This is why Cardano[1] might be interesting with their Plutus [2] and Marlowe[3] languages.
It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
21–30 of 121 posts
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#22These sorts of extreme costs are inherent to any trustless decentralized system like Ethereum. Storing and verifying contracts across tens if not hundreds of thousands of nodes is not free.
why does one need to execute the contact on thousands of nodes, when a verification proof (e.g. pinocchio) would be sufficient?
Why does a contract between two counterparties need to use a network with thousands of nodes at all?
What enforcement benefit does the network provide? I'd contend it's entirely superfluous to a smart contract system, which could just offer building blocks from a trusted third party instead for constructing contracts, and that trusted third party could also notary the transaction and provide arbitration.
All of these complex problems are already solved (trust, arbitration etc) and involve recourse to real legal systems whether you use some distributed contract or a traditional one.
The area in business contracts which is a mess and could do with attention is standard clauses for different industries, which are well understood by everyone, diffs between contracts etc etc.
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#23For those not that involved in this stuff, ETH2 fixes this issue by switching to proof-of-stake. There are already billions being staked in ETH2 validators today in preparation for the switch and Vitalik has written and talked a lot about it if you’re curious. It’s been making progress and Vitalik is a smart and capable leader of the project imo. High gas fees in the current system are arguably a sign of high demand.
> There are already billions being staked in ETH2 validators today in preparation for the switch
I find it mindblowing that people willingly lock in so much money given how uncertain the whole thing is. There's no specific explanation about what happens if the 2.0 release is delayed repeatedly (like it has been in the past) or if it isn't successful and fails in some way. There's a lot of "trust Vitalik" going around which contradicts everything crypto pretends to be about.
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#24These sorts of extreme costs are inherent to any trustless decentralized system like Ethereum. Storing and verifying contracts across tens if not hundreds of thousands of nodes is not free.
why does one need to execute the contact on thousands of nodes, when a verification proof (e.g. pinocchio) would be sufficient?
as a complete newbie to this,
where does the code actually execute? what's the code writen in?
whats stopping malicious code running?
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#25For those not that involved in this stuff, ETH2 fixes this issue by switching to proof-of-stake. There are already billions being staked in ETH2 validators today in preparation for the switch and Vitalik has written and talked a lot about it if you’re curious. It’s been making progress and Vitalik is a smart and capable leader of the project imo. High gas fees in the current system are arguably a sign of high demand.
Proof of stake has little to do with transaction costs. The roadmap to scaling is sharding + layer 2 tech (optimistic and zk rollup, some of it is already live like arbitrum).
But storing things off-chain kinda kills the entire concept, doesn't it? If I hack into DigitalOcean I can mess everybody's NFTs by tampering with one database.
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Regular blockchains are already utterly useless Curious why you think so? Also agree Solana is quite centralized but I wouldn't say it's a scam.
This is just one of many VC backed coins trying to be the next Ethereum. These VC coins don't enable mining so there's no dilution on the initial holders. Saving the environment is just a nice alibi to lock in the cap table. There's also no disclosure on what price did the initial round happen at. 40 cents/80 cents /1$? If you buy Gold/Copper you have a fair idea on what the mining cost is for the industry. These are…
First round price was disclosed by Kyle Samani in this video[1] as $0.04 per SOL. They're currently up about 4000x.
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#27I get the scary part but I don't really understand what's the beautiful one here.
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#28For those not that involved in this stuff, ETH2 fixes this issue by switching to proof-of-stake. There are already billions being staked in ETH2 validators today in preparation for the switch and Vitalik has written and talked a lot about it if you’re curious. It’s been making progress and Vitalik is a smart and capable leader of the project imo. High gas fees in the current system are arguably a sign of high demand.
Proof of stake has little to do with transaction costs. The roadmap to scaling is sharding + layer 2 tech (optimistic and zk rollup, some of it is already live like arbitrum).
PoS is much cheaper computationally than PoW so it absolutely does increase the throughput of a network.
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#29I wonder what the cost of deploying the same NFT contracts on L2s would be?
This should give you a rough indication of typical fees across L2s https://l2fees.info/
Re: It costs $436 to deploy a smartcontract on Ethereum
#30For those not that involved in this stuff, ETH2 fixes this issue by switching to proof-of-stake. There are already billions being staked in ETH2 validators today in preparation for the switch and Vitalik has written and talked a lot about it if you’re curious. It’s been making progress and Vitalik is a smart and capable leader of the project imo. High gas fees in the current system are arguably a sign of high demand.
> There are already billions being staked in ETH2 validators today in preparation for the switch I find it mindblowing that people willingly lock in so much money given how uncertain the whole thing is. There's no specific explanation about what happens if the 2.0 release is delayed repeatedly (like it has been in the past) or if it isn't successful and fails in some way. There's a lot of "trust Vitalik" going around…
Lack of leadership is why BTC elevated a con artist pretending to be satoshi and is still arguing over block size.
I think hard improvements require effective coordination and someone who can pull that off. Vitalik is part of the reason I think ETH is more likely to be successful than competitors in the space (in addition to their head start).