Ethereum 2.0 – What does the release mean for your application?

Maciej Zieliński

18 Jan 2021
Ethereum 2.0 – What does the release mean for your application?

Ethereum 2.0, also known as Serenity is a long-awaited update to the Ethereum network, significantly improving the security and scalability of arguably the world's most popular Blockchain protocol. Above all, it will reduce power consumption and enable the network to process more transactions. The most important improvements from the technical side are to be the transformation of Ethereum into a proof-of-stake blockchain and the introduction of fragmented chains.  

Note, however, that this is a change to the Ethereum infrastructure only. Dapp users or developers and ETH holders can rest assured. Ethereum 2.0 will be fully compatible with the Ethereum 1.0 network they use today. On the other hand, they will also be able to use the ETH they own after the update. 

So why are these changes so important? On the Nextrope blog, we will try to cover everything you should know about Ethereum 2.0. 

Source: ethereum.org

Current restrictions

Released in 2015, Ethereum has quickly become the most widely used blockchain protocol (learn what blockchain protocols are and what distinguishes them from each other here). The open public system has enabled previously unseen software applications and generated billions of dollars in value. However, to realize its full potential, Ethereum still has to deal with a few limitations. 

Speed and efficiency:

Currently, Ethereum is capable of handling around 15 transactions per second. Compared to Visa or Mastercard, which are able to process up to 1,500 of them at the same time, it therefore comes off rather poorly. In addition, the process of "mining" ETH, on which verification of these transactions is based, consumes too much energy, which limits the scalability of the entire network. 

What does ETH 'mining' consist of?

Mining is the process of creating a block of transactions to be added to the Ethereum blockchain (hence blockchain). Each block contains transaction information and data such as the Hash - the unique code of the block and the hash of the previous block to which the block hash is compatible. 

Essentially, the miners' role is to process pending transactions in exchange for rewards in the form of ETH, Ethereum's native currency (2 ETH for each block generated, respectively). Generating a block requires the use of a lot of computing power, due to the difficulty level set by the Ethereum protocol. The difficulty level is proportional to the total amount of computing power used to mine Ethereum and serves as a way to protect the network from attacks, as well as to tune the rate at which subsequent blocks are created. This system of using computing power to secure and verify data is known as Proof of Work (PoW).

To maintain the security of the current Ethereum network, therefore, the high energy intensity of the mining process is necessary - making the cost of attacking the network, making any change to any of the already existing blocks, extremely high.

The problem of retaining decentralisation when scaling up 

There are, of course, Blockchain protocols such as Hyperledger Fabric or Quorumthat allow for more transactions per second. However, the higher performance in their case comes from being more centralised than Ethereum. By design, Ethereum is intended to remain a fully decentralised network, so such a solution in this case is not an option. It seems Ethereum 2.0 developers have found a way to improve performance and enable scaling without sacrificing decentralisation. 

What's new in Ethereum 2.0?

Fragmented chains (or chains of fragments) 

At the moment, all nodes in the Ethereum network have to download, read, analyse and store every previous transaction before they process a new one. Not surprisingly, Ethereum is currently unable to process more than the aforementioned 15 transactions per second. 

Ethereum 2.0 introduces fragmented chains, which are parallel blockchains that take over a fair share of the network's processing work. They allow nodes to be dispersed into subsets corresponding to fragments of the network. This ensures that each node does not have to process and store transactions from the entire network, but only those in its subset. 

Proof-of-stake in Ethereum 2.0

In Ethereum 2.0, Proof-of-Work is to be replaced by Proof-of-stake. Network security will be achieved through financial commitments rather than computing power - energy consumption. Proof-of-stake is a consensus process where ETH becomes the validator for Ethereum. The validator runs software that confirms the transaction and adds new blocks to the chain. To become a full validator, 32 ETH will be needed. However, there will be an opportunity to join a pool of smaller validators and thus offer a smaller stake. When processing transactions, validators will take care to maintain consensus over the data and thus the security of the entire network.

Proof-of-stake will drastically reduce the energy intensity of the entire network, which is a key step towards further scaling Ethereum and increasing its environmental friendliness. 

Beacon chain 

A decisive role in introducing proof of stake into Ethereum is played by the Beacon Chain, which, in simple terms, can be described as the layer that coordinates the operation of the entire system. However, unlike the core network (meinnet) present in Ethereum, it does not support accounts or smart contracts. Instead, its main task is to implement proof-of-stake protocol management for all fragmented chains (shards). It was the connection of the Beacon Chain to Ethereum that was the first step towards version 2.0 ( phase 0).

