The Daily Gwei AMA Series #15 - 27th of November, 2021

Transcript

all right everyone welcome to the 15th daily way ama thank you all for being here as usual if you would like to ask a question you can raise your hand and i'll invite you up onto the stage and i'll be taking all the questions from the ama series channel in order you can also ask a question in there and it will be answered towards the end of the ama of course as usual this will be recorded and uploaded to youtube with timestamps within 24 hours uh so without further ado let's get started with the first question from the ama series channel which comes in from yon the thorn who asks are the l2s on ethereum in direct competition with one another for example is stark net competing with imx to be the nft layer on top of ethereum so i'll kind of answer the first

question um i guess it's a yes or no answer i think that all the l2s uh on ethereum are competing with each other yes just like they would you know they're competing for like liquidity developer mindshare applications all that sort of stuff right but it's not uh unhealthy competition it's not parasitic it's actually healthy competition because they're all kind of like at least most of them not all of them will be like this but like most of them have that have the same kind of goal in mind and that's to use ethereum as this decentralized secure settlement based layer and then a scale ethereum at layer two and and and allow users to tap into ether like ethereum layer one's uh properties so from that point of view it's kind of healthy competition but you know as time

goes on there's definitely going to be changes where there's going to be roll-ups that are much more aggressive than other ones for example we're already seeing the early stages of this right now right like boba network is a modified fork of optimism and they're being more aggressive about how they're attracting capital because they have a token and they're doing air drops and liquidity mining and all that sort of stuff there i'm sure optimism will will do that later on i'm not sure when they're going to do it but i i would bet that they would do it but the thing is you know blah blah network beat them to the punch and he's being more aggressive about it and that's just the early example of what's going to happen where yes the competition is is healthy but there is competition there so yeah i i i

guess as i said like the answer is yes and no yes in the fact that they're all competing with each other for the things i outlined but no in the sense that it's not competition like it is with other l1s competing against ethereum for example right or trying to compete against ethereum's l2 ecosystem uh where they're just trying to like get users to to come away from ethereum onto their own ecosystems that's very different when it comes to the l2s and then you kind of ask you know is stock net competing with as an example is stark net competing with immutable x to be the nft layer on top of ethereum so the thing is immutable x is built on built using starquest technology their starkx technology and if immutable wants to they can join starknet as a kind of like a a rollup as part of that kind of

network there so i wouldn't say that they're competing um but if you're looking at other other kind of like ecosystems for example optimism and arbitrary being the two premier optimistic roll-ups uh they would they're obviously definitely competing as well right they're competing across a number of different kind of like fronts there to be the you know the best optimistic roll-up on ethereum uh same goes for the zk roll ups obviously zk sync is competing with star quest competing with polygon they're all competing to be the best at what they do but as i said it is kind of like a healthy competition i haven't seen any unhealthy competition yet but i do expect that to change as time goes on where we get like more aggressive kind of like roll-ups uh as i said we're already seeing the early stages of this happening with bobber network and i'm

sure there's going to be others like coming very soon as well so it's going to be interesting to see how that all shakes out the the cool thing about l2s is that it basically detaches kind of like that uh that tribalism where all that that tribalistic parasitic competition where the l2s if they're competing with each other it's fine but they're not competing with ethereum l1 they're actually all benefiting ethereum l1 because they're all paying each gas fees to secure themselves they're all burning that eth right like that most of that either gets burned when they pay that they're basically letting users tap into ethereum's awesome properties which is which are its decentralization and security and they're breeding healthy competition at the execution layer which is obviously the roll-up layer so i in

all honesty i think that it's actually incredibly healthy that we have so many roll-ups already and we're going to have many many more as i mentioned in the refill plenty of times i expect roll ups and l2s to be the new l1s going forward because it just makes a lot more sense and the beautiful thing is that ethereum benefits from all of it so that's why you know that's obviously one of the reasons why i'm so big on ether as an asset it's just like a no-brainer bet on the entire ethereum ecosystem uh and you know everyone no matter if they're kind of like competing with each other like you know d5 apps compete with each other uh dow you know different dows can compete with each other all that sort of stuff like nfts it all goes back to ethereum like ethereum benefits from all

of it which is which i think is really really cool and basically makes it very different from you know l1 is competing with ethereum it's it's kind of like now the l2s compete with each other and now and ethereum l1 benefits from it so yeah hopefully that answers your questions there you're on the phone i know you have a few more in here which i'll get to but the next one comes from flex bc who asks i was in a discussion with the btc maxi and he questioned me on if ethereum is quantum resistant is it quantum resistant or will it become resistant in the upcoming upgrades uh it's not um and look i think quantum resistance is a bit of a red herring i it just seems like such a it's talked about like from time to time and you know if there's some tech blog

that writes something about there being a breakthrough in quantum computing and you know they're saying oh it's around the corner whatever there's a lot of this clickbait happening within within um you know the computing world with regards to quantum quantum computing but it is something that has been talked about by the ethereum community and vitalik has spoken about it before i believe and there are plans to make ethereum quantum resistant uh you know if if it needs to be right if there is an impending threat then a theorem can simply kind of like hard fork network upgrade to become quantum resistance uh and as far as i know it doesn't seem like it's a difficult thing to do from what i can tell but maybe uh maybe maybe my information's old there um now you know the funny thing is is that a btc maxi was uh was asking you this right i

do wonder if bitcoin has the culture to be able to upgrade this quickly because they obviously have an anti-hard fork culture they don't like doing any hard forks or network upgrades they only like doing the network upgrades by by the soft forking um which in my mind is basically worse than a hard fork but we won't get into that discussion for now um so i do wonder if that community would come together if there was an imminent threat and hard fork bitcoin to be quantum resistant i think they would i think that you know as as kind of like hard-headed as the bitcoin maximalists are they do first like first and foremost care about bitcoin and they only don't want hard forks because it goes against their kind of i guess like ethos it goes against their values but if there's like an impending network

threat and there's a credible threat then i do believe that eventually they'll get to the right kind of like um right uh right place where they'll they'll hard to become quantum resistant but i think that ethereum will do it much sooner because ethereum has a culture of network upgrades of hard forks it's not a surprise whenever ethereum does this or announces a new one it's kind of it's it's expected right and all the and the community's bought into that because if you're in ethereum you're bought into the way ethereum upgrades itself so yeah hopefully that answers your question all right vern i'll i'll invite you onto stage here it seems you've got a question for me you just got to click accept there we go hello hey how you going

hey anthony good to talk to you you too mate yeah two two relatively quick questions um uh one you know i'm starting to get through these air drops i'm getting a lot of erc20 tokens that uh are becoming increasingly valuable is are there any specific hardware wallets that you know of that are best for those um for like basically non-eth non btc um tokens and then secondly do you know of any ways like in doing analytics or elsewhere that um kind of dashboards that look at overall leverage in dbi those are my two questions thanks for taking them appreciate it no worries so yeah i guess like to your first question any hardware wallet that

supports ethereum will support erc20 tokens uh because they're you know it's the same kind of like uh ecosystem obviously an ethereum wallet and a um and aic20 tokens they they're kind of compatible so that that should be fine um there are different apps for these hardware wallets that may not have like out of the box support like ledger live may not have support for some token uh whatever it is and you may not be able to see it in their app but you would be able to see it on another kind of interface whether that be something like metamask when you connect your hardware wallet to metamask or myetherwallet or my crypto or anything like that so this there should be no worry there with erc20 tokens because they're rc 20 tokens they're supported you know

naturally by every ether by by every ethereum wallet because the format that's how the kind of like ethereum account works and ethereum while it works um in terms of like which ones i would recommend the only two that i've kind of like heard a lot of good things about over the years i've used myself i've never really had issues with are both uh the legend nano s or x s is the non-bluetooth x is bluetooth and it's it's a bit you know looks a bit nicer i guess uh and then the lattice one which is a bit bulkier uh well i think it's a lot bulkier it's like a basically a unit that sits on your desk uh you can google it lattice one from grid plus if you haven't seen it yet um but it is you know much more secure than a ledger it

has i mean it has so many different things uh built in to secure itself it's actually pretty crazy what they've done with it uh it's got like tempo tamper resistant it's basically i mean from what i can tell it's basically not impossible but like very very hard to crack into this thing and it's really great at securing everything that you've got and it also works with metamask as well so those are the two kind of things i've used both as i said i still use both uh both the ledger and and the lattice one uh and yeah as i said like depending on what interface you interact with will will you know one might not show you the tokens that you have one might but at the end of the day the tokens are there in your wallet you'll always be able to access them it's just depending on which

interface you want to access them from so yeah hopefully that answers those questions for you nice yeah thanks appreciate it yeah yeah so and then the second one about the leverage so i don't know of any dashboards that track leverage in d5 the one i use for cfi is bybt.com i think that's it let me just quickly look yeah bybt.com that allows you to track open interest liquidations funding rates for centralized finance um but in terms of defy no i haven't actually come across any i don't i don't i haven't really particularly particularly looked at it either i think maybe d5tbl is a good bet trick for or i guess a good kind of like

uh barometer or or something a good piece of signal that you can look at so if like tvl seems to be going up in lending protocols or if kind of like rates are kind of creeping up in terms of like stable coin yields that might that that probably signals there's leverage in the d5 ecosystem because at the end of the day most stable coin yields if not all of them come from some form of leverage uh so yeah unless you've seen something else that i may have not not have seen now that that's yeah i was trying to see if there's a way i figured they'd be hard to get a specific uh look at that but maybe they're like those are good like approximations of that to be interesting so i'm looking to see like to what extent we can see sort of systemic risk

um you know because i i i worked in finance for a while and there you know this is like 2008 back in those days and back then you couldn't tell what the heck was going on so i was what's so great about d5 is that so much transparency um i'm curious to see how is it okay you can actually see all the this risk build up and where it can be accounted for where it can be modified or whatever so yeah i think those are those are good approximations i've looked at this too thank you for confirming that yeah yeah no worries and yeah i mean i'm totally with you and and yeah the beautiful thing is you can see where all the assets are on chain anyway um uh but as i said like i think stable coin yields are a good proxy proxy for

