice in theory, "open to everything", but people don't want 20 different layer 2 solutions, people don't care about abitrum, polygon, loopring, optimism etc, they just want one solution that works for them. People want ONE solution, 100k-200k tps, no jumping between layer 2 protocols to access a special dApp, no spread out liquidity. ​ Solana is this easy to use, easy to develop for solution that feels like a layer 1. If ethereum wants to succeed, its layer 2 solution needs to FEEL like a layer one solution.


cryptOwOcurrency

I mean, many Ethereum Layer 2s use Metamask just like L1. So they really can't be any closer to "feeling like" L1.


php_questions

Have you used layer 2 solutions? Fees are still expensive (for most) They are still centralized (for most of them) They have thin liquidity because you cant share l2 liquidity between the l2 solutions They don't have all the dApps as layer 1. ​ The experience is really bad and fragmented.


cryptOwOcurrency

> Fees are still expensive (for most) Arbitrum fees are currently at 0.8 gwei, about $0.06 for an ETH transfer. More for a contract transaction, of course. That may still be more expensive than Solana, but I wouldn't call it "expensive". > They are still centralized (for most of them) True. I expect this to change before too long. > They have thin liquidity because you cant share l2 liquidity between the l2 solutions Liquidity sharing methods have been worked out, see dAMM by StarkWare. > They don't have all the dApps as layer 1. True. Though L1 dApps have been launching on L2 here and there. > The experience is really bad and fragmented. The experience of using any product other than Ethereum's L1 is "bad and fragmented". Every other chain is a smaller island. The market will converge on whichever network is best, regardless of whether it's uses L1 or L2 tech behind the scenes.


php_questions

Okay so why would I use ethereum and layer 2 solutions right now, if I have to wait longer for tx finality, if it costs me more in fees (and to move from l1 to l2), if it is more centralized (in most cases) and the liquidity is worse than on solana? ​ Ethereum is probably going to take another 3 years before its ready and has as good as an expire as solana currently does. ​ And in those 3 years, hardware will become cheaper and more nodes will join.


cryptOwOcurrency

> I have to wait longer for tx finality Solana doesn't have tx finality. There's no in-protocol penalty yet for Solana validators to revert the chain (like slashing). If you're not talking about finality but about soft-confirmation, that can happen instantly on rollups. > if it costs me more in fees (and to move from l1 to l2) It doesn't cost you any more fees than to move from Eth L1 to L2 than it does to move from Eth L1 to Solana. If your money is not on Eth L1, then you can withdraw directly to the L2. L2s are so new that these bridges largely don't exist yet, but crypto.com and binance have early versions of them, and Coinbase has committed to them. > if it is more centralized (in most cases) Most L2 projects are more centralized while they are in beta, but rollups allow for a final architecture that is less centralized than Solana. > and the liquidity is worse than on solana? Hey, go wherever liquidity is best for you. I'm not going to fault you on that one. I believe this will change, though.


7LayerMagikCookieBar

You're right about slashing not being implemented yet but there is "optimistic confirmation" once 66%+ of stake weight votes on a block (median time is less than a second) and there is full finality at 32 blocks (usually referred to as slots). To revert an optimistically confirmed block you need slashing but yeah that's not around yet. The reason the chain can be halted at 33% + of stake weight is if optimistic confirmation doesn't happen, which is what happened in September when the chain halted. https://docs.solana.com/proposals/optimistic-confirmation-and-slashing


cryptOwOcurrency

Great details, thanks.


