4 ms·

>But I really don't like the idea that all (most?) DApps are based on Ethereum and require huge amounts of Gas to run. Can't we have DApps without Blockchain/Et

>But I really don't like the idea that all (most?) DApps are based on Ethereum and require huge amounts of Gas to run. Can't we have DApps without Blockchain/Ethereum? Previous generation dapps were mostly on Ethereum because it was the only real solution available. But the ecosystem is maturing, there are chains that consume so little gas it's effectively a negligible cost, and more and more dapps are making use of them. Not to mention that Eth 2.0 is coming soon™.

esperent 5y ago
>there are chains that consume so little gas it's effectively a negligible cost, and more and more dapps are making use of them Can you give some examples? How far along is the development?
- PretzelPirate 5y ago
  It’s important to note that these chains that are cheaper to use have to make trade offs to enable that. The trade off they choose is generally to be more centralized. A better approach over using a new “cheap” blockchain is to use a Rollup network on top of a decentralized blockchain. Rollups inherit the security of the blockchain they are based on, and a user can always leave the rollup network if they become censored. The downside of current Optimistic Rollup networks is that many still have centralized points of control in place (such as arbitrary contract upgrades), but those are expected to be removed in the next few months for at least one of them. Zero-Knowledge rollups are also coming out and have key advantages over Optimistic Rollups, including much lower costs.
  - pcthrowaway 5y ago
    DAG based networks (rather than blockchains) such as Fantom and Avalanche seem to be emerging as a way to address scalability issues found on blockchain-based smart contract platforms. Currently, Fantom is doing more transactions per day than Ethereum, with gas costing 1-2 cents for simple transactions and 1-6 cents for smart contract interactions. The tradeoff, based on my understanding, is that there's not as much resilience to node outages (on both of these, 33% of validators by stake concentration going down could lead to block production halting)
    - PretzelPirate 5y ago
      Issues like “33% of validators by stake concentration going down could lead to block production halting” is exactly why systems like DAG-based networks would make great Ethereum L2 networks. They can have speed and low cost, which inheriting the security of Ethereum. At the same time, if block production ever stopped (like we just saw with Solana), all users can still retrieve their funds by forcing a withdraw back to the Ethereum mainnet. Networks with low attack thresholds shouldn’t be operating as L1s.
- opatdchan 5y ago
  I'll speak for myself, as I just finished developing a fully functional dapp on the Polygon blockchain. Transactions are usually confirmed <30s (not fantastic, but acceptable) and cost less than $0.0001 worth of gas each. There are also other solutions which may work better for certain dapps. For example there is Arbitrum, which has much higher gas costs but instantaneous confirmation times. Regardless, the ecosystem is moving fast, improvements are always coming soon™ and new solutions are popping up all the time. But what's right here, right now is already good enough to be usable.

esperent 5y ago

>there are chains that consume so little gas it's effectively a negligible cost, and more and more dapps are making use of them Can you give some examples? How far along is the development?

PretzelPirate 5y ago
It’s important to note that these chains that are cheaper to use have to make trade offs to enable that. The trade off they choose is generally to be more centralized. A better approach over using a new “cheap” blockchain is to use a Rollup network on top of a decentralized blockchain. Rollups inherit the security of the blockchain they are based on, and a user can always leave the rollup network if they become censored. The downside of current Optimistic Rollup networks is that many still have centralized points of control in place (such as arbitrary contract upgrades), but those are expected to be removed in the next few months for at least one of them. Zero-Knowledge rollups are also coming out and have key advantages over Optimistic Rollups, including much lower costs.
- pcthrowaway 5y ago
  DAG based networks (rather than blockchains) such as Fantom and Avalanche seem to be emerging as a way to address scalability issues found on blockchain-based smart contract platforms. Currently, Fantom is doing more transactions per day than Ethereum, with gas costing 1-2 cents for simple transactions and 1-6 cents for smart contract interactions. The tradeoff, based on my understanding, is that there's not as much resilience to node outages (on both of these, 33% of validators by stake concentration going down could lead to block production halting)
  - PretzelPirate 5y ago
    Issues like “33% of validators by stake concentration going down could lead to block production halting” is exactly why systems like DAG-based networks would make great Ethereum L2 networks. They can have speed and low cost, which inheriting the security of Ethereum. At the same time, if block production ever stopped (like we just saw with Solana), all users can still retrieve their funds by forcing a withdraw back to the Ethereum mainnet. Networks with low attack thresholds shouldn’t be operating as L1s.
opatdchan 5y ago
I'll speak for myself, as I just finished developing a fully functional dapp on the Polygon blockchain. Transactions are usually confirmed <30s (not fantastic, but acceptable) and cost less than $0.0001 worth of gas each. There are also other solutions which may work better for certain dapps. For example there is Arbitrum, which has much higher gas costs but instantaneous confirmation times. Regardless, the ecosystem is moving fast, improvements are always coming soon™ and new solutions are popping up all the time. But what's right here, right now is already good enough to be usable.