Hashing It Out
Hashing It Out

Episode 105 · 3 months ago

Hashing It Out EP 105- Optimism

ABOUT THIS EPISODE

Today Corey talks with John and Ben from the Optimism.io project, a scaling solution called an "optimistic roll-up" for Ethereum. We're going to go into how this project works and what we can expect in the near future as well as further down the road.  

**Links**:
- https://optimism.io
- https://twitter.com/optimismPBC
- https://hashingitout.stream 

Welcome to hashing it out a podcast,for we talk to the tech, innovators behind block, can infrastructure anddecentralized networks. We dive into the weed to get at. Why and how peoplebuild this technology the problems they face along the way come listening andlearn from the best in the business. You can join our ranks all right. Welcome back to the showepisode, one o five, i think, yeah to day e e t talk about optimism, you'reon hashing. It out i'm dr cory petty and got a co host guest john mardlin, who not only doesthis show with me, but also works for optimism, may be got ben jones whoworks for opois, so we run the whole ganet. I guess people know who you are john,but why don't you go and introduce yourself and then we'll allow ben, andthen we can talk about what often as it is, what's up everybody? It's looking for you to qu that up, oh yeah, it's okay! Yeah! I run i am john marlin. I also go bymorellian in many places online i and sometime host cost with cory ofthis show, and i work at optimism, and so i'm as wherei said, i'm sort of sitting in between maybe i'll serve as a bridge andsomething ben's not saying or ben and saying, doesn't seem like it's sleep. I can help dumb it down for the clubs,the audience i think that's necessary ay. What about you cool? What's up guys?I am one of the many folks out in the world named ben jones, but the i guess.The reason i'm on is because i've been working on this optimism thing in someform or another for about about two years now so yeah. It's a pleasure tohave me on thanks, cortin, thanks john for sure. Let's get this get the out of the way. What is olphis oh great question, so optimism is apublic benefit court. That is the current steward of the optimisticethereum protocol, and that is a scaling solution for a therium thatwe're building. It basically puts etherium inside of itself in a way thatis, you know, a roll up, so it maintains a lot of the securityproperties of the lair one, but makes it bigger and better and faster o. You said a few words there that i don't think most people hear, at least in the conversation of scaling solutions and roll up. So imost often but this as this conversation got started and it movedaway from plaza. I was like a roll up for the new scaling solution for atherium and that's going to be a varite of two flavors either the zeroknowledge roll ups, which is which is a dealing all its proofs to the poststuff on chain and the optimistic roll up, which does it in a different way.Optimism by its name, is a kind of ten for the idea that it is an optimisticroll up. But you said a few other things: can you elaborate him that abit sure so yeah? So actually, my my background wasworking at a nonprofit scaling, research or called pasmanick. That's alot of the folks sort of carried over in tapti. I guess the thing that iwould can be out by saying is really there's scaling, sotian that areoptimistic, n ck and the delineation within that is actually, i think, alittle less clear cut than everyone thinks. One of the early posts outthere that i would call out is one by fatali called the dawn of hybrid layertos, which was basically one of the first posts. That was, that sort ofstarted to really gain attention in the roll ofspace, and so it's worth calling out that these platus and these worldthings they're all sort of related...

...under this one. Framing of you don't execute the transaction onchain unless there's a dispute about it, and this is sort of the formula bywhich, in any of these scaling solutions, adoptin briey and by the way,there's optimistic plasma and ck plasmon. This is how you this is howyou get to those things so yeah. I guess i'm forgetting theinitial words that i said not. I'm just ran my god because he said plased. Iwanted to talk back to that. Is there anything? In particular, i can die inhelp you out on yeah, so you're calling at a court now, which is probably areasonable thing to say, because the only time you actually executed onchain is when it's just disputed and then there's like, i guess,consequences of forcing the layer one chain to execute it, and so, like ikind of want to dive into the deep of what differentiates optimism from theother scaling solutions, and one of those kind of pros and cons are hmm,okay, great first off like like. Why did you switch naming to like a courtlike people was a pcb or bc or t? Oh public benefit, cort corporate o, soyeah, so, okay yeah. I can start there, so the reason that we switched over wasbecause we knew that sort of this stuff was exiting the main research phasewhere that needed to be a focus, and it was time to implement, and so we wantedto do that in a way that wasn't just a d traditional start up that was goingto you know. Just have you know some of the incentive problems that we mightsee there, so we landed on a look benefit corp, as somewhere in themiddle, basically means that we have a project charter. That is, you know asbeing able to keep things open source and promote our mission, which is sortof democratizing access to blockchains you're, saying corpi in cor. I sang oroh yeah, i'm just talking about things: the corporate structure, there yeahokay, great okay, great, that's what i neet talk about that a bit then becauseit will great to dive into a lot of technical so like what is what what isthe corporation and why is it necessary in order for because i, the i say public benefit corporation is fuck automatically gives me feelings intwo different directions. One is this is like this is something that's apublic good, and so it should be shared by anyone who wants to use it in acorporation which is like i'm going to take all your money as best i can. So i,how do those two that mike, of course that's not that's some one of i perpetibut like how does this work? How does this legal entity actually insertitself into the development of this technology m yeah public benefit? Corpis an actually more on as a hilarious joke that i hadn't thought of before, but but it's really not one. So the imean if you go online, you can go to optimism that i and read our charter,and so basically, every public benefit. Corp has a charter that it has touphold, and so ours is something along lines of you know: promoting access toopen source products and particular particularlyblock change. What does it mean for us in practice?Well, i think the main thing that it means like, along with the generallibes of open source, is just that. The goal for optimistic etherium is tobecome a globally maintained software, and so it's veryimportant for us to not have incentives in place to retain control. So,starting out you need a boot strap in need to pay people. You need to get thecourse software written and so that required some components of traditionalstart up, but once you're there, you need to be able to relinquish thatcontrol, and so basically we have that there in place to be able to do that. You are o, may be talk about thenbriefly, like the idea of exit to community and- and i think, like the importance to theteam of avoiding things that might lock us in. As you know, centralized controllers ofthe system is something that, like is a calm. Constant conversation, i think,is really interesting yeah, so that your totally right, john, like one ofour you know our most important goal, is to in one of were we track oursprints and when we're going through...