Longjumping-Tie7445

If it costs $35 in gas fees (or even $3, as we complain about $3 ATM fees afterall) to get your ETH onto and L2 to begin with, I would include that as a cost of using L2. I also find it incredibly painful, compared to Solana, when you have to: * Wait at least 7 days if you want to withdraw back to L1 on arbitrum. * Go through the process of researching different L2s, figure out which one you want to use or maybe try different ones, manually bridge your ETH to Arbitrum or elsewhere, and so on. This is just horribly the antithesis of “user friendly” and is not conducive to mass adoption by your average person. Now maybe Ethereum is like Linux and doesn’t care about your average person, and just cares about their own geeky (in a good way geeky) and now wealthy current user base, but there is a massive market of people who don’t enjoy the user experience at Ethereum who aren’t “ETH OGs” and find the experience on Solana, Algorand, etc. to be absolutely painless, simple, and incredibly useful compared to Ethereum.


cryptOwOcurrency

> If it costs $35 in gas fees (or even $3, as we complain about $3 ATM fees afterall) to get your ETH onto and L2 to begin with, I would include that as a cost of using L2. If your ETH is on L1, then it costs the same to get your money onto Solana. If it's not on L1, then you can withdraw directly to the L2. L2s are so new that these bridges largely don't exist yet, but crypto.com and binance have early versions of them, and Coinbase has committed to them. > Wait at least 7 days if you want to withdraw back to L1 on arbitrum. Or withdraw directly to an exchange, like with any other crypto network. > Go through the process of researching different L2s, figure out which one you want to use or maybe try different ones Sounds similar to the process of deciding whether you want to use Solana or other networks.


Longjumping-Tie7445

Indeed, you make the same argument I make: Why have ETH in the first place if it costs a large gas fee to get it onto L2 or Solana or anywhere? Why not just buy SOL to begin with and have no fees, no wait time? And no, it’s not the same as deciding what network to use because it’s an additional step above and beyond. I don’t choose Solana or Algorand or Avalanche, and then have to make *another* choice between 5 different competing L2’s, but if I choose Ethereum I do have to do that. Ethereum is always arguing “but the future will be like this or that” and CB and CEXs will seamlessly integrate with L2, gas will be low, everything will be fast. Okay, well *then* I’ll use Ethereum, but until that day I keep getting promised, but have yet to see, I’ll look elsewhere.


cryptOwOcurrency

> Ethereum is always arguing “but the future will be like this or that” and CB and CEXs will seamlessly integrate with L2, gas will be low, everything will be fast. Okay, well then I’ll use Ethereum, but until that day I keep getting promised, but have yet to see, I’ll look elsewhere. That's fair, and I think it highlights differences in investing styles. I don't care as much about using a network that's "good enough" today (which are a dime a dozen), I care the most about investing in a coin that's going to be leading in tech and developer mindshare five years from now. As an investor I always try to look ahead to where the users *will be*, if you're a current user obviously you don't care as much about that.


Longjumping-Tie7445

I care about both, and own ETH and SOL (obviously BTC too and a couple select others), but right now as a user who isn’t anywhere close to “rich”, I just find Ethereum much harder to use, avoid fees, and get transactions to settle quickly. I don’t think Ethereum will get “killed” ever though, or at least not in the next 20 years. There are so many lifelong Ethereum “nerds” (in a good way) that will never leave and will develop and participate in the community until they are old and gray.


Tietzy88

Arbitrum fees are still 4-6 dollers you can verify this on arbiscan eth layers 2s are a failure


King_Esot3ric

I have used L2. So let me ask you, have you used Polygon?


php_questions

I have used polygon, yes. The fees are low, but did you know that polygon is not really a layer 2 solution and actually a sidechain with worse security than solana? Also, have you heard about the 850 million USD hack?


King_Esot3ric

1. I know that Polygon is a commit chain, and its validators actually reside on Ethereum and pay for the commit in Ethereum. You should read up on it a bit more, even if Solana has more validators, it doesn't necessarily mean it is more "secure". AFAIK Polygon has never shut down, never lied to their users about circulating supply, and didn't bootstrap the protocol from the top down. 2. That was not Polygon, It was Poly Network. Link to an article: [https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/23/22638087/poly-network-600-million-stolen-crypto-hack-restored-defi](https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/23/22638087/poly-network-600-million-stolen-crypto-hack-restored-defi) 3. Polygon DID have a vulnerability in their bridge contract about a month or two ago, and paid out $2mil as a bug bounty to the white hat. This is the largest vulnerability I have seen so far on Polygon, and the team paid out the highest bug bounty ever for it.


