Inventor of @zksync. zk/acc. Freedom maximalist. Freedom → Progress → Prosperity
- Tweets 7,712
- Following 2,410
- Followers 52,084
- Likes 26,670
1 cent transactions on @zksync.
With EIP4844 now completed, we've turned our undivided attention to decentralization. The network belongs to its community.
751
856
4,483
1,898,390
You're not on Ethereum because you trust the EF, Vitalik, or its users. You’re here because Ethereum eliminates the need for trust. Even if the core devs and validators turn rogue, Ethereum will persist and thrive.
To bring Ethereum to the masses, L2s must also eliminate trust.
For better or worse, blockchains are a hyper-adversarial environment. The conflict of interest is ubiquitous, and even the most sincere actors can be compromised or forced to be evil against their will. To build something that will last, you need to choose the most resilient stronghold as your home. Key to this is technology rooted in cypherpunk ideals.
Trusting core teams is not a sufficient substitute for a trustless network.
You should be on @zksync, because ZK tech makes verifiable computation exponentially scalable. Not because you need to trust teams working on the core protocol or their own L2s, like @the_matter_labs, @grvt_io, @cronosapp, @class_lambda, @moonsonglabs_, @SlushSDK, and many other contributors.
The most critical step in achieving this vision for @zksync is the broad decentralization of the network with a resilient governance framework. This is our sole focus right now. Huge progress has been made in this direction. We are coming close.
671
563
3,002
1,351,063
Massive amount of work went into making @zksync the most scalable, secure, reliable and affordable ZK EVM. I'm deeply grateful to many teams and individuals who contributed to this colossal effort.
2023 was the year of laying the technological fundamentals for Ethereum's ultimate scaling endgame.
2024 will be the year of making @zksync the best place for building things that matter.
It starts with the focus on decentralization, as a prerequisite for resilience and credible neutrality. Serious work takes time; we haven't and won't ever cut corners on anything related to the security of the protocol. But I can assure you, this is our top priority right now.
zkSync Era is a year old!
In that year, we:
🛠️ Shipped the ZK Stack, a modular framework for building sovereign hyperchains
💻 Deployed the Boojum proof system to reduce hardware requirements
🏎️ Hit 188 TPS during 2023’s Inscription Event
🔒 Hosted the largest Code4rena audit competition for over $1.1M
💸 Reduced fees to 1 cent with EIP-4844
The last year’s technical progress set the foundation to verifiably scale Ethereum. This year will be the year of ZK.
338
288
2,122
441,424
Huge misconception.
Ethereum is the world's settlement layer not because it has the largest economic security, but because it's the LARGEST VERIFIABLE BLOCKCHAIN with smart contracts.
You don't need to trust validators. You can run a full node on a laptop, the cost is very low. If you do, you are 100% certain that you are safe the onchain state is correct. Even if all validators are corrupt, users will fork and continue.
Verifiability guarantees security and resilience. People, institutions, and even nation states are willing to pay a massive premium for it.
Verifiability is what turns a database into a blockchain.
ZK is the endgame, because it SCALES VERIFIABILITY.
With ZK, you can prove any number of transactions in parallel – millions of TPS on thousands of rollups – then compress them into a single proof, put on Ethereum, prove the ETH block itself, and verify all of it in under 1 second on your mobile wallet.
Pause for a moment to fully grasp the implications.
ZK can turn Ethereum into an Intnernet of Value with unlimited throughput, and turn every smartphone in the world into its full node.
INFINITELY VERIFIABLE BLOCKCHAIN
This is what @zksync is all about.
P.S. Bitcoin is verifiable too, and that's what made it so valuable. It just lacks the primitives to build expressive verifiable smart contracts or verify ZK proofs. Yet.
By today's market prices, Ethereum has $110b staked while Solana stands at $70b staked.
Solana's economic security is getting really close to that of Ethereum. Isn't economic security one of the major reasons L2s choose Ethereum as its home?
194
364
1,903
472,404
Matter Labs is a zealous proponent of the libertarian, cypherpunk ethos and the values stated in the ZK Credo. We reject the very idea of “Intellectual Property”. Everything we create is released to the public under free open source licenses.
Trademarks, however, exist to protect users, not companies. All the trademarks we had ever registered, including ZK-related ones, are defensive, to prevent dishonest actors from misleading their customers and confusing their products and services with the ones offered by Matter Labs (as had unfortunately been the case in the past).
But ZK is the endgame, so we went one step further. We had earlier reached out to the legal team of the Ethereum Foundation and offered to cooperate on creating a legal framework to make the use of “ZK” and similar important tech terms in the public domain.
We invite others to participate in this initiative – in particular, those who filed trademarks related to STARKs.
ZK is a public good that should belong to everyone.
Matter Labs, the corporate entity behind @zksync, has filed trademark applications in nine countries, claiming ZK as its exclusive intellectual property, even though they neither created nor contributed to the creation of this technology.
By using the legal system to claim a public good for itself, Matter Labs contradicts the ethos of crypto, Ethereum, and its own principles, which state: "We can make this world better by increasing people's freedom."
StarkWare, alongside other leading ZK companies and researchers, urges the community to demand that Matter Labs withdraw all their trademark attempts.
💠 Public Statement: github.com/ZKPStatement/stat…
552
263
1,751
1,018,293
Faster than 10 years — and will start with @zksync.
ZK is the clear endgame.
IMO in 10 years, all rollups will be ZK and will commit blocks with finalized state roots to L1 every slot. It will take a lot of infrastructure and prover optimization to get there, but that's the clear endgame.
204
176
1,411
283,552
After 4 years of hard work, the door of @zkSync Era, Ethereum’s first zkEVM mainnet, is finally open to all.
Congratulations to @the_matter_labs team, the zkSync Era ecosystem, and the entire Ethereum community!
The Era of Freedom is waiting for you.
gm zkEVM! 👋🏻
zkSync Era Mainnet Alpha is now open to all users.
Developers, projects, and users can now experience the power of zkEVM.
Read more: blog.matter-labs.io/gm-zkevm…
1/11
111
285
1,275
208,807
Every decision we make as a team towards building @zksync is driven by our ethos, which is based on integrity and transparency. We have made honest mistakes in the past, but we always did our best to openly acknowledge them and take responsibility. And will always do so in the future.
However, today’s accusations are unfounded, misleading, and extremely disappointing coming from a team I highly respect.
The reader of the Polygon Zero post is left with the impression that Boojum is largely using Plonky2 code with little innovation, and that we allegedly re-used this code without providing any attribution to the original work. These claims could not be further from truth.
I really want to believe in the good intentions of the Polygon Zero team (which I highly respect for their excellent work). I am deeply passionate about the mission of @zksync and the amazing work our team is doing, and I’m sure the same applies to the authors of the post and their work. Alas, passion can at times lead to rushed arguments and inaccurate statements.
So I’m going to share pure facts here and let the reader come to their own conclusions. Here is what you need to know:
• Both Plonky2 and Boojum are implementations of the RedShift construction (PLONK + FRI).
• RedShift (1) was introduced by @the_matter_labs team 3 years before Plonky2 paper. (2)
• Plonky2 team never gave us credit (although they refered to RedShift in their paper). We never bothered. It’s great to see someone improving on your work!
• Only ~5% of the Boojum code is based on the code of Plonky2.
• For the reused code, a clear attribution is provided in line #1 of the main file of the module. (3)
• The rest of the files are provided as they are. If they contained more information about the authors, we would obviously have copied that.
• In addition, the README file contains an acknowledgement to Plonky2. (4)
• In addition, the intro post contains an attribution to Plonky2, with specific names of the authors. (5)
We could have done it better. The community rightfully pointed out that there is a more standard approach to attributions, which we will wholeheartedly apply from now on.