leveraging the system so if stable coin yields a high um like uh you know depositing your stable coin into like a yield farm and it's not giving token incentives it's just giving kind of like natural yield and it's high i would say that's probably the best approximation in d5 uh for leverage across the system thanks anthony really appreciate it love all your work thanks no worries thanks mate see you later cool all right on to the next one from the sheet here comes in from danny uh hi anthony i was really worried the other day when you mentioned the delegate that metamask plus legend nano is a risky wallet option because of exposure to man-in-the-middle attacks and other risks is this a big deal

look if i'm being honest it's a big deal in that you it's scary because you don't know that it's happening to you unless you're like checking everything that you're signing right like as i said on the refill video just to give context for those who maybe didn't catch this essentially what can happen with a man in the middle attack is that you can submit a transaction uh on metamask right uh and you can interact with like some some web three apps say it's a uni swap and you say okay i want to swap these tokens and then you'll get the the um the normal metamask pop-up that says hey you know confirm this transaction now a man in the middle attack what ends up happening is that it can actually uh fool you into signing something that you didn't trigger yourself so it can actually replace that

uniswap transaction that was sent to you uh from from kind of like uni swap it can replace that with their own transaction so for example say you've submitted a transaction you need to sign it to swap usdc for eth on uni swap now that transaction obviously in the normal case gets sent to you your metamask or other web 3 wallet you confirm that the transaction after you know putting in gas price or just like confirming it without changing the gas price uh and then it goes into the mempool and then it gets executed in you know after some time now in a man-in-the-middle attack scenario that uni swap trade that you did that transaction would never actually hit your metamask what would happen is there would be a another transaction that was crafted by the attacker probably automatically by some form of

malware that was on your pc and they would replace that trade with send this and you know send these kind of like uh coins or send this eth to this address the attacker's address for example and then you thinking that the transaction that's gone to your metamask is a uni swap trade uh the the units up trade you initiated you would just like sign the transaction right you'd say confirm and then you've actually confirmed that you're going to send these funds to the attacker and you won't actually realize that until you know the transaction confirms and then you go to check if you know if you got the funds from the uni swap trade and that and and that and that wasn't what happened and all your eighth got got sent to this attacker's address so that's what's very scary about it in terms of like worrying about it

i would say that for most users it's probably not something you're gonna worry about like too much because these kind of things are probably more targeted towards known people like well-known people and like targeted attacks and stuff like that but at the same time you know i look i worked in cyber security for a long time and it's amazing to me how easily people got themselves infected with malware because for this to work you would need to get infected with some form of malware and it's it's actually quite easy for malware to enter your pc because the easiest thing it's it's you know a lot of a lot of you would probably be familiar with this the easiest way malware gets onto your pc is if you open some kind of like attachment or you download some file uh and it's got a piece of malware attached to it just

installs itself on your pc it can do this completely in the background by the way you will have no idea that it's happening unless you run like antivirus software that has it cataloged and they can actually pick up on it but if it's like if it's like a new strain or if it's if it's got like evasion techniques or whatever it can install itself covertly and then uh basically do its job in the background so i don't mean to scare anyone with this sort of stuff and as i said like a lot of the mental attacks that i've seen have been more targeted but at the same time if you want to keep yourself like super secure especially for high value transfers i would definitely make sure that you look at what you're signing like if you're sending high value transfers like and a high value is

relative say your portfolio is worth ten thousand dollars if you're sending the whole thing to an exchange or if you're trading the whole thing for something well you might want to check that transaction right you want to double check that transaction the one that you're signing is actually the thing that you're actually trying to do and not not a man in the middle attack because if you don't um you know you could end up losing all your funds right and and the thing is a hydra wallet will not protect you from this because a hardware wallet just allows you to keep your private key off your kind of like pc keep it on this little kind of like a device that uh the private key never leaves that device it's secure there but the problem is is that it's the same transaction flow if you sign a you know you know on a ledger

or a lattice it comes up with the same kind of flow confirm the transaction after you've confirmed it uh uh kind of like through metamask or uh you know if you're doing a minimized pass-through and then you sign it and you'll be signing the same thing right you'll still be signing a malicious transaction if you don't check it it doesn't the hydra wallet won't help you with it with this so that's why i've been recommending the lattice one to people lately because on the ledger they have this thing called blind signing which means you can't actually see what you're signing at all and if even if you do see what you're signing you can't really see anything because the screen's so small whereas on the lattice it's got a bigger screen you can see the whole transaction and you can actually sign it and knowing exactly what you're signing

um so from that perspective if you do care deeply about security and you you know maybe on the paranoid side of things which to be honest is not a bad strategy being on the paranoid side of things i would definitely get a lattice instead of a ledger and make sure that you can see the whole uh transaction before you sign it so so yeah hopefully that uh that answers that that question there so i'm just bringing up my sheet here where was that question from that was uh that was from from danny yeah so hopefully that answers that there all right so our next question comes from s clark who asks in regards to a recent refuel episode where you mentioned alameda was a vc in starkware i mean i'm wondering what you think their game is i thought solano was

trying to pitch that it doesn't need l2s to scale so look alameda f sbf ftx whatever they're profit maximalist they're in this to make as much money as possible i don't think they're in this for the crypto vision or mission i'm pretty sure sbf has said this before that he's in this because it's the easiest way to make money in the world right now which it is because he's made himself extremely rich off of crypto in just a few short years so i would say that they are backing things or investing in a lot i mean they invest in a lot of things alameda is invested in hundreds of projects and because for them it's very low risk high reward they throw a check which is probably a very small amount of like if they throw like even a couple of million dollars at a project

which is probably on the higher side of things that's nothing to them these guys are multi-billionaires they manage probably tens of billions of dollars of capital that's that's nothing to them to take like a bet and if it goes to zero they don't care like they probably just make that back in in a day or something or even less than that um so i would say that them backing starkware is literally just a play for more profit maximalism they probably i don't i mean i can't speak for them but i would wager that they don't pay that much attention to what what starkware's doing or kind of like help them with anything they are i mean alameda's the market maker side of things and ftx is like the exchange side of things um so yeah i don't think that i would classify alameda as a vc either like

this is this is what's actually been getting on my nerves a little bit lately is that there's a line blurring between vcs and funds they're very very different beasts a vc like a typical vc or a traditional vc venture capitalist firm or individual or whatever you you know usually has a longer time frame like five to ten years but because crypto is so accelerated these time frames are becoming compressed and now i would say that you can forget about having a 10 year time horizon in crypto as a vc it's just not going to work out you have to have at least uh kind of like oh sorry that maximum five years probably and even that's probably stretching it for how long you know a trade can play out or an investment can play out because it goes to move so quickly so from that

perspective funds usually have a much shorter life cycle you know one two three years um so now the line between funds and vcs are blurring because vcs need to uh shorten their times uh their time frame as well to keep up with crypto and and funds are kind of like now selling themselves as being vcs because of those lines being blurred i i as i said i find this really annoying because there are a lot of good vcs out there there are a lot of vcs that help their portfolio companies they don't just spray and pray and everything they're pretty targeted about their approach they they like to kind of like be involved with projects like to help them and then there are a lot of funds who are literally just investing in these projects to make as much money as possible they don't really care i mean

not all of them but a lot of them because of the fact that this is the way they're structured they don't really care too much about helping the project out they just kind of like give the money in there you know make sure they know what their investing schedule is and then go about their merry way so from that point of view i would say that uh you know and i guess like i would say that those lines being blurred have actually been damaging to the space at this point in time i would say there's not actually many good vcs left there's maybe i i mean i don't even know if there's many good funds left because as i said those lines are blurred i don't even know what to find then what's a vc firm anymore um it typically is that they're they're pretty much like

the same thing at this point in time which is kind of like hard to navigate through um so hopefully however that answers the first part of your question and the second part you said you know i thought celina was trying to pitch that doesn't need l2s to scale look alameda took a huge bet on solana of course and so did sbf and ftx they've made a lot of money on celina billions of dollars easily on this lana on both the soul token and the celina ecosystem because there were early backers there uh which which is which is whatever um but if you take that context and then you kind of apply it to what they're doing in their their kind of like investment spree it doesn't really kind of jowl or map because as i said they invest in everything so i don't think they

actually even think about their investment in solana when investing in something like starkware they just see a deal term that comes to them or some kind of like terms that come to them and they're like okay well well let's put some money into this uh we know you know they may they may know that it's a big deal for another ecosystem they may know that uh it's a hyped up project um and they kind of like invest in that and invest in that way um on a and i guess like on the technology side here i've been saying for a very long time that solano is either going to become a roll-up on ethereum or it's going to have roll-ups on it and that's how it's going to scale and it's not just exclusive to solana it's all the monolithic l1 chains they're on borrowed

time they're already dead in my eyes that they're a technological dead end just like i believe um bitcoin is a technological dead end and proof of work is a technological dead end as well maybe those are more controversial opinions um but yeah i've seen plenty of times before that whether they want to or not solana is going to scale via roll-ups but the thing is is that why would you as a roll-up why would you even care to deploy to solana um you know unless you're trying to do it for some kind of opportunistic thing where you're riding the roll-up hype and you put it on solana so you can issue a token and have that token go up in value um but for long-term health and the the long-term actually actual kind of like sustainable roll-ups there is literally zero reason not to anchor yourself to the most

decentralized and secure chain in existence uh i mean the only reason i can think of and this isn't even really a reason is that you may want to save on costs right as a roll-up but the thing is these roll-ups are going to be so popular they're going to have so much transactional activity that the l1 fees are going to be uh aren't going to be that much of a concern when you're making so much revenue on l2 um so yeah i see no reason for these or l2s these rollups to ever settle on anything that's not ethereum in terms of like fundamental reasons profit reasons that's a different kind of like story they'll probably do it because they'll be able to push a narrative and say oh we're a roll-up on solana like look how well the roll-ups on ethereum did and you know you know

how it goes right it's the same story that played out with all these evm side chains that did exactly what ethereum did in d5 summer liquidity mining you know having a whole default ecosystem or all avm based they just did the same thing they ported it over to avalanche and phantom and all these other evm chains and it worked right because narratives are powerful so i expect the same thing to play out on these other chains i expect or you know i i actually do expect starkware to deploy their tech to solana eventually as well there seems to be a bit of overlap with that with those kind of teams but again i just don't see the point i really like fundamentally don't see the point in doing that and it's not just because it's solana but any chain i don't see the the point of anchoring a roll up to

