Coinbase layer 2 network Base set a new record yet after hitting 136,000 daily users on AUG 10
On the same day, about 30% of the users were new.
Coinbase layer 2 network Base has registered an impressive 136K users in a day despite the exchange being under US SEC investigations and legal battles.
Coinbase layer 2 network Base gaining traction despite legal troubles
On-chain analytics show that over 136K users accessed the Coinbase layer 2 network Base on August 10, just a day after its launch, a record performance for a new blockchain.
Nearly 42,000 users accessed the network for the first time on August 10 though its record high for new users was on July 31 when it hit the registered 60,000 mark. Data from Cryptorank.io show that the blockchain stood as the 4th largest in daily transactions among layer 2 networks, just behind zkSync Era, Arbitrum, and Optimism.
Base Now Ranks 4th in Daily TPS Among Layer 2 Solutions 🔵#Base Layer 2 launched its mainnet yesterday and is showing robust growth in active users and transactions. Now it ranks 4th by daily TPS (Transaction per second). pic.twitter.com/pnYF0tk7b0
The network launched on August 9 officially and has been pulling numbers despite the exchange being in a legal battle with the US SEC. It is being charged for acting as a securities broker despite not having had the chance to register ‘fully’ with the regulator regarding the complainants in the past.
However, the case is still far from being determined. Keep watching Fintech Express for details and updates as soon as they happen.
Matter Labs have denied allegations that it copied “performance-critical components” from Polygon Zero’s “Plonky2.”
Matter Labs CEO Alex Glochowski says the allegations against them are unfounded, misleading, and disappointing
Matter Labs CEO Alex Glochowski has responded to an August 3rd report from Polygon Zero that claims they copy-pasted their code when building Boojum. Polygon Zero claims that Plonky2’s code was seen on the latest product by Matter Labs dubbed “Boojum,” which did not attribute to the original code’s author.
Matter Labs CEO Alex Glochowski denies Polygon Zero plagiarism claims
Expressing disappointment Matter Labs CEO Alex Glochowski has denied Polygon Zero’s allegations in a Twitter post, saying that their decisions on building zkSync were based on integrity and transparency.
Polygon Zero posted a blog post on August 3rd claiming that Matter Labs copied its code without proper author attributions. It said such behavior harms the developer ecosystem and could hurt smaller development teams across the industry as better-funded companies take advantage of their work.
While Matter Labs CEO Alex Glochowski debunked the claims, he did not completely assert that Boojum did not use Plonky’s code. He said that they only based 5% of their code on Plonky2. He also added that they had some reused code that they worked with and gave clear attribution.
Every decision we make as a team towards building @zksync is driven by our ethos, which is based on integrity and transparency. We have made honest mistakes in the past, but we always did our best to openly acknowledge them and take responsibility. And will always do so in the… https://t.co/4yjpSCHC2d
“Only ~5% of the Boojum code is based on the code of Plonky2. For the reused code, a clear attribution is provided in line #1 of the main file of the module,” he said.
He also said that he was very “disappointed” in the Polygon Zero team since it had also committed a similar mistake, and Matter Labs did not take it as a major issue. In his argument, Matter Labs CEO Alex Glochowski said that Plonky2 and Boojum are implementations of RedSHift construction, which was introduced by his team 3 years before Plonky2 paper 2.
As such, the Plonky2 team never gave matter labs credit though they referred to RedShift in their white paper. However, Matter Labs never bothered as it was glad to see someone else build on and improve their work.
However, he also conceded that there are either attribution standards that they should have used and will be more mindful of going forward. Additionally, he also called out Polygon Zero for going straight public with claims that made it look like Boojum was a total copy-paste work.
“Open Source is all about genuine cooperation. If the Polygon Zero team wanted additional credit, the easiest way would have been to submit a pull request which we would have happily accepted. Going ahead with public accusations of a complete lack of attribution (even if it was true, which is not the case here) is anything but the spirit of the Open Source movement. If you’re not happy about others – including potential competitors – using parts of your code, maybe Open Source is not for you?” Part of the tweet reads.
Keep watching Fintech Express for more updates on crypto and other Fintech related developments.
Vitalik Buterin has released a blog note on what he thinks about biometric Proof of Personhood as cases of identity theft rage.
He applauds the Worldcoin team for their efforts in linking up to discuss the matter.
Vitalik says that Proof of Personhood has been a key point in the Ethereum community as they try to build an undisputable real-world identity that asserts a person’s registry on a blockchain. In the blog, he explains that there have been multiple attempts to tackle this issue, with Proof of Humanity, BrightID, Idena, and Circles coming on top.
Why Proof of Personhood matters
Worldcoin, a crypto project built by Sam Altman, the CEO behind the world-moving GPT chatbot, has been in the limelight after showcasing the lengths AI can go to replace human prints on the internet. As a result, they have devised an idea to plug the hole by making it possible to tell who is a human and who is a bot.
The philosophy behind these plans will follow the following deliberations
(i) creating a really good proof-of-personhood system so that humans can prove that they are humans
(ii) giving everyone a UBI.