Open Source is all about genuine cooperation. If the Polygon Zero team wanted additional credit, the easiest way would have been to submit a pull request which we would have happily accepted. Going ahead with public accusations of a complete lack of attribution (even if it was true, which is not the case here) is anything but the spirit of the Open Source movement. If you’re not happy about others – including potential competitors – using parts of your code, maybe Open Source is not for you?
Now, the part that I am most surprised about is complaints about benchmarking.
The whole point of neutral 3rd party benchmarks is to compare apples to apples, going beyond marketing noise and nuances of implementation. If you are unhappy with the choice of the benchmarking function (SHA256) or your implementations being unoptimized, why put your code out for benchmarking in the first place and then endorse it? (6) (7)
If someone can take 5% of the Boojum code and make it 10x faster, not only will we consider this a breakthrough work and immediately hire this person, – @shamatar will name one of his cats in their honor.
We all stand on the shoulders of giants. Boojum is built leveraging the work of the brightest minds contributing to the field of cryptography. And we fully agree with the Polygon Zero team: “We can sustainably build software in the open, leveraging the combined talent and expertise of entire communities, and everyone benefits.” This is why Boojum was open-sourced under a free permissive license the moment it was released to the public, just like ZK Stack, and like every other software component we will ever create for @zksync. Each of them is a small step on the long journey to scale Ethereum along with its values.
(1) eprint.iacr.org/2019/1400.pd…
(2) github.com/mir-protocol/plon…
(3) github.com/matter-labs/era-b…
(4) github.com/matter-labs/era-b…
(5) zksync.mirror.xyz/HJ2Pj45EJk…
(6) nitter.app/dlubarov/status/…
(7) nitter.app/MihailoBjelic/st…
Crypto runs on the open source ethos. When projects don’t follow it, the ecosystem suffers.
We were disappointed to see that @zksync copied our code without attribution and made misleading claims about the original work, so we wrote this post.
mirror.xyz/0x70DF15b0208eFCe…
148
280
1,168
429,876
I just sent this message to the Matter Labs team:
===
Today, I’m sharing the hardest change we had to make in the 6-year history of Matter Labs. We are restructuring the organization and parting ways with many amazing team members (~16% of the team). We’ve already reached out 1-to-1 to each individual impacted.
As founder and CEO, I bear full responsibility for this decision and the ones that have led up to it. For those of you leaving: I’m sorry we had to take this step. It hurts to say goodbye to talented employees for reasons unrelated to their performance. I will explain why we made this decision, how we're going to take care of departing team members, and what this means for Matter Labs going forward.
Why we made this decision
From day 1, Matter Labs embraced the philosophy of being a lean and focused team committed to a singular mission — accelerating the mass adoption of crypto for personal sovereignty. Staying small and focused enabled us to keep a steady pace of impactful innovation, continuously adapting to changes.
Our market environment and business needs have changed significantly over the course of this year. We see that many teams building on ZKsync Era now require a different type of technology and support than they had previously. At the same time, we see a big increase in demand for ZK Chains.
The role of Matter Labs in the decentralized ZKsync ecosystem has evolved, too. The launch of the Elastic Chain and ZK Nation was the right moment to re-evaluate our strategy, goals, and team composition. We went through a large org planning exercise, and it became clear that the talent and roles we have today do not perfectly match our needs. We then reviewed every single role in the company to make sure that we have the right roles and people in the right place, to remain agile and effective.
How we’re handling departures
We've structured a comprehensive exit package for everyone leaving us today, including:
Base Pay: ensuring 3 months of base salary.
Healthcare & Mental Health Support: 4 months of continued coverage.
Vesting: Full vesting through the effective termination date, with the cliff waived for those who have been with the company for at least 6 months.
Career Support:
1) Inclusion in a list of impacted employees shared with investors (on an opt-in basis).
2) Personalized career support meetings with members of the Leadership Team to assist in navigating the next steps.
3) CV and LinkedIn profile assistance.
Equipment: Keep company-issued laptop as well as any other equipment purchased with company-provided stipends.
Immigration: Assistance with immigration will be provided for the next 4 months.
Moving forward
As CEO, it’s my duty to keep the organizational complexity constantly in check. To avoid painful corrections like this in the future, I will ensure that all new functions and roles we hire for are aligned with our long-term strategy while maintaining the highest performance standards.
While today's change hurts, I feel extremely optimistic about our future. The demand for our technology is growing, with around a dozen chains launching on the Elastic Chain this year alone, and many more teams building on ZKsync Era. We are also fortunate to have the financial resources to thrive even in a multi-year bear market. We'll continue to build and hire the right talent crucial for the next phase of Matter Labs.
I want to end by expressing my deep gratitude to every team member, both those moving on and continuing with us, for your invaluable contributions to our journey. Your efforts have shaped Matter Labs into what it is today: a transformative force advancing freedom for everyone in the world.
I will provide more details about today’s decision to the team so you can hear directly from me. Also, your team leads will be holding team-specific forums and meetings throughout this week.
Alex
576
62
1,225
554,787
If you're worried about one actor being able to abuse TMs, you should be worried about any one actor to have this ability.
Treat the root cause, not the symptoms.
ZK belongs to the community.
The Matter Labs ZK Pledge
We are grateful to @VitalikButerin, @ilblackdragon, @hasufl, @MicahZoltu, @stonecoldpat0, @StaniKulechov, @lex_node, @hosseeb, @pcaversaccio, and others for their comments and suggestions on how to ensure critical terms like “ZK” remain freely available to everyone and protected against squatters.
Here is a community proposal we fully support:
1. Setting up an ownerless legal entity with the sole purpose of holding trademarks for “ZK” and similar, critical names. This effort must be led by a trusted, credibly neutral organization or community members.
2. The entity grants free licenses of the trademarks to everyone.
3. Many prominent community figures and credibly neutral organizations are invited to join as guarantors.
The Matter Labs Pledge:
1. Matter Labs will not file any new trademark applications for ZK. Matter Labs will not appeal any applications if they are rejected. Matter Labs will never enforce any of the ZK trademarks it owns now or in the future except for defensive purposes (i.e. preventing others from suing us).
2. We commit to financially support the creation of a community-led, TM-holder entity.
3. Matter Labs will immediately transfer to this entity all the filed ZK trademarks.
We are asking for your help to create this new model and to put together the most effective structure for all. Everyone in the Ethereum and ZK communities is invited to join and contribute to this effort. You can reach us at zk-for-all@matterlabs.dev
208
113
1,095
150,266
This was not an easy decision. It increases legal risks, but the very purpose of ZK is to help humanity change its mode of cooperation from “don’t be evil” to “can’t be evil”. I feel that this is the right thing to do.
Thank you to everyone who reached out following our post, offering ideas, support, and feedback.
As a result of these conversations, we decided to drop all trademark applications for the term “ZK”.
These discussions came down to one important fact: it would be impossible to agree on a group of people perceived as credibly neutral by nearly everyone. What could have worked for Ethereum would not necessarily work for the entire world.
We're proud to be a part of a movement that cares so deeply about cypherpunk values. And we are incredibly grateful to the @zksync community in particular for the thousands of messages of support we received, once again affirming that community is everything.
ZK summer is imminent 😎
163
86
1,024
130,288
zkSync is not just another L2.
zkSync firmly stands by its commitment to decentralize.
Since rolling out support for EIP4844 in March, this has been the sole focus. The upcoming release of v24 is the final planned protocol upgrade needed before handing over network governance to the community. The remaining missing pieces are expected to be in place by the end of June.
Decentralization is a big, irreversible step that requires utmost attention to detail at the intersection of complex technological and legal frameworks. In an industry often characterized by hype and short-term sacrifices, zkSync continues to put in the effort to stand apart – to build foundational technology that will stand the test of time.
zkSync is not just another L2. It’s the catalyst for the emerging era of the verifiable internet that belongs to the users — at the scale of billions of people.
