Why is Beam Chain a major boon to Layer2?

Original author: Haotian (X: @tme l0 211 )

This is really outrageous. I have been attending Devcon these past two days and have seen a lot of rumors about Ethereum upgrading to 3.0 — BeamChain, and layer 2 is doomed (I am so angry). Layer 2, which was already in a passive position, was innocently backstabbed, triggering a sharp drop. In fact, it is a big positive! Let me quickly explain my point of view to set the record straight:

1) Don’t assume that a large-scale fork or new coins will be needed when a new chain is mentioned. As Justin Drake said, BeamChain is just an upgrade of BeaconChain. It is still a proposal and it will be a long time before it is officially launched. It also fully follows Ethereum’s Roadmap.

Ethereum is divided into BeaconChain and EVM. The two together constitute the Ethereum chain we know. The Beacon Chain plays the role of the consensus layer, and the EVM plays the role of the execution layer. Don’t think that the name is a chain, which means we are going to launch something new. BeamChain is just a transitional upgrade of the Beacon Chain, and it does not affect the execution of the Ethereum chain at all.

Where does Ethereum 3.0 come from?

2) Let’s talk about the logic behind the Beacon Chain upgrade:

The Proposer block proposer, Realy relay node and Validators of the Ethereum EVM execution layer are the roles of project manager, worker and quality inspector respectively. After the user submits the transaction to the Mempool, the block builder Builder will select transactions from the transaction pool and package them. The process will handle some transaction sorting functions, and then distribute the constructed block Realy. The Proposer will select the optimal block, and finally the Validators will conduct acceptance verification.

In this process, there is an element of excessive centralization in the process of Builder sorting transactions and Realy distributing transactions. Large builders like Flashbot can decide the order of some blocks and thus MEV, which is obviously not in line with Ethereums overall strategy.

Therefore, Justin proposed an idea to add an inclusion list to the Builders building block, which is equivalent to a list of transactions that must be included. If centralized interference occurs in the builder and relay links, or causes the proposing node to supervise the block construction and participate in the subsequent consensus, the proposer-builder separation (PBS), and the validators find that some key transactions are not in the transaction list, they can directly verify that the block is unqualified. You can see that the inclusion list is to enhance the decentralized properties of the Ethereum block generation process to enhance anti-censorship capabilities.

The question is, who will put the inclusion list into the entire execution verification process? It can only be added by relying on the BeaconChain consensus layer, but BeaconChain does not support this function, so it is upgraded to BeamChain to improve it. In the future, the beacon chain can publicize all the transactions that must be included. If there is a problem with the execution layer, the verification node will not pass it.

In addition, the Pectal upgrade also added the issue of changing the staking threshold to 32 ETH-1 ETH. This time it involves changes in the BeaconChain economic model and management logic, which also requires a major version upgrade.

Moreover, after Ethereum is fully Snarkized in the subsequent stages such as Verge, the verification process of the beacon chain and the EVM execution chain will also be optimized with SNARKs, and SNARKs support will also be required at the consensus layer. Moreover, resisting quantum cryptographic attacks has always been one of Ethereum’s strategic goals. The upgrade of BeaconChain will change some signature verification mechanisms to make Ethereum more secure.

Therefore, the emergence of BeamChain is entirely a series of necessary preparations to cater to the plan of the Ethereum roadmap.

3) Why is it not bad news for layer 2, but great news!

First of all, Ethereum has long determined the grand strategic expansion idea of Rollup-Centric, and the upgrade of BeamChain cannot shake the foundation of this strategy. Otherwise, even if Justin has this intention, the proposal will not be passed by the entire Ethereum community.

Secondly, it is said that the new BeamChain beacon chain will help Ethereum achieve mainnet-level expansion. The key point is SNARKs. After SNARKs, the overall framework of Ethereum has changed from storing and computing all data to only verifying Proofs, which naturally achieves a major expansion. However, this expansion is the result of the ZK-ization of the underlying data structure logic, which is not the same as the expansion of layer 2. One is responsible for reducing operating costs, and the other is responsible for traffic and user application scenarios. So dont think that the mainnet can be expanded, which means that layer 2 will be weakened.

Furthermore, a few days ago, I published an article interpreting @VitalikButerin’s idea of fully SNARKing Ethereum and making EVM one of the altVMs existing on the mainnet. By then, other layer 2 altVMs that perform outstandingly will be promoted to the mainnet level and will execute transactions in the entire Ethereum ecosystem in parallel with EVM.

By then, the role of BeamChain will be magnified, and upgrading is necessary. Following this logic, excellent VM solutions that meet the needs of Ethereum expansion will be brought to the main network level to absorb and execute transactions, and the interoperability between Ethereum layer 2 will also be smoothly solved, which is completely in line with the development strategy of layer 2.

There are so many generic layer 2s in the market. If Ethereum really adopts the modular idea and adopts the new strategy of alt-VM, it is foreseeable that many layer 2s will get Ethereums direct upward channel, which can also promote the reshuffle and optimization of layer 2. Shouldnt this be a direct benefit?

Finally, everyone should have more expectations for the arrival of the ZK explosion era, and avoid such illogical FUD and rumors.

This article is sourced from the internet: Why is Beam Chain a major boon to Layer2?

Related: If Trump loses the election, what are the arbitrage opportunities on Polymarket?

Original title: Polymarket | What will happen if Trump loses the election? Original author: zaddycoin, founder of Shoal Research Original translation: zhouzhou, BlockBeats Editors note: This article explores the complications and arbitrage opportunities that the Polymarket platform may face if Trump loses the election. The article assumes that the market may enter a double dispute period after AP, Foxnews, and NBCNews announce Trumps defeat. The author believes that arbitrage opportunities will arise during the dispute period and points out that if Foxnews does not announce the election results, it may make the situation more chaotic. The article reminds that this is a hypothetical discussion and looks forward to insights from industry insiders. The following is the original content (for easier reading and understanding, the original content has been reorganized): If…