Worldcoin will achieve this by scanning the user’s iris with an orb. However, it has not gone without a backlash that the security concerns around it could compromise users. According to Vitalik, Proof of Personhood, all in all, is valuable because “ it solves a lot of anti-spam and anti-concentration-of-power problems” in a way that reduces their solves a lot of anti-spam and anti-concentration-of-power problems.”
In the article, Vitalik says that if Proof of Personhood is not developed, decentralized governance could become much easier to capture by wealthy actors, including hostile governments. He adds that most of the available services would only be able to provide denial-of-service attacks by setting an access price which ensures that bots won’t be used owing to high cumulative costs.
However, he pointed out that the current usage of government-backed identity systems like passports may be ineffective in the long term as it brings forth unacceptable sacrifices on privacy, which is open to attacks.
“Today, Many major applications deal with this issue using government-backed identity systems such as credit cards and passports. This solves the problem, but it makes large and perhaps unacceptable sacrifices on privacy and can be trivially attacked by governments.”
Vitalik further pointed out the already existing use cases of Proof of Personhood.
Protection against bots / sybil attacks in social media
An alternative to captchas for preventing DoS attacks
He explained that the major underlying problem with Proof of Personhood projects is the leakage of personal data, where he suggested using zero Knwoneledge proof technology.
“Instead of directly making a signature with a private key whose corresponding public key is in the database, a user could make a ZK-SNARK proving that they own the private key whose corresponding public key is somewhere in the database, without revealing which specific key they have” he suggested.
Keep watching Fintech Express for more updates on blockchain and other fintech-related developments. Read more here
Bitcoin halving is a significant event that occurs approximately every four years within the Bitcoin network. It is a programmed reduction in the rate at which miners create and earn new bitcoins. Bitcoin halving is an integral part of the cryptocurrency’s design and plays a crucial role in maintaining its scarcity, controlling inflation, and influencing the supply-demand dynamics. This comprehensive guide will explore everything you need to know about Bitcoin halving, including its purpose, process, historical context, and potential implications.
Understanding Bitcoin Supply:
Bitcoin operates on a fixed supply model, with a maximum limit of 21 million bitcoins. Unlike traditional fiat currencies, which can be created indefinitely, Bitcoin’s supply is predetermined and governed by its underlying protocol.
What is Bitcoin Halving?
Bitcoin halving is an event that occurs approximately every 210,000 blocks, which takes roughly four years. During the halving, the reward for miners who successfully validate and add new blocks to the blockchain is reduced by 50%.
a. Scarcity and Controlled Supply: By reducing the rate of new bitcoins entering circulation, halving helps maintain scarcity and slows the creation of new coins. This scarcity contributes to Bitcoin’s value proposition and safeguards against inflation.
b. Incentive Mechanism: Halving ensures that miners remain incentivized to secure the network even as the block reward diminishes. Miners are compensated not only through block rewards but also through transaction fees paid by users.
The Process of Bitcoin Halving:
Bitcoin halving follows a pre-defined schedule:
a. Genesis Block: The first halving occurred with Bitcoin’s Genesis block in 2009 when the block reward was initially set at 50 bitcoins.
b. Subsequent Halvings: Approximately every four years, the block reward is halved. The first halving in 2012 reduced the block reward to 25 bitcoins. The second halving in 2016 further reduced it to 12.5 bitcoins. The third halving occurred in May 2020, lowering the block reward to 6.25 bitcoins. The next halving will lower it to 3.125 bitcoins in 2024.
Historical Context and Impact of Bitcoin Halvings:
Bitcoin halvings have had notable effects on the cryptocurrency ecosystem:
a. Price Volatility: Historically, Bitcoin halvings have been associated with increased price volatility. The anticipation and post-halving speculation can drive market sentiment and result in significant price movements.
b. Supply and Demand Dynamics: The reduced rate of newly minted bitcoins can influence the supply-demand dynamics of the cryptocurrency. If demand remains constant or increases while the supply decreases, it can increase Bitcoin’s price pressure.
c. Miner Economics: Halvings directly impact miners’ revenue as their block rewards are reduced. Miners must adjust their operations, factor in transaction fees, and assess the profitability of their activities in the context of the lower block rewards.
Potential Implications for Investors and Traders:
Bitcoin halvings can have implications for investors and traders:
a. Increased Investor Attention: Halving events often attract significant media attention, driving increased interest from investors and traders. This heightened attention can influence market sentiment and potentially impact Bitcoin’s price.
b. Long-Term Investment Perspective: Some investors view halvings as long-term bullish indicators, as they reduce the rate of new supply entering the market. They perceive halvings as potential catalysts for upward price movements in the years following the event.
c. Short-Term Price Volatility: In the immediate aftermath of a halving, Bitcoin’s price can exhibit increased volatility, with both upward and downward price movements. Traders should exercise caution and employ appropriate risk management strategies.