ZK summer is coming.
127
94
926
97,472
"We have all the tools we need. We should go out and to build applications that are simultaneously cypherpunk and user-friendly."
🫡
No compromise between Cypherpunk & UX has been @zksync's commitment from day 1.
We'll make Ethereum feel like Whatsapp, not like PGP.
Ethereum has blobs. Where do we go from here?
vitalik.eth.limo/general/202…
104
93
778
179,192
zkSync has always championed Freedom as the primary driver for worldwide innovation, progress, and prosperity. @LensProtocol will become the freest, fairest, and most open social network by deploying their Lens Network as a ZK Chain on @zksync.
156
64
802
85,890
1k TPS is a drop in the ocean of the world's demand for Web3.
The Internet can't run on a single server.
The Internet of Value can't run on a single monolithic blockchain, no matter how fast and willing to sacrifice decentralization.
The endgame is ZK singularity:
⧫ Thousands of permissionless hyperchains with thousands of TPS each;
⧫ ZK proofs for each block of these chains aggregated recursively into one;
⧫ Finalized on the most decentralized, credibly neutral settlement layer (gm Ethereum!);
Every single one of millions of their transactions verified by every single user on their smartphone, in under 1 second (if every user can't verify it, is it really a blockchain?)
TLDR: ZK enables unlimited scaling with zero compromises (yes, long-term we can solve data availability problem too; most data will be hosted by end-users).
But what about UX and liquidity fragmentation?
Every user of these chains will be able to transact with any contract or user on any other chains seamlessly – in seconds, with no extra costs or trust assumptions. It will take just one wallet confirmation and confirm instantly, similar to how we can send an email today from alice@any_domain.com to bob@any_other_domain.com.
Liquidity will flow freely between ZK hyperchains, without the need to trust validators of those chains or bridges in-between.
Some of these chains will be private and privacy-preserving (run by banks and financial institutions), but still seamlessly interoperable with the rest of the ecosystem. This will create orders of magnitude larger network effects for liquidity than what the world has ever seen onchain.
How cool is that?!
This vision will become reality on Ethereum in 2024. Ask me anything about it.
#ZKisTheEndgame
Say what you want about SOL hitting its scaling limits today
At least SOL is trying, as ETH gave up on scaling a long time ago
SOL is clocking in over 1k TPS of real usage every day!
While ETH has remained stuck on 100 TPS for three years, they have no ground left to stand on!
102
154
767
324,860
Some personal news:
I will be leaving @zksync at the end of April.
I've been working on starting my own project.
Allow me to introduce @sophon
Sophon is a general purpose hyperchain, focused on ██████ and ██████, using ██████ as DA, leading us all towards a brighter future.
I'm incredibly excited to build this new venture on the ZK Stack. I will be progressively sharing more information on X and Medium, but a few FAQ for now:
Why I am leaving zkSync
- TLDR: I'm bullish on hyperchains and realised I needed to build my own.
- I'm leaving Matter Labs, but I'm not really leaving zkSync. zkSync is so much more than Era, the first L2 zkEVM. The ambition is to build a constellation of hyperchains, leveraging the zkSync codebase, with shared users and liquidity on zkSync.
- I will continue to work closely with the amazing Matter Labs teams, lead by @gluk64 @Ozhar & @anthonykrose and will always endeavour to be their biggest ambassador.
Why build a hyperchain?
When I decided to build Sophon, choosing the ZK Stack was no brainer - I know the product inside out in comparison to other stacks on the market. Building for tomorrow rather than yesterday. I'm convinced that in a few years, looking back at the design and infrastructure choices ML made will seem obvious.
What is Sophon?
Sophon is the brainchild of @Pentosh1, ██████ and myself. We envisioned a place where communities could symbiotically co-exist, leveraging the best user experiences and partnerships.
Catering for today's most crypto native users, whilst building for tomorrow's newcomers. And always, nothing matters more than community.
Sophon will be pioneers in the modular ZK space, benefiting from the best tech and most strategic partnerships.
When will you start?
We already have.
The first partnerships struck are with @BuildOnBeam and @AethirCloud
We also announced our $10m seed round for Sophon, led by @Papervc, @Maven11Capital and participation from @TheSpartanGroup, @SevenXVentures, @OKX_Ventures, @the_matter_labs, @class_lambda & more.
With angels @StaniKulechov, @LucaNetz
End of Tweet ✊
116
69
757
127,797
We stand together. Bullish Uniswap.
Today @Uniswap Labs received a Wells notice from the SEC.
I’m not surprised. Just annoyed, disappointed, and ready to fight.
I am confident that the products we offer are legal and that our work is on the right side of history. But it’s been clear for a while that rather than working to create clear, informed rules, the SEC has decided to focus on attacking long-time good actors like Uniswap and Coinbase. All while letting bad actors like FTX slip by.
When I first set out to build Uniswap, the goal wasn’t to reimagine finance.
It was an experiment in radically decentralized, fully automated onchain markets. I didn’t know if it would work or if anyone would use it.
Fast forward to today, the Uniswap Protocol has processed over $2 trillion in volume. Many thousands of teams and developers have forked our code or built on top of it. We built entirely new financial infrastructure that is transparent, fair, secure, and accessible powering an entire industry.
The team at @Uniswap did all of this in the US from our office in New York City.
People often ask me why we stay in the US and my answer is simple: I believe that blockchain is incredibly powerful technology. Like the Internet, it’s here to stay. So someone needs to figure it out, and it might as well be us.
And that when you build technology that improves people’s lives – you don’t need to hide.
The @SEC’s mission is “protecting investors, maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitating capital formation.” This is a noble mission. I would argue @Uniswap does a far better job of this today than the SEC.
Yes, I'm frustrated that the SEC seems to be more concerned with protecting opaque systems than protecting consumers. And that we'll have to fight a US government agency to protect our company and our industry.
This fight will take years, may go all the way to the Supreme Court, and the future of financial technology and our industry hangs in the balance. If we stand together we can win.
I think freedom is worth fighting for. I think DeFi is worth fighting for.
And of course, we won’t stop shipping. Stay tuned
🦄💜
112
44
733
75,183
Today, developers can deploy their existing Solidity code, without modifications, on a live ZK-rollup on mainnet. For the first time ever.
I'm so proud of the entire @the_matter_labs team who made the first Ethereum's zkEVM possible!
The wait is over.
All aboard zkSync Era∎ Mainnet!
Today, Ethereum's first zkEVM is:
• Opening mainnet to builders 🥳
• Adopting a brand new name 🎈
• Open-sourcing its entire codebase 🎆
blog.matter-labs.io/8b8964ba…
1/8
50
182
738
188,404
ZKsync is shipping. The ZKsync governance system just went live.
It’s raising the bar for decentralized governance systems that are built to last. Here is how:
1️⃣Not a multisig. All scheduled upgrades are initiated directly onchain by the community of over 370k ZK token holders, not by some foundation or a small group of trusted actors. This is a dramatic improvement for both technical and legal resilience of the protocol, and a critical step towards Stage 2.
2️⃣Professional Security Council with limited powers. ZKsync was a pioneer of the concept of security councils, and now elevates it to the next level. In ZKsync governance, the security council consists of 12 security professionals and firms with duties and responsibilities. It can temporarily freeze withdrawals in response to a threat, but can’t unilaterally perform an emergency upgrade.
3️⃣Real protection of cypherpunk values. The governance system introduces Guardians: high profile individuals with a track record of mission alignment, who serve as protectors of the foundational values of ZKsync. Guardians have the right and obligation to veto destructive governance decisions. They also participate in emergency responses.
As governance is battle-tested over time, the training wheels will be gradually removed until ZKsync reaches Stage 2.
Learn more:
blog.zknation.io/zksync-gove…
84
133
754
140,432
I will not rest till the mission of @zksync is fulfilled: crypto has gone mainstream in a way that ensures inalienability of personal sovereignty.
