Here's How AVAX Subnets are Scaling Ethereum

GoGoPool, Landslide + Savvy Defi talked to NodeKit about how rollups are using Avalanche Subnets to scale Ethereum

Social Links:
GoGoPool Twitter: https://twitter.com/GoGoPool_
Savvy DeFi Twitter: https://twitter.com/SavvyDeFi
Landslide Twitter: https://twitter.com/CosmosAVAX

Transcript

0:00

We're gonna get this thing started. I love doing this. I would like to welcome everyone too. The avac ecosystem space. I am one of your lovely hosts. My name is Brey. I do growth strategies for Go-Go Pool. We're a permissionless liquid sticking protocol and we help some nets and validators. Launch at half cost, baby. That's right, half cost. I am joined here by my lovely co-host, one of which is Nathan Up. Landslide. Say, what's up my friend? All right. Here we go. Pushups. Pushups. Let's get it. And I tried to time this a lot. So I'm going to talk slower, so hopefully Savvy Defi can't get up here, but they're still not up here yet. So Twitter space is tweaking, but I'm still gonna introduce Savvy Defi. We got Alex Lumley at the helm and for those of you don't know who, what Savvy Defi does, they do non liquidating lines of credits and landslide does bringing the cosmos to Avalanche Subnets. And we are joined here by our special guest. We have Noah here from Node Kit say, what's up my friend? Hey everybody. Happy to be on it today. Hey, hey, hey my friend. Thank you so much for popping on today. We really appreciate you. So we're gonna get this thing started, everybody. I'll just go over the agenda that we got going on today. We're gonna be, first, we're gonna talk a little bit about Noah's crypto story. Adi Land here on Ax. We'll go over Noah Kit. Just a quick overview and then we're gonna dive into like what is a rollup and then why everyone should be excited about Rollups coming to Avalanche. And then there was a little tidbit shared from Uzman who said that no Kit Subnet could help scale E. So we definitely are gonna talk a little bit about that of course, as well. Actually, we're gonna talk a lot a bit about that. I'm not gonna lie to you cause I'm definitely for sure. Curious about that. Um, so to start everything off, Noah, can you kind of just give us your crypto story, man. How'd you start off in crypto and then how'd you land here on a on avalanche? Yeah, so it's a bit of a long one, so I'll, I'll, I'll keep it short, but I've been around since you could trade crypto on centralized exchanges without an id. So I've been around since I was before I was 18 even. So I've been trading an interest in crypto for a really long time. For the last, before node kit I was doing anomaly fi, which did data analytics in crypto. So I've just been kind of bouncing around the ecosystem, figuring out like what I really liked, what I didn't like. We landed on shared sequencing and avalanche in specific because of Usman Usman, and we were talking about it and we talked about the potential for sequencing on Avalanche, and we realized how fast it could be if we used hyper as dk, and we just kind of went with it from there and we built it up and that's what node kit is today. All right, so definitely something we're gonna have to go into here. So let's talk a little bit about, um, like what you said, like sequencing, like, like what does that mean? Can you dive a little bit deeper? Yep, I can. So node kit's first product is node kit seq, which is shared sequencer L one. What that means is this allows rollups to easily decentralize their sequencing and can also lead to performance increases for the same rollups cuz they can receive soft finality from the SQ subnet instead of having to wait for the underlying DA layers. Hard finality like Ethereum. So essentially somebody can submit a transaction through a rollup and then it gets submitted to the seek subnet and they only have to wait for finality on the seek subnet instead of on the layer one, they can get a soft finality, which is, it's a lot faster. And then when they get a hard finality, that's when basically the bridge can validate and stuff like that. Like how optimism and arbitrary have like the seven day window. That's the hard finality part. So that's kinda how SEQ works. So, so let me just make sure I got it. So on like Ethere, uh, Ethereum has this hard sequencing. Where like the transaction like has to like fully post. Yeah. Okay. Hard and soft finality is one of those things people argue about a lot. Um, just like they argue about the definitions of rollups, people argue about the definition of finality of things like that. So it's something that's always changed, well, not always changing, but the definitions being redefined quite frequently. And it's kind of one of those things, I think as the space matures, people will have it more ingrained on what it means and have like a universal definition, if that makes sense. Let's, uh, let's actually go into that, into that definition. Like how would you define a rollup? So I'm gonna go over smart contract, rollups and sovereign. So, and this definition is actually by John, John Ow, who I believe is he's one of the leading like speakers in the space. So his definition's kind of the most common one, I would say at this time. So for a smart contract roll up, What that needs to have happen is an order array of inputs on the L one where the transaction data is posted on like that DA layer. The DA layer in this case is the L one code being run over it. That's the roll up node software that's looking for the transactions on the L one. And then from this you can use the roll up blockchain to get deterministic outputs of running the function over the inputs and then just new blocks extend the tip of the rollup. An on chain contract runs a light client of the rollup, keeping the block header hashes in storage, and then that contract is convinced of settlement upon receipt of avail validity proof or after the fraud window has passed. And this is kind of the most common definition currently. I'm sure people would disagree with me on some points here, but that's kind of the general definition that's widely regarded around the industry as being what we currently believe. Can I get that like in an e l I five? We put data on, on Ethereum, we look at the data on Ethereum, see if it, it's correct. If it's correct, the rollup can keep going. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you so much for that. And Sovereign Rollups is like that, but like, um, the best way of describing Sovereign Rollups is like that. But like the users can decide cuz Sovereign Rollups just post it. It's kind of like they can just send the data to the, to Ethereum basically and say like, Hey, we we're posting data to the L one, but the, they verify the rollup blocks client side instead of via smart contract. So there is no smart contract with a sovereign rollup. It's decided by the rollup notes themselves and they locally verify the fork short rule. So that's why they're quite different than the traditional smart contract rollups. And there's no really large sovereign Rollups yet that have reached adoption. Um, it's still kind of a new technology so far. Okay, so maybe I can, uh, help guide this a little bit. So the difference between hard finality and soft finality, like hard finality is the point at which a transaction is considered irreversible and soft finality is, it refers to probabilistic finality, which is the likelihood that a transaction being reverted decreases over time as more blocks are added on top of it. Got you, got you. Okay. And then, all right, now, now keep going. Now what's the difference? Like how, how does eth the way the eth processes it differ from, let's say, like no kit segment? Oh, so it's very different from, for e itself, um, like eth has validators versus, like rollups typically don't have validators in the same way. E, they do have validators, but it's a different kind of validation. Like EAs, validators, sequence, EAs, validators do a lot more in rollups. Those processes are typically separated, but it depends on the rollup. Like for example, chroma network separates their verifier and their, and their proposer, but it also differs rollup to rollup. The, the issue right now, if Rollups is that there's so many different competing standards that like the difference between ETH and a rollup is, it's a wide margin at this point, just because they just don't operate the same. I feel like it's easier if I kind of explain like what a shared sequencer is. I think that'll kind of help out to make more sense of it. Well, let's, let's discuss what a sequencer is and then why it's quote shared. Okay, I can do that. So a sequencer, all it does is takes in transactions and then orders them and puts it on a DA layer. That's it at the most basic definition, it batches transactions and it puts it on a DA layer. That's it. Okay. So real quick, what's a DA layer? Yeah. L one, um, slash it, it could be anything from Ethereum slash geo polygon, any number of sources of data availability. All you need for a DA layer is you need to be able to take in data and store it there and have some, most people choose one that's fast. You could obviously use slower DA layers, but typically a DA layer is decentralized unless you're talking about, um, Valiums. And then it can be not decentralized, but typically a day layer. Just think of it like Ethereum Polygon slash g somewhere where you can store data. Yeah. Got you, got you. And, and smoke Joe. I see with your hand up. I'm gonna let, I'm gonna let Noah finish up with his, um, with his, uh, sequence. And then I got you right after that, my friend. No. So sequencer is gathering all the transactions and then where does the shared sequencer come in? So a shared sequencer does basically the same thing, but instead of for one rollup, it does it for multiple. And the reason why this is better, well the reason why we believe it's better is cross up interopability. Sometimes you can actually have performance increases too, and better censorship resistance compared to a lot of the sequencers currently are centralized. They're not decentralized at all. So when you have a centralized sequencer, you can have issues with downtime, censorship, potentially. Just a lot of other things like that, which if the rollups want to be like decentralized blockchains, it's really a big like hard stopping point for them because they have a lot of issues because of that. Well, or potential at least. The, the, the, the, the, the larger elephant here is that there's a limit to the scale they can achieve because you have the amount of compression you can do on a data set and the amount of block space you have in a single block. Yes. But you also have to remember different rollups use different DA layers. So, but that does stand true for all DA layers. There's always gonna be a limit on how many transactions you can put in a block, right? So, so what is happening on eth rollups is like, there's a prevailing narrative now that there will be 10,000 rollups within five or 10 years, and the, you're gonna have thousands of users fighting for the same block space. Yep. So what, so what will happen for the gas prices as they not only compete with each other, but the native users of, of L one is, is, is that it will ultimately vampire attack eth itself and everything will happen have to happen on a different network like an L three or an L four or an L five. That, and, and that's sort of a big if, because if Ethereum is able to implement sharding and then sort of pivot the new narrative into ditching L two s. So this is why it gets so weirdly semantic, be it, it's not only a semantic quagmire, it's like an issue of, uh, of, of the space cannibalizing itself. Like Yep. It's also an issue if they decide if they're gonna keep posting the full transaction data. Or not because, for example, slash j integrated with optimism to have, like, I believe it's still in demo stage, it's not fully live, but what they are doing now is they're using slash J for data availability with optimism. So then they're posting less data to e theorem. And if patterns like that continue, then it will take longer to, to reach that phase. But that is something that, that is an issue that still needs to be figured out. But I believe that's more on the DA side, um, to figure out. Currently we, we aren't building a data availability there, but it is a, that's a major issue that needs to be solved. And I believe, I believe there's a lot of different solutions out there that are currently working towards building better DA layers, like eigen da celestia avail. So there's a lot of different options out there, and hopefully they can help solve this long-term to make it easier for roll-ups long-term. That's just the goal. I think it's not a one one shoe fits all kinda solution. It's gonna be something that gets worked on over a couple years at least. Understood. The, the, what we see on, on, on E is that L two s fracture, liquidity. Instead of having one chain, you fracture the liquidity value into disparate systems and the users have to interact with each chain differently. What, uh, what is different about node kit and how rollups are implemented here on Avalanche? Yep. So we're actually working on some bridging solutions already. We have yet to announce the exact implementation, so I can't share a ton of details about it yet, but we are working on some bridging solutions and we should be able to announce those in the next couple months and those should make it a lot easier for just users to move funds cross roll up. Pay for funds on the sequencer, stuff like that. So that is something we're working on from day one to make sure that we