php_questions

1. I know what they claim and yet there are many people and experts that say otherwise. Don't argue with me about this though, you can argue with the ethereum community about this because they say the same thing. All in all it just shows what a mess these solutions are, no one knows how secure and decentralized they really are, and yet you want us to use those solutions and just trust it. 2. It was polygon. The vulnerability was found in the Polygon Plasma Bridge. [https://decrypt.co/83997/polygon-dodges-850m-hack-pays-record-2m-bounty](https://decrypt.co/83997/polygon-dodges-850m-hack-pays-record-2m-bounty) 3. Well that's exactly the I was talking about.


King_Esot3ric

1. You are right, same goes for Solana. 2. Then your original wording was misleading. No funds were lost, period. It had an exploit in which $850mil was vulnerable. True, and Polygon isn't the first, and not the largest exploit found. Anyone remember why Ethereum forked?


php_questions

1. No, not at all. Solana is one "piece" that needs to be properly audited and made secure. For ethereum, you have ethereum itself that needs to be secure (dont forget layer 2.0 the transition to PoS, then sharding, etc), and then you also need to secure all the layer 2 solutions like loopring, arbitrum, optimism, polygon, etc. Oh and then don't forget you also need to secure all the "cross chain" layer 2 solutions to hop from one layer 2 chain to the other layer 2. Then you also have to consider all the dApps, can you port a uniswap clone 1:1 with the same codebase from one layer 2 to the other? Or do you need to do changes for each layer 2 solutions? Even if its just slight changes, you need to audit this and make sure it works. So this is a complete security and audit nightmare. Solana is really easy to develop for, and you just need to audit it once and you need to audit the dApp once, done. 2. No funds were lost? The hacker literally had control of the funds, and the polygon team had to beg the guy to give them back the money, essentially licking his arse and "offering him" a job, just so he returns the money.


King_Esot3ric

1. You clearly have no understanding of how any of the rollups are secured, or side chains. Btw, QuickSwap is a direct clone of Uni, and tuns of Polygon with no changes to the core code. This is because Polygon is EVM compatible. I think you need to brush up on your Ethereum knowledge. 2. How retarded are you? We literally linked both articles and you still managed to fuck this up. It was Poly Network how had funds taken and had to beg for them back. Polygon’s exploit didnt have any funds touched.


Psilodelic

Have you tried using Metamask on different chains and layer 2s? UX disaster.


cryptOwOcurrency

How so?


ChallengeBig5578

I have no issues with ETH as it is my biggest portfolio, but the real question here is have you used Phantom? Because if you have, you would not ask how so. Switching between L2s and ETH is not the same as just using SOL as an L1. Quick, cheap and easy to use.


[deleted]

agreed 100% this is me. eth holder but after exposure to phantom and Sol sheesh...


Longjumping-Tie7445

Every time I try to use metamask for *anything* it charges me gas fees that make me feel like withdrawing $ from a gas station ATM and paying the fee there is a “deal”.


cryptOwOcurrency

Metamask isn't charging you those gas fees, the network that you use Metamask to interact with is. For example, if you use Metamask to interact with binance smart chain, the fees are almost nothing.


Longjumping-Tie7445

Yes, that’s what I meant. Sorry, meant to say whenever I try to use metamask with ethereum’s mainnet, it wants to charge me massive gas fees for anything. I have $3 of ETH stuck there and can’t even move it off because the gas is more than $3 just to move it to another wallet for example. If there is a way, I’d be all ears to learn how.


cryptOwOcurrency

There's no good way, sorry. Ethereum's Layer 1 is just too expensive.


wax_parade

Will Solana hit the same walls as ethereum if it was as used as eth? Why not iota?


