Compare the three multi-blockchain networks of Polkadot and Avalanche. Are they really better than Bitcoin and Ethereum?

How do we ensure liquidity flows efficiently across chains, rather than being isolated within a particular chain? How will those open organizations that operate across chains prevent the emergence of multi-chain whales and ensure fair distribution of wealth and power?

The promise of de-Ethereum is being challenged by the centralization of Bitcoin, the first encrypted internet, Bridge Smart Contract Development Services the bulk performance of Ethereum, the validity and efficiency of the Ethereum version. Performance issues at the moment, but newer projects Cosmos, Polkadot, and Avalanche have released infrastructure with superior capabilities.

Their operation is horizontally scalable through a broad multi-co-network model, specific to a certain block of the application and participating when needed. different influences.

We will discuss them one by one in this article. Both are an internet of blockchains to reach the scale of the web that can create tens of thousands a day (even today) and achieve their millions of active users, the center of the 3 visions of user ownership and control .
Bitcoin Bitcoin’s Pandora’s Box, the idea that it became “gold” in popularity over time, has become common sense.

However, Bitcoin, Ethereum variants have these key issues that hinder mass adoption of the crypto network. We will first see the problem and then use this point to compare the new generation of blockchain platforms.

1. High-efficiency network operators need to ensure that network participants effectively implement consensus. Fault Tolerance (Byzantine Fault Tolerance).

Consent that allows participation in an open network of activities, simultaneously using the same stance against multiple identities (Sybil attack) is handled through an admission method called Proof of Work (PoW) (pioneered by Cynthia Dwork in 1992, in Request The participants harnessed the enormous computing power, which empowered the planet, and also gave some power companies.

Pre-determined, secure items are computed over the network, with new proof-of-stake (PoS) implementations that require economic infusions to validate participants in order to use them. In fact, similar economies of scale are available for Proof of Stake (PoS) and Proof of Work (PoW): the cost of validating nodes grows from OPEX (the operating cost of the mine) to CAPEX (the cost of capital).

2. Delayed adoption of Nakamoto consensus in Bitcoin, Ethereum and their variants, which requires waiting for multiple new blocks to be created to secure transactions. Therefore, the Nakamoto consensus chain has high availability. Due to the long transaction chain, the finality is guaranteed, the transaction speed is reduced, and it needs to wait quickly.

To improve transaction finality, the Practical Byting Fault Tolerance (PBFT) consensus set used by many blockchain projects has its own weaknesses, including how large a validator can be without slowing down the network, and when it has normal operation. Security in terms of time or activity.

3. Calculation results : In computer network transactions, the performance calculation of the network can be optimized, it can determine the nature of the transaction object, because it can carry out the nature of the task, because it can determine the transaction volume. Refers to simple different or different complex computing power; the computing power they require.

In order to achieve the overall goal, the project adopts high performance indicators or vertical expansion, that is, the performance calculation of nodes and the optimization software of computing nodes, that is, the horizontal expansion strategy is adopted, that is, parallel processing is carried out through the network part.

4. Transactions Transactions : Blockchains must find a way to limit their execution, otherwise the network of nodes running the blockchain is vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack (DOS). To enforce this limitation, Bitcoin uses a very limited scripting language, and Ethereum charges transaction fees based on gas metering performed by smart contracts.

In this problem, whatever is done in the transaction thus is conveniently done in the transaction, they all process the result conveniently on one network, and when the network adds time, even for simple operations, the transaction fee will be Added, use the same perks of being someone with a big wallet. Fees are paid to miners as an incentive to prioritize transactions.

Bitcoin will serve as a measure of widespread post-trade public offerings, but in Ethereum they are the only price, their only project cost. Ethereum is also starting to burn costs, so as network activity grows, all token holders are reaping the increase in scarcity.

5. The degree of de -bitcoin is opposite to the degree of generalization, due to the centralization of mining pools, the degree of centralization that actually occurs in Bitcoin and Ethereum is very low (by November 2021, 90% of the mining power of 11 Bitcoins will be removed. Centralized) mining pool control, 90% of Ethereum’s computing power is controlled by 16 mining pools).

With the increased love and love that will be among the difficult masses below, we run, unite, and let us succeed in the minds of many workers. Various solutions to solve this problem.

6. With how the blockchain project of the network distributes a kind of common distribution chain (token chain) on the blockchain, the security, fairness, ecological development system and the shared chain of the distributed chain are many dependencies around the city Accompanying the project: Along with the network of miners, join the token reward center of this project, and it will be safely decomposed on this network, thus attracting more people to use it.