any chain except the most secure and decentralized one which is obviously ethereum by far like it's not even a question of what's first in terms of like being able to be anchored to obviously bitcoin can't uh support roll-ups so that's already out so it's ethereum and then there's like a long list of others that aren't even like they're all fighting to be in second place they're not even close to second place so yeah hopefully that answers your question there s clark all right on to one from max invests i've come to the conclusion that ethereum no longer competes with alternative layer ones ethereum is objectively the best sentiment layer and it has made this path clear all these other layer ones will need to choose between settlement and computation and it seems like they will choose computation as they are good at this also i don't like the l1 and l2

terminology to be honest i prefer computational layer and sediment layout do you share this sentiment i mean i think it's pretty obvious from if you listen to the refuel that i should definitely share this sentiment and um i think that there's literally no competition right now for ethereum l1 as a settlement and security layer at all like there's not there's no one even trying to do this if you have to be charitable and say them you know which other ecosystems are trying to go down the same modular path that ethereum has been going down i would say that celestia may be the only one um and but they're doing it a bit differently as well they're actually not having any execution on the quote-unquote l1 they're just doing it all at quote-unquote l2 um but i also share

your sentiment around the terminology not being the best either but at the same time it these kind of like terminologies are hard to break for the mainstream like people are still using the eth2 terminology uh because of the fact that it got memes right into reality and it was used for a very long time so changing uh terminology is very very hard i'm not even gonna bother doing that but i i definitely will still push the kind of like modular terminology where it's the the separation of concerns between data availability security uh and settlements and uh and execution right uh but at the same time that's like for people that are in the weeds for the mainstream normies as we like to call them i think the l1 l2 terminology is definitely the path forward for the

short to medium term and in the long term i mean in the long term most people are not going to care about what we call this sort of stuff at all most people are just going to be interacting with ethereum on these l2s they're not even you know it's going to get to a point where they're not even going to realize they're interacting with ethereum because these l2s have their own branding you can imagine someone saying oh i'm going i'm minting nfts on immutable this is really cool and having absolutely zero idea what a theorem is an absolutely zero idea that ethereum is the thing kind of like um securing immutable and immutable is putting their proofs on ethereum and and you can bridge to ethereum and stuff like that that's that's it's going to be abstracted away completely so i think if we're talking about terminology for the

insiders it's going to be in flux all the time uh because it changes pretty regularly especially considering that ethereum's roadmap is in flux a lot and i mean the general high-level roadmap is is kind of like setting not setting stone but it's kind of like well-known but the implementation details are in flux the terminologies in flux so i would say that even though it may be inaccurate terminology it's still something that we can just use and we can chop and change with the modular stuff because i think if you're in the weeds you understand the the kind of like key differences there between them so so yeah hopefully that answers your question max all right one here from handassatak who asks can contract based wallets like arjun just bridge all the ether in the contract from l1 to l2 on behalf of all their wallet application users

since it's a multi-sig contract with the keys owned by the team wouldn't that be cheaper than each of us bridging individually and pay the high gas fees um i as far as i know i don't think that the argent team has access to anyone's funds even though that they're a multi-sig key holder it would require you to sign any transactions if they put you know if they wanted to kind of like do something i would require you to sign it as well so they can't do anything with your funds without your permission as far as i know unless they can i don't think that's that's the um i don't think that's the case there uh but in terms of like getting people onto l2 from l1 on behalf of users i actually wrote about this in the newsletter the other day um it's called all on board the newsletter

if you want to go read that it was friday's one so it's the latest one um where i basically said that there's various things that teams can do to onboard people to l2 we saw dydx do what they call gasless deposits which is basically uh paying the gas fee for people depositing into dydx with a thousand or two thousand dollars and then make that their their kind of like logic is they'll make that gas feedback from trading fees or maybe liquidation fees on the platform and in the process they uh basically get a new user so it's basically a customer acquisition strategy there and there's a cost to doing that of course there are other ways that can be done to get our funds from l1 to l2 there's batched onboarding salon network is working on this sort of stuff and i think a few other kind of like teams as

well there's the teleporter for optimism as well from the synthetics team i think that's quite limited right now but that's another kind of like initiative then there's the roll-ups themselves being able to subsidize costs for users right to get to get them to kind of like bridge in argent could do it as well you know when argent launches their l2 support they could offer a thing to users saying hey bridge your assets to these l2s and we'll kind of like i cover the gas cost for you because it was funny originally argent was actually covering the gas cost to create smart contract wallets um in their platform but then it got way too expensive like i'm talking they were doing it when the fees were definitely a lot less than 100 to create these wallets now to create this wallet last time i checked is is you know hundreds

of dollars so they're obviously not going to be able to do that in a sustainable way for end users but to bridge assets across they could do that i i i think so we're gonna have to see how they kind of like um how that shakes out but at the same time i as i said like i don't think that they as far as i know they can't access user funds without the user signing their transaction as well so um just because it's a multi-sig doesn't mean they have unilateral uh yeah they don't because it's a multi-seek they don't have unilateral control over the uh the funds there so hopefully that answers your question all right one here from yon the faun could you please explain to us how these new domain resolvers work eg on ens unstoppable domains the central web the central web etc are these simply

organization partnerships with wallet providers whereby the wallet providers agree to look up a name address mapping in a specific contract and how are these assurances that two different decentralized domain providers aren't going to use the same tld extension and thereby create mapping conflicts so all of the like before and s for example all of it is handled by the smart contracts so if another system came along forked ens it would be a different set of smart contracts you actually can't have mapping conflicts at all because there would be a completely different set of contracts completely different set of of um of uh of controllers around those smart contracts if it's a you know if it's the ens governance uh forked or if they're just doing it through a multi-sig wallet um and even if there was the same name say you had like sassel.eth on in the original ans and

then you had sassed with ethernet forked ens it would still be different contracts maybe it still maps to the same same kind of address but the thing is the wallets that are adding support for this sort of stuff have to support the forked ens as well right so in terms of like uh support for these things they have to actually point to the contracts so right now they're appointing to the original ens smart contracts right and i don't see a reason why they would change that because the whole ecosystem in community would basically say well this is it it doesn't make sense to support a forked a fork version of ens because ens is fine the way it is it's it's community governed now it has all the mapping has everything going well for it maybe in the future there is something that goes wrong with e s and we do have

to fork off of it uh because the original one something bad happens well in that case it would take the community to come together and convince the wallets and everything to support the new one in addition to the old one so in terms of conflicts it's pretty much impossible for that to happen because of the fact that it's all based on smart contract logic um even not even just with between like ens's ens and its possible forks but also unstoppable domains and decentral web it's all running on different contracts so they cannot they literally it's literally impossible for there to be mapping conflicts um so so yeah hopefully that answers your question uh around that and as i said like it it's up to the kind of like the wallets to point to the correct contracts and resolve the correct names because whenever you put like you know

say you're in like a mobile wallet that supports ns i think rainbow supports it put sasso.ethan there they're looking up kind of sassel.eth using the ens contracts and looking up what that resolves to which is obviously my ethereum address and that's how they map it out now if they were to look that up on the forked ens uh it would be a completely different thing you know i could have a different address set there or someone else could own sasebo.ether and it would be different to the new one um but you know it could be confusing for end users you know if if say for example the wallet was to say okay we're going to support both of them you'd have to like change it in the drop down menu you'd have to say oh well i want sassworld.eth on the original ens or i want sassool.ethan the forked one

so from that perspective it kind of like makes it so that these wallet interfaces don't want to support a forked version because it just gets messy from there it would be very messy for the end user because the end user probably wouldn't want to click through again we'll have to check these things that get confused by the fact that there's multiple kind of like um multiple different versions going on so i think a forked version of ens would uh wouldn't take off at all i don't think anyone would support it so so yeah hopefully that answers your question there all right one here from dom who asks does abe's v3 rv 3's portal thing mean i could bite the bullet today and deposit my eighth bag on iv main net and then in the future borrow stable coins against it but receive the stable coins on

polygon arbitrary optimism as soon as ava deploys there would there be l1 fees involved for using that portal as far as i know yes because i think this is how the current version of the portal is going to work is that you'll be able to take your a tokens across chain um and kind of like do things on different chains using your a tokens i need to dive deeper into it i don't know if there's more details about how the portal is going to work just yet but essentially you would still have to pay l1 fees i believe i don't think there's going to be a thing where you can have funds on rve v3 on layer 1 and then you know polygon or arbitrary optimism reads from that and kind of lets you borrow an l2 unless they implement it themselves as well uh i think that might

be one of the features and one of the end goals for uh the portal kind of like um the feature but i think as it currently stands it's just for transferring a tokens across different layers at this point in time but uh i wouldn't be surprised to see them do do this feature where you can tap into and read state from different kind of like chains it probably would only work for l2 side chains get get murky because if you start reading state from l2 from side chains you're having like different security assumptions whereas with l2s you're not because the state is is kind of like shared between ethereum l1 and l2 and it's all secured by ethereum l1 so i think that they may do that for the l2s but i'm not sure if they do that for the the side chains it definitely becomes a bigger security

risk um doing it like that so hopefully that answers your question but um you know i should dig deeper into the portal kind of like feature and see if they've added more information about that because when they first announced announced that i remember the information wasn't too detailed it was a bit sparse so i'll have to just do a bit of a bit of a deeper dive there all right one here from rv deeb who asks a question about mev and around the rise of mav on alternative low fee l1s including ones branded as mev resistant mev resistant low-fat l1 we all know how that turned out um anyway you ask how would the ethereum l2s fight transaction spam from any vr bots once the fees are low enough is it something that even needs to be fought

against as the arbs mev are pretty much essential to keep everything in check so there is kind of like different versions of mev or different kind of like types of mav i should say there's the quote-unquote good mav or useful mav such as arbitrage right like keeping the prices in check across different liquidity pools on uh within d5 that is good mev because it's needed right um but you know obviously the people doing that the people doing the arbitrage transactions are profiting from that so and and if they're doing it through through miners or through validators it technically mav that's why people kind of like knock back against emin who said that that um arbitrage wasn't mev it is the most kind of like elementary form of mav but it is still mav