keep that in mind and make sure that it's less of an issue. It's always an issue if roll-ups having fractured liquidity, but there's, there's lots of different ways we can mitigate it and really try and work around it long term. It's just one of those things that, even if for example, well, avalanche and other chains, it's always, there's always some kind of bridging process unless you're buying and putting assets directly on Avalanche, if it's integrated with like a centralized exchange. So there's, if people want to do it in decentralized way, there's always some kind of bridging in involved, typically moving assets from one chain to another. So it's just something that I think we're gonna work on. And I believe other people are, other people are already working on it, so it's something we're keeping in mind and trying to build to work around that and figure it out long term. I, well, one easy solution to that is we can just use. Landslide to bridge I BBC like clients. That's one real simple solution. Yep. That that is one simple solution. It's just we also need to consider node kit seeq. The seeq chain itself is just used for thes sequencers, so we'd also have to work with landslide to develop bridges to and from the rollups that deploy on node kit seek. But that's definitely something we'd be, we'd consider and I think it'd be a great opportunity for us and we'd love to talk about it more in the future. Yeah, that happens. I think that would happen through natively, through avalanche warp messaging. Yeah. We have to look into, I'd have to look at the docs and really dive deep into it before we could commit to one implementation or the other. Cuz it would need to be a sequencer. The sequencer itself would need to be able to submit the transaction so, We'll have to figure it out. It also depends on if the rollups want to implement it at the native level, if that's something they want, or if they wanna implement it at the smart contract level. So I think it'd be something, something to consider. There's lots of different ways to implement stuff like that, which is one of the great things about having landslide in the avalanche ecosystem is they've made it a lot easier because you're already in the ecosystem. It's a lot easier to connect to that than to connect directly to Cosmos. Yeah. Um, can you, uh, talk a bit about the data availability problem? I know like we kind of breeze over this, but it's, it's pretty big. And, um, can you explain what the problem is to people who, who are unfamiliar with it? Because it, it's, it's hard to understand and it's a really big issue. Yep, I can, so essentially the data availability issue is, there's only so much block space in Ethereum blocks. So what will happen is if all the gas fees are going up, Because all this block space is used by Rollups, you'll essentially have no extra block space. Block times will incre, well block times will stay the same, but Rollups won't be able to submit blocks on time cuz essentially there will be so much usage that they won't be able to roll up transactions would grind to a halt basically, plus their transaction fees would skyrocket and it would overall be a worse experience. So what I think is really the solution for that long term is using an alternative DA layer like slash year, like avail, like eigen da, using something like that and then only posting like a state route or something similar to Ethereum. Instead of posting all the transaction data, which currently a lot of the rollups, what they do is they post the full transaction data on Ethereum. I think if we continue doing that long term and we try and scale that up, I think there's definitely gonna be scaling issues. So I think that's a problem that needs to really get sorted out quickly and I think there's a lot of different options. Kind of to solve that. I think using alternative DA layers like Celestia or Egen layer or avail, I think it's a great option. I think that's, that's really the way I think that works out. Otherwise, it's literally just a ticking time bomb. If, if we all want to use Ethereum, there's just not gonna be enough space. Can you explain, um, if, if you squint your eyes here, it seems to me like we're almost replicating the issue of mem pools and the entire like ledger. It's like we're almost moving the game to another layer. Like what, what is it about the data availability that is not, uh, available to validators on the L one? Well, typically the da la well, the DA layer also doesn't have. Smart contracts plus it can shard. That's the big thing of celestia is they have these light clients, they have the data availability sampling. So celestia can expand out really how much they can handle by how many light clients are connected, which is something we don't have currently on the L one, so Right. But the, but the light clients rely on the state o o on the, uh, source and the target chain, uh, being genuine. Right. Are you talking about roll up light clients or slash light clients? So let, let's say, let's say, let's just say roll up light clients, that that's their trust assumption. Right. Well, what I was talking about is more so the celestia light clients, cuz the celestia clients, like clients are the ones that allow the scaling because that's one of the main properties of celestia is how it allows scaling with adding more light clients, you can scale it more. That's, that's how they decrease their block times over time. That's really the scale. That's the scaling plan for, I believe Cel Jan also avail, but the, but the light clients still have to relay information. Right. So isn't, isn't Celestia relayed over tender? Yes, they are. So isn't there a limit to the Byzantine fault tolerance of Tendermint, like clients versus avalanche like clients? It's something we haven't seen at that scale yet. So I think that it's gonna be one of those things that is gonna have to be addressed by them. It's with the slash j integration for how they've managed the light clients. I wouldn't be able to tell you off the top of my head exactly how they've done it. But I know that they are working towards scaling with Celestia in that regard. It's just, it's one of those things where they have a very specific integration. And I understand that the scaling issues still happen there, but it's the same scaling issues you'd have with any chain potentially. Uh, but it's, but those scaling issues are inherent to the consensus algorithm that, that's kind of what I'm driving at here. Like the, the other, the other, you know, time bomb here is that, is Nakamoto consensus on E Derman, consensus on, on Cosmos and Avalanche Consensus solves a lot of these issues. Yep. I agree. That's why the biggest thing for us is we're not part, we're not only pushing for one data available a layer. We're kind of agnostic in that regard. So we