Every technological and organizational decision we make is judged against this purpose, and some big news is on the way.
61
156
654
ZK will always be faster than Solana since it's secured by math and not validators — which means that one or a few validators (for redundancy) is enough and you don't need to wait for reaching consensus between thousands of nodes.
ZK is slower than classical computation. So solana will always be faster than zk since there is no religious reasons to limit full node capacity
75
84
748
116,264
Smart contract implementation risks remain the biggest unsolved problem of Defi. L2s are equally affected.
Let me pitch an idea: L1 Fork as the Court of Final Appeal.
First, why existing solutions don't work:
1) Time-locked upgrades are great for scheduled changes, but obviously don't work for emergency situations.
2) Converting to an alt L1s only adds more problems and solves nothing. Even though an alt L1 can be forked, assets bridged over from Ethereum cannot, and the fork choice resolution is no different than an upgrade problem. See this thread for example: nitter.app/gluk64/status/16…
3) Security councils can mitigate the problem, but not solve it. Any gov multisig empowered with emergency upgrade rights poses regulatory and security risks of a different kind, rendering a Defi system immature (@ChrisBlec won't let us forget about it).
4) Combined gov mechanisms are better: a security council could only freeze the contract temporarily, requiring a token governance approval for an emergency upgrade. But now a malicious majority of undercollaterized stakers could perform an evil take-over upgrade and steal all the assets.
L1s don't face the same problem because they are forkable: any user can opt-in into the fork branch which they subjective believe to be correct and canonical. This doesn't work for L2s and Defi protocols, unfortunately, because we can't fork underlying native assets bridged from L1 (such as ETH).
Or can we? What if we forked the L1 itself and let the L1 social consensus resolve an issue for a specific protocol?
This is tempting and perfectly possible technically, but creates two problems. First, it would only work for large protocols – for the smaller ones, L1 users will likely not bother to take any action. But second, even with the big protocols, we run into a risk of overloading L1 social consensus, which Vitalik has explicitly warned against: vitalik.ca/general/2023/05/2…
Now, hear me out. What if we built a hierarchical system of onchain courts similar to the real-world judiciary?
Every protocol will have its own governance with normal and emergency upgrade mechanisms defined. The protocol must also designate a special contract that serves as an instance of appeal. We'll need a standard ERC interface for it.
For an emergency upgrade there must be an appeal period, during which anyone can submit a challenge to the higher court. They will have to put a pre-defined bail deposit.
This court can then cancel the emergency upgrade (and do nothing else). Different courts will have different members, prices and reputation, in a completely decentralized manner.
Each court will also have to specify the a higher court where any decision can be appealed – until at some point we reach the Ethereum Supreme Court. The decision of this smart contract can only be determined by a (technically soft) fork of the L1.
Of course, anyone can deploy a contract like this, and there is no guarantee that the users will bother to soft-fork. So the idea is to form a social consensus argound this idea, and deploy a "canonical" instance of the court that be configured to be so expensive to use, that only truly extrodinary cases will be brought before it, and thus will likely be worthy of the attention of the entire Layer-0 (the social consensus) of Ethereum. Think of a bug in @Uniswap, a major L2, a Defi protocol with a systemic risk, etc.
The most important function of such a system will be to protect protocols against political inference from the outside. It will serve as a great deterrence mechanism, and will elevate the role of Ethereum as a powerful network state.
What do you all think? Is anyone working on something like this already? We at @zksync will be more than happy to fund such a research.
Irrespective of the problem, everyone is puzzled about the proposed solution.
How can forkability of a new chain help if it's supposed to affect something located over a bridge?
A bridge always negates any benefits of the forkability, making it strictly worse than a rollup.
132
168
610
199,169
"Trust is a $35 trillion industry" — @lalleclausen
Crypto is trust automation.
ZK is trust automation at industrial scale.
35% of all jobs in the US are in trust-building functions.
Crypto has become a $2.6T industry by automating some of these trust functions, and doing a better job at it than authorities and institutions.
Automation means replacing humans labour with machines, which always brings higher effectiveness and lower costs — by orders of magnitude.
Once you look at it from this perspective, you can't unsee that "don't trust, verify" is not just a catchy slogan. It's literally the revelation of how blockchains are creating — and redistributing — value.
On a long enough time horizon, trust created by "can't be evil" technology will always economically outperform trust created by a "don't be evil" org — just like we've seen machines eventually surpass any skilled and reputable master.
ZK is the ultimate trust automation scaler. It's the only blockchain scaling technology that is secured by math, not validators. And its capacity is unlimited.
That's why, ZK is the endgame.
We're rapidly approaching the point where developer experience, cost and performance of ZK rollups will flip those of optimistic rollups. And the Golden Age of ZK will begin.
87
141
718
122,021
Looking forward to working together on the shared mission: to make crypto mainstream and advance freedom, progress and prosperity for everyone.
USDC launches on @zksync
Super impressed with the work of the team and the speed and performance and security they have built up.
100
36
607
85,030
The first zkEVM (and rollup) to submit a 4844 blob.
@the_matter_labs eng team, you rock.
Aaaand the first L2 to use blobs is @zksync! 👏
More projects to follow in the coming days - remember to check our new DA tab for updates!
56
82
632
97,114
Decentralization is freedom.
See you all on @LensProtocol
hey.xyz/posts/0x0214a4-0x01-…
72
57
589
77,954
The whole monolithic Solana thesis is gone at once. Impressive.
Meanwhile, @zksync has been quietly building asynchronously composable ZK future for Ethereum. Big reveal this week.
453
67
653
272,370
What a sticky misconception 🙈
@ZKsync is no longer “a chain”.
@ZKsync is building Incorruptible Financial Infrastructure for the world.
It’s a network of public and private (enterprise) chains secured by Ethereum and ZK cryptography, not validators.
Spread the word frens 🙏
Chains with the biggest fee growth in the past 7 days:
1️⃣ @ZKsync: +694%
2️⃣ @Arbitrum: +194%
3️⃣ @SeiNetwork:+186%
4️⃣ @LineaBuild: +121%
5️⃣ @Optimism: +117%
Usage is cool.
But revenue is better.
61
133
708
122,900
@zksync will reach stage 2 and decentralize the sequencer because this is critical to its mission, and the core values system is the project’s DNA.
It’s enough for one to do it right, market pressure will then create sufficient incentives for others.
162
74
608
203,139
Bear market is the best time to build.
S&P500 is down 2% in a week, BTC and ETH — 10%. To make crypto the new home of free finance, we must make it safe, easy and cheap for RWAs, at scale.
Largest parts of @zksync v1 and v2 were built during bears. The mission continues.
143
37
654
102,855
ZK is the HTTPS moment of crypto.
HTTPS took Web mainstream, by making it trustworthy and adding privacy.
ZK will do the same for Web3.
131
72
633
72,818
Free open source = owned by community.
Open Source is freedom to view the code, modify the code, and fork code. Anything else is functionally censorship of ideas, innovation, and code. zkSync 2.0 will be MIT open source by our next milestone. Quote tweet us if you support us in this decision. #1000truedevs
1/4
19
225
515
Most addresses are already like this — indistinguishable from normal users.
Sybil hunt is a theater. You either give everyone peanuts (90% going to sybils, which fucks the protocol), or go bold and do something unexpected.
Both ways will leave many real people upset 😿
How to be a good airdrop sybil:
1. Keep your on-chain wallets separate, always.
2. Move tokens between non-custodial wallets through CEXes.
3. Assign a unique CEX address to each non-custodial wallet.
4. Use subaccounts and label addresses to stay organized.
5. Avoid sending tiny amounts per wallet.
That's it.
You'll also improve security by spreading your assets and maximize airdrops.