then there's the parasitic mav like sandwich attacks and front running sandwich attacks are pretty uh are in particular pretty bad because they essentially force the end user to buy something at a much higher price than the or potentially at a much higher price than they thought they were going to buy it at and front running does the same it does a similar thing as well and there's back running and then there's time-banded attacks mev goes deep like it's it's pretty pretty wild um so so with that context you ask about like how is mvv going to be treated at l2 this is an open question um i think i actually do think that l1 mev is going to eventually either be completely eradicated um or at least go flow back to eath holders because with post merge validators obviously uh um you know our

eighth holders because they have to stake 328 and all the mev are going to be going to validators so uh it would flow back to them which i guess is is is a lot more symbiotic than what it is now but at the same time once l1 ethereum literally just becomes a chain that only um that only validates proofs and data from from l2s as far as i know there wouldn't actually be any mav to extract because there's no mev to be done on proofs or on call data because it's just storing these things on chain there is no there's like the front run there is nothing to sandwich attack as far as i know maybe i'm wrong here but i've asked this question to a few people and they haven't been able to to kind of like

break my assumptions here so my assumption is that l1 mev eventually will go away completely as a consequence of l2s filling up l1 with uh with proofs and core data which is which is really cool but then you push the mav to l2 which is already happening i mean any l2 with multiple liquidity pools is going to have mav on it and pretty much i mean i'm sure it's happening on arbetron um right now in terms of like uh being able to arbitrage but the thing is arbitrary the only one running the sequencer and i don't think that albatrom are going to be doing mev on their user on on any of the users but it's when they decentralize the sequences that's when it becomes uh you know it becomes more tricky right because the sequences have the ability to order transactions which means they

have the ability to do uh mev but being nasty mav or just like the normal mav but they're still gonna be able to do it so there's been a few different ideas proposed of how to combat this i know optimism talked about doing what was called um i think it was like auctioning off meva so mev auctions where they would essentially auction off the rights to mav on the chain and then uh give the auctioned proceeds to public goods this was controversial because it was people basically said well i mean yeah okay the funds are going to public goods but the the mov is still bad because the nav is still happening so i think that would be maybe a short to medium term solution but the long term solution would be to just try and eradicate as much mev as

possible and there are different ways you can do this there are different research kind of like initiatives going on in this area one of the big ones is flashbots which doesn't eradicate mev but it democratizes it which makes it more fair again there is kind of like arguments for and against this as well people say just because you made mev more fair doesn't really mean anything for the end user they're still getting screwed yeah yeah i get that argument but at the same time it's better than not no democrat don't know democratization sorry i mix my words there um but i i think like uh in in terms of like the l2s having low fees and trying to fight spam that's another concern and this is why i don't think fees can be zero and this is i this is why i actually wasn't surprised

when kind of like solana fell over because their fees aren't zero but their fees are like very very cheap right they offer whatever it is 50k tps and their fees are like 0.001 or whatever now because the fees are so cheap it encourages bots it encourages a lot of bots and encourages transaction spamming and that's exactly what happened when that uh kind of think it was like an ido that went live and and suddenly 400 000 transactions flooded the memphis other than have a memphis like flooded the network in solana and it caused the validators to go offline which was effectively a ddos attack or a dos attack or a denial of service attack um now how do and this can this exact same thing can happen on any chain that offers basically super low fees uh or no fees this is why fees exist in the first place by the way

or a major reason to prevent against dos attacks among other things so how do you keep fees really low um for end users but also fight against spam and and kind of like uh and uh related kind of like malicious things on l2 the way celina has done it is that they're doing what's called qos or quality of service where they've got some system in place or they plan to put some system in place which drops transactions that they consider to be spam i don't think this is a good solution especially not for layer one i think that is it's basically censorship because you're always going to have false positives in that um just like you always have you sometimes have false positives in web 2. web 2 deals with spam by the way by doing qos as well there are providers for this such as

cloudflare ddos protection providers that basically drop packets of information from ips that they consider to be potential spam or potential bot activity or potential dos activity now that's okay for web 2 because if for some reason you are flagged uh as a kind of like a bot or your flag to someone trying to ddos the website then you can just uh kind of refresh and that problem usually goes away or you just wait a little bit and and then it's okay but i mean you don't really expect web 2 to be censorship resistant right or kind of like it's it's it's it's a different kind of set of expectations there there and there's not no kind of like money involved or anything like that it doesn't stop you from kind of like accessing your funds or anything like that

um but but in kind of like the web 3 world where you definitely expect to be able to access the chain whenever you want uh then it becomes like a very big issue and dropping random transactions that that you suspect are spam uh you could end up dropping real user transactions so i don't think that that is a sustainable solution either at layer one it could be at layer two it could be a sustainable solution where you have this dos protection of you know quality of service of dropping transactions at layer 2 and all that sort of stuff but again it in my eyes it's time to mount to censorship but if it has to be done at layer 2 it's actually fine because if you know the worst case scenario you can't do anything at layer two because

you've been censored or you know your address has been blacklisted or whatever i mean blacklisted by the qs system or whatever happens there you can always get your funds back out at layer one yes the fees on layer one are probably going to be pretty expensive to get your fees to get your funds out but it's better than in my eyes at least it's better than not being able to access your funds at all or not be able to do anything at all on on kind of like the l2 or an l1 that uses qos to kind of like fight spam and dos things so hopefully that gives you an overview of how you know i'm thinking about mev at l1 l2 how i think about spam and all that sort of stuff it's definitely something that the l2 teams are going to have to think

think long and hard about and it's going to be a balance that needs to be struck between you know how low the fees are and and protecting against spam and dos but i do think eventually fees for end users are just going to be zero in the interface and they're going to be hidden so to speak where the fees will be still collected and paid but the end users will pay them not through quote-unquote gas fees but through trading fees marketplace fees if they're doing nft stuff other sorts of fees that are just like part of using a service this already happens on immutable x by the way the end user pays zero gas fees but you pay marketplace fees you pay minting fees you pay blah blah fees and that goes to immutable they pay the gas fees for you uh and and all's well and dandy

so i think that's what's going to be kind of like the end state for these l2s because if we want to scale this to the world you can't have these extra kind of like in your face gas fees in the in the transaction flow you have to abstract them away and the easiest way to do that is to basically pay you know have the l2 operators pay it pay it for users but make up for it in other kind of like ways there so hopefully that gives you an overview there so i got a question from the audience from top ko hopefully i said that right um i'm inviting you up on stage here oh just gotta accept my invite there tom no okay

doesn't maybe he's afk or something like that uh all good all right uh while we're waiting for for them uh i'll continue through my list here of questions all right uh one here from yon the four oh you're on the phone or or dom no i think dom's first yeah one here from dom first i have a few friends who tell me that even if the web 3 utopia happens the power structure would only shift from shareholders who have the most money to people who have the most coins with regards to what happens to a project and how the value is shifted around i.e that nothing would fundamentally truly change and things would still be terrible just in a slightly different way i have my own answers to these claims would love to hear your thoughts to see if i'm missing anything so i would love to hear your answers to

this if you want to kind of like follow this up uh in the discord channel later on but i guess like my answer is maybe multifaceted here the first thing i would say is that i think building on a strong decentralized and secure base layer is of utmost importance and i've mentioned this before without a strong foundation everything else built on top tends to fall apart so for example ethereum layer 1 is a strong foundation to build on right you have relative certainty that's not going to fall apart that the network is stewarded by a vast and large worldwide community of um of thousands tens of thousands of people who deeply care about the technology you have a set of

developers core developers otherwise that deeply care about the ethereum chain and making sure that it is long-term sustainable and healthy and you have a general culture of of sustainability as well so you can be real you know you can be very very um certain or relative relatively certain compared to other things that ethereum is going to ethereum layer one is is going to stay decentralized and secure and and also ethereum layer 1 hasn't got on chain governance so there is no people with the most coins being able to um mess with the chain and miners can't really do anything stakers won't be able to do much ethereum being truly decentralized actually means something when you think about these questions it means that no one uh actor or group or party can actually influence the network

uh in kind of like a um authoritarian way right as just use an example there um there's you know for example even the core devs can't do this if the core devs put an eip forward and it was a really shitty eip the whole community would come together and say it was a really shitty aip like they're not going to just say oh yeah this this eip from these quarters that makes that makes total sense even though like it's it's absolutely terrible for the chain for let me give an example here of a terrible eip let's increase the eighth issuance by 10 a year right let's say for some reason the core devs all agreed to do this which i mean i don't think they would but let's just entertain this for this example let's say they all agreed here's this eip we're gonna increase eight issuance

ten percent a year our reasoning is that we think that eth uh should be much more inflationary and and that's that well you're going to get pushback from pretty much everyone in the ethereum community because one it goes against precedent two it makes zero sense to do this three there is a defined road map for each issuance you know post merge there is an issuance schedule that is variable based on how much ethics staked we have the burn to offset that issuance and everyone in the ethereum well most people in the ethereum community agree that eighth being a deflationary asset is desirable so that's an example of some something happen happening where even the core devs can't uh put in stuff that would adversely affect the network into into ethereum they get pushback on it and the whole community would rally against them on that um i i don't think

they'd ever do that to be honest but you know just just to say that but i think it's a it's a good example to illustrate my points um but then on to i guess like above ethereum layer one whether that be the apps built on top of it or l2s or anything like that anything with with coin vote you know coin voted governance or coin holder governance um i do think that your friends may have a point uh with regards to things centralizing around a small group of people because this is why i've always been very bearish on on-chain governance for layer ones um is that it will always in my mind devolve into plutocracy especially if that chain is being run as a depos system or a delegated proof-of-stake

system i think the default and the incentives all just point towards that chain becoming a plutocracy but when it comes to the applications built on top the good thing about the applications is that they're kind of like i mean they do talk to each other but they can be isolated so for example if uh an app an app on ethereum uh whether that be a big or small app was to get like taken over in a hostile takeover and um you know everyone was trying to enrich themselves the community would basically come together and fork that off right and and you know either fork the project or remove the liquidity from the project or abandon the project really quickly and go to somewhere else but if this happened on ethereum layer 1 the only place that they could go to is