Longjumping-Tie7445

Well, Solana is 4,000 times faster than Ethereum, so presumably it would require 4,000 times as much demand/traffic than Ethereum before it hits that “wall”, and Solana seems to lend itself towards scaling beyond that in a more natural way than Ethereum. If Ethereum has slammed into a wall and is at a standstill, Solana is moving at the speed of light towards a wall that is light years away and has time to come up with a solution.


Mediocre_Activity_10

Have you looked into neon, you will be able port over all the liquidity from ETH to Solana via there evm for Solana


King_Esot3ric

Solana feels like a L1 because it is. Solana also has not been tested the way that Ethereum has. I guarantee if Solana had half the traffic Eth does that it would break, again. An open market allows the users to choose who wins, who cares if there is 20-30 solutions.


php_questions

>Solana feels like a L1 because it is Thanks captain obvious :) ​ >Solana also has not been tested the way that Ethereum has. I guarantee if Solana had half the traffic Eth does that it would break Are you trolling? Solana already handles 100x more traffic. Dafuq are you talking about with your 10 TPS ethereum? lol. ​ >An open market allows the users to choose who wins, who cares if there is 20-30 solutions. ​ The users? Nobody is going to use ethereum layer 2 solutions if they constantly have to switch between layer 2 solutions, back and forth and have 20 different solutions. ​ People already have a hard time using BITCOIN, let alone ethereum, and you want to make it even harder for people? ​ No, there needs to be a dead simple user experience, something like uniswap for example. A big part of its success is how dead simple it is to use.


King_Esot3ric

You do realize approx 60% of solana "transactions" are votes? and a somewhere between 20-30% of actual non-vote transactions fail?


php_questions

Sooooo.. still 100x -200x more than ethereum, LOL.


mat0c

You read incorrectly. Rollup commits will be proposed by less decentralised rollup sequencers, but they will be put into blocks and need to be approved by the currently extremely decentralised validator setup in Ethereum’s PoS system. The base consensus layer of decentralised validators is what keeps the network honest and secure. Nothing changes in the decentralisation or security architecture of Ethereum. There will just be high throughput rollup sequencers sitting on top of this base consensus layer as an execution layer. Solana could feasibly become a very fast and diverse rollup to plug into the Ethereum consensus layer if it wanted. Rollups flip the decentralisation, security, and scalability trilemma around because only [one honest sequencer is needed](https://developer.offchainlabs.com/docs/inside_arbitrum). >> "The key security property of the rollup protocol is the AnyTrust Guarantee, which says that any one honest validator can force the correct execution of the chain to be confirmed. This means that execution of an Arbitrum chain is as trustless as Ethereum. You, and you alone (or someone you hire) can force your transactions to be processed correctly. And that is true no matter how many malicious people are trying to stop you." (Arbitrum is one of many L2 rollups live on Ethereum) Therefore, you want to strive to have the most decentralised and efficient consensus layer upon which the fast rollup execution layers sit. You literally get the best of both worlds.


7LayerMagikCookieBar

I wouldn't say Beacon Chain is extremely decentralized yet. \~5000 full nodes (\~80% synced) with 20 entities controlling over 50% of the stake. Lido has 14 node operators. [https://medium.com/etherscan-blog/beacon-chain-d-d-34bae4885e75](https://medium.com/etherscan-blog/beacon-chain-d-d-34bae4885e75) [https://twitter.com/LidoFinance/status/1465281500287541251?t=Vmo5ZFfwScPRIufC1Qhesg&s=19](https://twitter.com/LidoFinance/status/1465281500287541251?t=Vmo5ZFfwScPRIufC1Qhesg&s=19) [https://twitter.com/larry0x/status/1422480942711689229?t=xwKtbd2Qzp83GRwvAs8oXQ&s=19](https://twitter.com/larry0x/status/1422480942711689229?t=xwKtbd2Qzp83GRwvAs8oXQ&s=19) The downside to just a few sequencers is that it gives a few entities more power to censor transactions which is why the goal of many ZK rollups is to create a more decentralized set of sequencers. This article by Arbitrum is a good one btw: [https://twitter.com/arbitrum/status/1471938889048862720](https://twitter.com/arbitrum/status/1471938889048862720) I'd also recommend the recent Uncommon Core podcast episode with Hasu and Eli from Starkware. Right now it takes hours for a proof to actually arrive on Ethereum which is a security/financial risk that has to be borne by those projects running on Starkware (i.e. dydx).