...our engineering cycles of pushing out,you know, releases and developing code. Our main goal with that is, we have acommunity section where we go over. What is the poor requests of thecommunity have contributed and like our ultimate goal, is to have the number ofpoints the like amount of work that, when it from the community to exceedwhat we can do- and this is like a portent of what of howwe've designed our software protocol to basically be a fork of existingethereum projects that have massive amounts of contributors and, like johnsaid, everyone on the team is very hyped about that too. So yeah. Basically, we know that the onlyway for a cryptic protocol to succeed is do what a theory has done, which ishave everyone working on it from all sorts of parts of the world under everyall sorts of conditions and the that pace of veldon. Whatdevelopment is just going to outmatch anything else that can happen. So we'rereally like focused on making sure that one we have a code base that is goingto be accessible and familiar to that group of people to be able to bottathat that's why we use all these therin technology and to it's. Why we developeverything out in the open and and push the things on that front? I try to think about where i want totake this conversation, because a few like core concepts that i think i'dlike to try and get a grasp on, especially for the audience, because ithink there's a few bubbles of misunderstanding or notmisunderstanding, but like curiosity about how things are going to go moving forward, as i as like me as apotential user, would actually use this stuff or develop the stuff or support psych supporting infrastructurefrom just type of stuff right. So, like i run a bunch of notes personally, if iwant to use the optimism network this thislayer, two network that goes is you know the basically, this court systemof like passing around passing and executing transactions andthen optimistically playing and throwing them into the lair one right. Do i need to run additional notes? Whatdo i? What do i need to do to just support it like? How does this thingactually have infrastructure it? It's going to becompletely outside of a serum, because it's o network that then that interactswith the therium who's running this network and what type of resources doesit cost to do so m? So that's that's a great question.So, first of all, yes, it is a distinct network and, of course, the importantnew on sirs that is bridged to the main ethereum chain, and so that's the thepart of being an optimistic roll up is sort of how that bridging structure isdefined and the strength of the security of that is what you know makesa different complais chain, where you also have to run notes, but in terms of the functionality that users can expect.It is very similar to its own network, in that you do have notes that arerunning an optimate. You know that are optimistical therium nodes as opposedto l, one notes- or you know, notes for some side chain or like polygon andyeah. So that's how it works. So it is a different thing and obviously themechanism by what you get in and out is like depositing and withdrawing. So youridge between it. Obviously you know we have support for in prosute providers.People like in fura and stuff like that, so you have a similar experience there,where power users can run their notes if they, like other causes, may notchoose to, and the system progresses of course. Additionally, if you're runningthe node on l, two you're playing this system of watching it alone andcomparing to what's being done there and potentially prepping front ofdisputes that might service so obvious, the the obvious question and feeling from from peoplethis is coming from from me too. I've partly know the answer, but it'ssomething that you're going to get a lot of is how does that depreciate itself from fto? Because that's exactly what i'd be...

...doing as a note operator for ath to m?Oh, so it's very similar, i mean, i think this is why you see a lot of thelike phase one and done or italics roll up centric if you're a future. Is thatwe're realizing that a lot of the things that especially he's to face tothe sort of execution layer for charting? That is planned. We realizethat a lot of that can be done with roll ups and it's an excuge compellingway to go about things. So first of all, you do is complementary, because itgives you more data to post to the roll up, which is still ultimately one ofthe potential bottle next for roll ups, but you can actually do the executionwithout having to wait for a started execution in layer twos and it'sbasically naturally shorted in that way. So, yes, it is very similar and justlike ye to you should be very excited to run a note. I'm running a thing doesa pope can but like. I think this is there's a there's, a somewhat of abreakdown in relaying this type of stuff to anyone,who's, not a developer or just been an ego system for a long time,and that's basically what like the naming of what these things are and howthey differentiate themselves so like. If i think about it too, that'ssomewhat of a transitioning network from a therium one it, but ostensiblyit does a lot of the same things i run. I run a separate piece of software. Itwatches the ethereum one chain, whether that's an etherium. I tim one note thati run myself or i'm relying on some other centralizing frustratur like likein fura and based on, and it is it's it's chained in a way it's bridged to thether one network and that the validators, the valuator pool, comesfrom the the deposit contract on a therium one, and so it makes it it hasto watch that to make its own decisions now, where the differentiation happens,at least with respect to, if theorem too, in its current phasesand all of the layer to stuff is what it's watching for, and the data itpushes back and forth. Can you talk a little bit about like what an optimismnode is actually watching and what is it pushing back to laron and gettingsecurity back right? Hmm, great question great question, so there's twonote roles to differentiate there actually and the answer is going to bea little bit different for each of them. So the first thing i'll talk about is averification. Not i guess the first thing i'll talk aboutis what i e both of those notes watching because they do watch somethings in common, so basically they're watching for blocks that get a rolledup. Hence it is a roll up. So what does that mean in practice basically to beable to dispute transactions? You need to guarantee two things. One. You needto guarantee that any transaction in question which could be disputed isaccessible it's available and that's important, because someonecould propose. I the outcome of the chain is x and that could be wrong. Butif no one had the transaction to disprove it, it would be impossible todemonstrate in a dispute what the actual transaction is. So the first thing you need to know youneed to be watching, for is transactions that get rolled up andbasically, what this means is you submit a very large transaction whichdoes nothing other than like hash and motorize all the transactions which, bycome into question down the line and stores just is very cheap hash on chain.So this is where you hear the layer. One is the data availabilitylayer come from right. It's because we need the reason that we need to makethose transactions available is because this pizz are useless. If you can'talways find the transaction that you were disputing, so that's the first thing that you'rewatching as a no and by the way those comes and comeinto forms. Really they come in the form of deposits or sort of l, one to l,two transactions, you might think of the mass, which is an effect almostalways a deposit as well as user transactions that are just transactionswithin the role of an art communicating...