one of these competing l1 ecosystems and that's a much harder switching cost like the switching cost from going from ethereum l1 to another chain is massive as opposed to going uh from you know an app to an app we saw like little bits of this play out with the unisop and sushi swap stuff because originally sushi schwab said that they were created because they didn't like that unisop raised them vcs it didn't feel like a community-oriented thing um so they forked off and then you had all the drama around it but you know now unisop is still much bigger than sushi swap because they haven't done anything to adversely affect the you know running of the protocol yet right it could happen in the future but up until this point unit swap has been run really well they've done major releases like v3 which is you know just

killing the game they recently did their 0.01 stable coin fee pool which seems to be killing the game as well so from that perspective even though there may be like concentration in the coins and kind of like the quote-unquote shareholders of uni swap and of governance um one they're limited in what they can do in unisop's case uh and two it seems the community and and people in general are fine with what with the way they're running things but if they weren't they could switch to something else we have other amms out there people could pull the liquidity from uni swap go somewhere else if they wanted to and it'd all be well and fine there so i think always splitting up the foundations from what's built on top is is critically important because as i've used the analogy before

you know if you have a building you build the foundations and the foundations need to be the strongest thing of that building because if they're not it doesn't matter what you build on top everything comes coming comes comes crashing down if the foundations break uh it doesn't matter how fancy you know floor 10 is or how fancy floor 20 is um if the foundation is weak the whole building comes down together and there's nothing those floors can do to protect themselves whereas on ethereum you can have you know really good certainty around the fact that ethereum as a base layer is not going to screw over your project it doesn't have coin holder voting there's no one that can do a hostile takeover of ethereum um or at least it's near impossible to a hostile takeover of ethereum or anything like that um and then you know the apps built

on top well they have to earn that right right even if they have coin holder voting they have to kind of like show over time that they're not going to adversely affect uh their kind of like users of their app through on-chain governance but at the same time it's limited right the damage is limited if they do that the damage doesn't spread to everywhere else there's been multiple examples in d5 of projects that have had really bad governance or have had really bad um you know teams running the project and the project falls apart completely but that doesn't really adversely affect the other kind of projects on the network it doesn't really affect ethereum at all ethereum keeps chugging ethereum as a protocol doesn't actually care what's happening on its network that's the beautiful thing about ethereum is that everything to the ethereum protocol is the same as

long as it's following the ethereum protocol specification and the rules um the ethereum protocol doesn't care what you're doing on it so if a project fails ethereum says nothing it doesn't even notice that a project failed it just keeps producing blocks every 13 seconds uh and and there's nothing that anyone can can and do to change that unless the whole community came together to to change the base layer but that's why having a fundamentally strong base layer is is so important um so that these apps can be built on top they can experiment they can have these on-chain governance things and if they fail it's okay let's just move on to the next thing um and you know with d5 things are obviously more interconnected and and something as big as unisop or maker they are failing would send kind of like ripple effects across the ecosystem but

the thing is ethereum would still be able to recover from this because the ethereum network as i said would still keep chugging it would just require the app layer to kind of like navigate around this and we can because everything's transparent we can see everything that's happening no one can do things behind closed doors because to do anything you have to do it on chain where everything's transparent so that's another kind of like key aspect to it as well where you know in uh in companies in centralized companies you know you you can't really see what's going on like most of the time at all like you can't see uh what changes are being made usually you have to wait till like the quarterly reports to see things as a shareholder whereas on ethereum there's no such thing as a quarterly report there's a every second report or every

million like you can always look at the chain you can always check the chain you can always see what's going on at 24 7. so that radical transparency just adds another layer on top uh that allows you to to basically have better guarantees around things even though there may be concentration of coins uh you know for different various defy apps using on-chain governance um but you know i think that only works with the app layer the base layer doesn't work for because if the base layer is centralized if it's if it turns into plutocracy then you have very little wiggle room there because essentially the base layer affects everything else built on top of it and that everything else you know it has to either migrate off of the base layout which can be very painful to do that to another base layer and build up

a network effects there maybe compete with other projects there um or you know they could run the risk of uh something something bad happening to their app because uh the runners of the of the layer one chain uh want to do something to that app uh something malicious to it so and then the chain doesn't become credibly neutral anymore which is something that i've written about in the past as well so maybe that's a long-winded answer but hopefully that answers your question there dom i'm gonna take a quick drink break one sec guys all right on to the next question from johannaforn who asks just for fun say

you fall into a wormhole and get spit out in january 2023 you go to check coin market cap what do you see in the top 10 in roughly what order this is a this is a really fun question because if i'm being honest every time i've tried to predict what the top 10 is going to look like it has completely failed i don't think anyone can predict what the top 10 is going to look like simply because the top 10 is like i've thought about this a lot the top 10 for me is like this zone of like memes that's what it is because if you look at the top 10 over the years and how it's changed what gets in there a lot of the time has to do with like memes and attention we had dogecoin in there we had shib in there we had cardano at

number three it's now number six that was all memes right and then they launched smart contracts and people realized that cardano actually wasn't going to kill ethereum um i guess like most people knew this already but there was kind of like the fanboys um and then you had like other things going there like litecoin was in there for a while litecoin is now what 16. i'm just looking at the list here um on my on my um on my screen um and then you know solana wasn't in there until recently you have stable coins in there i mean if you remove the stable coins xrp was it number three now it's number seven you know if you had told me that xrp would still be in the top 10 in uh november 2021 i would have called you crazy but here we are right it's there

if you told me that cardano would get to number three would have called you crazy um you know you just look at these sorts of things it's just like it's really insane dogecoin and shiv if you told me they'd be in the top 10 i would have called you crazy so i just don't have any predictions around this except that i believe maybe i regret saying this but i believe that there's a high chance ethel will be number one in january 2023 and bitcoin will be number two or lower than number two uh maybe that's controversial for me to say uh maybe not for this crowd but in general um maybe it is but i think that eth uh has a shot at flipping btc before the merge now whether this is a temporary flip or a permanent flip is another thing it's probably going to be temporary to

start because of just the way the markets work it's going to be a big deal when it happens of course but in terms of like long term i mean the merge if you say the merge happens in june 2022 then there's still another like six seven months for eighth to get back to number one if it if it falls but it depends on what the market's doing like are we in in a bear market then it's kind of really hard to tell but that's the only thing i could really say uh with relative certainty the rest of it you know top 10 could look completely different to what it is right now i actually thought like the beginning of this year that the top 10 top 20 would consist mainly of d5 tokens uh by the end of this year that was one of my

predictions i got that wildly wrong because d5 tokens have actually been one of the worst performers of this year most of them at least some of them have done well but you know the the 1.0 quote unquote 1.0 tokens that people like to talk about they have done really poorly especially against eighth i didn't say that coming i thought that would be that that would actually um do very well and another thing i didn't see coming was like the l1s pumping and you know in hindsight i should have seen this coming because of the high fees but i didn't realize how aggressive these l1 would be with their liquidity mining programs and their incentive programs so you know as i said like it's just too hard to tell what's going to happen with the top 10 top 20 top top whatever so i don't really have any predictions

there but i do think with relative certainty that eighth will be number one by january 2023 i do as i said i do think it's going to happen before that leading up to the merge i mean if ether is going to flip bitcoin at any time in its history it would be leading up to the merge because we have that massive issue introduction coming we have eth finally going to proof of stake which has been a long time coming and there's a very very strong narrative around that and if you look at the eighth bitcoin ratio right now the charts just from a pure kind of technical perspective is extremely strong i mean eth usually bleeds against bitcoin and q4 and it's done that for the last six years didn't do it this year that's a huge precedent break there and you're seeing the narrative shift right now i mean if you

go on twitter i go follow some traders they're talking about this as well um it's just been in a constant uptrend and i think that's a lot due to the fact that ethereum has grown you know so rapidly we have eip159 in place the scaling road map is coming to view and people are like well okay ethereum is actually going to scale it has solutions live today and there's more coming and everyone's talking about zk stuff now and roll ups in general so you know as i said i i that's the only thing i can predict is that what i can i can hope to predict is that i think that eth will flip bitcoin before january 2023 um and may even be number one in in january 2023 as well as a permanent flip there all right on to one here from xerox boomer who asks will optimistic ross

become extinct if zktec really flourishes it feels like all of the optimistic roll-up l2s will be obsolete once ck tech is generally available if so does that mean arbitrary optimism etc are gone or do they migrate to generalized zk roll up technology so i think over the long term the cons the consensus that i've seen at least for most people is that optimistic roll-ups will be obsolete eventually right when we get those kind of like zk uh evms and we have them like on par with what optimistic wallops can do today we've battle tested them they're safer and secure um then yes i do believe that zk tech is going to eat everything in saying that there is still a lot of risks with zktech right now very untested the

cryptography is very new there's a lot of weird and wacky going on that people you know a lot of people look at and like oh how do you know how does this work i don't understand how this works because this is very new tech so i would say that optimistic roll-ups are going to be with us for for a few years at least in terms of like um availability and being used by different projects and i and you know the thing is optimistic roll-ups are very early still as well so if optimistic roll-ups are early i would say zk tech is still very very early and there is a lot of hype for it but i think the hype underestimates how kind of like difficult it is to do evm stuff with this new technology because of the fact that um it's so new that uh there's

not really to do a vm equivalent to the zk requires a lot more work than to do evm equivalents with optimistic roll-ups so i think that optimistic roll-ups work as like the next stage in the scaling journey for ethereum first we had side chains like the polygon pos chain which i mean probably on posgen is hard to classify it's not you know it's not technically a side chain but it acts like a side chain but it has other security guarantees but in terms of like just evm side chains in general those have been kind of like you know went from e5 to evm side chains now it's swung back to roll-ups and i think that optimistic roll-ups are what it's going to mostly swing back to because they're ready now you can deploy apps there you can use them you can have the same experience as l1 with cheaper fees and

as we progress through them they're going to get even cheaper to use um than they are right now i know they're still a bit expensive you know four or five dollars for a swap we can hopefully get that down to under a dollar pretty quickly over the next maybe two three months depending on if call data compression is enabled and if this eip goes through to uh reduce roll-up costs by five times on l1 but if we're talking like you know maybe two years maybe could be less than two years i don't know but if we're talking about like uh two years out or something like that two three years out i would be very surprised if zk wasn't dominating everything at that point and in that kind of like context i would be very surprised if arbitrary optimism haven't also had zk technology developed and put