are kind, what we're looking at long term is allowing people to really scale. And use whichever data avail layer we want. They really want to use, instead of just saying, okay, you're gonna be locked into one. That's it. We only support support putting data in this one place. That's it. We're really trying to be more agnostic towards that. And I understand and the issue of what we, you're trying to say. If, for example, there's an data availability layer that comes out on Avalanche, for example, we'd be glad to support it. It really depends on what the end users want. From what we've heard, talking to Rollups that want to integrate with node kits, SEEQ, they want to be able to put their data on Ethereum, they wanna be able to put it on Celestia and all these other places, and if they wanna be able to put it there, it's just, that's kind of what we're leading towards currently because at the end of the day, We're just trying to build out the roll up integrations the way they want it. We really wanna work with Rollups instead of saying, you have to do X, Y, and Z every single time. Like, we wanna be much more fluid about it, if that makes sense. And kind of allow it to be modular. Understood. Thank you. No problem. So I, there's a couple different, uh, ways that we can go with this. I, I do have a question, but I also wanna let smoke one. Joe, you've been waiting patiently. Go ahead and ask you a question and then we'll come on back to mine. Okay. Thank you for letting me speak. Um, I love the conversation you guys are going in right now, and I appreciate it. I, I like learning about the, the tech stack and how everything works behind the wall. Um, for this part of the conversation, I would just ask, how does, uh, zk play into this? Could, could Ethereum implement. Sharding and then implement ZK on its layer to help like compress data to like increase their throughput. Yep. They definitely could with dang sharding coming about. That makes it easier for rollups to include more data. Yeah, it, it wouldn't be an issue. We, if anything, we'd probably just need to change the client slightly. The nice thing is all of our stuff's just written in go, so connecting to Ethereum, if Ethereum adds an extra data blob, as long as we just update our smart contract, it should be good to go on on our end. It'll, that'll just affect our, our end users, which are, are the Rollups and also node kit chain. So yeah, we'd be happy to see that happen on Ethereum. And it'd be great. It would, it would help solve some of the issues at least currently. Um, I. As stuff scales, there's always different issues you have to consider in mine because that's just the way, the way it works with all of these things, as stuff scales up, there's always different things we have to consider. Now, there's two things that you said there that I just want you to like go a little bit into detail about Noah. You said zk, rollups and sharding. Can you just kind of give a quick overview of those two things? Yes, I can. So with zk Rollups, what a ZK rollup is, it's a zero knowledge rollup. So it's just a different way of proving the, the, the state transition function work correctly. And it looks at the LA basically you're looking at the, the previous state, the input, and you have a private input. Well, it's typically a private input, private input pub, public input. So the public input could be the previous state, if that's how. Maybe had it implemented and then it just proves that that transaction happened. A good way of thinking of CK in a way that's really easy, um, is think you're looking at a cave and there's two entrances. If you're able to, to show how a CK Rollup works, go in the entrance on the right and then walk out on the left. Now you haven't shown them that there is something connecting those two entrances, but the end user can assume that there is something connecting those two entrances because otherwise you wouldn't be able to go in one and come out the other, if that makes sense. And then no charting, it's, it's just a different way to scale the data availability layer. It's attaching an extra blob onto blocks so Rollups can add data to those blobs. It makes it cheaper for user transactions. And it's overall, I think sh. Proto Dan Charting. Proto Dan Charting. It's, it's a long name, which is EIP 48 44. I think it'll be a very interesting proposal once it gets implemented and I'm looking forward to it because I think, I think it'll help out with making Rollups cheaper. At least currently, if Rollups scale with Dan sh charting will still run into some of the same issues, potentially, just like Nathan was saying earlier, but it's kind of the name of the game. As we scale these things, we're gonna run into some of those issues and that's why we're modular. We don't, we don't wanna lock people in. I'm also curious, cuz you know, earlier you had said that Rollups were coming to you and they, they wanted to kind of send information to multiple different, um, chains. Can you talk a little bit about why, what's the why behind that? Why do they need to send information in all these different places? It's cheaper. Ethereum's very expensive. Uh, Like, yeah, it's the same, like putting all your data on Ethereum might be the safest. But buyer cost wise, for some of these rollups, they have so much state, especially for example, alternate VMs, alternate VMs, like other than Ethereum, like for example, the C-level vm, um, move vm, stuff like that. They have so many transactions per second that submitting all those transactions to a blockchain like Ethereum might be cost prohibitive. So they might wanna consider alternate DA layers. So it's just something I think a lot of people are currently considering. And even for Ethereum role, e v M based rollups, not Ethereum, rollups, E V M based rollups, it is something they're, they're considering because it makes the transactions cheaper for the users long term. And as Nathan said, then they don't have to worry as much about running into the vampire attack, even if other rollups are doing it. If we start adopting alternate DA layers earlier on, long term, it'll be a better solution than if just everybody tries to use Ethereum because it'll just make it more difficult and more expensive for everybody. Got you, got you. So the issue is that if basically if all the rollups send all of the information just to Ethereum, then the gas prices will be hiked up. Yep. Think about it like if everybody wanted to get in a club on a, a Friday night, everybody wants to go to it, the price goes up. If everybody wants to be in there and everybody's trying to jam in for the spot, the price goes up. That's really the simplest way to look at. There's only so much capacity you can fit and, and I may have this, have this wrong, so correct me if I do, um, they want to take. Transactions