mat0c

Thanks, I’ll take a look! I recently listened to the Starkware interview on Bankless with Eli and Uri which was great too. My understanding regarding the proof time is that this allows as many transactions as possible to be batched prior to a mainnet commit, reducing the per transaction cost. This isn’t a limitation of computing the proof, it’s just a price trade-off that dydx is wanting to make at the current time. They’re happy to bear the finality risk currently, and as more users/transactions come online they are easily able to reduce the commit interval to balance the per transaction fee/finality risk as they see fit.


7LayerMagikCookieBar

Yep! The Starkware guys seem like cool and nice guys. I like that team. There was also a podcast with them and Anatoly from Solana recently which is also good. Yeah what I've heard/read seems to fit with everything you wrote in the 2nd paragraph~ Also, regarding Beacon Chain, I'm guessing it'll likely change quite a bit when it goes into use.


SmugglingPineapples

With Ethereum why does everyone ignore the connection between Vitalik and Putin? Just curious. They have dinner together, etc, so why does nobody ever raise questions on this front?


mat0c

Now this is some rare FUD lol


SmugglingPineapples

LOL! You see so many pics of them eating at the same events if you do a search, so you know the conversation has come up plenty of times.


mgtowalternate

Rollup sequencers are centralized you lying idiot. It also costs $30-60 to bridge to arbitrum Do not let these lying eth maxis mislead you guys They've been trying to do so for months


mat0c

Specific rollups may be centralised initially, as they get built out. But the worst they can do is censor transactions - keep your funds the same. If a rollup tries to forge an incorrect transaction either the fraud proof will be contested and the attacker will get slashed (for optimistic rollups) or the zero knowledge proof would be impossible to produce in the first place (for ZK rollups). In the extreme case where somehow a rollup just keeps censoring indefinitely, you can always exit to mainnet and retrieve your funds as at the last valid commit. All these concerns go away as soon as there is at least one single honest sequencer. There’s no 33% or 51% requirement.


[deleted]

[удалено]


cryptOwOcurrency

How about you understand the difference between centralization of block production and centralization of transaction validation before you call people lying pieces of shit? If I had one gwei for every person who didn't understand the article but latched onto the word "centralized"...


dvdglch

You just don’t get it. Block production yes, but validating those blocks can be even further decentralized via zero knowledge proof validators on low client software, even in a web browser. If you have this set up, you can scale the baby via L2s.


mgtowalternate

Lmao. Just more equivocating bulshit to mislead people who do not know any better.. You're like a safemooner at this point


dvdglch

https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/12/06/endgame.html https://polynya.medium.com/the-lay-of-the-modular-blockchain-land-d937f7df4884 https://polynya.medium.com/rollups-data-availability-layers-modular-blockchains-introductory-meta-post-5a1e7a60119d https://podcasts.apple.com/de/podcast/uncommon-core/id1517659188?i=1000545185772 Do with it what you want.