...between chans okay. So that's one thing that youwatch the other thing that you watch is basically a set of proposals, so youdownload those transactions. You look at the bodies of thosetransactions and you run them your note. Just runs them right adds them to thesterium chain and you then get a state route that is effectively what theresults of all those transactions are right. Be that now years, twentybalances be that you know some ask whatever right: it's a smart contractexecution and the other committed to that that's a statement and those arealso being some minted to his area. So you watch for those two things youwatch for the transactions and you watch from the statements and if yousee that a transact by watching the transactions, you know what thestatements should be and you basically checked there for despeate forpotential disputes. I would i do that. Oh great question. Well, i mean onebecause you want to say that you're, the first person to ever submit achallenge on a man at roll of that would be insanely cool beyond that. Of course, i like it is ina be a net positive action in terms of submitting the challenge like you canget rewarded for doing that, at least to recruit your gas cause fundamentally like. Why do people runnotes is a different answer for everyone so core it might be a divanser for you, then it's going to be, for you know, other major, no providers,lots of people are getting paid to run, notes and that's going to be an youknow, a market that exists on lay or two, i think, has even more so thantheyre one in the long run, and there are also certain applicationsand power users of the rope that want to run their own notes and, at thepoint you're running you're running the note. It's free to be checking for thespeed so you're going to do that. But one example of this is well there's a whole can of worms there,but you can do liquidity provision where you basically provide fasterwithdrawals as a service, and this is one of the prime use cases of peoplethat definitely want to run their own notes so that that was not now one of the twotimes who now it's correct? That's right! That's right! So those are thoseyou can think of as like we call them verifiers you can think of. As them asquiglan to like the full notes, then we have a secondary second type ofnode, which is currently run by optimism and that is called thesequencer and the sequent seri is basically there to collect new sertransactions to aggravate them into blocks, order them and submit them toas the things that are being watched by the full notes, and so that's kind ofmore equivalent to the minor role in layer, wanter, the valid ator role andease to, and so that sequencer, basically, users concenter transactionsto it and the seven serl bundle them up and submit them on chain. So two things i want to ask about:sequetur one. I guess i i find i like duke amental picture. I see the secrets are basically doing most of the processingof a lot of the stuff and the valadora just kind of watching taking him with acan and prose and doing stuff as they need to base on whatever their businesscase is. But ostensibly the valeto notes, or the kind of watching notes,are there to make sure that one people aren't cheating and to the sequencersand cheating exactly right. So that's that gives melike a good mental picture of like a swarm of watcher nodes, doing whateverbusiness case. They care about on optimism and the secrets are nofunneling a good portion of all these transactions so that they actually makeit into the main chain appropriately. Is that a good mental model yeah? I think that's a good mentalmodel yeah! Absolutely the other thing thati'll call out that is really cool about see that bad sequencers is, you can getbasically, your state confirmed faster than it's laid down on lon, which is areally cool property, so the sequencer actually maintains like at in somesense an extra optimistic state of what...

...it is going to submit any thing that islike the next pending block right. It's like i tan to think about like tryingto like i mean, if you think about it in terms of almost like a hierarchaltree of vium like blockchains, you have onelayer of security and the sequencer which is like the mim pool, is all thetransactors flying around. It gets confirmed in the sequencer, and thenyou have the time it takes for the secret sertum blocks in the layer, onechain which is like an additional layer, security exactly exactly okay, and thenyou have i. What you said previously, which is kind of neat, is that keeplike liquidity is a service, as people saying will scrawl that if you trust meand then i'll, just i'll just give you whatever fund you want on either one ofthose chains and i'll handle that waiting process. First i'll wait i'lldeal with the waiting time for a small thing. Yes, even better, you can dowith smart contracts, so you don't have to trust those people as a matter evenbetter, with trust even better. So i'm very interested to start mapping outrisk, because this thing starts to solidify a little bit. But, like theone of the other questions i had for, the sequencer is i'll get to the i'll, get to othersecurity part later. What are the resources of running a sequencer andhow do those scale, particularly with the number of peoplewho run them m? That's a great question. So onething that i want to caveat is bought sort of definitional. You onlyhave one sequencer at a time: okay, because the sequence is the personchoosing the sequence, and so it to to that's like a a a leader tixo whatever.However, that grows in terms of number participants. That's a leader basedprotocol actaea, and then they answer that scales obvious it'swhatever, whatever the actual my work is for any any for omitting up lock.How does that go from optimism running that like? What is how do you see thatscaling computationally, the common? How do you? How is that going to beable to how how's the hardware going to scaleas you d need to handle the scale of the gumber people submittingtransactions? That's a great question! So definitely we have a big focus optimismon vertical scaling. So, there's a this trivial way, obviously that you can getmore through, but where you just deploy another chain right and that's likehorsical, but we are of the opinion that thesingle change that we see today are not sufficient and that's not because we'regoing to just increase the hardware crimeans forever. We have to have bigbikers there. So that's a big focus of our work. I think, as it relates toyour question, i think i think what i will. I think whati will say is that what we are now really seeing and what at least fromour perspective lay or to is really started. The highlight is that there isdifferent computational requirements between validation and block production,and i think this is something that's like a little bit overlooked right now,because of the the gas, for example, for those two constraints are tightlycoupled on l one today m, but on one of the things that we're a big fan of isincreasing the hardwar requirements for that sequencer disproportionately tothe harari ans to t e, the barrifield, and you can think of that as there's a great tweet by jeff coleman,where he calls this first run. Gas pricing and second run gas pricing,where the where you actually have different properties, that it come thatit requires to calculate a block of transactions and like determined whether that's valid versusplaying it playing it later anyway, i'll pause there. But but theanswer is yes, and the coolest thing is to be able to increase those harderequiment on sequencer make them be big beefy. You know service providerswithout doing the same thing to verifiers, it's kind of so so this isinteresting. I haven't heard this idea before it. It makes it think it sounds like acryptic graphic cash function is or way...