that are happening on Ethereum, bring it to them and then process it on a different chain and then bring it back. It's not so much as processing on a different chain. It's more so putting trans, putting the transaction data on a separate chain and then putting like for example, a DA pointer and like a height. That's the way the optimistic version optimism and Slash's version works. They're putting a DA pointer and then the height based, basically the block and like the transaction. It's basically an idea, so they can look up that data in Celestia to be able to store very little data on Ethereum store, most of it on Celestia, and then you save a lot of money that way. Plus you can scale it up a lot more because you don't have to worry about, am I gonna spend 50 ETH or something on all the transaction storage costs, which. If anybody saw Delphi Digital's article, these sequencers, uh, for arbitrary and optimism are spending a ton of money to post their data. Currently, how much money, how much money per month? I believe it's 6 million per month. Well, it's 6 million in profit, I believe. I remember Uzman actually posted something about it, um, the other day, or he had reposted the Delphi digital article. I believe it was six to 7 million per month. Um, sorry. It's been a chaotic past few days of launching out of stealth, so I, I may have that wrong, but I believe that it's the amount and just making sure I, that's six to 7 million per month just for data storage, right? Yep. Data storage and sequencing. And who's paying that bill? Oh, the users. That's, that's what your transaction fee, that's what the transaction fee ERs. Okay. Okay. Now I'm, now I'm seeing the big picture here. I'm, I'm gonna let you sum up the big picture for me here. Um, for the end user, their, our benefit, like say I'm an end user, I just wanna use a defi protocol. My specific benefit is I get cheaper gas prices if everything is optimized in this way. Yep. And also that was actually cumulative revenue, not monthly. So currently the cumulative revenue for Arbitra is over 9 million. For optimism, it's over five. Um, yeah. So it's re they're revenue machines currently. Um, you know, so the main advantage of a shared sequencer is it's cheaper, um, using alternative DA layers plus. You don't have to worry about roll up sequencers going down like everybody saw it in the past year, like optimism and arbitrary had issues with their sequencers just going down because it's just one sequencer backing entire blockchain, which is a hilariously bad idea. Um, and people are like still trying to go after like the one sequencer idea. And it's like you, it's, I just find it like insane. Cause it's just like we we're calling ourselves blockchain when we're, we have one sequencer managing the ordering of every single transaction and it's just, it's just running on one server in some AWS warehouse and Yeah, Virginia, it's like gray. This is why it's like stacking hats on top of other hats. Like when you squint your eyes and you look at eth, it said layer one, but the layer one, the layer one mem pool, which was supposed to be ordering the transactions first, basically failed and got congested. Right. Yep. That's why Flash bots came around that, right, because everyone was sniping each other in the men pool. Yep, exactly. And that's why I think that in the end we do need to use the alternative DA layers, but cuz the problem is it's also super expensive for people to start up their own L one s and that's another thing I think people aren't realizing. Yeah. But not, not inside of Avalanche. It's still expensive. You just, yeah, it's still fairly expensive, not on Gogo pool. So yes, we do cut the things in half for sure, and I wanna make that known. But no, the, you know, obviously the long-term vision of global pools to get it to a point where the cost is like pretty trivial. You know, like I always come in here and I talk all the time about like my vision would be get it to a point to where if I am a college student, I have an idea for subnet. I can reliably build one without like this crazy hundreds of thousands of dollar gateway that we have currently. Uh, plus, plus there's the added regulatory overhead, right? Yeah. Plus the regulatory overhead paying for lawyers, all this other site. Like, it's just, uh, yeah, it's a lot, man. So like we and college kid going through it, it, it's definitely a lot currently. Yeah. Dude, I couldn't imagine that. I, I, as a college student, I had a on-campus job, I made$60 a week. Like, I was like, I couldn't even pay for aws. So yeah, we've been loving the AWS free tier for credits and AWS activate tell a lot of stuff. This is, this is where we promote the people from last week, which is peer to peer cloud, p2p, cloud.io. Um, my, my, yeah, that's my sort of longer rant here is that if you squint your eyes, this all sort of looks like the architecture of Avalanche, right? What is an L two? It's a subnet. Why does it exist to scale? You know, it's like, it's like the same rap lyric coming from a different artist. Same thing. Yeah. I just think it depends on costs. I, I think using rollups will be better for things that wanna decrease cost or want to do things. Really wanna post data to e theorem at the end of the day. Or they wanna post data to some other E V M chain. If that, if that's one of their priorities, they're gonna use a roll up. If that's not a priority, they're gonna probably end up using a subnet or building out their own L one. At the end of the day, it's just a, it's just a game of preferences that, that's all, all any of us are really doing is. The users want to do things a certain way and we help them do it that way. If that's the current preference, that's kind of what we help them do. If eventually people are like, Hey, we wanna spin up subnets repeatedly for the sequencers, for rollups, and they wanna like be able to spin up their own subnet for every rollup or something like that, we'll do it. It, it's just one of those things where currently we believe that's what people kind of want and so far it's proven true. Um, so yeah. But I definitely think there's a lot of different scaling solutions, but I think it's not gonna be a one shoe fits all kind of thing. It's kind of gonna be something we figure out over time as web three in general scales. Yo, Alex, see what your hand up my friend. You got the floor. So, um, I have a question around, um, developers deciding to like move to Avalanche from, from main net, from many L two s, et cetera. Um, I know like Nathan kinda every week talks at like this concept. It it's the same rap. Lyrica eventually ends up looking like, like, like, like avalanche with subnets and all this stuff. And that makes total sense to me. But at a certain, at a certain point it's about, uh, an individual developer making a decision