Ethereum 2.0, what will 2021 bring?

The introduction of Ethereum 2.0 developers will divide into 3 stages - phases: Phase 0, 1 and 2. In December 2020, the first one, which started in 2018, was completed. As we mentioned its main goal was to launch the Beacon chain. The success of Phase 0 will allow the start of Phase 1 in 2021 - the shard chain deployment, which will start the full-fledged transition to the Proof-of-stake protocol. The full upgrade to Ethereum 2.0 will be enabled by Phase 2 scheduled for late 2021/early 2022, this is when shard chains should start supporting all contracts and transactions. 

How might the next phases of Ethereum 2.0 implications affect ETH prices? This is a question we will certainly return to in the blog. 

Tagi

Most viewed


Never miss a story

Stay updated about Nextrope news as it happens.

You are subscribed

Aethir Tokenomics – Case Study

Kajetan Olas

22 Nov 2024
Aethir Tokenomics – Case Study

Authors of the contents are not affiliated to the reviewed project in any way and none of the information presented should be taken as financial advice.

In this article we analyze tokenomics of Aethir - a project providing on-demand cloud compute resources for the AI, Gaming, and virtualized compute sectors.
Aethir aims to aggregate enterprise-grade GPUs from multiple providers into a DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network). Its competitive edge comes from utlizing the GPUs for very specific use-cases, such as low-latency rendering for online games.
Due to decentralized nature of its infrastructure Aethir can meet the demands of online-gaming in any region. This is especially important for some gamer-abundant regions in Asia with underdeveloped cloud infrastructure that causes high latency ("lags").
We will analyze Aethir's tokenomics, give our opinion on what was done well, and provide specific recommendations on how to improve it.

Evaluation Summary

Aethir Tokenomics Structure

The total supply of ATH tokens is capped at 42 billion ATH. This fixed cap provides a predictable supply environment, and the complete emissions schedule is listed here. As of November 2024 there are approximately 5.2 Billion ATH in circulation. In a year from now (November 2025), the circulating supply will almost triple, and will amount to approximately 15 Billion ATH. By November 2028, today's circulating supply will be diluted by around 86%.

From an investor standpoint the rational decision would be to stake their tokens and hope for rewards that will balance the inflation. Currently the estimated APR for 3-year staking is 195% and for 4-year staking APR is 261%. The rewards are paid out weekly. Furthermore, stakers can expect to get additional rewards from partnered AI projects.

Staking Incentives

Rewards are calculated based on the staking duration and staked amount. These factors are equally important and they linearly influence weekly rewards. This means that someone who stakes 100 ATH for 2 weeks will have the same weekly rewards as someone who stakes 200 ATH for 1 week. This mechanism greatly emphasizes long-term holding. That's because holding a token makes sense only if you go for long-term staking. E.g. a whale staking $200k with 1 week lockup. will have the same weekly rewards as person staking $1k with 4 year lockup. Furthermore the ATH staking rewards are fixed and divided among stakers. Therefore Increase of user base is likely to come with decrease in rewards.
We believe the main weak-point of Aethirs staking is the lack of equivalency between rewards paid out to the users and value generated for the protocol as a result of staking.

Token Distribution

The token distribution of $ATH is well designed and comes with long vesting time-frames. 18-month cliff and 36-moths subsequent linear vesting is applied to team's allocation. This is higher than industry standard and is a sign of long-term commitment.

  • Checkers and Compute Providers: 50%
  • Ecosystem: 15%
  • Team: 12.5%
  • Investors: 11.5%
  • Airdrop: 6%
  • Advisors: 5%

Aethir's airdrop is divided into 3 phases to ensure that only loyal users get rewarded. This mechanism is very-well thought and we rate it highly. It fosters high community engagement within the first months of the project and sets the ground for potentially giving more-control to the DAO.

Governance and Community-Led Development

Aethir’s governance model promotes community-led decision-making in a very practical way. Instead of rushing with creation of a DAO for PR and marketing purposes Aethir is trying to make it the right way. They support projects building on their infrastructure and regularly share updates with their community in the most professional manner.

We believe Aethir would benefit from implementing reputation boosted voting. An example of such system is described here. The core assumption is to abandon the simplistic: 1 token = 1 vote and go towards: Votes = tokens * reputation_based_multiplication_factor.

