Layer2 Sequencer问题：去中心化前途难测？

Before the author encrypted the source of observers, many articles discussed in detail the stagnation of decentralization. Does this mean that decentralization has no solution at all? With this question, I made a correct study of this project, which claims to have built the first decentralized sorter. I found that the technical logic of decentralization is not difficult. It seems reasonable that the decentralization scheme adopts hard distributed technical consensus and soft distributed social consensus, but it will bring completely different reasons. Why is it on the main network of Ethereum? Users submit transactions to the broadcast of collected transactions, and finally the miners sort them out in high and low order, which means that the transactions submitted by users may be paid by and need to follow the queuing mechanism, which leads to the transaction being expensive, slow and easy to be caught on the main network. Analogously, it is like a closed user submitting transactions to be responsible for sorting and concentrating them into a block and finally submitting them to the main network, which makes the transaction sorting completely up and there is no value queuing. In theory, after receiving the transaction, it will be sorted fairly according to the receiving time, price or random algorithm. However, due to excessive power, there are still doubts about whether malicious transactions will be inserted. At present, the mainstream solution in the market is centralized by default, but it is an optimistic solution. On the one hand, most projects will affect the user experience because the core components are distributed at first. In the early days, Fang tended to centralize operation and maintenance to ensure safety and stability. On the other hand, when the project developed to a certain extent and handled a large number of transaction demands, he used the supreme power, which not only controlled the pricing power but also directly pumped water to make profits. At this time, the market was too big to implement decentralization again, and the power was handed over to the four kings. This is precisely the reason why the decentralization process was slow. However, they all chose the same strategic framework, which opened the core technology code and merged it. The strategic plan of trying to share key technology components is to build a multi-chain combined framework by sharing the core, and then to jointly govern by signing governance rights votes, forming a socialized transparent decentralized consensus, just like the king of the mountain sealed several management seats for the second, the third and the fourth, but when it comes to major decisions, everyone has to follow the lead of the big brother. Isn't this kind of soft distributed plan suitable for the market to a certain scale? Everyone has absolute trust in the power center and made some trust frictions. The premise of desensitization such as evil challenges, for example, what is the decentralized scheme provided? Simply put, this is a hard distributed scheme for building distributed nodes. A number of nodes form a sorter pool. Only by mortgaging 10,000 tokens can the sorter qualify for the right to block. Users can also choose the corresponding nodes in the form of "block mining", so that a large number of tokens will be obtained to encourage users to share. In order to prevent evil behavior, sampling of blocks and their original state roots are introduced. Conduct comparative verification, including whether the order of transactions has been reversed, whether malicious transactions have been inserted, etc. The verification behavior itself can also get mining rewards. Once it is found that the evil system will verify the assets pledged by the evil nodes, the nodes can also get a part of the confiscated assets. If they want to get incentives, they will join the equity queue, and mining will also strengthen the sampling verification work. Through this incentive and punishment model, a decentralized system is strung together. This hard distributed architecture is run by multiple entities and has. The existence of a transparent reward and punishment mechanism is an effective way to restrain individual rights and ensure fair ranking. Finally, both soft distribution and hard distribution are strategic means. The open source framework is more suitable for the expansion of large subject's territory, relying more on intangible trust assets such as subject's market position and brand prestige, while decentralization is relatively more suitable for small subject's overtaking in corners. After all, the most powerful consensus after the blockchain has settled is that the consensus model of node mining technology will reduce the development of the project party in the new market situation. Cost, but the trust problem under its accumulation depends on all participants to pay off together, and the direct and hard distributed technical consensus has a clearer boundary, which is more suitable for the background of slow overall technical progress and public opinion. Of course, I have also seen other decentralized technical consensus schemes and their logic are similar, but the test based on the extended Ethereum is adopted when this part of off-chain consensus is involved. The ability of certification adopts a more modular way to provide developers with a quick modular scheme, and it adopts the method of encrypting all transactions entering the pool to eliminate evil and risks and find opportunities to analyze. In short, my view is that decentralization will not stop at the decentralization scheme of the strategic and technical consensus of the four kings. Although there is indeed the risk of consensus overload, it is more promising than the one of signing more social consensus. 比特币今日价格行情网_okx交易所app_永续合约_比特币怎么买卖交易_虚拟币交易所平台

注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群

文章转载注明 网址：https://netpsp.com/?id=62388