No products in the cart.
- Latest
- Trending
ADVERTISEMENT
In recent history, it wouldn’t surprise me to see such ideas floating around in the online space. Then smart he contracts it was Ethereum because he provided concrete functionality through a framework.
The dominance of this conceptually naive worldview remained unwavering for quite some time. Conventional wisdom concluded very early on that he could provide everything he needed on one chain and rarely needed another solution.
As we saw with Ethereum, it never became a reality. Fairly simple games like CryptoKitties gain traction, quickly and effectively squashing networks to slow them down dramatically, start exorbitant fees rising, and everything else built on the chain. It became clear that if dApps can suffer, it will not grow into a myth. One chain”.
We have seen the project move to various other chains claiming to be the Ethereum killer. How many times can you say you’re building something very secure for end users at a low price? The proof is in the pudding on this. Even a reasonable amount of traffic, even the slightest hint, shows that Solana and others all cannot scale.
Undoubtedly, blockchain technology is still in its infancy. However, there is a collective perception that the tide of opinion is changing amid signs of maturity in the industry. People now perceive that different blockchains serve different use cases. Chains no longer need to brag as Ethereum killers to be successful.
What we lack is a protocol to combine the capabilities of multiple blockchains and create a comprehensive solution that brings the best of all worlds to our users.
Building Layer 2 on top of these chains and allowing projects to be built on top of that platform is key to providing maximum benefit while mitigating risk. For example, if developers built on top of the Terra chain, all their work would go to waste after a well-known catastrophic failure. As a result, their code becomes almost useless.
This is currently a major issue surrounding blockchain development. Do you live or die by the performance of your project’s underlying chain?
Picking and choosing between different chain functions is more than a sensible approach. It could become a mission-critical option for sustaining the life of a project should volatility or indeed catastrophic failure turn a cryptocurrency dream into a nightmare.
Building in load balancing technology greatly reduces risk by allowing projects to move from chain to chain. Even six months ago, many chain operators viewed cryptocurrencies as monolithic spaces controlled by one or very few large entities. The mindset shift is potentially revolutionary.
Interoperability is becoming an important buzzword surrounding chain-related technologies. Still, the journey to this point was not in vain. All of these chains had to build their own communities and foster the belief that their projects would not only succeed but also take the world by storm in order to survive.
But this approach has never matched the technological advances that have happened in the past, as great momentum and widespread adoption do not occur in a vacuum.
In this context, Layer 2 solutions are poised to emerge as a cornerstone of new blockchain technology. A cross-chain protocol that allows the transfer of tokens and assets between chains makes perfect sense.
Just as visionaries built Layer 1 blockchains to meet the needs of consumers and businesses in a variety of ways, it will take considerable talent on the Layer 2 side to execute and make it happen. . The underlying technology, both protocols that build effective cross-chain systems and dApps that provide a reason for end-users to interact with chains, can only be unlocked through considerable her L2 development.
There is a misconception that EVM compatibility and broader cross-chain solutions come with higher security risks. There is an element of truth in that all code has security risks, but the fact is that the broad and robust development community that exists for EVM greatly mitigates this risk.
Building on the Ethereum family of chains forces developers to stick to EVM. This is not necessarily compatible with real-world technologies and use cases that exist outside the token buying community. Adoption could skyrocket when companies decide to build on top of the chain and create an EVM framework. But it is a barrier to entry.
The concept of decentralization ultimately powers the blockchain. But in every type of pipeline, from upstream to downstream, there is a point where decentralization beats centralization. For EOS, it’s very close to a centralized project. There are also other projects that stray far from the concept of decentralization.
And because each of these chains has a different architecture, even though they focus on solving the same type of problem, the end features and solutions are very different. Part of it is where decentralization meets centralization.
For DeFi products that want to widen the gap with centralization, EOS may not be the right solution. But logistics companies looking to track their supply chains, and consequently seeking only a smart contract framework to automate processes and cut down on costly middlemen, will see how close their solutions are to centralization. There are not many concerns about
Overall, industry needs will drive adoption of certain types of blockchains. At the same time, consumer usage habits naturally lead to the success of other types of blockchains. When it comes to cryptography, there is no single right answer.
With the continued evolution of the market, we will likely see adaptation and growth, and many ill-suited chains will fall by the wayside. You need to meet needs you didn’t even know you had.
Overall, the use cases for blockchain are plentiful, and the possibilities that have yet to be unlocked are endless, as the technology itself has not reached the required level.
One credo is clear. One chain cannot do it all. We are inexorably moving towards a multi-chain future where the great minds across cryptocurrencies either solve different problems on chains or provide solutions to the same problem with different functions.
Toby attended Global University (UCL) in London, where he devoted himself to the technology and telecommunications industry. He has a proven track record of successful investments and exits in his three telecommunications companies operating in Europe, Africa and Asia. In 2018, Toby invested in He Coinweb, a cross-chain computing platform and solution for retail and enterprise. Toby is also the co-founder of the Blockfort and OnRamp DeFi projects.