...right, like the com like where validverification is much much easier than like the initial computation yep andthe main source of this is going to be paralyse. So, basically, if you have,you know, you can consider an extremely simple version of paralyse where youjust take a block and you at a validity condition that says a block is invalid.If two transactions touch the same piece of ethereum state right, so theyboth touched, the syrium, the unis. You know eath price, that's an invalid lockas soon as you make that block living condition, then t, then you can takeany ball block and you can paralyze it and you can run it on multiple courseat want. The trickiness is that for the sequencer, that is not so easy right,because it's hot, because the nature of the etheric virtual machine is suchthat a transaction could this is the money legos right, o trans actuallycould execute the unit swat trade at any point in time, and even it might bethe last thing that it does at the end of a very long piece of computation andso that first run of figuring out whether or not transactions can beparalyzed. It's going to be very expensive and it's a much harderproblem, but once you've done that and it's just a bility condition, then it'strivial for the verifiers to go and split that up, and i have so many waysin which i can take this conversation. Ye'll. Take it once one step at thetime. The next one is like the obvious one, which is going to be a lot of l'sminds. How do we? How does it go from full? Does it go from being a optimism, run, verifieror like sequencer to a community run set of notes that take turns being thesequencer? If so, what does that look like great question? So our earliestthinking about this was about a year and a half ago we put out a post calledmv auctions, which sort of said hey. We have this separation that people aremaking right now, which is between inclusion of transactions and orderingof transactions, and v is clearly showing that the ordering oftransactions is very popular, and this should be called the sequencer so onand so forth. Since the thing yeah, i haven't,thought about it. That way, because i was having i was having an argumentwith someone in the dicin podcast lack around the concept of mv and what itwould look like to have fairness built into the sequencing ofof transactions while maintaining like openness and permission to at the baselayer. So, like i'm sorry just i want to introduce that, but i had that, andi didn't think about it from this perspective that way so like okay, so are you saying it like? The sequenceris a form of entity. Auctions like this is like this network was basically away of sequencing transactions that eventually end up on the on the mainchain, whereas or you can just go to or you go the main chain because, like yousaid v or like the ordering of the transactions, is a market in itself andit's proven to be incredibly fruitful for those who are able to takeadvantage of it now right and it's very interesting. It's a very interestingquestion: what is the market for ordering transactions? So just a re one for a second, the thething that i was originally talking about. There was sort of our first stabat understanding this and a first sort of you know construction and the ideawas to sell off the ability to be the sequencer. Basically just have arecurring auction or something of that nature, and what is important to highlight is thatthat is not the same as what we're seeing with like flash pots going onright now, i d n. I don't know how much context listeners have so i'll, becareful with that, but really the market for transactionordering today is my name right. It is still the minors who are determiningthe ordering of transactions that they become a direct link to how i get myintrada, where i want to is going straight to the miners and bribing themto put it where i wanted to be right,...

...exactly and well, and really you're notgoing and really when people are paying for that transaction on during thesedates. Right they're usually praying like flashpoint and really what flashpots apias is a reseller of transaction ordering. So it's the minors that getto decide the or the ordering of transactions, but it's then flashpointand reselling that to them, because minors have a set there's a separation ofconcerns where minors are really good at mining, not necessarily ordering, sothey can out sort that to a market, just a heads up off off, so i'm hearingevery time your hand hit the desk a doing it. I do the same thing, but ican hear but yeah so like okay. So that's thatthe it's being resold, because it is a tremendous amount of work to optimize the value from ordering transactionsand minors, are spending all of their effort. Just mining, because that'sthat's its own separation of concerns is staying up to date on what the besthash is for. Lace, improve work that what the best hash is for gin block. Yes, fuck totally. So how does thatmove forward for you guys? So what it means for us is that we haveto. We basically have to observe thismarket condition and to figure out how that is going to inform what happensfor optician. So, basically, what it tells us is that if there's somebodythat has the ability to secretes transactions, then it's in there, it'sprobably in their economic interest, to be reselling this, because, even in thecase where you are a even in the case, it seems that the people that aredetermining these orders of transactions are no longer just oneparty right. It's a group of parties, so flash pots is like. Has this bundleaggregation where there's different parties that say hey this ordering isgood for me in this way, because i have this specialty. I know how to deal withthis liquidation and whatever, and someone else is saying well, thisordering is good for me and then combine them, so what it seems likely that will see onthere too. It's probably the exact same thing where we have a multi, tear layer of marketing or likedifferent mem pools that are than being aggregated into a final selection or afinal sequence, or like almost application specific, because iindepending on, depending upon the efficiency of bridges, enlighten cyof bridges across the myriad of networks. That's going to exist in thefuture being on the same network will have itsbenefits and so you'll start to see kind of aggregates of applications thatneed energy or composait. Whatever buzz word, you want to use for that being onthe same network, which then makes a given pool of interacting transactionstogether, which then creates a market for how to be best order. These thesetransactions and that's where th, that's where, like that equivalent of flash bots, mayexist of like the market for ordering these things right exactly right andit's very similar to to what we see an out layer, one right, that's reallyjust as taking those concepts and ma macking them on to lay or to wore.Instead of minding, you have the sequencing and the mechanism thatchooses the sequencer and then instead of flashfire, have you know optimisticflash pots or whatever you so you're, still playing with the idea of likewhat's the best way, if you want to keep this as a public good as best you can, then thefairness of that market on who gets to order is going to need to be prettydamn fair and since you're not you're, not relying upon kind of arguably afair distribution of energy across the globe. To do this, your you're, using whoever we choose as a leader andwhatever pot o call besides that right and so like so the answer is likewe don't know yet, but we're actively looking into it. Yeah i mean i think,on the topic of like order. Fairness like this is stillsiting, that's being defined and will...