516
49
603
157,135
Vitalik talking the Endgame.
"within one or two years we'll have the capability of proving the Ethereum L1 in realtime" (talking about zkchains vs no zkchains)
"now entering a mode where every serious chain is a zkChain"
@VitalikButerin just now on the ACD call 🚀
the fun is just beginning
240
45
540
121,209
ZK and crypto-economics are in many ways complementary. But one area crypto-economics cannot help with, is scalable bridging.
Bridging will be solved by ZK.
This is my hill to die on. Will go on a debate with anyone about it.
Here is why:
1) Attributable security of the stake incurs proportional capital costs. Since it can only cover limited transacted value, users will be charged a significant percentage of the transacted value. This is already the case with all existing crypto-economic bridges.
In contrast, ZK bridges within multichain ecosystems like @zksync will cost a flat transaction fee of the order of a normal transfer.
2) Crypto-economic bridges cannot be used to pass arbitrary messages, because their consequences follow the Butterfly effect and are detached from the attributable security of the stake. This renders complex cross-chain composability impossible, preventing cool things like atomic interactions.
In contrast, ZK bridges enable magical UX that make the entire ecosystem feel like a single chain. User with funds on ZK-chain A can sign a single transaction that will bridge funds to ZK-chain B, perform a swap, and send the result back to ZK-chain A, all within a single atomic interaction.
3) Even if capital costs and fractional security were not a concern, connecting disparate rollup ecosystems would still lead to liquidity fragmentation. ETH bridged natively from L1 would be represented by a different ERC20 token than ETH bridged from another rollup. This would lead to a mess and lack of fungibility, or would need to be solved by maintaining separate liquidity pools on both sides of the bridge, leading to additional (high) capital costs. And, of course, liquidity pools can't help with NFTs.
Because of this, seamless bridging will only be possible within a single ZK-multichain ecosystem (like @zksync's Hyperchain or @0xPolygon 2.0). To get there, these networks are implementing shared bridge architectures, so that native assets can be arbitrary shifted around rollups without the need to move them between different L1 contracts.
Therefore, my prediction is that we will see a limited number of such ZK ecosystems, with a power law distribution of network effects. Between them, bridging via L1 or crypto-economic mechanisms will work, but it won't be scalable.
Do we need L3s?
————-
Direct L2 to L2 interaction can happen in many ways.
@cemozer_ is pointing out you can have direct fraud or zk proofs across L2, which is true. One downside with fraud proofs is that you are still waiting for the fraud proof window. With zk proofs you are writing verifiers across all these L2s with potentially disparate VMs. When these L2s are “sovereign” ie don’t have any L1 bridged assets these tradeoffs can be solved in other ways.
In the case that there are L1 bridged assets, using @eigencloud cryptoeconomic security is a cool mechanism for solving the trade offs, without adding any load to L1: a validator group promises the current state of the L2s and post it on other L2s. As long as this avs has attributable security greater than the value transacted in the fraud proof period, the whole system works well without any added latency or necessity to verify proofs everywhere. The avs can be slashed on L1 once the rollups settle.
But this does not necessarily obviate the need for a L3 like architecture. This is because the L2s that interoperate frequently benefit if there is a canonical L2 on which these interactions happen. Now, depending on how much of value is routed though this central L2, we can think of this canonical L2 on which a bunch of other L2 interactions happen as really an L2 and the other L2s are really L3s.
These hierarchical architectures can be emergent rather than planned and the current landscape allows for all of these possibilities.
132
53
530
137,936
Open source is not a crime.
Today, @the_matter_labs donated $100K to @FreeAlexeyRoman to support @rstormsf and @alex_pertsev with their legal cases.
The lawsuits don’t allege that Alexey and Roman created Tornado for illegal activities, but they face charges because bad actors used their code.
This is a crucial test of our community's values and collective agency.
Will we ignore it, because “privacy only matters to those who have something to hide?” Or will we collectively stand against setting the dangerous, horrifying precedent — where developers are jailed for writing and publishing code?
First, they came for the privacy devs. Who’s next?
Open source is freedom.
***
Transaction: etherscan.io/tx/0xd92521d340…
Image credit: @perrymetzger
2024 is the year that will define the rest of my life.
Honestly, I’m scared. But also hopeful that this community cares with a passion.
Please donate towards my legal defense.
wewantjusticedao.org/
43
105
567
243,822
If EVM = HTTP, ZK = HTTPS.
HTTPS (SSL) provided integrity of communication,
paving the path for online banking, SaaS, remote work.
ZK provides integrity of computation,
enabling interoperability at infinite scale.
42
69
520
310,558
ZK proofs enable low-latency, trustless, zero-overhead bridging between permissionless and sovereign ZK chains with mixed data availability models. We call it hyperbridging. Not necessarily atomic, but seamless: one single confirmation in Metamask will let you interact with any smart contract on any other L2 in the ZK network, sending the result back to your wallet, in seconds.
This is a prerequisite for limitless scalability on Ethereum, and will solidify it as the global settlement layer of the Internet of Value.
Let's break it down:
- Low-latency. With sufficient parallelization, we can bring down the proof generation time for a block to seconds. The actual latency will be determined by the users preference for finality guarantees (either Ethereum will embrace single-slot finality, or chains will rely on economic finality guarantees), but it will be low in any case (seconds). But even if you insist on waiting to reach full finality on L1 under today's model, all the other benefits hold and are not possible with anything but ZK rollups.
- Trustless. Every user verifies the validity of all of the transactions on all chains and all the bridging transactions by relying purely on math. You never need to trust any validator, watcher, relayer—anyone else but yourself.
- Zero-overhead. With state diff architectures (uniquely enabled by ZK rollups and currently embraced by zkSync and Starknet), a bridging tx will cost nearly as much as a normal tx on either chains; if the chains have different costs, e.g. because one account is a rollup and the other one is a validium, total_cost = tx_cost(chain A)/2 + tx_cost(chain B)/2. This is because data availability is our main cost driver, and with state diffs you only pay for the storage slots you update where you update them.
- Permissionless, sovereign ZK chains. Ethereum is so powerful because anyone can deploy a smart contract. You don't have to ask Vitalik for permission or sign a contract with the Ethereum Foundation. To reach hyperscale, the same must be true for deploying L2s, an unlimited number of them. But that means most other L2s cannot be trusted, by default. No one has the capacity to verify all the value transactions of the world. Thus, most bridging must rely on fully trustless mechanisms. Using ZK proofs, it's easy. A single proof on L1 can attest to the validity of all the thousands of ZK rollups—and, what's very important, validiums (which will be responsible for the bulk of all transactions thanks to much lower costs). For optimistic rollups, you either have to wait 7 days, or you must explicitly whitelist a small number of shared sequenced rollups, which kills the ability to deploy L2s permissionlessly.
- Mixed data availability (DA) models. Rollups will always be relatively expensive, by design (because, unlike sidechains and alt L1s, they trustless prioritize security and censorship-resistance). Most L2s will thus have to use alternative DA layers which are much cheaper. The beauty of validiums and volitions (such as zkSync’s zkPorter) is that this affects neither verifiability nor bridgeability at zero overhead. The same does not hold true for optimistic rollups, though. There is simply no way to trustlessly bridge between an optimistic rollup and an Anytrust chain (such as Arbitrum Nova), even with a shared sequencer: by mixing optimistic DA models, or you will automatically downgrade all the optimistic rollups in this shared sequencing scheme to the least secure of them, rendering them not much more secure than a sidechain.
Nothing has changed about these fundamentals. Ethereum will win not even because of its first-mover advantage, but because its ethos and culture is focusing us on solving the right problems. What I describe above gives you infinite scalability – not 10k, not 100k, but arbitrary many TPS and users – while not sacrificing UX, decentralization, trustlessness, or resilience in front of mighty adversaries.