out into the wild as well so yeah i don't think just to summarize optimistic rollups here to stay for the foreseeable future don't think they're going to be obsoleted as quickly as people think they are i think they serve a very good kind of like need right now i think they you know they work right now they work to scale ethereum right now there's a lot of smart people working on them and i think that the drawbacks people talk about are vastly over overstated at this point because the seven-day withdrawal period you know for a long time people like oh this is kind of like a deal breaker now we have like i don't know how many bridges there's like 10 of them at this point where you can go from an l2 to an l1 we have arbitrary integration coming with uh sorry binance

integrating arbitram and that became like a non-issue right so uh looking at it from that perspective in that context optimistic roll-ups are not obsolete yet probably will be eventually but not for at least a couple of years i believe and that's going to give us another kind of like uh stepping stone to getting to the ultimate final boss or i guess like not boss but like final form which is zk tech and the way i kind of like think about it is if ethereum l1 is like a 56k modem and if uh optimistic roll-ups uh are kind of like um no maybe uh maybe ethereum l1 is like a is like uh dial-up and optimistic roll-ups are like broadband then zk is like fiber so that's kind of like how i think about

it in my head as a as a progression um maybe cardano is um his 56k modem since they only can only do one transaction per block um but yeah that's kind of like how i think about the scaling journey that ethereum is currently going under and either l1 feed into all of this of course like sharding people might be wondering about it sharding just works to enhance roll ups it works for both optimistic and zk roll up it doesn't matter which one they are so that's all part of it and same with like any changes on l1 it's all just to support the l2 ecosystem um so yeah hopefully that covers your question there's xerox boomer all right one here from johann the phone thoughts on shell protocol anything in particular that makes it special so i heard about shell protocol a while ago for those who don't know who what this

is it seems to be a kind of like a stable coin aggregator swapper kind of like uh similar to curve i haven't looked into it recently i know they were working on a v2 um i don't know if that's live or anything but yeah i haven't checked in on it recently so i don't really have much color to add here of why it what makes it special or anything like that but if anyone else does sorry excuse me if anyone else has looked into shell protocol you can post about it in the d5 channel if you want to talk about it there but yeah sorry i haven't really looked into it lately all right one here from kushim who asks rockerpool finished their launch on november 22nd if you had 28 but did not want to deal with the hardware side of running a node would it be better to

for the network to a use all nodes saas or software as a service to run your node or b simply stake 16 to the protocol and receive r8 in your wallet interested to hear your thoughts on this i don't actually know what all nodes uh sas is i'm assuming it's some kind of like service provider for for running a node maybe similar to something like dap node or or kind of like maybe something centralized i haven't heard of it before sorry but i would say that staking sixteen eighth with uh rockapool will probably be the better choice here because i mean rockapool is trying to build and is building a decentralized staking network on top of ethereum right so that people can stake with less than 328 of course um and for you know from that kind of like vayne i would say that

it's better to kind of like put your ether in there grow the rockapool network because it actually directly contributes to the decentralization of kind of like the beacon chain so but as i said i don't know much about all nodes i don't know sorry i don't know anything about all nodes so i don't know what i'm comparing rocketpool here too but generally you know rockapool is definitely a very very good solution for for staking with less than 32 eighth all right uh one here or two more here from you're on the phone who asked you were talking about unisop's low fee stable coin stop feature and mentioned that it had resulted in high trading volume what does training volume mean exactly if you do a swap of one usdc for one die does that transaction amount to a trading volume of two dollars this is an interesting question because

i've never thought about this before um but i'm going to i'm going to assume it accounts for a trading volume of two dollars right because it's swapped between uh the two two dollars right so between two stable coins one and one but i don't know actually maybe i maybe i'm wrong there i should know the answer to this question by the way uh i've just never thought about it in this context before um yeah i i mean i i assume that it would be like a trading volume of two dollars maybe i'm going to sound like a complete noob here by giving that answer but uh yeah i should definitely kind of like look into that or maybe i'm brain fighting um but uh but yeah unfortunately i don't know exactly how that's how that's kind of like counted because you know there are concerns

about like wash trading and things like that um and being able to fake volumes because you just like trade between yourself or trade between someone else and just like keep trading the same thing in order to fake volumes there are some ways to mitigate that or sorry some things that mitigate that such as like the trading fees on uni swap or the gas fees and stuff like that um but in terms of like counting the trading volume i'm going to assume that it's yeah i'm pretty confident that it would count it as kind of like uh two dollars because it's like one usdc being traded for one die you know equals two so i'm going to assume that but if i'm wrong then i have egg on my face i'll i'll admit i'll i'll take the l there but uh yeah that's my kind of answer there

all right uh next one next question you had was next year seems like the perfect storm of events to make 2022 the year of ethereum in particular successful merge combined with l2 deployments which would both simultaneously make eighth become low in supply burned plus staked plus d5 locked eighth and high in demand l2s enable low fees so that anyone can play on the network is it just me or do you also feel like 2022 is going to be bananas for ethereum not just you my friend i have been saying this for quite a while i think as as i've been saying for a while i think 2020 is shaping up to be an absolutely amazing year for ethereum because as you mentioned we're going to have the merge we're going to have l2 deployments really ramp up there's definitely going to be token incentives on these l2s uh

100 like i have no doubt in my mind about that that all the l2s are going to have tokens within six months i put money i'll put money on that but um uh and you know d5 continuing to keep growing nft is continuing to keep growing the merge leading to um eth becoming net deflationary all the time massive issue introduction moving to proof of stake finally after six or seven years of being in research and development and there's other upgrades that may be coming in 2022 as well such as that eip to lower gas fees for roll-ups on on l1 that's huge by the way like that five times inc that's an immediate five times uh increase in scalability for roll-ups as i mentioned on the refuel so yeah we really are i i mean i've said this so many times guys

we're at the golden age of ethereum if there was any period of ethereum's life cycle to be in to experience like all of it and to experience the best things ethereum is going to have to offer it's right now um you know obviously if you were earlier on uh you could have like been there at the very beginning and that was that was fun that was obviously more you know that was obviously very profitable if you were there in 2019 buying eighth you're kind of like in a very good position right now but i think that we're really just getting to the point as i said we're kind going from like the dial up error to broadband with optimistic roll-ups but and then going to fiber with zk stuff but i do think that maybe the analogy doesn't work one-to-one i do think that for most users going from l1 to l2 will

feel like a fiber experience even with optimistic robs because l1 is just so stupidly expensive right like i've been doing some trades lately and and a bunch of other stuff and you know i'm spending so much gas on l1 and you know i i mean i'm less sensitive to it just because of the position that i'm in but at the same time even for me i'm looking at it right now and i'm like that's like eth right that's not that's not like a stable coin that i'm paying that's eighth and i have to what i do is i actually replenish my eighth um every time i use it for gas fees i i buy it back on an exchange but like i'm looking at that and i'm just like ah like it's so expensive so um you know i think l2s is just like such a big

deal um uh in oven and of itself but then you have all this other stuff happening in ethereum as well so yeah definitely agree with you that 2022 is going to be an absolutely amazing year for ethereum it could be even more amazing than we even know because there are things that we probably can't even see that it's going to happen right like for example i didn't see nfts blowing up as much as they did this year i don't think anyone saw that happening maybe 2022 is the year of the dows and we have like so many dows everywhere people are you know speculating here i was speculating there norm is getting involved in dows this stuff happens there's air drops everywhere there's been air drops everywhere this year but like more air drops you know more money who knows right maybe nfts have another kind of like go at it and we

have like different nfts that get popular maybe the um the art and fts get really popular this time or something or maybe there's a use case that comes along that we haven't even thought of yet there's all this stuff that could happen but if you just look at the stuff that we can actually see coming and we see happening it's already amazing so the fact that we have all of that stuff that we know about and then all of the stuff that we don't know about that could happen in 2022 which let's be honest because there's so much experimentation going on on ethereum all the time we're bound to see really really cool stuff happen in 2022 and even even you know beyond that of course um i do truly believe that uh that ethereum in 2022 is going to be amazing and i'm obviously

going to be covering it every weekday on the refuel and i can't wait to see what what uh what happens in 2022 but yeah i mean it's funny that i'm talking about 202 as if it's something that's that that's kind of like in the distance it's kind of like really close right it's a month and a bit left of this year and christmas came around quickly i was actually thinking about that today um i was i was thinking about well i have to put the christmas tree up soon um so so yeah anyway that was a little bit of a tangent there um yeah definitely share your kind of like excitement yawn all right one here from tim j robinson who asks i've heard you mentioned that when the merge happens the apy for eth2 node runners will go up do you have any details on what it will change to post

merge so it's it's hard to tell exactly what it's going to be post merge but you can do some napkin math take the fees that aren't being burned right now so the fees that are being paid to miners calculate that annualize that then annualize that return for validators um and then you'll get the apy boost justin drake has a spreadsheet for this i believe it might be on his twitter somewhere so if you want to kind of find that spreadsheet you can go to his twitter to find it but that's how you would get the apy the estimations from i think a few months ago was over ten percent apy uh and that then that would mean that like it'd be five percent from the block awards five percent from the fees but it's variable because fees

obviously vary greatly throughout the year so annualizing fear revenue for ethereum is kind of hard because you know we had like less than ten great transactions in june and then since like august we've had like 100 plus consistent grade transactions so like a 10 times increase so it's very hard to annualize out fees so it's very hard to to kind of like know exactly what the apy is going to be on an annual you know for the whole year it's going to be variable of course because of the fear revenue but i would say that you can do like napkin math and just take a period of the year say it's like a three month period average that out and then annualize it and you can get like a rough estimate of what the api will be post-merged there and then you get a second follow-up

question do you know if anyone has studied the possibility of mitigation of miners performing real attacks against ethereum in a few days before the merge as they have little incentive to act honestly they could try malicious tactics if they do do something malicious can these two nodes that take over validation do anything about it or is the chain finalized on the merge switch over block so this has been thought about a lot and actually this is one of the the main things that the researchers and the client implementers have been thinking about with regards to the merge the solution presented itself as the merge block happens at a certain kind of like difficulty height so there's no block number from from kind of like uh from from the current spec from what i know it's basically do the merge once this difficulty