...some for sure, and i think it's kind ofit's almost beneficial- that mv and it's kind of coming to the scene so hard and fast is beneficial because hadyou chosen something that was naive to this early could have had a severe impact on thegame ability of your system. Yeah. That's that's. What is definitely trueand i'm unfortunately, i mean that hesitant say that we'll see it play outand then it'll be clear what the note far orin for the copy that seemsportans going to be an issue regardless, where you go like right and- andanother note, is that so long as there are different definitions of a fairordering protocol, and there are then different chains that implement thosedefinitions, then you're going to have an t arbitrage in between them andthat's what i kind of think it seems to be here to day. It seems to be so sthis technology. So you have. You have two mechanisms here: kind of you havethe the the technical process of rolling up transactions and watchingthe fairness of those things get put into the layer, one and and the like minimum viable implications of what it means to exitthat system and that's kind of like what, like from from plasma to hear.That was that a that's you're trying to build. How do we aggregate transactionsin such a way that we allow people? We allow more people to execute things offchain and then in bed those things until layer, one chain, while stillallowing people to exit. When malfeasance happens right right, thenyou have how the hell do we choose that personto order things and put it on chain and those are two completely separatedifferent mechanisms, yeah, and so what you're saying is that the technologicalone of how do we aggregate things and throw them into a chain is, will go cut more straightforward and by allowing people to come up withthe different iterations of fairness on how you order. You have multiple layer,tos vying for the markets in which people think isfair yeah. I think we'll see finetta s aboutright. I think the question of fair ordering to me isstill like completely not whether one to even exist or not. I think it'sreally up rat subjective, but like that's. What the markets are for rightis like the people use. What they think is fair and you try to make it as fairas possible, based on what your definition of good is for fair right right and theinteresting thing is even in those so and the interesting thing is, i don'tknow there's like this. Like i don't know, if somebody had been vadelike oh attract the mv, prevent the med right and the answer is going to beboth, it seems very unlikely that we'll just get rid of all in medi. In fact, ithink it's probably impossible and at the point in which that's the case, we need to have an economic grasp onwhat that is. So that's why i still like in many ways our original design,even though we are, you know, update again in improving it to take thesethings into account of being able to sell that first order right to transactyou ordering and that you know distribute that by whatever fairmechanism you desire, but the end of the day. It's not going to be perfectand it's great to be able to extract that value and font of the protocoldevelopment with it. I want to ad something her like what ifind really like. Neb is not good, but what i like aboutthis is that there's kind of a transparency that like mat, is parallel to a lot of thingsthat exist in the real world outside of watching that t aren't beneficial likethere's literally just front running of, but it's look at high frigate tradingyeah. Really i like robin hood. App is the later. Basically just you know,selling information to aggregator so that they can skin more from you thanyou probably would get if you were actually paying to us yeah. I appreciate the that this, at least asblocking does with many things, is...

...make that dynamic, transparent andvisible, and you can choose the nev regime that works for you there's a here's,something that i think, because of what you just said, is potentially apossibility. So this is a problem that i was not a problem, but something iwas somewhat worried about that i haven't got an answer for yet or anytype of like indication that there was an answer and that is okay, we're using these layer twos as away to scale the number of people who can throw transactions through this.But as we've seen through the what andrea sent some op, those callsgraceful scaling of the internet. The more you give people room to do thingsthan more they're going to do them. Like the moment. You give people thespace and the cost of opening up new use cases ormore transactions, and so on and so forth. It's going to get filled up realquick, and so what i saw are worried about and the end like. The advent oflair to s and everyone using them is that it's it's the same shit's going tohappen where you can end up with it was just another layer and we're not goingto fix anything, or at least like. What's the stopoptimism or whatever the layer to du jour is from just becoming the oneeveryone uses, because everyone likes composait, and it may seem that, like this, this,like concept of fairness and how you choose it at the sequence, your lightlayer ends up becoming a way in which you have multiple networks competingwith each other, as opposed to just one being the only thing everyone uses andyou just have their one being this giant roll up data deposit and notanything else, there's like there's no like there's no reason to use it otherthan throwing data on the one lay or two, and that doesn't seem to be likethis gives you at least like some game, to play. That's like a reasonable gameto play. That's interesting! Yeah! That's athat's an interesting hypothesis sided. It definitely is the case to somedegree that we'll see that playing out. I think the difficult thing that theygrow up chris. Just to what extent is the are the newik effects going to befundamental and our suspicion is that there are strong network effects inhaving syncro like by directional communication, that, as is you, know,atomic property of the the flash long where it all happens or at all doesn't,and that you know, that's really really powerful and that's why i we reallyfocused on on horizontal scout, because you're totally right that you basicallyhave to look. You have to try to look ahead at the bottle neck and and likepreempt them, and it seems likely that it may just be the case that the bolelike that we run into an autos exactly what we saw in l on right, which isjust which is just the truth. But so it's really important to work on thosethings in the right order. Well like it may solve a type of mv case or problemthat we currently see. But i guess the question here is: is it possible for a once once a layer, a layer to like?What's the sequencer throws all the data on to layer? One there's no way tochange that. There's no way to mess with that. There's no there's no marketthere. So like reasonably speaking, if say all of the applications youcentralize applications that currently participate in this in the ned marketand the weare going to trust mostly dex's. Things like this right move tolayer to. There is no layer, one in market anymore, correct because it's all happening onlayer to, and you can't reader those transactions, one the secrets of throwsin it. It depends on the construction in general. I think that's a good classcase yea it it's a tisean, a trade right, a trite. Well, i think i, this is a weird edge case. There islike our fraud, proving so let's say that somebody committed fraud on anoptimistic etherium, there's a lot of...