if they want to, um, stay where, where his quote unquote home, right, where they currently are on Ethereum and main net or go over to where arguably the technology is better, like avalanche, right? And if we think about it from, from that perspective, from an individual making a decision of, of where to build or where to transition from cuz it takes a bunch of work to, you know, migrate work from one place to another. Is there enough of a difference on avalanche for an individual to want to make the transition? Consistently, like will they eventually be quote like pushed out of main net pushed out of L two s and have to go to Avalanche? Or will it be more something that Avalanche has to be as enticing enough to bring them over? So I think I have an interesting perspective on this cuz for my last thing that we did and anomaly five, we built exclusively on main net. Um, for the data analytics. We did have some stuff for Polygon, Z K E V M, but it was mostly main net. So the reason why, which main net Ethereum, we were scraping data from Ethereum. So currently I would say the reason why people will want to move to Avalanche is probably gonna be different person to person. But I think I could see more and more utility applications moving to avalanche subnets specifically. We're already seeing it with the gaming industry of shrapnel and stuff like that. But I also, I just saw somebody who was announcing an oracle that's building on, on an avalanche subnet, stuff like that, applications that. Are very like app chain specific but need to be able to scale up extremely high. I could see a lot of stuff like that moving to avalanche subnets and it's not even applications that necessarily need to interact with like an end user, but more so interactive like protocols. So I could see a lot of those kind of applications moving to subnets cuz it just makes a lot of sense. It makes it way easier than spinning up your own L one. You get a world class development team that's working on the consensus mechanisms and like the bare metal kind of stuff for example. It just makes your life so much easier that, that you can only have to focus on the end product. So I think a lot more people will be ending moving on Avalanche for that reason long term. I'm excited for all that to come to fruition. Yo, Nathan, you got it my friend. I, yeah, I suspect that there is going like a lot of Alex's question, um, A lot of it will come from mandate from institutions like as much as we like, you know, the small team and Right. You know, right now that's, that's basically everyone that's still in the space, right? Like a lot of the next layer of adoption is gonna come from, um, AI integration, right. Making the, the programming language English or Turkish or, or Chinese or whatever at Mandarin or, um, but, um, it's also gonna come from, from mandates And, um, y y you know, from an investment perspective, from these institutional investors, they have a Bitcoin mandate and BlackRock is pushing that thing down the throats of everyone right now, which is good for us. Um, but their, their mandate around development is not, is probably not gonna be an L two. Although we don't know, right? Like Coinbase launch in L two, Coinbase launch in L two because it, they have to, because it, they wanna make their, their stock go up. Um, but in the case of like, you, you, you know, you see that like the Reddit n f t like ground to a halt because of their, because of their layer two on heath, right? You, you, you, you just can't run an effective business that way. And there there's gonna be a long trail of dead of people who try to push their way through something that doesn't work until they find something that does work. So, but I'm, you know, mandate means their, their, their board will have to give them the okay to have, you know, yes, you can run your nodes on this network and here's why. Here's your counterparty risk. Here's your, here's your mandate. So I that's, I hope that's a helpful answer. The, the, the mandate makes a lot of sense. Cause at the end of the day, for, uh, for Avalanche to continue to, to pick up users, to continue to pick up businesses and things like that, um, people have to decide to build on there. It'll either come from more mass adoption, choosing Avalanche over an L two over another L two, or it'll come from, um, mandates forcing people to choose Avalanche cuz they can have certain KYC elements and all these other things. Or, or, or, or it'll come from, uh, I guess, yeah, really just those two main things. People either switching from L two s or just new mass adoption and, and the mandates make, makes a lot of sense. It'll, it'll force you into having to use Avalanche rather than other L two s or it'll make it easier to choose Avalanche rather than those other L two s y you know, you can say, you could say the same thing about the consensus algorithm, right? Like what, what happens to Bitcoin long term? And their consensus algorithm is they're, they're in a game of chicken. I if in the next couple havings, unless the price of Bitcoin goes up significantly, uh, they're gonna have a a, a, a, they, they can face tax from their own mins because it, because the amount of omitted Bitcoin is so low. Yeah. Right. So like I, I feel like bitcoin's gonna be a very interesting, it's gonna be, have a few interesting few years, I can tell you that much because with just the Ordinals and all these different things, plus of the happenings and all these different things, plus how much institution usage has been on Bitcoin, it wouldn't really surprise me to see attacks become more frequent on the Bitcoin consensus mechanisms. And they're gonna try and say like, oh, but nobody owns it that much. But it's like if they're all institutions that control all of it, like they can kind of do what they want and they're playing a long game, but. Essentially if they, they all get together and say, Hey, we're gonna go do this. I feel like it'd be easier than people might anticipate for them to really change things up, which could be very detrimental to community at large. Yeah. They're in a, they're in a game of chicken with their own miners and market price because of Nakamoto consensus. Like, so one, one solution to that is just swap out the consensus algorithm. But they're fundamentalists, so they won't necessarily do that. They're Satoshi's vision, you know, what they thought was the, the real Bitcoin, you know, but they're not, why, why aren't they so anti avalanches? Consensus? They're anti anything that's not Bitcoin. Yeah. If you've ever talked to, like, the hardcore, hardcore guys, like if you mention anything but Bitcoin, they're, they won't even touch it. They're like, They're like so far away from regular like crypto stuff that it, it's like just, it's its own thing. Wouldn't you agree Nathan? Like, like