Have just a little patience, you will soon see all of it in action. I promise. 🍿
29
105
527
148,801
This is how @the_matter_labs operates. So proud of our amazing team!
160
51
506
87,207
Multi-ZK-chain networks (such as @zksync's Hyperchains) settling on Ethereum with low latency will have UX, composability, and trustlessness properties equivalent to sharded blockchains.
But: with limitless scalability (as most Hyperchains will be validium/zkPorter-based).
An L2-based scaling roadmap fragments liquidity, composability & interoperability
L2 scaling will lead to hundreds of competing solutions; it will not coalesce
Creating a UX nightmare!
Sharding only sacrifices a few seconds before confirmation; it is clearly a better solution!
202
154
397
123,943
TL;DR:
OP Stack → Many chains, one choice.
Single shared sequencer.
Centralized MEV distribution.
Protected by Laws and Governance.
ZK Stack → Many chains, many choices.
Pick your own sequencer.
Handle MEV your way.
Protected by Math and Code.
We are not the same.
It was bound to happen not only due to the cultural differences between the projects, but because technologically, single shared sequencer is the only thing that can make seamless interoperability between optimistic rollups feasible, from the UX and economic perspectives (because every chains need to validate transactions of every other chain or else wait 7 days for finality on L1).
ZK chains, on the other hand, if they share a particular (small) set of circuits, can trust each other blindly relying on pure math. Designed in the right way, this enables them to transfer messages and tokens back in forth in seconds (because provers are becoming blazing fast), irrespective of who and how runs their sequencers.
We built the OP Stack to be the most forkable, modular scaling infrastructure out there.
That bet on community is paying off: it feels like every other day someone gives the OP Stack a new superpower, or launches a new chain. 🥞🦸♂️✨
But the story doesn’t end there.
49
83
546
223,904
Great point. Some thoughts:
∎ Users are willing to take risks, but risks affect the calculus. A fully decentralized L2 will have a strong competitive edge.
∎ Stage 1 is slightly better than Stage 0. Stage 2 is a whole new level.
∎ Stage 2 is mission critical for @zksync.
Manlets arguing that L2s “have no incentive” to build a L1-aligned rollup violates their own narrative:
Thesis states that users should prefer a fully decentralized scaling solution
so you’re arguing that nobody will build the precise thing that users want, obviously wrong.
121
42
500
99,943
The new class of blockchain networks is emereging, with @zksync quietly leading the way.
The difference between the "chain-of-chains" vision and the previous generation of rollups is the emphasis on transparent interoperability. These networks are meant to feel like one chain.
Several other teams are working towards their own version of the chain-of-chains concept. Below are recent results from an AMM TPS test for ZKsync Era, Polygon zkEVM, and OP Mainnet:
Source: github.com/bogatyy/rollup-am…
159
67
565
82,665
ZK is the endgame for RWAs
app.rwa.xyz/
74
64
542
63,288
Thank you @VitalikButerin ❤️
Stage 1 or bust. Big news from @zksync coming today.
I take this seriously. Starting next year, I plan to only publicly mention (in blogs, talks, etc) L2s that are stage 1+, with *maybe a short grace period* for new genuinely interesting projects.
It doesn't matter if I invested, or if you're my friend; stage 1 or bust.
Multiple ZK-rollup teams have told me they're on track to be stage 1 by year end. I'm excited to see that happen!
Of course we should not throw away training wheels become we're actually confident that the proof systems are secure; that would be irresponsible. But stage 1 (75% threshold on council to override the proof system, 26%+ of council must be outside the rollup team) is a very reasonable moderate milestone. The multisigs I'm in have not had a single liveness failure in years, let alone 26%.
The era of rollups being glorified multisigs is coming to an end. The era of cryptographic trust is upon us.
68
62
550
62,084
Wanna know why ZK is the Endgame?
Got you covered.
Thank you @lawmaster!
NEW EPISODE 🔎
Why ZK proofs are the 'endgame' for blockchain scalability
zkSync founder @gluk64 joins @lawmaster on The Block Research Podcast to discuss how zero-knowledge rollups allow blockchains to scale to meet near "infinite" demand 🧠
OUTLINE
00:00 ZK is the Endgame
05:23 Trustless Verifiability
08:31 ZK-Rollups on Bitcoin
11:15 Hyperscaling
22:22 L2 Competition
29:35 EVM Compatibility
34:39 zkSync Milestones
42:10 Application Layer
47:45 Closing Thoughts
66
61
468
57,021
Deutsche Bank’s requirements:
✅ Ethereum security
✅ Privacy
✅ Interop with other private chains
Only possible on @zksync
Huge win for the Elastic Chain
The world's corps and govts will each run a private zk L2 as their "Ethereum Intranet".
This is today's global standard of
"public internet<>private intranet"
expanding to #Ethereum $ETH.
Deutsche Bank, the largest bank in Germany, is now doing this with @zksync @Memento_Bc.
39
72
543
69,526
I'm MUCH looking forward to a neutral comparison between this and the peformance of some cool new stuff we built for @zksync 😜🍿
But it's important to set realistic expectations. Actual tx costs for all ZK-rollups will be higher and determined by something else: 🧵1/
Really excited about our results on the @0xPolygon zkEVM Prover! Batchproof 2:30 (2min soon) ~500 or ~250 ERC20 tx/batch🚀On a spot m6id.metal prover's cost: $0.064/proof ($0.0001/tx) The fastest ZK tech and the first production-ready zkEVM💪The prover is no longer a bottleneck🍾
26
186
463
209,857
This is a humbling moment for Ethereum and rollups. We're taking too many shortcuts and not moving fast enough towards our vision.
@dYdX has no decentralized L2 alternative as of today. This is a justified decision, but not for long. L1 model is unsustainable.
Here is why: 🧵1/
22
110
499
Ethereum has concrete product-market fit: it is the World Computer.
Everything else, a decentralized NASDAQ, SWIFT, etc., is downstream. It is an ambitious vision, but Ethereum has real moats. Switching the EVM to RISC-V would add another.
Let’s talk about this vision, @Ethereum’s future, and @ZKsync’s essential role:
L2s should build for where @ethereum is going, not where it’s been.
@VitalikButerin's latest proposal on RISC-V points toward a future @ZKsync has been preparing for all along.
A new Era for EVM is coming. Get ready for some big announcements in the next two weeks.
48
72
537
101,255
Extremely excited to welcome @NanaMurugesan at Matter Labs!
Let’s give a warm welcome to Matter Labs’ first-ever President, @NanaMurugesan.
Bringing world-class leadership and extensive experience, he’ll work with @zksync’s co-founder @gluk64 to scale @the_matter_labs’ go-to-market vision and strategy.
Read more here ↓
bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
152
25
449
71,576
If you are launching a DeFi app-chain, liquidity is the moat. Which of these capital pools would you rather build on?
@ZKsync gives you direct, real-time access to the number one.
49
75
529
62,881
Fantastic overview!
A couple of comments:
1. DA
~300 TPS combined for most rollups is correct.
The math for the rollups with state diffs (@zksync, Starknet) is indeed different — by orders of magnitude!
State ∆s offer superlinear compression: when you interact with the same storage slots many times within the same batch (i.e. within a given time interval), your cost remains O(1). Practically speaking, for use cases such as oracles or DEXes it means something like a 1000x increase in DA capacity.
In addition, ZK rollups with state ∆s have an option of volition, which can arbitrarily increase DA capacity at the expense of security, which is acceptable for many computational use-cases. See: blog.matter-labs.io/zkporter…
2. Why not throw hardware at the problem?
The beauty of the ZK rollup + state diffs architecture—at @zksync, we abbreviate it as (∎, ∆)—is that full nodes don't need to re-execute transactions to reconstruct the state updates (unless they want to cross-check ZK execution, which matters mostly in the early days of the protocol). They don't even need to recompute the Merkle root (because the new root hash is proven with ZK). All they have to do is to apply patches of data to a fast key-value storage. This enables easy separation between high-end validators and low-end full nodes, without compromises on decentralization.