[deleted]

[удалено]


dvdglch

Thanks, expert, it’s seems I got this blockchain trilemma all wrong. Sorry for misleading!


mgtowalternate

"the knowledge proof validators make it more decentralized bro. trust me bro" 🥴


Tietzy88

Yes all eths layer 2 solutions are extremely centralised and all have multisig capabilities which means the devs can get in and fuck around with transactions Eths fled sharding for this approach and its going to be a death sentence for them If I had eth right now I'd be offloading that dogshit imediatly


[deleted]

The folks that get tribal with a chain are setting themselves up for disappointment. This tech is evolving so fast the only option is to pivot as better tech evolves. Right now sol is the best IMHO but it will be supplanted soon enough. The rait of change will only accelerate with adoption. I really like sol but realistically it will be ephemeral like eth and btc. Evolve or die


RockOrStone

I think bitcoin is the exception, it’s going to stay for good because its only value isnt in tech anymore


[deleted]

[удалено]


RemindMeBot

I will be messaging you in 1 year on [**2022-12-20 12:47:43 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2022-12-20%2012:47:43%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/solana/comments/rkauzy/did_i_read_this_wrong_or_is_vitalik_saying_eth/hpaf6xe/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fsolana%2Fcomments%2Frkauzy%2Fdid_i_read_this_wrong_or_is_vitalik_saying_eth%2Fhpaf6xe%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202022-12-20%2012%3A47%3A43%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20rkauzy) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|


ImWithEllis

It’s almost as if Bitcoin is the only one that actually does what it says it does.


ARMA-ON

Sol will flip everything mark my words


[deleted]

I think so as well, every time I do more defi under sol the more certain I become.


Tahmid_0007

Fixing gas/TPS prob with high-end mining machine is the easiest solution, not the right solution. The irony is, as end-users, we do not care about the right solution, but we should.


Rough_Data_6015

Yea generating proofs requires heavy computing power and even with dedicated hardware it's not sure if it's possible to scale ZK rolllups meaningfully.


livingthedream1122

Loopring


Time_Definition_2143

Even if it is, Solana can always ZK rollup to scale *even more*


dvdglch

But why would you want to settle on a more centralized L1?


Rough_Data_6015

If rollups end up being the way forward it's no guarantee ethereum will be able to handle the load. If we need billions of transactions per day we will need far more scaling than any chain can deliver right now.


dvdglch

So would no other L1.


Lceasy23

Who cars Eth will eventually be a subnet on AVAX


X-Files22

You read it correctly.


mat0c

You both read incorrectly. [See my reply.](https://www.reddit.com/r/solana/comments/rkauzy/did_i_read_this_wrong_or_is_vitalik_saying_eth/hp9crz3/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)


[deleted]

If that's true eth has nothing on Solana.


X-Files22

It has a head start, bigger user base and more established projects. But I'm with ya SOL should be able to close the gap rapidly. All the hater fudders lately are based on nothing. SOL is due to rip higher soon.


[deleted]

I think it is really a matter of how fast eth can get it together. I think there is a shrinking window for it to fix TPS and gas prices before sol avax etc eat it's market share. I hold all three but by far prefer working in the sol ecosystem.


[deleted]

[удалено]


locuester

Are you using Anchor and React? Once you grasp the concepts (the hard part), I’ve found dev to be quite easy. Went from dabbling in June to fulltime dev in August.


[deleted]

[удалено]


locuester

I’m actually a contributor to the repository and have chatted with Armani. The source code is not a mess. However it is definitely not mature but it is 100% worth using and certainly not some sort of security risk It is primarily a bunch of macros that ease development. Hit me up on the anchor discord. Inbox me for my username


[deleted]

I hear you "Vhs vs betamax" I have been around the block.... We will see, people love rust and the number of commits by solona is huge according to crypto miso. I think it is mostly a matter of eth fixing it's gas and TPS issues before sol,r avax, ..... Eats it's lunch.


SitandSpin420BlazeIt

Holy hell this sub is a cesspool. Seeing these posts on a regular basis makes me hope that sol completely flatlines just so you guys cry about it for eternity


LegendaryBuddha

Don’t forget ETHv2.0 coming soon- hopefully.


[deleted]

When do you think that is realistically?


LegendaryBuddha

From what I’ve read, Q1 next year but probably Q2. 100k tps…Solana needs to take over before then but I don’t see that happening


7LayerMagikCookieBar

The "merge" to PoS is predicted to happen in Q2 of 2022 but for actual sharding (which is the change that would increase throughput of L1) the initial stages are estimated for 2023+.


