- Polygon boss initially called L3s an “Ethereum security risk.”
- Buterin said there were “lightweight” alternatives to L3.
conversation about the need for Ethereum (ETH) L3s has not cooled down. Now, Vitalik Buterin has expressed his opinion on the L3 debate, joining the number of opponents of the three-layer architecture.
To put this into perspective, the buzz arose when L3 Dagen Chain on Base recorded explosive growth less than a week after its debut.
Marc Boiron, CEO of Polygon (MATIC), described L3s as “Ethereum Security Risks”And he highlighted how they could devalue ETH.
Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin added his opinion to the discussion. it shows That “lightweight” alternatives to L3 exist.
“There are other, potentially ‘lighter’ ways to achieve similar cost savings as L3.”
Ethereum L3s opposition
Buterin’s position on L3 has not changed. In 2017 he expressed his of booking On a three-tier architecture with uniform scaling scheme.
“A three-tier scaling architecture that involves stacking the same scaling scheme on top of itself usually doesn’t work well.”
However, Buterin acknowledged that L3s could “reduce certain costs of batch publishing and deposits/withdrawals.” Unfortunately, they do not improve transaction performance.
Instead, Buterin advocated “lightweight” cryptographic tools, known as SNARKs (short for Knowledge Non-Interactive Arguments).
He believed that whatever L3s were trying to solve, SNARKs could efficiently address them.
Chem Ozer of Sovereign Labs had similar sentiments, with emphasis on He;
“The complex hierarchy (three-layer architecture) is completely unnecessary.”
Similarly, Eigen Layer founder Sriram Kannan echoed Ozer and Buterin’s stance. He noted That L2 can communicate with each other without the need for L3.
“Do we need L3? Direct L2-to-L2 interaction can occur in several ways.
The above discussion shows a lot of heat for L3s. It remains to be seen whether L3 will be able to survive the attack.
This is an automatic translation of our English version.