There’s been some recent discussion about execution bottlenecks and gas limits, both for L1 and L2. I'll discuss a few of the bottlenecks below.
1. DA
With the introduction of blob data (EIP-4844), Eth DA has become cheaper than before (because it doesn't have to compete with ordinary L1 transactions in the priority gas auction).
The median capacity is 3x 125 kb blobs per 12s block, or 31.25 kb/s. Transactions are currently about 100 bytes, so this translates to about 300 tps across all rollups.
Footnotes:
- This could increase with better compression of transaction data.
- Rollups could theoretically utilize both calldata and blob data although doing so would add complexity.
- Some ZK-rollups post state diffs (notably, zkSync Era and Starknet) so the math is different for those.
2. Rollup gas limits
Base has been getting a lot of attention recently because gas fees have spiked and have been several dollars for a simple swap. This is because blocks on Base have a gas limit, and with any limited-supply resource, when demand exceeds supply the clearing price becomes whatever price causes demand to match supply. This gas limit is a parameter in code.
Base currently uses the same gas target as Optimism (5 million gas per L2 block, i.e. 5 million gas every 2 seconds).
Why doesn’t Base raise the gas limits? (Or more generally, why does any rollup need a gas limit?) While they can (and probably will), there are two additional motivations (other than DA) for keeping it low: execution throughput and concerns about state growth.
3. Execution throughput
EVM rollups generally run an EVM which is a fork of the EVM from geth. This means that they have similar performance characteristics to the geth client.
The geth client is single-threaded and stores its state in a merkle patricia trie (MPT) which is encoded using LevelDB/PebbleDB. These are commodity databases that use another tree structure (an LSM tree) under the hood to store data on SSD.
State access (reading values from the merkle trie) and state updates (updating the merkle trie at the end of each block) are the most expensive parts of execution. That makes sense when you consider that a single read from SSD costs 40-100 us and that, due to the fact that the merkle trie datastructure is being embedded in another datastructure, there are many excess lookups.
A simple mental picture: you are navigating to a node at the bottom of a merkle trie, i.e. traversing from the root to one of the leaves. Each node you visit requires looking up a key in LevelDB. But each of those LevelDB lookups requires navigating the underlying LSM-tree, visiting many LSM-tree nodes in the process.
In Monad, we addressed this with MonadDb, a custom database which 1) directly stores the merkle trie on disk, avoiding the overhead of LevelDb; 2) supports asynchronous IO, allowing many reads to proceed in parallel; 3) bypasses the filesystem. Additionally, optimistic parallel execution in Monad allows many transactions to proceed in parallel and pull their state dependencies from MonadDb in parallel.
However, rollups don’t have these optimizations so are bottlenecked on execution throughput.
Footnotes:
- Erigon/reth offer some improvements to database efficiency, and some rollups have clients that are based on these clients (in particular op-reth). Erigon/reth use a flattened datastructure which reduces lookup costs somewhat for reads; however there isn’t support for asynchronous reads or multithreading. Also, the merkle root still needs to be recomputed after each block, and this is quite slow.
4. Concerns about state growth
Rollups, like any other blockchain, also limit their throughput to prevent their active state from growing too quickly.
A common refrain is that state growth is concerning because if the state grows a lot, the SSD size requirements will have to increase. However, I think this is a bit imprecise. SSDs are relatively cheap (a high-quality 2 TB SSD costs about $200) and the full Ethereum state after nearly 10 years of history is “only” about 200 GB right now. From a pure storage perspective, there is room to grow.
The bigger concern is that, as state grows larger, lookup times for any given piece of state become larger. This is because the merkle patricia trie uses “shortcuts” when a node only has one child, which reduces the effective depth of the trie, thus speeding up lookups. As the merkle trie gets fuller, there are few “shortcuts” available.
Concerns about state growth ultimately boil down to similar concerns about the inefficiency of state access. Accelerating state access is what is needed to make state growth more tenable.
5. Epilogue: Why not throw hardware at the problem?
L2s are (currently) centralized, with a single sequencer maintaining the state and producing blocks. One might ask: why not just make that sequencer run on hardware with extremely high RAM requirements, so that all state can live in memory?
Two reasons.
First, this doesn’t address the bottleneck of Ethereum DA, which (while not the constraint in the case of Base at the present moment) will ultimately be a significant bottleneck.
Second and more importantly: decentralization.
Although sequencing is highly centralized, it is still extremely important for anyone else to be able to independently run nodes that replay the same transaction history and maintain the same state.
Raw transaction data and state commitments on the L1 are not enough to unpack the full state. Anyone who needs reliable access to the full state (for example, a merchant, an exchange, or an automated trader) should run a full L2 node to process the transactions and have an up-to-date copy of the state of the world.
Rollups are still blockchains, and blockchains are interesting because they enable global coordination through shared global state. Performant software is necessary for any blockchain; it's not sufficient to throw hardware at the problem.
106
42
442
111,129
Matter Labs is a zealous proponent of the libertarian, cypherpunk ethos and the values stated in the ZK Credo. We reject the very idea of “Intellectual Property”. Everything we create is released to the public under free open source licenses.
Trademarks, however, exist to protect users, not companies. All the trademarks we had ever registered, including ZK-related ones, are defensive, to prevent dishonest actors from misleading their customers and confusing their products and services with the ones offered by Matter Labs (as had unfortunately been the case in the past).
But ZK is the endgame, so we went one step further. We had earlier reached out to the legal team of the Ethereum Foundation and offered to cooperate on creating a legal framework to make the use of “ZK” and similar important tech terms in the public domain.
We invite others to participate in this initiative – in particular, those who filed trademarks related to STARKs.
37
26
486
84,178
Frictionless interoperability is what makes the Elastic Chain special. It's expected to be production-ready in Q4 2024, which will make @zksync the first of its kind — and by far the most powerful — among the L2 ecosystems.
What this means in practice:
⭐ Unified liquidity. Unlike conventional bridges, there is no capital cost (i.e. % charged) for moving assets between ZK chains using the native protocol. All chains will get free access to the liquidity of the entire network.
⭐ No counterparty risk. Most of the bridge hacks in the recent years, with billions of $ lost, were caused by compromised bridge operators, not protocol bugs. The Elastic Chain architecture eliminates the need to trust centralized entities – instead, security is enforced by math and open-source code.
⭐ Seamless UX. A user with assets on one ZK chain will be able to interact with any smart contract on any other ZK chain with a single wallet confirmation. Which means that all ZK chains will get free access to all users of the entire network.
⭐ Simple DevEx. Any smart contract on any ZK chain will be able to call any other smart contract on any other ZK chain with a single method invocation, passing assets and arbitrary data. This enables asynchronous yet atomic operations: for example, you can request a swap on the AMM on a remote chain, and this operation will either succeed or fail, automatically sending the proceeds back to origin.
These are all the pre-requisites for a true Internet of Chains that have always been missing. Cosmos and Polkadot recognized the need for it early on, but they lacked ZK and a shared settlement layer to really make it work.
Now all the pieces of the puzzle are finally coming together. Combined with private (and privacy-preserving) validiums, this is what makes ZK the endgame for Ethereum's multichain future.
77
115
473
139,232
Matter Labs is hiring. Join us on @zksync's mission: to make Ethereum mainstream by scaling its security and values.
Despite a recent $200m Series C, we remain financially prudent and will keep growing our talented team even during a multi-year bear market.
Open positions 🧵👇
26
99
420
250,366
ZKsync has 25% of RWA market share today. I'm in a lot of conversations with financial institutions.
They absolutely DO care about security, decentralization, and credible neutrality.