However, as the network continues to grow, more and more miners come to protect the cost of success. The distribution of tokens or power is centralized and the core is concentrated on a few entities running miners.

Ethereum employs a different strategy: how many tokens do they prepay, remove the total supply chain and funding, give some of the tokens to early investors and sellers, allocate some of the tokens to early investors and sellers, use To distribute the money to the donors and start to become miners like the new standard coin model over time.

Ethereum soon issued a pool of tokens concentrated in several mining pools, with the largest holder holding the console. Ultimately, in a network of circulation over time, circulation defines who has power: the power of blocks (ordering, accepting or reviewing transactions), the power to fork the network, the power to decide protocol upgrades, and the power to invest and The right to pledge the application.

7 : Protocol network does not affect all user changes. Whether or not they propose improvements is significantly influenced by these agreements and future ones. In Bitcoin Ethereum, improvement proposals lead to changes and parameter changes, core core communities, discussion decisions, implementation and application.

Miners have an interest in pursuing a network that differs from the majority, going in a different direction and starting a new network, then actively forking on the network. Additionally, alternatives are emerging if R&D funding allocations are typically managed by a central foundation, while DAOs (Decentralized Organizations) are clustered around community funding negotiations.

Because they have no real token holders or rights holders in decision making, because they do not express professionalism, interest or awareness in decision making. than, they might also have a little impact, since it’s usually token voting.

The new currency adopts fair and equitable, Cross chain bridge development more generational de-time chain supervision (i.e. participation in voting), supervision scheme, supervision scheme to supervise in a more equitable way, voting appointment, supervision committee, voting institution, supervisory committee, voting institution, supervisory committee tickets) and off-chain signaling mechanisms, this is changing.

These issues are the real application of the continued adoption of the network, and its decentralization and ease of use.

Existing gang users continue to use Ethereum and Bitcoin because they are unaware of the problems; companies and investors continue to use them because they want to be liquid; those who are early entrants or “primitive black” because they There are great benefits. But another world is possible.
Every day, Ethereum has an average of 500,000 daily active users, while popular web apps like Twitter have 200 million daily active users (400 times that of Ethereum), and Facebook has nearly 2 billion daily active users (4,000 times that of Ethereum) active user) .

The new version of Ethereum rolls out a wide range of solutions and its interim solution is currently meeting the expanding demand, but it is currently meeting the growing demand, Polkadot, Avalanche (mainnet 2019 2020) re-launch is right The promise of a truly decentralized internet.

Ethereum as new version of the EVM ecosystem

The new mechanics of Ethereum have been happening through new mechanics and the invention of the blockchain platform for new mechanics ever since. Ethereum’s new Proof of Stake, which publishes the network version as a synchronized shard, (data and results calculated by total Ethereum users). Running the same allocator will be generated by verification blocks to different virtual machines, activities on multiple different chains, and chain synchronization of Beacon.

Synchronous replication means replication, i.e. testing consistent database copies across all servers. data for expansion.

The same speed, cost, and scaling issues start to arise when synchronizing or building a network to deploy a shard of the same (eg DeFi shard) to get more usage than the other shards. A new problem is efficiently synchronizing data between shards.

The transition to the new version in Ethereum’s time will be fully completed around this year, but at this time the Laer2 solutions — Rollup (Optimistic, zk Sync), Plasma and state channels — have been rolled out for the growing Ethereum usage needs to provide efficiency and speed.

Paradoxically, the layer 2 central trust model may have an intermediary operator for the purpose of de-censorship and counter-censorship, i.e. having multiple operators (Polygon is made with Tendermint and runs on multiple validators, the goal of Matter Labs) is Authenticator network using zkSync)

It’s like having your own codename (such as MATIC’s blockchain, and eventually adding a second trading center) to quote issues.

Blockchain Design

Recently, Ethereum adopted a new strategy called llup-centric roadmap, which positions the Ethereum Layer1 as data validity and the Layer2 project as computational formula. And share the base layer of security with Rollup.

Ethereum is computing the EVM blockchain ecosystem, is it a game of multiple Rollups collectively occupying the dominant storage position or a Rollup (see Vik Buter’s article Endgame Strategy). Adopting Reality, and therefore suitable for such emerging market blockchain designs, blockchains can deliver data to or from other blockchains.

A general model for this strategy was developed by Celestia and the EigenLayr. Additionally, Ethereum’s new strategy is similar to the shared security model already used in Polkadot and Avalanche.