comparing Yeah, they're fundamentalist. Yeah, they're fundamentalists. But it, I would say they're kind of fundamental. Like they're radically fundamental. Like they are fundamental, fundamental. It's like the Amish, it's the Amish of cryptocurrencies, I would say. Right? There's one way that's what they do. We don't change that way. We've done it since the beginning of time. That's the way we do it and that's how Bitcoiners I think, have approached it so far, which I'm not saying is wrong. I don't wanna like try and like ran on their pre, obviously Bitcoin is i'll, I'll say is wrong. I'll reign on their parade. Yeah. But I don't know, it's like they obviously have specific ideas and that's just how it's gonna be at Bitcoin. If Bitcoin changes their consensus mechanisms, I would be shocked. I just don't think that's ever in the cards for them. Well, they're, they're in for an interesting couple years at, at, at, when they emit less and less Bitcoin. How will the miners like support their business? Well, I had a business in high school where I actually made a, I could have been of money selling gaming PCs cause I bought cards, graphics cards from minors that went bankrupt. So I can tell you they don't support their business once the price of Bitcoin goes down. Right. Right. Exactly. They sell And, and here's the other piece, dude. When quantum computing becomes way more easy for state actors, they're gonna have to switch their crypto library. Yep. Because the first thing somebody, like, for example, North Korea, Iran, some hostile state's gonna do is they're gonna say, oh, we're gonna mess with that. It's, it's a fundamental. Currency like object that we can use to mess with stuff, pay for stuff, um, make a ton of money for our country. They've already shown that they'll, they'll mess with stuff. Look at the Harmony Bridge hack and all. Yeah, all what happened with that? Like they've shown that if there's an opportunity, they're gonna take it. So if Bitcoin ever has an opportunity like that, which it looks like it will, they will absolutely take it. Yeah. Wouldn't, sorry, Brie over to you. No, we're gonna keep going with this. I, I like this line of thinking. Wouldn't that also put, so Quantum, I love this quantum computing line of questioning. Quantum computing makes it so that all kind of algorithms basically useless at that point. So then wouldn't it put all consensus algorithms make it all useless? It shouldn't be all consensus is still Okay. Well the issue is encryption. Got you, got you. So it's, from my understanding, it could be easily hacked then. Yeah, but like all ba that, that means like all banks, you know, all water systems, nuclear codes, I mean this whole thing, right? We are talking very calmly about this, but this, uh, seems long. Well, I'm in my bunker man. You do got a bunker, so Yeah. You're, you're, you're not talking calmly me. I do. I'm, I, I'm not in a bunker. I'm in a regular home. Um, I, uh, cuz like, you're, you're talking about this and I am now kind of thinking like, all right, so what happens when this does happen? Does that mean like every single blockchain has to change their algorithm completely? Yeah. Every, yeah, every single thing around the world will change their stuff completely. So it's not gonna just be us. It's gonna be everything. Everything's gonna have to switch once quantum computing becomes feasible, um, for like actual applications instead of just like, Theoretical stuff, like once it's actually in use, everything's gonna have to change to be quantum resistant. Got you. Oh my goodness. So it would seem like the Bitcoin Maxxis basically have like a very finite, uh, deadline then. It's a very finite end, end date for them. Yeah. Their shelf life is declining as, as the days go on. Holy shit. Hey, smoke one Joe. I see you popped up my friend. You got the floor. Yeah. From what I understand, um, once quantum computing comes into play, all of pretty, not all of, there are some out there I believe, like, uh, Poseidon is a modular setup, so you can swap out the mechanisms within the hashing algorithm. Um, to Conti, like progress it over time. I don't know exactly how that works, but that's one I've, I've learned a little bit about or like listened to a podcast with the, the creator speaking and that's something that they're preparing for. Uh, for something like Bitcoin running on shot 2 56, they would have to update their hashing algorithm or their encryption algorithm to like a SHA five 12 or the next one would be like 10 28 or whatever it is. And then at those, at those levels, even with quantum computing, you're still like, you'd be in the, I think like mid to high hundreds of years and low thousands of years to crack it. Um, being that it's a single quantum computer, it's new gin and it's not like hyper advanced. Uh, and that's what we're all gonna experience. That's for every encryption that's out there right now. Um, They may be, if, if it's not completely revamped, they might even be able to go into the past hashing algorithm, crack that, and then use the me the methods of breaking the old algorithms to help them dec decrypt the newer versions or the, the updated algorithms. So everybody's gonna have to go through that. There were, there's a few people who say they're quantum resistant, but I haven't seen anything that's, that's, you know, like solid solidified yet, and there isn't really, uh, very much testing that we can do until it's here. So you can, there are ni so NIST is the National Institute of Science Technology. They, they, they do have quantum resistant, um, cryptography libraries, and they're, they're open source and they're, um, vetted by peer review. That's the best option that we have. How can they have, if you, if you google nist, uh, you know, n i s t quantum, um, crystal lattice, you'll, you'll see it. How can they claim to have resistance to a technology that is not current? The out be right. The difficulty of decrypting the hash. It's like, um, password protection. When people tell you you want to have a password that's longer than 10 characters, or you wanna have numbers and different things in your password, it becomes, something goes through and tries to brute force it. It's going letter by letter for my nu by number, trying every different option available until it gets a correct option. Once you have a string that's so long with so many different variables in it, they're just, Saying for you to compute as fast as our computers are, but for you to compute the, you know, hundred trillion variations that this happening algorithm can, um, create. Um, and, and, and you only get the correct answer at the end of trail. It would take you this many years, this many hundreds of years, or this many thousands of years, and all of the energy on planet Earth push through one computer to find