In recent times, the Ethereum network has received a lot of criticism about data transfer fees and the scalability of the protocol. In a blog post called “Endgame,” published on December 6, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin discussed plans for upscaling, the upcoming proof-of-stake transition, and censorship resistance.
Buterin Describes Plausible Ethereum Scaling Roadmap In Endgame Blog Post
Vitalik Buterin, the prominent co-founder of the Ethereum project, has outlined his thoughts on a “plausible roadmap” that could address network scale issues. The blog post called “Endgame” explains some concepts such as a “second level of participation with low resource requirements” and the introduction of fraud tests or Zk-Snarks where ETH users can acquire block validity “cheaply” . The roadmap that Buterin summarizes aims to improve the blockchain without giving up censorship resistance.
“What do we get after doing all this? Buterin asks in his latest blog post. “We get a chain where block production is still centralized, but block validation is unreliable and highly decentralized, and specialized anti-censorship magic prevents block producers from censoring.” Buterin further adds:
It’s an aesthetically ugly thing to do, but it provides the basic assurances we’re looking for: even if each of the major stakeholders (the block producers) intends to attack or censor, the worst they could do is go offline altogether. , at which point the chain stops accepting transactions until the community pools its resources and sets up a primary participant node that is honest.
Buterin Discusses a Roadmap Focusing on Stacking Ethereum, Large Blockchains, and Cross-domain MEVs
Buterin’s recent blog post follows the discussions that took place in late November when Ethereum developers discussed concepts like EIP-4488. The plan could reduce data transfer costs five times lessand Ethereum developer Tim Beiko shared your thoughts on EIP-4488 and cumulative package cost reduction. In the Endgame blog post, Buterin also spoke about leveraging rollups and the “possible long-term future” of this technology.
“Ethereum is very well positioned to adapt to this future world, despite the inherent uncertainty,” emphasizes Buterin. “The profound benefit of the Ethereum roundup-centric roadmap is that it means Ethereum is open to all futures and you don’t have to commit to an opinion on which one will necessarily win.” Buterin further added:
Ethereum researchers should think hard about what levels of decentralization in block production are actually achievable. It may not be worth adding complicated plumbing to facilitate highly decentralized block production if cross-domain MEVs (or even cross-fragment MEVs of a rollup that takes multiple fragments) makes it unsustainable regardless.
In terms of ‘big blockchains’, Buterin says that’ there is a way for them to become trustless and censorship resistant, and we will soon find out if their core developers and communities really value censorship resistance and decentralization. long enough for you to do it. ” Buterin’s blog post ends by saying that “it will probably take years for all of this to unfold.”
“Data availability sampling and fragmentation are complex technologies to implement. It will take years of refinement and audits for people to feel completely comfortable storing their assets in a ZK-rollup running a full EVM, ”the Buterin Endgame post concludes. “And cross-domain MEV research is still in its infancy as well. But it seems increasingly clear how a realistic but bright future for scalable blockchains is likely to emerge. “
What do you think of Vitalik Buterin’s Engame blog post on scaling and possible roadmaps? Let us know what you think on this topic in the comment section below.
Image credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not an offer or direct solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, nor is it a recommendation or endorsement of any product, service or company. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author are responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or allegedly caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.