LogFAQs > #974986769

Sad_Face posted...

Because of these basic properties, developers are in a mad rush to recreate any and every financial tool, and major website with these properties. Some are in it to make the world a fairer place. Others, admittedly are only in it for EZ profits and have no conscience in achieving it. Celsius Network's Mashinsky and FTX's SBF are clear examples of this and also evidence of why this industry needs to gatekeep more to ensure people who have noble and genuine intentions are supported while those who are clearly in it for their own selfish gain are pushed out.

not fond of gatekeeping, but the sector would be well-served by a metaregulatory apparatus, with or without state regulation. basically taking advantage of the verifiability and transparency inherent to the sector to roll out services assisting users in vetting protocols, contracts, addresses for reputability and safety. custodial services should be completely and utterly rebuked except as on/offramps and providers of liquidity towards that ends, with all facets of onchain ux being further refined towards the ends of ending reliance on custodial services. much easier said than done, but important.

I did hear about later down the road ZK L2 chains being interoperable with other ZK chains, in some Bankless podcast with ZKsync developers. As it stands right now, not to my knowledge.

But Chainlink has a ZK function coming up, DECO, but this is only to allow sensitive data to be used on the blockchain without revealing it. "Is this girl above the age of 18?", a age limiter on some new age dating app. DECO can use a passport or some other piece of data to demonstrate her identity to answer the question but ensure the item used isn't revealed to the chainlink node operator or the network at large. Basically simple Zero Knowledge proof functionality.

But when the ZK chains gain the cross chain communication functionality, they'll definitely be a competitor to Chainlink. I'd imagine Chainlink's dominance at that point will be determined by the strength of the network effect (Chainlink has found itself in everyone's tech stack already and cross chain solutions out presently get ignored as everyone was waiting on Chainlink's cross chain solution) and whether ZK chains will offer more meaningful functionality that can't be replicated and will make it more profitable to transition.

I'm not too familiar with the ZK world, so I'd love to hear your thoughts.

i haven't worked with zk chains, and am not familiar with the use of zk for offchain consumer data privacy, though i have an idea of how they might work for private-public blockchain interoperability, and a more vague idea of how they could be used for scaling onchain computation. also some potential applications for offchain auditability of sensitive data and untrusted collaborative computing, but i'm not sure if anything's been explored on this side of things.

it seems unlikely that zk chains will be spearheading crosschain since the zkevm is a challenge they've been consumed by for a couple years at this point, but there's a burgeoning subsector of expressive zk communications and data protocols that seem posed to nibble on the oracle market share. if chainlink/ccip consumes less gas relative to traditional communications protocols, zk eliminates that gas completely - or at least sends it offchain to the end user or whoever's generating the proof of computation or data.

i don't think it's far off when you'll be able to do extensive transacting on one less expensive chain and prove it in full context on another more secure chain without expensive relays, intermediaries, or (heaven forbid) bridging when it isn't absolutely necessary; just submitting a proof to another contract when appropriate. one implication includes liquidity balancing across networks, for instance, which in turn provides for more robust onchain-based liquidity oracles comparatively less vulnerable to flash loan attacks. others include unlocking more expressive credit/reputation applications, and chain-agnostic transactions and other activities.

chainlink's unchallenged as a source of offchain data, and challenging it is a fool's errand, but interchain is ripe for disruption.

full disclosure, i'm a little biased because i work in zk; just curious whether chainlink's current r&d is anticipating the expansion of the space and its use cases.

MarthGoomba posted...
i'm cautiously optimistic about the concept of layer 2s as a scaling solution for ethereum, but working on layer-1 and layer-2 interoperability, the data situation for l2 networks leaves more than a bit to be desired. you need big guns to do interesting things with metadata, big guns don't come cheap and access isn't scalable, and cheap big guns are not credibly neutral.

but anyway, there aren't really layer 1 options outside ethereum with the same security assurances and credible neutrality without their own tradeoffs. other decentralized l1s are just cheaper because they're comparatively underutilized and sacrifice decentralization, and when they see heavy utilization, it brings ethereum-esque fee surges or worse.

Anteaterking posted...
you kinda do