The second largest point that comes up is privacy.
ZK and Ethereum win.
institutions (including financial companies and governments) absolutely will care about decentralization
and being sure they're building on credibly neutral infrastructure which none of their competitors or enemies can control
there's only one real choice for this: Ethereum
that said, we need to think much more about how to provide a good and semi-integrated end user experience via L2s, and quickly
46
73
475
47,565
EVM DevEx is one of @Ethereum's strongest moats.
{solx} is a chance to bring it to the next level via:
1) Faster language evolution
2) Eliminating the need for inline assembly
3) Solidity-to-RISC-V compilation
4) World-class LLVM tooling (e.g. VS Code debuggers)
EVM Equivalence on @ZKsync was just the beginning.
For years, we’ve been quietly building toward a better future for all of @Ethereum.
Introducing ⚡️ solx — a powerful new Solidity-to-EVM compiler 🧵
104
185
461
206,845
Is it now clear why ZK, decentralized sequencing, and stage 2 rollups are not nice-to-haves?
How many more martyrs do ye all yet desire?
67
38
468
64,747
The only serious technical argument in this post is fast L1 finality—something we as L2s can neither fix nor mitigate. We fully depend on the L1 progress rate here.
I'd told @ethereumfndn leadership earlier in summer that's the ONLY thing we care about on the ETH roadmap.
On Tempo, permissionlessness, L1 vs L2
Tempo will be a permissionless chain. On day 1, anyone will be able to deploy a token, and anyone will be able to transact on the chain. Some projects think that attracting real-world usage and serious institutions requires giving up on base layer neutrality. We do not think that, and that's not how we're building Tempo.
The plan for Tempo is to have permissionless validation and permissionless smart contract deployment as well as permissionless usage: just like Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, etc. We’ll start with a permissioned validator set to get going and decentralize further from there.
We’re building in features to make it easy for entities interacting with the blockchain (like asset issuers, money transmitters, etc.) to comply with their relevant obligations, but the base layer will remain neutral. This is a principle we feel incredibly strongly about (see: paradigm.xyz/2022/09/base-la…).
As many parts of the mainstream world look to adopt crypto, we think there is a risk that they adopt permissioned systems. Our goal with Tempo is to help onboard them onto crypto rails that solve specific payments needs while still being truly permissionless.
—
Why L1 rather than an Ethereum L2?
At Paradigm, we are heavily invested, both intellectually and literally, in the Ethereum ecosystem. We will continue to help it scale, and invest in and support companies building on Ethereum. We are also extremely excited about single-sequencer L2s for many use cases, including trading.
But building a network for global payments will require bringing together thousands of partners that may not trust us, or Stripe, or anyone as a platform. We think a decentralized validator set—for the chain itself—is a necessary requirement for those partners, and to ensure that the chain is unquestionably neutral in the long run.
From an operational perspective, we feel urgency to build for the demand that’s coming and want fewer dependencies, including on the rate of Ethereum L1 progress. With Tempo, we tried to remove all crypto tribalism and alignment games from our thinking and just focus on building the right product for crypto payments.
At a technical level, we are prioritizing attributes like fast finality (L2s are generally only as final as the underlying L1), multiple validators (vs. single sequencer), and custom transaction lanes and gas pricing. Some of these are technically possible for an L2, but could be complex, slow to implement, and/or introduce many external dependencies. Tempo is stablecoin-focused, so interoperability through native issuance is more relevant to us than the native bridge to Ethereum that L2s have.
We aren’t Bitcoin, Ethereum, or Tempo maximalists. We’re maximalists for permissionless crypto. We want Ethereum L1 to scale, and we want L2s to thrive. We love Bitcoin as a monetary asset. We find substance in Solana, Hyperliquid, and many other ecosystems. We want to ensure real-world payment flows happen on crypto rails, and that’s why we’re building Tempo.
49
31
490
128,748
ZKsync Era is in top 3 L2s by # weekly active users 📈
Just posting this here, @zksync is the 3rd L2 with the most active users.
We could say second as @base is still being farmed 😃
TVL is not what should people look at on L2 but more on the usage, cause this is what matters if we want to bring web3 to the world ⛽️
61
56
446
108,851
Black day for all of us. Devs arrested for writing code.
Next, carmakers arrested for criminals riding cars?
Stand up and show your support.
14
78
421
48,609
Secure,
permissionless,
innovative:
pick two.
The rollup security trilemma and how we tackle it for the mainnet rollout of @zksync Era∎
👇 1/
15
131
353
156,034
Not your bank, not your money
🇨🇦 CANADIAN BANK ASKS CUSTOMER WHAT THEY'LL SPEND THEIR MONEY ON
A conversation when a man went into a local bank and asked for an emergency cash withdrawal:
Bank clerk: "I will need an invoice or coverages."
Customer: "It's for the car's payments in cash."
Source: CatchUpFeed
111
36
364
64,008
zkEVM is now open to public for the first time and found its first real-world application using native Account Abstraction.
UX and scalability were the show-stoppers of mass adoption. Not anymore.
Tremendous job, @zksync team!
History in the making: 20k+ @EthereumDenver attendees can now experience the power of ZK-rollups and native Account Abstraction on zkSync Era mainnet, powered by zero-knowledge proofs, at the festival’s food trucks.👇
1/7
19
139
344
84,305
No one should grant unlimited approvals to any contracts, ever.
I understand that ERC20 UX sucks. Native account abstraction fixes this. On @zksync Era, multicall is possible for any wallet (even EOA), so that limited approvals and contract call can all be done in 1 click.
Revoke all approvals from the following contracts asap! gist.github.com/0xngmi/40c53…
20
64
340
255,266
While the FUD campaign was real, and even though no one meant to offend disappointed users, posting this picture was wrong.
As the founder of the project, I apologize for it on behalf of @zksync 🙏
1,266
46
395
401,905
Very important: no code was compromised — an operator key was compromised.
This is why ZK is the Endgame.
Trust math, not operators.
157
41
424
97,270
It doesn’t matter if they start on Base, Arbitrum or Solana. Most successful apps will eventually become their own appchains.
This is incredibly bullish for @ZKsync—the elastic network of rollups that offers sovereignty and connectivity for all.
Value accrual in L2s is fascinating right now
HyperLiquid approaching Arbitrum's market cap reveals a crucial insight about the future of L2s and where protocols should build
Let me explain why general purpose L2s might be a trap
25
42
409
43,842
Ethereum is definitely more resistant against nation state attacks than any alt-L1. The key property that gives it more resilience is trustless verifiability. Every user can verify (and thus enforce) computational integrity and data availability on the network with consumer-grade hardware. This is deeply engraved in Ethereum's ethos and culture.
Alt-L1s boasting high throughput today achieve it by giving up trustless verifiability. Their validators can be pushed not only to censor, but to confiscate users' assets or to alter the rules of the game by mutating existing smart contracts. There is nothing ordinary users or even big players can do to counteract.
This scenario is unthinkable on Ethereum. If real systematic censorship ever takes places (this has not been the case so far, even Tornado continues to operate), the community has real and unalienable ability to counteract with a fork. We can fork away from any block, any time, because the state is always valid and data is available.
Ethereum's L2s – specifically ZK rollups – achieve high throughput today by embracing trustless verifiability. Every single ZK rollup transaction is verified and enforced by every single Ethereum full node, and its data is made availble to all nodes too. We can enforce transactions on a sufficiently mature L2 subject to the same censorship-resistant guarantees as L1 itself.
Alt-L1s require placing full trust in a small group of validators who control the stake quorum. Now ask yourself: if relying on a small number of trusted institutions were acceptable, would there be real need for blockchains in the first place?
P.S. Ethereum is arguably more resilient against nation states than BTC, because an attack on the ETH stake quorum is recoverable with a hard fork, while an attack on mining hardware is not.
24
67
384
64,845
