5 ms·

Why does an Ethereum L2 have to be slow or planet destroying? IMHO most Eth L2s already show more promise than PayPal as a future payment rail tech, despite th

Why does an Ethereum L2 have to be slow or planet destroying? IMHO most Eth L2s already show more promise than PayPal as a future payment rail tech, despite them all basically being in beta state. Much lower fees, faster transactions, permissionless withdrawals, fully programmable, negligible energy usage now thanks to PoS.

hot_gril 4y ago
L2 shows promise, but I don't believe it works till I see it used at scale. Sorry but there's just too much hype, and I often say the same thing about other tech like Tesla FSD, the Metaverse, or all of Google's side bets.
- mattdesl 4y ago
  “At scale” is relative. Platforms like Patreon and Ko-Fi haven’t achieved the same reach and scale as PayPal, but they still work for lots of users.
  - hot_gril 4y ago
    To me it's binary. If I've ever used it for real and not just as a curiosity, it's at scale.
yashg 4y ago
PoS violets one of the fundamental tenets of crypto/blockchain - decentralization. Bitcoin uses PoW because it at least had a possibility of avoiding monopolizing by ensuring that no single entity will ever come to own majority of processing power of the network. That PoW is slow and expensive is a feature, not a bug. It's a different matter that Bitcoin eventually became centralized in the hands of a few whales who work as a cartel, but PoS makes it all the more easy and ensures that those who have more tokes, will accumulate even more tokens. All being said and done, all the L2 are just centralization projects. These chains and tokens will always be controlled by a small number of early movers. Eventually, it doesn't even fulfill the very purpose of all these tokens - being peer to peer money.
msm_ 4y ago
Do you recommend any "Ethereum L2"s? I'm only vaguely familiar with the concept, and didn't hear about a single Ethereum L2 in the wild. Quick google led me to Arbitrum, Optimism, and Boba. Do you honestly think they may compete with PayPal in terms of usabilty, fees and transaction speed in the near future? Are there any caveats (other than their immaturity)?
- mattdesl 4y ago
  If “near future” is 3-5 years then yes. Four interesting protocols in early development: Optimism, Arbitrum, zkSync, Scroll. These already all compete with PayPal in fees & transaction time, but not in UX, features, and widespread use. In theory they could provide similar frontend web UX, but with the option to hold tokens non-custodially so you could withdraw & exit the protocol without having to ask permission. (IMHO it’s likely that other tech/protocols will emerge in 3-5 yrs that supersedes the protocols in development today.) Lots of typical crypto caveats - eg: USDC on an L2 is centralized around Circle’s ability to redeem. Protocols can have bugs that make coins go poof. Non custodial ownership is harder for many users than asking PayPal or a bank not to lose their funds. L2s specifically are typically run by a single sequencer who could potentially disrupt your ability to use the network smoothly (but then you could use an escape hatch to permissionlessly get your funds out if that happens).
- TimJRobinson 4y ago
  Fees and Transaction speed definitely - with new upgrades coming out in the next year (EIP4844) L2s can handle thousands of transactions per second. The UI is really up to the apps, the good thing is there are many teams working on payments so there will be plenty to choose from to find the UI you like, and people will be able to pay via the same wallet. Stripe already has USDC payments on crypto rails and Visa is working with Starknet to integrate with these L2s too. All the L2s with their usage, security, speed and tradeoffs are at http://l2beat.com http://l2beat.com
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

hot_gril 4y ago

L2 shows promise, but I don't believe it works till I see it used at scale. Sorry but there's just too much hype, and I often say the same thing about other tech like Tesla FSD, the Metaverse, or all of Google's side bets.

mattdesl 4y ago
“At scale” is relative. Platforms like Patreon and Ko-Fi haven’t achieved the same reach and scale as PayPal, but they still work for lots of users.
- hot_gril 4y ago
  To me it's binary. If I've ever used it for real and not just as a curiosity, it's at scale.

yashg 4y ago

PoS violets one of the fundamental tenets of crypto/blockchain - decentralization. Bitcoin uses PoW because it at least had a possibility of avoiding monopolizing by ensuring that no single entity will ever come to own majority of processing power of the network. That PoW is slow and expensive is a feature, not a bug. It's a different matter that Bitcoin eventually became centralized in the hands of a few whales who work as a cartel, but PoS makes it all the more easy and ensures that those who have more tokes, will accumulate even more tokens. All being said and done, all the L2 are just centralization projects. These chains and tokens will always be controlled by a small number of early movers. Eventually, it doesn't even fulfill the very purpose of all these tokens - being peer to peer money.

msm_ 4y ago

Do you recommend any "Ethereum L2"s? I'm only vaguely familiar with the concept, and didn't hear about a single Ethereum L2 in the wild. Quick google led me to Arbitrum, Optimism, and Boba. Do you honestly think they may compete with PayPal in terms of usabilty, fees and transaction speed in the near future? Are there any caveats (other than their immaturity)?

mattdesl 4y ago
If “near future” is 3-5 years then yes. Four interesting protocols in early development: Optimism, Arbitrum, zkSync, Scroll. These already all compete with PayPal in fees & transaction time, but not in UX, features, and widespread use. In theory they could provide similar frontend web UX, but with the option to hold tokens non-custodially so you could withdraw & exit the protocol without having to ask permission. (IMHO it’s likely that other tech/protocols will emerge in 3-5 yrs that supersedes the protocols in development today.) Lots of typical crypto caveats - eg: USDC on an L2 is centralized around Circle’s ability to redeem. Protocols can have bugs that make coins go poof. Non custodial ownership is harder for many users than asking PayPal or a bank not to lose their funds. L2s specifically are typically run by a single sequencer who could potentially disrupt your ability to use the network smoothly (but then you could use an escape hatch to permissionlessly get your funds out if that happens).
TimJRobinson 4y ago
Fees and Transaction speed definitely - with new upgrades coming out in the next year (EIP4844) L2s can handle thousands of transactions per second. The UI is really up to the apps, the good thing is there are many teams working on payments so there will be plenty to choose from to find the UI you like, and people will be able to pay via the same wallet. Stripe already has USDC payments on crypto rails and Visa is working with Starknet to integrate with these L2s too. All the L2s with their usage, security, speed and tradeoffs are at http://l2beat.com http://l2beat.com
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]