Considerations for Miners:
Bitcoin miners should consider the following:
a. Profitability Adjustments: With reduced block rewards, miners may need to reassess their operations, operational costs, and energy consumption. Efficient operations and competitive electricity costs are crucial for maintaining profitability.
b. Transaction Fee Importance: As block rewards decline, transaction fees become an increasingly significant source of revenue for miners. Monitoring and optimizing fee collection strategies can help maintain profitability.
The Future of Bitcoin Halving:
Bitcoin halving will continue until the block reward reaches zero, which is projected to happen around the year 2140. After this point, no new bitcoins will be created, and miners will rely solely on transaction fees for rewards.
Conclusion:
Bitcoin halving is a fundamental aspect of the Bitcoin protocol that regulates the creation of new bitcoins and maintains the cryptocurrency’s scarcity. By understanding halvings’ purpose, process, and historical context, investors, traders, and miners can gain insights into the potential impact on the Bitcoin ecosystem. It is essential to approach Bitcoin halving events with a comprehensive understanding of the underlying dynamics, consider the broader market conditions, and make informed decisions based on individual investment goals and risk tolerance.
At the heart of Blockchain technology lies the concept of blockchain addresses, which play a crucial role in facilitating transactions and interactions within the network. Blockchain addresses are alphanumeric strings that uniquely identify participants on a blockchain network. This article will explore the two primary types of blockchain addresses: Externally Owned Addresses (EOAs) and Smart Contract Addresses.
Externally Owned Addresses (EOAs):
Externally Owned Addresses, often referred to as simply “addresses,” are the most common type of blockchain addresses. These addresses are used by individuals and entities to send, receive, and store cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin or Ether. EOAs are associated with private keys, which are cryptographic keys that provide access and control over the funds or assets associated with the address.
Key characteristics of EOAs:
a. Control: An EOA is controlled by its owner through the possession of the private key. This private key is used to sign transactions and authenticate ownership during transfers or interactions on the blockchain.
b. Transactions: EOAs are primarily used to initiate and sign transactions on the blockchain. These transactions involve the transfer of cryptocurrencies between different addresses.
c. Human-readable format: EOAs are usually represented in a human-readable format, such as a string of letters and numbers. For example, Ethereum addresses often start with “0x.”
d. Non-programmable: EOAs lack the ability to execute code or smart contracts directly. They can only perform simple operations like sending and receiving cryptocurrency.
Smart Contract Addresses:
While EOAs are suitable for transferring and holding cryptocurrencies, they cannot execute complex operations or implement business logic autonomously. That’s where smart contract addresses come into play. Smart contracts are self-executing contracts with the terms of the agreement directly written into code. Smart contract addresses, unlike EOAs, are not controlled by private keys associated with individuals or entities. Instead, they are associated with the code and logic of the smart contract.
Key characteristics of Smart Contract Addresses:
a. Autonomy: Smart contract addresses are self-sustained and can operate independently without human intervention once deployed on the blockchain. The code defines the rules and conditions for the smart contract’s execution.
b. Programmable: Unlike EOAs, smart contract addresses can execute code and implement complex logic. They can hold and manage funds, interact with other smart contracts, and perform various functions based on predefined conditions.
c. No private key: Smart contract addresses do not have a private key associated with them. The code itself governs the actions and functions of the smart contract.
d. Usage scenarios: Smart contracts find applications in decentralized applications (DApps), automated financial instruments, supply chain management, voting systems, and more. They provide a secure and tamper-resistant way to execute agreements and transactions.
Conclusion
In conclusion, blockchain addresses enable transactions and interactions within a blockchain network. Externally Owned Addresses (EOAs) are used by individuals and entities for simple cryptocurrency transfers, while Smart Contract Addresses are associated with self-executing code and are used to execute complex operations autonomously. Understanding the distinctions between EOAs and Smart Contract Addresses is essential for grasping the full potential of blockchain technology and its various applications across diverse industries.
Ethereum Co-founder and core developer Vitalik Buterin took the main stage on ETH cc 2023 talking about Account Abstraction.
Vitalik explained how account abstraction factored in the Ethereum ecosystem even after facing multiple challenges.
Account abstraction is a concept in Blockchain technology that refers to separating the user account layer from the smart contract layer to make it easier for users to operate their accounts. Vitalik has been pushing this idea to increase security in the Ethereum network while improving user experience.
Account Abstraction as a future path in crypto custody
In ETHcc, he took the stage on Tuesday and explained how an account abstraction extension called “paymasters” could allow other users to pay for gas fees using any crypto asset they are transferring.
He explained some of the key innovations around the account abstraction concept in the Ethereum ecosystem and some of the current hurdles they face. He recognized that developers still have many issues to deal with to bring the full potential of Account Abstraction to life.
In his report, he added that more developments are needed in the existing Ethereum Improvement Proposal (EIP) that is meant to upgrade current Ethereum Externally Owned Accounts (EOAs; normal users accounts) into smart contract accounts that can execute transactions automatically and covertly.
Vitalik highlighted that challenges around current technology behind wallets and networks would be a major obstacle in actualizing this dream. However, he expressed excitement about the development behind this concept, explaining that he is confident more progress will come in the future.
Keep watching Fintech Express for more crypto and fintech-related developments.