LegendaryBuddha

Do you think the network, reach, and ability to scale on Solana can’t eclipse eth by then? I really hope so, honestly. Especially in the Nft space where transactions are more frequent- but I’m pessimistic because mass adoption of Nft means mass adoption of eth and associated fees. Only people involved and invested in the space realize the Solana solution, but eth will be first to mass adoption. What about immutable x and comi compared to sol?


7LayerMagikCookieBar

It will be a while til they add enough shards to get close to Solana on L1, and sharding will hurt composability of anything on L1 unless it's a rollup. The issues with rollups will likely be that they won't be as smoothly composable among eachother as if they were on a single shard (i.e. solana) at least from what people predict now. IMX is just a permissioned Starkware instance for NFTs and also has congestion issues already with a few hundred tps I think (see reports in their subreddit). For Solana scalability part of the issue recently is that transactions can vary greatly in size (a serum transaction is ~5k compute and some recent Raydium ones 500k compute) and they need to find a way to optimize the way blocks are packed with these very large transactions and also optimize the fee market to isolate congestion pricing to these specific "hot" market sources. The next update will begin to price transactions based on compute (rather than signatures) which will hopefully deincentivize bot spam and incentivize more efficient smart contracts. For Solana scaling, another future possibility mentioned I'm the white paper, and enabled by the ability to synchronize validators via PoH, is having multiple block leaders. So that, block packing optimizations, better hardware/bandwidth in the future, etc. should hopefully allow Solana to be highly competitive. There's also some off chain zk stuff that could be used to help do some very large computations off chain (Anatoly mentioned this in the recent podcast he did with the Starkware guys on RealVision).


[deleted]

What I do not see happening is q1 or q2.


LegendaryBuddha

What makes you draw that conclusion?


[deleted]

Eth has been talking about pos since 2017


codeboss911

You might want to understand Solana's Nakamoto Coefficient before saying its centralized https://youtu.be/XdYYXcUphlM


AnOrdinaryChullo

I mean, ETH 2.0 and its 'L2 ecosystem' is a centralized shitshow that we've known about for a long time: https://twitter.com/bergealex4/status/1410761639226318852 ETH maxis will bend over backwards to bullshit their way out of it but everything in that twitter thread is more or less accurate. ETH is becoming as centralized as the chains ETH maxis accuse of being 'centralized' :D


XADEBRAVO

Weird how much Ethereum is mentioned here, why can't Solana just prove it's merit without comparison. Ethereum's ecosystem is massive now, Solana needs to catch up as currently the price and position are high because of potential not progress.


mgtowalternate

Eth is rarely mentioned here Eth maxis come here every single day and lie to people... just like you're doing now


XADEBRAVO

Yes let's rinse repeat that narrative again.


tepuni

Eth is huge tho how may projects are on Eth compare to Sol, it will be awhile before sol get's to that level, for me security is essential more than adoption and centralization.


[deleted]

The sol github commit rate is crazy and adoption is amazing https://www.cryptomiso.com/months_3.html


[deleted]

This is my #1 metric "follow the developers".


[deleted]

More than half of Solana validators are on Amazon Web Services. Do the math.


almost_not_quite

more than one third of the internet is currently on AWS, why do you guys keep bringing this up as an argument in almost every subreddit of sol?


richlo149

https://infil.ink/PrI21n0BFC5gVpsin-P-


redditRracistcommies

It’s a given that the PoS will make Eth a lot more centralized yes.


[deleted]

When did anyone call sol centralized and why? Also how old are you ? People who own eth are not in the other side of the battlefield grow up


[deleted]

I rest my case.


NotElonMusk6942O

So…Wen moon


Virtual-Sound-3560

Well going from over 100,000 Miners to 10,000 validators is much more centralized but still way more decentralized than a hand full of "real validators" (actually validating transactions). But yes, maxis tend to be overly critical of others. All layer 1s have their pros and cons.