...med around that process. The idea is that so so, if you couldcomplete the fraud proof before someone else, then you get the pay out. Theidea is, the bet is now that's a good work, and you want. I mean you want you,want people fighting to prove fraud as best as possible, such that there is nofraud, don't and not censoring that fraud process. That's a that's a a, but well now whatif they're fighting, i think like if, if you're fighting to, i haven'tthought about this a lot before. But if you have people really fighting toperform that front proof and bidding for it, then you have minors who are have anincentive to include it and it decreases their potential incentive toto exclude that froude from happening fingers crossed. I guess we see be like yeah, where i was going with. That was.Is it you have a bunch of differentmarkets for v? Then you you've solved a lot of thecurrent issues because it just moves it to a layer to where the concept offairness is changed. It's not. It gives you a uina for thelayer, one and just be basically a deposit box of aggregation machines,which is really what it should be in a lot of ways to man for various privacyreasons, if, like scaling reasons so on and so forth, then other networks decide whatactivity is happening here. Here's here's a reasonably secure way to putit and verify it and exit to. If you need to and like first kas scenario, this a really interesting pattern,we've seen where something of well, i guess i know what it is: thefact that these layer, two constructions, are built on apermissionless. You know smart contract layer actually isn't enough of itselfan extremely extremely powerful thing. There are often times when we'll talkabout ideas and they really are applicable to layer one but there'sjust no chance of them being tried out on layer one because it's this, youknow incredibly important hard to fork andimportant to not screw up protocol. That is at the base of everything, butonce you're at the point where you can just deploy a new clone of your thingwith some new tweets and some of your properties are trying out some newresearch. It's super super exciting. So i definitely think that we'll see layertos allowing us to experiment a lot more ether. Part of that is it's notworth it. It's not a it's like the time and money required to do that thing arevery much not worth it until you get to a certain level of now. It is worth it and, as you start to scale into layer, twos andthere's more people doing smaller, faster transactions and a lot more ofthem suffing out what it means to be worthit to take it off that chain in the case of malfeasance o. This right wordin case of something going wrong, is going to be something that needs to becleared up because, like for every implementation of layer to there are,if i want to say this didn't happen, the way it should have happened, and iwant to file the complaint and take my money elsewhere. There's implicationsof that there's consequences of that. It may take it's going to take time andmoney to do it and, depending upon how that thing is constructed, i might notbe able to make that complaint. There's going to be a buffer of. Is it worth itfor me to make this complaint if i'm buying a doughnut and something goes wrong, and it takes me a week and twentydollars to get to the main chain to get that money back, i'm not going to do it.Has that been thought about inside of like at least like optimistic oflimitation of this yeah? It's a very interesting questionand i think this all returns to the value of being within a synchronicstate space. So, what's fascinating is...

...that this actually might be an argumentfor you to want to be t on a larger roll up, because then the because,basically the more eyes and the more activity that is on your chain, the,hopefully the more likeliness that someone else will take care of that foryou, some big power study is that is like what is the cost of taking care ofit, not watching to make sure it can be taken care of or finding it it's with the cost of doing it isn't evenworth doing. Oh, i see so. Basically, what happensif your switching cost is higher than the value that you have. Is that theidea yahyah? That's that's not a that's, nota flat feet. Alway wol, i guess in most emlement ations, maybe maybe as yourknowledge one that might be flash fee, but for i think for my intuition saysthat's going to be dynamic over time, and i don't know how to i don't knowhow to measure it. Yeah o. These are tough things tomeasure. Hopefully what we are seeing now is innovation on the bridging side.In terms of things like efficiency, so really simple example of this is, ifyou have a bunch of people that want to get out, they cannot basically allaggregate their exits or withdrawals together and thatcan go through the main chain as one edit and then they get reimbursed onthe other side to wherever we exibit to so hope that which do make it notlinear in l, one cost in the vales. But these are very good, open questions. We,it may be the case that switching costs are prosily high for some thingstotally possible that that's reasonable for networks right like so like if youget embedded or ossify it into a given way of thingsand- and you understand the exit cost, then that's part of like the entrancefee of joining that community. You know what it's worth and you deal with youdeal with you deal with that buffer and you only exit when it gets to the pointof being worth your while or time and value something that i was worried about bebeforehand that i haven't read enough or understoodenough to fix on. My head is like: if someone exits due to do to fraud,does that ruin the chain? Great question great question, so theanswer is no, which is very cool good. Basically, the words that i'll throwout are subjective finality. So an a very important thing about armlimitation is that you can achieve subjective finality, basically at thesame rate as l one does. So. What does that mean? Basically, what it means is:yes, there's a week long period worse, things can be disputed, but if you look at the chain- and yousee the correct proposal that you know could not be disputed and you see itimmediately, then you know that the state is progressed correctly. You wantthe l, one won't be able to acknowledge it because it needs to keep the dooropen for disputes. You know for those next six days, but you know immediately. So that's that's the first then thiscan do that. A parallel yes and the other component is that inthe event that there is a challenge submitted, that is a successfulchallenge. You roll back that second thing, that the notes were watching thestate proposals without rolling back the transactions. So when someonesubmits a successful challenge, what that does is it says what was challengewas the result of these transactions? We're still going to keep them applied,but someone's got to come in and put the right result of those transactions,because that one just got challenged so you're directly changing the state notrolling back the actual execution of the transactions yeah, you change the proposed state.You do not change the transactions. Okay, so i were were like in on thosetransactions right, so to think about this appropriately so like i guess we never covered this, but ifsomeone would submit to dispute there's...

