Categories
- 17.3K All Categories
- 9.5K Mining
- 574 Pool Discussion
- 378 Promotional
- 1.4K General Project Discussion (non-technical)
- 485 Education
- 811 Protocol and Client discussion
- 170 web3-js
- 29 Whisper
- 16 Swarm
- 3 RLP
- 303 IoT & Hardware
- 1.2K Smart Contracts and Dapps
- 28 Serpent
- 359 Solidity
- 664 Projects
- 1.2K Reference clients code and builds
- 249 Eth & AlethZero- Cpp Implementation
- 471 Geth - Go Implementation
- 242 Mist
- 15 Node.js Implementation
- 36 Python Implementation
- 49 Mix
- 36 Other Implementations
- 170 Meetups
- 40 Other Events
- 226 Jobs & Skills
- 281 Press and Articles
- 75 Audio/Video
- 296 Ether Sale
- 1.2K Other Languages
- 96 Chinese
- 255 German
- 33 Italian
- 111 French
- 3 Hebrew
- 42 Japanese
- 75 Portugese
- 46 Romanian
- 185 Russian
- 231 Spanish
- 47 Turkish
- 125 Watercooler
Ethereum should develop and release the "official" Ethereum Side-chain
kordova
Member Posts: 4 ✭
TL;DR:
Ethereum can continue with its POS plans, but should also create and "own" the official Ethereum side-chain.
Shares in Ethereum side-chain will be distributed to Ether holders according to balances at launch time. Dividends, collected by an addition to transaction fee, will be paid to shareholders. The foundation and community will benefit from both chains.
99% of the Ethereum code base - the EVM, the browsers, scripting, development tools, Web3, as well as the DAPs and third-party tools - are all relevant to both chains. The additional effort surly worth the potential reward.
------------
If we had doubts about if or when will Ethereum be ported to Bitcoin, not only in the sense of contracts that are able to move Bitcoin but also in the sense of Bitcoin as gas, then Sergio Lerner's rootstock.io should end them.
The required Bitcoin protocol change to allow actual 2-way peg is not even deployed yet, but Ethereum sidechains are already being coded. Chances are that this change will be deployed and sidechains will become a reality. There's a lot of talent, funding and influence behind this effort and a good progress was already made. When side-chains happen, Ethereum side-chains also happen, that much is clear. The question is: Will it be the official Ethereum sidechain or will it be third parties.
Vitalik refered to the Ethereum sidechain issue few month back. He agrees that Ethereum on a sidechain while might not enjoy all the network effect advantages listed in his analysis, still enjoys quite a few. The importance of two of them - Market depth and Liquidity was wrongly downplayed in the post:
Other advantages are the "Size stability effect" and the "Single-currency preference effect" - but formal definitions aside, its quite clear that Bitcoin powered Ethereum is superior to Ether powered Ethereum given the rest is equal.
Even if Ethereum can't be easily and properly warped as a side-chain by forks without much resources, DAPs might still prefer other side-chain platforms or their own sidechain implementation over Ethereum not because they are better platforms but because of their integration to Bitcoin. Truthcoin is one such example.
The good news - we don't have to decide. Ethereum can continue with its POS plans, but should also create and "own" the official Ethereum side-chain. Two separate chains. 99% of the Ethereum code base - the EVM, the browsers, scripting, development tools, Web3, as well as the DAPs and third-party tools - are all relevant to both chains. The additional effort surly worth the potential reward.
Shares in Ethereum side-chain will be distributed to Ether holders according to balances at that point in time and dividends collected as an addition to transaction fees will be paid to share holders. I leave the exact model to others, but in order to make sense, this fee should be small enough so people prefer to use the official, best maintained, best secured chain rather then save few cents elsewhere.
Ethereum can continue with its POS plans, but should also create and "own" the official Ethereum side-chain.
Shares in Ethereum side-chain will be distributed to Ether holders according to balances at launch time. Dividends, collected by an addition to transaction fee, will be paid to shareholders. The foundation and community will benefit from both chains.
99% of the Ethereum code base - the EVM, the browsers, scripting, development tools, Web3, as well as the DAPs and third-party tools - are all relevant to both chains. The additional effort surly worth the potential reward.
------------
If we had doubts about if or when will Ethereum be ported to Bitcoin, not only in the sense of contracts that are able to move Bitcoin but also in the sense of Bitcoin as gas, then Sergio Lerner's rootstock.io should end them.
The required Bitcoin protocol change to allow actual 2-way peg is not even deployed yet, but Ethereum sidechains are already being coded. Chances are that this change will be deployed and sidechains will become a reality. There's a lot of talent, funding and influence behind this effort and a good progress was already made. When side-chains happen, Ethereum side-chains also happen, that much is clear. The question is: Will it be the official Ethereum sidechain or will it be third parties.