Then, since Comos, Polka, Avalanche are on at least one of their bridges to the on-chain connection of the EVM La chain, they are sometimes connected in a bucket like “Layer2”, which these projects usually call themselves because they provide The foundation of the Layer1 blockchain for interconnection.

Cosmos, Polkadot, Avalanche

Cosmos Polkadot, Avalanche need to scale horizontally with specific applications where the blockchains have different virtual machines and are interoperable with other chains.

These facility platforms give you the ability to customize your blockchain hub, and therefore provide a design-by-design for your application to run your project space and chain instead of your own set of smart contracts. Three basic advantages:

1. Performance Isolation: Isolation of your chain from other chains ensures that the experience is not affected by the network for a specific activity, so it provides better performance needs and you can use when users bridge other chains.
2. Fees that are predictable and you can customize: Fees on shared permissionless networks are not controlled. High activity on the network for some applications may increase arbitrary charges for your application. Have your custom structure and don’t use ATOM, DOT applications, and can use applications to calculate costs between your applications. Spirit.
3. Customizable Validation: Custom validator rules and requirements focus your chain on its domain-specific needs. Your chain’s validators can be jurisdiction compliant (e.g. GDPR in the EU), can have hardware requirements for performance, or have some kind of proof of being a validator.

As well as these latest networks are also connected to Ethereum, a bridge between Bitcoin is being developed, and to fully realize the vision of the Internet of Blockchains.

For example, Cosmos, Avalanche have their key differences at the protocol level (e.g., Polkadot, consensus mechanisms, secure economic processing) that affect platform functionality (its, chain communication, token differences, types of applications between economies) and how the network scales Example (validator participation, constant release).

The investor comparisons below help those, entrepreneurs, researchers, and those considering next-generation infrastructure understand their differential development and talent.

consensus mechanism

Securely maintained and consistent application state on an open network is achieved through faulty consensus mechanisms. While performing, the information is not expressed or there are opposing actors (Byzantine, the network shows faulty and valid consensus.

Practical Party Call Communication (PBFT), which was decided to be used in Cosmos and Polkadot, allows all parties to participate and therefore determines where all the networks participate. It has low latency and fast finality, but it cannot achieve its participants in all participants in a global open network, because the load rate on each validator node increases exponentially with the increase of validation work.

Over time, widely disseminated low-sex speech, it builds a very slow and scalable network to spread.

• Cosmos, due to go live in March 2019, but the mainnet must use Tendermint PBFT message consensus while providing finality for both parties. .
• Polkadot is the mainnet launched in May 2020. The blockchain is produced and finalized by consensus: BABE (a variant of Ouroboros Praos) creates sub-blocks, and the PBFT variant is completed. Hybrid consensus provides the complexity of secondary message passing to a certain extent.
• Avalanche went live in September 2020 and uses Avalanche consensus, a unique mechanism that combines duplicate voting between validator nodes (snowballs) and commit voting in a directed acyclic (DAG) that is linear error chain. Since Avalanche has consensus, there is a common message propagation complexity, allowing for low and large participation. rate is extremely low.

 

 Validator entry criteria

Allowing participation in the consensus of an open network while preventing the same action against multiple (Sybil identity attacks) is handled by a proof-of-work (PoW) or proof-of-stake (PoS) mechanism.

Like all new projects, Cosmos, Polkadot, Avalanche use Proof of Stake because of its energy efficiency and ability to provide design space. There are also projects on these networks that implement a lighter proof-of-work (PoW) mechanism for a fair generation distribution mechanism.

 

transaction delay

• Cosmos can achieve transaction finality in 6-7 seconds.
• Polkadot as a whole can achieve finality in 12-60 seconds, with block creation and finality being separate.
• Avalanche can be the failure rate within the pole. It achieves transactional finality like Bitcoin and is low finality.

 

Calculate output

The complexity of the machines and network architectures used on the virtual network network blockchain that Cosmos, Polkadot are building. What really matters is how much the network can grow, and their choice for cross-chain economic security matters. Build a cross chain bridge

 

Trading price

Cosmos, Polkadot, Avalanche make a network with its own network, each with a fee mechanism customized as the network state grows.

Each Cosmos chain has a customizable fee mechanism.

Polkadot has a customizable fee mechanism per chain. Fees are recalculated using a weighting system. The cost of burning each chain is optional.

Avaya has different types of primary fees per chain, which are fixed fees for network fees. Harvest.

0