...a week long period in which that thinghas settled right. Okay, so i submitted dispute some. They went wrong that separates from everything else, so youhave this pool of things that are disputed in a pool of things that isdisputed, so the way works in our system actuallyis yeah john john ayahwa to try to bridgethe gap sweet. So if you like, the like ben said that the finality is likebasically the same as what you get on l on, so the idea is that, if you're, ifyou were watching l one, you can read the transactions that have beencommitted to the chain on l one. If l one gets reorganized, thosetransactions might get get reorganized, but to the extent that you trust that ablock is finalized on l, one with some layer, two transactions within them,you can trust that those transactions are never going to change and then an observer watching the chain can play thosetransactions and calculate the actual state route. So so you can have a situation where perhaps the thecommitment to the result of those transactions is dishonest, buteverybody else off chain or reading the order transactions can calculate forthemselves and they should come to agreement about what the correct, andso they all know the truth and can more or less go about their business and that evenlike that transaction chain can continue to be extended during a fraudproof. So it's like you all. You all have ashared vision of the world, that is, you can calculate off chain and trusteach other based on and continue to transact over, even though it's notlike finalized in state and is still subjected to subjects to potentialchallenges. But you can t know that it's not going that a challenge is notgoing to succeed in rolling back to those transactions, and it just requires a little bitadditional work so like that, that's assuming that what i'm doing say, goodfine, if i am watching the state root on l one i'mwatching to see like oh there's, no disputes, all things are moving forward,so any transaction on the on the network is undisputed. I can, i canjust assume it has the same confirmation like the same finality asflayer one, yes, but even stronger. The idea is that, even before it'sfinalized after by that seven day, challenge period, passing if you arehonestly computing the outcome of those transactions, you don't have to worry about it. You just like you, can see that thebalance of eath does belong. You know i can see oh ye es god, but my questionis like to me: are you expecting people to just watch i'm trying to word disappropriate,because it's in my head that garbled up a little bit, if i'm trying to makesure that everything on up the athenis m network is is valid? Am i watchingthe state route, or am i just watching the transactions that i give a shitabout because, like what you're saying isthat yeah i have? I have full transparent to her. I can view all thetransaction. So if something is disputed, similer the network, itdoesn't really affect me unless it's my transaction, that right m a little bit. Maybe the clarifying thatis that in the question is what happens in theevent of a successful challenge: yeah, it's like as it's separated because itlike it ses, i'm assuming there's probably like. Are you expecting thereto be any challenges like how what's the frequency of challenging? Are youexpecting an there's in a system and can that be dost so like there's,basically always challenges happening? Making people do extra work,...

...great question, so yeah to two things there. One thing isyes: there is a separation, basically between a transaction chain and a statechain and there's a one. One correspondence between the two and theevent of a dispute is just rolling back the state chain so that the correctstates can be proposed. So those transactions are still playing along.They never get pickin off. That's one compana! That's what we were talkingabout a little bit got that the other thing that you just got at is known asthe verifier stileman, which is a fascinating, fascinating, like acompote, and i think yet yet unsolved in practice. We don't expect to see alot of a lot of challenges. I mean, while we're running the sequencer,which is doing the proposing right other other than you know bugs. Wewould have no reason to do to propose a you know: a mismatch state route in the future. How of this play out? Itis more tricky to tell like this is this touches on this was described as aproblem before even what john got into, which is our figures. Fishing and pokedpink paper, where the hell it was right like right, exactly exactly yeah andand at some point you have this, you know it's going to be a tough problemto all the good news that we see. Is that andthe reason that we're not like freaking out about it, i'm not running aroundright now, with my hair on fire going. Oh, my god, we didn't think of this isgoing me not challenges right. The cool thing is that people just seem to runnodes in crypto in the crypto phere like for reasons and and and it doesn'thave to always be totally rational right. Like there's people running l onfull notes, they are not getting a block reward for doing that. I have no,i don't get shift for it. Sorry sorry so, we've already seen this like on ournetwork, like we have infrastructure providers that are now running notesright and at least at the point in which you're running a note, then it'sa profitable action to go and submit your challenge because, there's youknow a bond at stake, and so hopefully that that will cover our bases. Okay. Well, then i mean i don't knowmuch time. I have you guys for why? Don't we try to transition into what's next?When can we expect to actually get our hands on things? When can i deploy acontract? When does main net go? What's going on great question great question, so firstof all, you can do some diplomat transactions today when we've had ourco, an test that running now for, for i think, half year half year at thispoint, well gosh almost a year at this point in some carnation as far aswhat's coming up our next. Our next thing: that's coming up is a unsworelease which is coming very soon, tm, that's a trademark date and, and basically basically that'sgoing to be our next next release. So that will put out yunis on the map.You'll be able to try that out, we'll be able to test the stability and loadof our system can handle that kind of usage and in everyone will go, go dothat and then, after that, we're basically going to have a communityrelease which is going to be the release that opens this up to arbitrarydeployment and and stuff like that. So that's going to be the next thing out aroad map. Basically, once we thought the eyes and cross the teas of gettingthe community ready for that and getting us ready to be able to supportthat kind of excitement, because, even with a even with the lockdown system,people are always asking questions about how to integrate, and so we needto be able to be gales, but it's very exciting we're getting close help. You need, as there someone isthere people you want people you who do you want to reach out to you and askyou questions or help or do things with like? What are you looking forward toor hoping someone does, such that like ofters, a mo moves forward nicely? Oh,that is a great question. I will clog get developers, so i didn't get achance to really show this, but one of the most exciting and unique thingsabout our design for optimist, eether...