reaches a certain height i mean i can't remember the exact details but um this was a direct result of them realizing that yes there's kind of like bad incentive synthesis for miners you know especially in the final hours leading up to the merge or at least the final days or weeks leading up to the merge for them to play games i have talked about this before on the refuel i think but i basically said that i don't believe that miners are going to play these games regardless because miners have known about this for a long time all the big industrial miners are definitely preparing for this already whether that's being hedging their exposure with their kind of like mining equipment or stacking as much as they can to be stakers and a lot of them already are stakers so for them to screw the merge would be screwing

themselves a lot of the time as well so i just don't see any kind of attack happening but obviously you always have to kind of like um be prepared just in case something does and and that's why they've come to this conclusion of instead of doing it at a block number where everyone knows when it would happen you do it with like a target difficulty rate or mining difficulty rate and then it can kind of be like pseudo-randomized there are i may be butchering the explanation there about that there are more details about that um if you go to like the merge details on the github for the ethereum github you can just google it um and you'll be able to find uh some more details about that so and then i guess like your follow-up question after that was if they do do something malicious

can these two nodes that take over validation do anything about it or is the chain finalized on the merge switch over block i don't think the chains finalize on the merge whichever block uh because finalization takes 12 minutes oh 30 minutes 12 minutes 12 minutes um so i would have to wait until kind of like that that happens there but again some of this stuff is in flux so it may be worth checking out the repo and checking out the supporting documentation around the merge to see what the current kind of like thinking is around this from the researchers themselves all right next question uh one another one from you on the phone uh question about token voting currently the general model is to weight voting power proportional to the amount of tokens owned which concentrates voting power in the hands of the wealthy and creates

dysfunctional scenarios such as the one that played out in the recent liquidity mining on unisoft proposal wouldn't it be more democratic to have voting power be one address one vote with some thresholds to be able to vote eg holding in the minimum some minimum amount of the governance token so the reason why it's not done like this is because every ethereum address is uh anonymous or pseudonymous you don't know anyone can spin up as many ethereum addresses as they want and they can act in any which way they want and you have no idea who that is because there's no kyc there's nothing to identify them or anything like that that's why it's kind of like gone towards coinholder voting because that way you have like an unchained verifiable proof of what they're doing right like oh sorry what they hold and kind of like

their voting power i agree with you it is not a great system it's plutocratic it's kind of like really shitty as you mentioned that unisop liquidity mining proposal example that was a shitty outcome but to do the one address one vote thing you would have to have a way to do to to tag addresses and to make sure that it's done in a civil resistant way the only way to do this in the i mean in a way that kind of like ensures as much civil resistance as possible is to id the address in some way now there are things like that git coin have been has been running like proof of humanity there's a bunch of other things on there to verify yourself there is kind of like uh taking the activity that the address has done over time you know maybe popes that they perhaps that

they're holding i should say sorry um stuff like that in order to identify and address and to make sure that that address is kind of like unique or a unique person without kind of like directly identifying that person that presents its own challenges obviously it's less scalable it's kind of like hard to get everyone involved it's it can be exclusionary so you know that's why we're still kind of like um defaulted to this kind of like coin holder voting thing and then you say you know can we do other thresholds like holding some minimum amount of the governance token no because if someone has like 10 000 tokens they can just split the tokens up into like 100 different addresses if you have like a minimum of 10. um uh sorry if you have a minimum of 100 tokens per address then they can just

split up those hund you know 100 tokens from that 10 000 into you know 100 different addresses so that doesn't work either but civil resistance is a very very hard problem by the way this isn't just a problem for crypto this is a problem for like online in general because you don't really um you know you don't know you don't know the person's identity you don't know an ip addresses identity unless you kind of like go through regular law floor channels but that's kind of like a whole process you know the law enforcement channels and stuff like that so you can't you know you you can't really even do that with ethereum addresses so so yeah it's something that's being worked on for sure um but hopefully that gives you a kind of like overview of the state of that all right i want to hear from fran who

asks can you explain why certain dapps only work with certain wallets most everything except metamask but other wallets sometimes won't connect to a particular dap as far as i know i'm not a developer here as far as i know the wallet has to add support for that app or the app has add support for for that wallet um on on their kind of like interface uh this is why things like wallet connect are pretty popular because wallet connect is basically a standard where if a website supports or web3 website or a default or whatever supports wallet connect then any other apps that support wallet connect can interact with it so that's why you know people are encouraging the apps to just integrate wallet connect because then you don't have to worry about doing a kind of like wallet by wallet basis of integrations there but as far as i know

it yeah every interface has to um integrate uh a certain wallet so that it will work with with their dap all right uh one here from looking handsome who says uh anthony follow up question regarding alright what's the downside of stock stacking our eth on arbitrary my assumption dca australian dollars into crypto.com to stack r8 via the arbitrary withdrawal gives you exposure to eat depreciation plus four percent interest is this a viable alternative to services like celsius for those who can't afford a stake with rocketpool on mainnet yes definitely a viable alternative i would say the only downside is the fact that arbitram is more risky to use than ethereum layer 1 because it's new arts still got admin keys and centralization vectors stuff

like that but generally yeah i don't think there's much downside there there's other you know as i said this is the risk aspect to it earning a nice four percent interest on on eighth is is is great right like you know and and like holding ra to do that is great and that's the whole point of rockable to give users exposure to staked teeth um without having to kind of like stake either you know just being able to hold a token so so yeah i can't see any kind of like uh any downsides besides some added risk there which obviously comes with everything that you use on chain there's always risks everywhere so as long as you understand that then yeah you should be fine all right uh one here from brian peace who asked congrats on the one year anniversary of the daily way regarding

validiums what's the point of posting proofs on chain if cool data is kept off shane if access to the coordinator is lost or censored aren't the proofs basically worthless in which case why not just store everything off chain so no so the the reason why this isn't useless is because validium isn't the final form of off-chain data the revolution is and what the volition will enable to you to do is to either run in validity mode or in roll-up mode or store your data wherever you want to store it so for example the proofs are still posted on chain under evolution model but say you want to store the data yourself you want to put it on your own computer and you'll be responsible for your own data but say for some reason you kind of like lose

the data and you and um you have to kind of like uh get it back at some point in the future somehow say you've lost it because you've actually accidentally deleted it and you're doing some data recovery but that takes some time well uh the thing is is that you just because the data is lost doesn't mean that uh the proofs are worthless because without the proofs being on chain uh uh you wouldn't be able to get the get kind of like your funds back no matter what even if you were able to achieve that data but even in that kind of like aspect as well imagine that you've kind of like put your data on a data availability committee and they go offline and they run away with your data but say someone else comes along and says well hey like i actually had this

data i was acting as a backup you can download it from me if you just go to this kind of like um you you have this torrent and you just download it like in a peer-to-peer fashion then you get your data well you know you have the data now the proofs are on chain so you can just present the data to the chain and everything will be well and good and you'll be able to unlock your funds so i don't think it's worthless to have the proofs on chain at all i think it's very necessary because um and i i don't think you can store the proofs off chain by the way because for the for the proofs you actually need the chain to come to consensus on it so it's actually impossible to have the proofs on chain from what from what i know um i

may have to to double check on that maybe polly now knows the answer but um i'm i'm pretty certain that you actually can't have proofs on chain to begin with but as i said like the other stuff still applies where even if you could it's just it it's it's not you know it doesn't make sense to do that and it does it and it doesn't make it worthless just decide the proofs don't become worthless just because you lose data um uh you lose access to that data because you can always gain access to that data back and then you have guarantees that the proofs are still there on layer one ethereum because for them to be lost on layer 1 ethereum the ethereum chain would either have to go offline or get attacked to delete those proofs which you know it's very obviously near impossible for that stuff to happen so

so yeah hopefully that answers your question but i think like the the crux of the answer is that like the proofs as far as i know can't actually be off-chain they have to be on chain because the proofs are what the uh you know validators or miners would have come to consensus on when building the blocks and everything like that and securing things uh and you had a follow-up question here brian or another question regarding vitalik's suggestion to reduce gas costs for rollouts posting their proofs why not reduce gas costs for other transaction types too could we reduce the gas required for sending funds from l1 to l2 so vitalik's proposal is to reduce a specific type of um of kind of like opcode being the call data opcode as far as i understand it this is very specific to rollups because

rollups use call data i don't know if other kind of like smart contracts use it but rollups use it heavily i mean all roll-ups use it it's basically critical to their operation um and then you know yeah and that's kind of like why the way it is but in terms of other transaction types if you reduce the gas required for sending funds from l1 to l2 you can't actually do this because the chain doesn't know that you're sending funds from l1 to l2 the change just sees that you're sending funds to a smart contract so if you change the cost of sending funds to a smart contract you change it for every smart contract right um and you know you change it for like literally every um contract that's ever been kind of like deployed on kind of like on ethereum um so that actually

wouldn't help because it would actually just uh it wouldn't just apply to l2s it would apply to everything um so that's why you can't do it there i'm sure there are some op codes that can be maybe fine-tuned to allow cheaper sending i mean i actually think eighth costing 21 000 gas to send is probably too expensive but at the same time eath is the kind of like it sends is one of the most uh active kind of like activities on the ethereum network and gas costs are pretty much in place to make sure that the chain uh uh kind of sorry in place for various different things but mostly to make sure the chain state doesn't bloat too hard or like that that um too big of transactions can't like push the network over or can't dos the network so there is kind of like a

reasoning around this um but yeah it wouldn't be possible to reduce the gas cost of sending funds from l1 to l2 because sending to l2 is just sending it to a smart contract and to ethereum the smart contracts are all the same in terms of like how they're supposed to act based on their op codes all right last one on the sheet here from handus attack who says explain like i'm five mav oh you sound like i'm five mav that's uh i mean i can explain that mav like you're 30 but like you're five hmm let me let me quickly think of something if i was explaining mav to a five-year-old if you want the literal kind of explanation to a five-year-old i would maybe explain it in such a way where imagine you're buying okay imagine there's an ice cream truck

in your street and they only have uh they only have like five ice cream cones left or ice creams left before they sell out now imagine there's a line of five people and they're all gonna go buy the ice cream cone right but then a sixth person shows up well there's only five ice creams there's six people so what does the sixth person do well they cut the line they buy an ice cream and then the other four people buy their ice cream but the fifth person doesn't get one but then that that sixth person comes along and says hey i'll give you an ice cream but they'll sell it to you at like a ten percent markup that is an example of front running where the sixth person front ran you know the the kind of like last person in the line there well technically that would front run