the answer. Now there's a potential that that get lucky. You can crack it within the first 25% of whatever the, the total, you know, are. Uh, so it's not. Sure. They're, they're relying on mathematical process today with all the energy on earth supercomputer and all of the amount of variables you would've to go through them one by one. And it would take it long to do that. Got you. Thank you for that explanation. That that was actually super fucking, that was perfect, dude. Like I completely understand now, um, their, their password is just so fucking long. It's like good luck, basically. Okay. I got you. I got you. So, cause I'm wondering like, how does quantum computing scale, like now we're going into quantum computing? Sure. We got three minutes. Brey. We got three minutes. Man. Ex explain how it scales to me, Nathan. Uh, it scales in other dimensions. That's, that's what I'll quickly say. Oh God, my brain just can't even wrap around this guy. So I dunno what I have to like learn in order to like truly wrap around it. But the moment you start saying other dimensions, my brain taps out. It, it just, it just no longer analog. It's no longer zeros and ones, it's no longer a, a small set of, of things you're calculating like an infinite set size because of all the electron spins. You're calculating everything all at once. That's right. Good god, man. Holy shit. Okay. All right. My brain's fucked, guys. My brain's fucked. Guys. I'm coming up, coming up at the hour mark as well. Um, I wanna just say, I'm gonna open everything up for closing remarks and also for appreciations for our friend Noah here, for coming out today. Um, we're gonna start off, we're gonna, we're gonna leave Noah for the end, for, for his closing, closing remarks. You can shield anything. And, but we're gonna start off with my friend Alex, you've been pretty quiet today, my friend. You got anything for us? Uh, I have been quiet because I've been in the background chatting with my engineering team, trying to figure out everything that's happening and just thinking big things at the end of the, what always ends up happening in these, in these awesome calls is I know about you guys, but I, I end up leaving them with like more questions than answers in a very good way. So, so I appreciate like the, the great people that we have come on and ask good questions and, and help me think deep thoughts and it's like a good kind of meditative, uh, hour. So, so, so I appreciate you no kid for coming on. Thank you for that, that that lovely and warm response Alex, uh, opening up to my friend Nathan with Landslide. You got any closing remarks? Um, I, I'm very curious to see how communication happens over time with Rollups. It's like, uh, everyone's like reinventing the wheel all at once and the wheel costs 6 million a month to run. I'm really curious. There's, you know, optimistic rollups on say network and there's, there's everything we just discussed. So I'm very curious to see how these develop over time. Wait, there's another rollup. So there's a ZK rollup and then there's like another kind of rollup that's called an optimistic rollup. Yeah. That if you look at, say, network, s d i, optimism is the main one. If you here, I can send you over an article, um, that it like explains how, um, Optimism itself works. I'll just, um, bre I'll just text it to from the note kit account. It'll probably help with that stuff. Hey, I really appreciate you. Thank you. Yeah, no problem. And, and I can also send over an article that I, I was actually reviewing that basically explains the differences between Rollups just cuz I wanted to make sure the definit definitions I used were as close to what everybody agrees on as possible. Um, because the problem is just always changing. But I was super happy to be on the space today, learned about a lot of different stuff from the land. I guys, I really didn't think that it was as simple for shot 2 56 to go to shop five 12. It's, that sounds like it'll be kind of hilarious when it's just like everything gets updated and it's just like, it'll probably just be like one commit. It's like move from shot 2 56 to shot five 12. So that'll, that'll be nice whenever. That happens, and then we'll be quantum resistant. But yeah, nothing really to chill on the no kit side yet. Keep an eye on our Twitter. Um, the telegram and discord are open and we should be announcing more stuff towards the end of the month. Uh, thanks. Excellent. And Noah, thank you so much for popping on today To the audience out there, if you popped on in the middle towards the end, basically, if you didn't pop on in the beginning, you need to go ahead. We're gonna, this is recorded so you can go ahead as soon as this thing ends, you can go ahead and hit play and listen to this thing on back. Trust me, you wanna, you wanna listen back. There was way too much alpha. We learned a lot about rollups, like a lot, like way, like a lot. My mind is bursting right now. So make sure you go ahead and check that out. My friends also, I will of course upload it to all the major streaming platforms very soon. Of course it's gonna be on Spotify and all that good stuff. Also, to all my folks out there, if you've ever listened to an avac ecosystem space on Spotify, please, please really quick, just head on Spotify, just give us a review it. It would help us out immensely as far as getting the podcast out there to the masses so we can share the good old fashion love here on Avalanche. Um, What's my, what's my usual thing that I keep going with? Oh, I didn't give, I didn't show anything. Let me show things. Go, go pool. We're doing major, major things, my friend, working on a lot of different things in the background. For anyone out there who's not privy to us, we help validators and subnets launch at half cost, my friend. And we also help increase the rewards for validators as well. So if you have been interested in starting up a validator, please feel free to contact the Gogo Pool team. We can definitely help you out. Um, again, we do this weekly, guys, every Wednesday at 3:00 PM e s t. You guys know the best. You know our, you guys know the best place to be. And don't forget we got the avac Ecosystem space, the Avalanche Q2 review that's gonna be coming up on August 17th, I believe 17th. August 17th, whichever one, whichever one's. The Wednesday, August 16th through seven, 17th, whichever one's the Wednesday, that's when it will be on. So far we got a couple Avalanche people confirmed. I'm not gonna say who, but you definitely wanna show up to that. We'll be talking about everything that happened on Avalanche q Q2 with the folks that made it happen. Uh, thank you everyone who joined the space today. Uh, my usual saying is you don't gotta go home, but you gotta get a phone outta here, y'all. Peace, closing the space. Love you guys. Bye.