Vitalik refered to the Ethereum sidechain issue few month back. He agrees that Ethereum on a sidechain while might not enjoy all the network effect advantages listed in his analysis, still enjoys quite a few. The importance of two of them - Market depth and Liquidity was wrongly downplayed in the post:
[with a] market cap of $10-$100M, the market depth is simply good enough and the spread is low enough for nearly all types of transactions.What if this transaction type is "deposit Ether collateral to short gold"? Can the ether market with its 24h volume of 1000-2000 BTC support a large position there? No. Big financial DAPs will go where its possible to move millions.
Other advantages are the "Size stability effect" and the "Single-currency preference effect" - but formal definitions aside, its quite clear that Bitcoin powered Ethereum is superior to Ether powered Ethereum given the rest is equal.
Even if Ethereum can't be easily and properly warped as a side-chain by forks without much resources, DAPs might still prefer other side-chain platforms or their own sidechain implementation over Ethereum not because they are better platforms but because of their integration to Bitcoin. Truthcoin is one such example.
The good news - we don't have to decide. Ethereum can continue with its POS plans, but should also create and "own" the official Ethereum side-chain. Two separate chains. 99% of the Ethereum code base - the EVM, the browsers, scripting, development tools, Web3, as well as the DAPs and third-party tools - are all relevant to both chains. The additional effort surly worth the potential reward.
Shares in Ethereum side-chain will be distributed to Ether holders according to balances at that point in time and dividends collected as an addition to transaction fees will be paid to share holders. I leave the exact model to others, but in order to make sense, this fee should be small enough so people prefer to use the official, best maintained, best secured chain rather then save few cents elsewhere.
Post edited by kordova on
Comments
It is totally possible to manage both pegged BTC and an internal token. Take TruthCoin for example: they are building a complex system of payments to voters according to their votes *and* their stake in the “oracle corporation”. That stake is represented in VoteCoin. In other words: voters are paid in (pegged) BTC according to their VoteCoin balance. VoteCoin indeed has a speculative potential.
For Ethereum Sidechain we need a simpler logic that distribute part of the fees to shareholders. Shares are distributed to Ether holders according to their balances at genesis time.
Shit like this is depressing
But Lets leave Ethereum as a new toy and play with it and then perhaps let it fall away before The Suits Fuck It Up like the rest of the market economy. It is not market Cap' that’s the problem it's the Market Mentality that is baked in to BitCoin. If we get CryptoCurrencies wrong then we'll just make the virtual world in the image of the physical like Satoshi did. Lets say he was right and BitCoin is the one true Digital Gold and Gold is the one true money. Then AnarcoCaps like Stefan Molyneux get to play out their wet dream and we all end up in the "best of all possible worlds". [Just like this one, but with better book keeping to make sure (for eternity) that those who don't have the digital gold are kept in their place.] But perhaps Gold is not the one true money, if we still make the whole crypto-economic world inside Bitcoin then in that case Libertarian-Socialists like me will be condemned to live in the dystopia I fear, but at least we'll get to say "I told you so" like we have since Bakunin told Marx this time last time around.
This shit has happened before - but the problem is, when the Luddites were prevented from making a living from the trade they knew, they had no power in the face of the State and its Laws, so they didn't get to save us from 'capital'. This time round, those who are being technologically unemployed ALREADY control the power of the State. If Crypto is going to redistribute the surplus that is currently captured by the administrator class we'd better make a world they want to be in just as much as we do.
In the end as long as everyone can still eat, make stuff and get along with the other monkeys they live near, perhaps it will be a world worth making; but if all we do is find a better way for the winners to hide the surplus behind their Crypto then what's the point?
I hope we can just make stuff (like the Ethereum ecosystem) because it's Fun, and distribute that stuff so the disposable generation can't bury it all in a land fill or loose the benefits to the ResRushers. If "we" get the development of these tools right - in the end there will be so much surplus stuff, that the proprietary stuff, locked as it is behind the PayWalls, the DRM and the Intellectual
PovertyProperty laws will just be more stuff amongst all the free/libre stuff that's too cheep to meter.I'm hoping Once crypto'eco' can make ANY NUMBER special then non of the numbers will be special, and we can give up on the bitcoinesq supply/demand wall just like when we make enough Software Freedom none of the PayWalls that Rentiers like Micro$oft and CrApple hide behind will make any economic sense. Then, along with a little AI and Full Automation (perhaps) it won't be what you can hold on to but what you can give that will make value in the human as well as the digital world.