the first person in the line but let's just for the sake of the argument say they front ran this the last person in the line and the last person ends up having to pay higher for their for their ice cream and they otherwise would have because they got front run by uh you know the sixth person so that is my best explain like i'm 5 mev like on on the spot there hopefully that makes sense but mav so so that explains front running which is just an elementary part of mev uh mav standing for minor extractable value is literally just like any value that can be extracted by the miner or the staker or kind of like the sequencer or anyone producing blocks ordering transactions now this is going like i'm this is not going to be

explained like i'm five anymore because i don't have something prepared to explain that come five but essentially that's what that's what mavs so you can have like any type of mev whether it be like back running sandwich attacks and front running or you know time-banded attacks as well which is time-banded attacks are basically got to do with re-orgs where essentially miners can like re-org each other and then reopen each other again and it's kind of like the chain seems to be doing kind of like time travel so to speak it gets really messy and really it's really cool when you think about it but um this sort of stuff can happen but there's like different incentives that are preventing it from happening um but i can't begin to explain like i'm five that um and maybe not even explain like

i'm 30 because i'm not an mev expert but but yeah hopefully that kind of like explained it as well as i could on the spot all right uh i think there's a bunch more questions in the ama series channel i'll get to now so one here from pakobo who asked what would be the tps on eth2 proof of stake without the roll-ups and sharding uh the same as it is today um a proof of stake doesn't uh increase scalability at all uh that then there's no kind of like tps increase on layer one ethereum with uh the merge which is the proof of state kind of like merged there um and without rollups and charting yeah it'd be the exact same with it as it is today on layer one uh one here from crumpy with something like polygon having multiple scaling solutions what is the process of all

these dapps already on the pos train moving over to polygon future zika roll-ups is it a smooth and easy transition or is this a burden anyway that would just basically have to redeploy to these future zk roll ups just like they have to redeploy to other ecosystems there's not really a simple way to yank your app and all the liquidity i mean there isn't really a way to do this at all to yank your app and all your liquidity from one chain and put it on another obviously that is a very centralizing thing too so that obviously is not something that that the teams want to do either even if they have the ability to do so through a multi or an admin key so yeah it's basically just like migrating across one here from g4d gmi i want to get your opinion regarding um i can't

seem to understand how they get the insane apy um i i won't give my opinion on arm because like it's a controversial thing where some people think it's a ponzi some people think it's it's not um the reason why they can get that insane apy is because they do uh um what's it's not it's not rebalancing it's uh oh man what's what's the thing called uh man the words escaping me right now uh rebasing rebasing that's what it's called because they do rebasing where they have like a target um price that they want to get to and they rebase every so often to get to that target price and by rebasing they give everyone else more tokens um than what they had and that feeds into the apy um but on top of that they also kind of get

the apy fed in from the trading fees because they do what's called protocol owned liquidity where they buy their own liquidity shares and then like manage it themselves and the apy as far as i know from the trading fees goes to uh the om stakers but i think most of it comes from the rebasing um so hopefully that answers that answers your question um the the insane apy is actually like uh i mean there's a lot of risk attached there because what can end up happening is that these rebasing coins can death spiral where people will sell them and then the price will dump and then it'll rebase and then people will sell it again and rebates and sell it again you know you know what i mean like it can death spiral but it did it i mean it attempted to their spell a few weeks ago

but then it kind of like bounced back but a lot of smart people think it's just going to eventually hit a point where it just deaths brawls completely i'm not convinced of that yet but i'm not going to give my opinion on if i think it's a ponzi or not uh that's up to the i think like the the general viewer to decide that um one here from jimar888 is is wa gmi or we're gonna make it legit or just marketing what does making it look like um i think making it for most people looks like making enough money in order not to work a normal kind of like full-time nine-to-five or quote-unquote wage-cut job anymore i think that's at least that's what making it was for me um and not just financially but also a lot of people it's also like kind of like

socially and professionally so what i mean by that is having a career that they enjoy doing that allows them to kind of like keep advancing and progressing getting better at what they do grow their own kind of like social capital grow their own community a lot of people have done this i mean speaking from personal experience here i i'm pretty like at this point in time i'm pretty comfortable saying that i've done both like i've made it both financially and kind of like socially and professionally i'm doing what i love every single day you know everything that i do is growing i have a great community of people um that i've managed to foster which really really makes me happy uh and yeah i can't really think of anything else that i would would be doing that would mean although that would make me more make it i feel like

i've already gotten to that point so i think from for most people it's basically that and i think just you know saying wagmi is just kind of like a mantra that the crypto community uses to spread positive and good vibes around uh you know whether it be if the price is going up or down it doesn't really matter it's just all about spreading good vibes but i mean everything is marketing when you really think about it everything's narratives but there are good and bad narratives and i think that uh we're going to make it is a good narrative but at the same time it can be used in a bad way where people say we're gonna make it and then like they're just like dumping their tokens on you in the back room right so if you just take it like as like a high level i

think it's a good way to spread positive vibes around all right one here from darklight1 who asked would it be better to invest in layer 2 coins such as matic than eth talking about the long term as most people will be interacting with ethereum through a rollup it seems like that would pump the price of the layer two coins into the layer one coin i'm sorry dark glad i'm gonna give you the cop-out answer of i don't give investment advice sorry i'm not gonna answer that question directly um and also i am an advisor to polygon i've invested in most of the l2s fi private rounds so i have conflict of interest out the ass here so i'm not going to give you an answer but you know if you've listened to any of my content that i obviously am extremely bullish on eighth i have said before that i don't

believe that most things are going to outperform eighth over the long term um it does depend on your entry on things as well but yeah i can't give a direct investment advice here i would suggest posting about this in the discord channel somewhere there's a lot of people looking having the same questions as you in the community and talking about it they might be able to give you like direct answers but unfortunately i can't um just i don't feel responsible giving it an answer to that question so sorry about that uh uh sorry don't feel comfortable giving an answer not responsible uh i want to hear from jan what's something you changed your mind about in the last three months in the ethereum space ah this is this is a good question um you know the funny thing is i don't want

to kind of like toot my own horn here but a lot of the things that i've been talking about for a long time have basically come true and i i don't think i've missed the mark on a lot of things as i said i did kind of like earlier in the year i think that defy tokens would have performed a lot better than what they did but that's like a market related thing i think in terms of like fundamentals based stuff in the last three months in the ethereum space i would actu actually no this is one thing that i've been thinking about a lot lately and this is probably this last couple weeks i think that the ethereum space can be more pragmatic and sacrifice a little bit of short-term kind of like decentralization for growth now what i mean by this is that

obviously the the fees are high on layer 1 ethereum because we want to keep the chain as decentralized as possible we want users to be able to run nodes uh you know full nodes we want people to be able to validate the chain on consumer hardware but what is the use of allowing users to validate the chain of consumer hardware if they can't even afford to use the chain to begin with right so there's that kind of like dichotomy there and yes i know i've said like plenty of times before that layer one is the settlement layer but the thing is is that between now and when we get sharding layer two fees are still probably going to be relatively high um you know or higher than what we would like them to be so that's you know when vitalik came along and basically proposed this thing

of of um of kind of like reducing the the uh the gas cost of call data in order to give us that scalability boost for roll-ups but in doing so there is a consequence the consequence being that the chain becomes harder to run because you're adding more uh kind of state to the chain and in the worst case i think it adds another uh how much terabytes a yeah like a few terabytes e3 i think it was three terabytes a year to the chain so it does make it harder to run the chain but as the kind of trade-off is that we get much better scalability for layer twos but i think it strikes a good balance i think that yes it makes it harder to run the chain but it allows layer twos to have cheaper fees which allows end users to have cheaper fees and it basically

allows them to use the kind of um use the chain again and basically migrate to roll-ups faster and and kind of like get people off layer one uh and then in the kind of like longer term uh in the longer term when we get sharding and things like that it becomes less of a concern and um and then obviously we have like uh uh statelessness and state and state expiry or history expiring other things going on with the chain as well to make it easier to run nodes and like clients and stuff but as i said that's all like longer term stuff like two three years maybe for most of that stuff to be rolled out so from that perspective i've changed my mind on the fact that i'm happy for us to sacrifice a little bit of kind of like decentralization in that it's going to become harder for users to

run nodes if we do this eip that reduces the cost for roll-ups but we get a massive boost in scalability for roll-ups which to me is a fair trade so that's what i've something i've changed my mind in the last three months or probably just like the last week to be honest um because i was very i was a very ardent supporter of keeping layer one as maximally kind of like decentralized as possible and easy to run as possible but the argument around getting users to layer twos and to use them as quickly as possible also fits into what i've been saying about we need to migrate everyone to layer two and if we can do that while only sacrificing a little bit of um you know decentralization in the short term then i'm happy to happy for that to go ahead so so hopefully that answers uh

your question jan i think that's gonna be it uh i know there's one here from from gmat888 that comes in again do you think that any of the crypto debt uh debit card offerings are worth considering versus normal off ramp to bank to my to bank any favorites um i think that they are if you kind of care about like cashback and things like that like i know that crypto.com has one and but the thing is for i think for the crypto.com one they make you stake crow tokens so you would actually have exposure to a token i don't know how much they make you stake i'm sure it's not a lot but that's kind of like a everything you have to take on you know maybe the crow token falls in value and you lose money or whatever um but uh i've heard good things about the

crypto.com one in terms of like cashback but i'm not endorsing it i haven't tried it myself so don't take that as an endorsement just just as an example and i think there's a bunch of others out there if they do cash back it might you know it's pr it could be worth it um but i haven't tried any of them myself just yet uh so sorry if that answers your question jimmer um but i think that's going to be it unless anyone else has a question in the audience otherwise i'm going to wrap it up for today so i'll give it a few seconds just raise your hand if you have a question if not i'm going to end it there all right well that's it thank you everyone for tuning in to the 15th delegate ama i do these every two weeks

i think through the christmas period i might uh not do another one of these for another month or so maybe another five weeks till the new year because i'm going to be busy moving into my new house as you know i announced on the refill the other day um and also it's christmas time so we'll see how i go i'll announce it in the discord channel if it will be going ahead in two weeks if not expect a new one in the new year but yeah thanks everyone for tuning in and i'll see you in the discord channel