...um, is that we basically are able areable to implement all of our software as a fork to go with therium cobas. Toguess- and this is extremely extremely useful for us to beable to use open source the open source power of the world, because basicallyit means that if you are a guest developer, you are also a optimisticget developer and l two get developer and those people are extremelyextremely awesome. So, please, if you were out there, take a break from yourfring shenanigans and come talk to us about how we're going to do it on l,two, a d and about no for real. That's where we, by a lot of these getsh forthere on and come help us build the future so that there can be ten xtransactions for for those for what can they expect to see different in theprocess of getting into your code, bas versus death, whereas where is thegatches that they're going to find? They may help them go from zero? Usefulhonestly, if honestly like, what i would say is like we're constantlyworking to improve that answer. So really what i want to get them to do todo is come and talk to us and say this is all the ways that you can reducethat, because there definitely some ways we can reduce that in general. Theanswer is basically two fold. Basically one you have to connect the node to thel. One note right, so it's the way that block or produce is no longer by youknow verifying a proof of work it's by reading from an lone node and andputting those transactions into the alto now. So that's the one differenceyou're going to see is how our transactions ingested and the other one has to do withsomething called the om, optimistic virtual machine, which is this tweet tothe evm that lets you run disputes on it after the fact. So that's going tobe the name two sources of difference, interesting place. I find myself in. Iusually ask what question should i have asked that i didn't, but i have johnhere, so he can ask it. You want me to ask the question thatyou should have asked yeah. You could play both roles. You're your again, i guess, i think been what like may be askingabout. Did we talk? We talk enough aboutpublic goods in this conversation and like what we think is the right likewhere the proceeds of minor extractable you would guy be directed. That's a good one. There you go. That'sa good one. That's a great line yeah! So one of the most one of the most oneof the things that we're most excited by right is to basically put our moneyor our mouth is in terms of this public good stuff. So we have this publicbenefit cor, corp, not cork and- and it's very very,very important to us not because well because of our values most definitely,but i think even more fundamentally is just. We think that our success iscompletely predominant on. This is, is the opensource community taking this over and one of the great things that we're seeing rightnow is a lot of innovation and public os funding? Right,like i don't know, if you guys are watching all the katcina ou know grantsrounds that have come out over the past year year. Two years now, but one of the things that weidentified, certainly when we were a research or you know just putting outopen source, you know papers and code. What's that you have the problem offunding. Where does the funding problem come from? So it's something that icould have that i maybe should have highlighted more there. So thank you,john for re, raising. It is that when you do this auction of mv of minor,attractive value, the reason that we're most excited about that is because thatis a revenue source to put back into finding the protocol. So right now iwant you, ask me what i want to have them. Who should come talk to me. Iwon't get that to come. Talk to me...

...right now, but what is going to have tohappen in the future? For us to be successful is get death. That's to justgo start writing and contributing code and be rewarded by the protocol forcontriving come to the predica. So that's something that we're extremelyexcited about. We have some post coming out very shortly about some of ourthinking around. What are the right mechanisms to be doing that by so i'llleave that for the post, but it's the right call out time. It's very, veryimportant that we make this happy rainbow universe possible by fundingpeople around the world contusing every play request. I a forward to read those blockbustergoing to go to find those block posts and the previous ones made twitter com sa optimism. Pvc shouldhave the link to our medium to a description. Is the area optimism yeah?It should be in the description or optimism. Dot ia will definitely haveit. Yeah, okay, ottos. Both of those links were already in the descriptionof this of this video. So go down below and check him out. What about you guys? What do you? Whatdo you most excited like? What are you most excited about over the next yearlike? Where do you see this stuff going? What what? What is your optimistic? Sorry to use the word viewof what etherium looks like over the nextyear, because it can go in a lot of different directions? And i don't knowwhat most people think john. You first shit yeah, i mean broadly, i don't know howhow well this ties into yeah it does so. So i think, like thething i think a lot about is is like instead of saying cross chain, i'mstarting to think in terms of like cross do main more and more and a bitof a almost like a melting away of the idea of layers. So i anticipate a future where it's, like you thinkless about, like in my in the sense of like moving from l, one to l, two andmore just like moving from one roll up to another roll up to you know like a cosmos zone or potentially, what is a pokaia chainlike i and then, and then also between thecerium and the therium shar its like. I see, there's going to be some weirdmental models and user experience, flows and security challenges aroundthese. These different domains that aredropping up and that's going to be really fun. No, it's not fun. We'vebeen spending a good portion of our time, trying to figure this out atstatus to try and make an interface that works in this world. Okay, so likeas a security guy, that's amused by when things break. Okay, that's abetter way of war, t yeah, sorry, sorry for the people thatactually have to use it and a that's my answer. I agree. Ben oh man, i'm going to sound like a totaleat, show right now, but i am pretty excited for p one: five, five, nine!That's not like! That's not like a bag! Holler thing! That's a use! It in our protocol. Thing likeyeah, be one five, five, nine and having this access to this base feed.That will basically tell you like what is the opportunity cause for a minor tocensor transaction? I think is going to be super super valuable for lay or twoprotocols from just from a future information perspective beingable to predict a little better than you previously good yeah, and we'regoing to be able to do better as well on basically the economics of thesechallenges,...

...because right now, it's kind of hard todenominate, a challenge which is a bond which is met to recoup the gas cost ofa challenge, because this is just like a hard problem. So i think we'll startto see things while, even in the extreme, i think we'll see really coolsynthetic assets being built around the base price but yeah. This is a kind of this kindof like a boring technical answer, but being able to economically price bondsbetter for roll up, as can be super, do break that down, and i put the quotefor you oblig guys. I appreciate it just hitting over an hour. I think wecould go for another one if i really wanted to, but gus have to have you that one and texcome on show thanks having, as is awesome, that'sgreat. I.

In-Stream Audio Search

NEW

Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (108)