In the attached example, reputation_based_multiplication_factor rises exponentially with the number of standard deviations above norm, with regard to user's rating. For compute compute providers at Aethir, user's rating could be replaced by provider's uptime.

Perspectives for the future

While it's important to analyze aspects such as supply-side tokenomics, or governance, we must keep in mind that 95% of project's success depends on demand-side. In this regard the outlook for Aethir may be very bright. The project declares $36M annual reccuring revenue. Revenue like this is very rare in the web3 space. Many projects are not able to generate any revenue after succesfull ICO event, due to lack fo product-market-fit.

If you're looking to create a robust tokenomics model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure your project’s resilience in the long term.

Quadratic Voting in Web3

Kajetan Olas

04 Dec 2024
Quadratic Voting in Web3

Decentralized systems are reshaping how we interact, conduct transactions, and govern online communities. As Web3 continues to advance, the necessity for effective and fair voting mechanisms becomes apparent. Traditional voting systems, such as the one-token-one-vote model, often fall short in capturing the intensity of individual preferences, which can result in centralization. Quadratic Voting (QV) addresses this challenge by enabling individuals to express not only their choices but also the strength of their preferences.

In QV, voters are allocated a budget of credits that they can spend to cast votes on various issues. The cost of casting multiple votes on a single issue increases quadratically, meaning that each additional vote costs more than the last. This system allows for a more precise expression of preferences, as individuals can invest more heavily in issues they care deeply about while conserving credits on matters of lesser importance.

Understanding Quadratic Voting

Quadratic Voting (QV) is a voting system designed to capture not only the choices of individuals but also the strength of their preferences. In most DAO voting mechanisms, each person typically has one vote per token, which limits the ability to express how strongly they feel about a particular matter. Furthermore, QV limits the power of whales and founding team who typically have large token allocations. These problems are adressed by making the cost of each additional vote increase quadratically.

In QV, each voter is given a budget of credits or tokens that they can spend to cast votes on various issues. The key principle is that the cost to cast n votes on a single issue is proportional to the square of n. This quadratic cost function ensures that while voters can express stronger preferences, doing so requires a disproportionately higher expenditure of their voting credits. This mechanism discourages voters from concentrating all their influence on a single issue unless they feel very strongly about it. In the context of DAOs, it means that large holders will have a hard-time pushing through with a proposal if they'll try to do it on their own.

Practical Example

Consider a voter who has been allocated 25 voting credits to spend on several proposals. The voter has varying degrees of interest in three proposals: Proposal A, Proposal B, and Proposal C.

  • Proposal A: High interest.
  • Proposal B: Moderate interest.
  • Proposal C: Low interest.

The voter might allocate their credits as follows:

Proposal A:

  • Votes cast: 3
  • Cost: 9 delegated tokens

Proposal B:

  • Votes cast: 2
  • Cost: 4 delegated tokens

Proposal C:

  • Votes cast: 1
  • Cost: 1 delegated token

Total delegated tokens: 14
Remaining tokens: 11

With the remaining tokens, the voter can choose to allocate additional votes to the proposals based on their preferences or save for future proposals. If they feel particularly strong about Proposal A, they might decide to cast one more vote:

Additional vote on Proposal A:

  • New total votes: 4
  • New cost: 16 delegated tokens
  • Additional cost: 16−9 = 7 delegated tokens

Updated total delegated tokens: 14+7 = 21

Updated remaining tokens: 25−21 = 425 - 21 = 4

This additional vote on Proposal A costs 7 credits, significantly more than the previous vote, illustrating how the quadratic cost discourages excessive influence on a single issue without strong conviction.

Benefits of Implementing Quadratic Voting

Key Characteristics of the Quadratic Cost Function

  • Marginal Cost Increases Linearly: The marginal cost of each additional vote increases linearly. The cost difference between casting n and n−1 votes is 2n−1.
  • Total Cost Increases Quadratically: The total cost to cast multiple votes rises steeply, discouraging voters from concentrating too many votes on a single issue without significant reason.
  • Promotes Egalitarian Voting: Small voters are encouraged to participate, because relatively they have a much higher impact.

Advantages Over Traditional Voting Systems

Quadratic Voting offers several benefits compared to traditional one-person-one-vote systems:

  • Captures Preference Intensity: By allowing voters to express how strongly they feel about an issue, QV leads to outcomes that better reflect the collective welfare.
  • Reduces Majority Domination: The quadratic cost makes it costly for majority groups to overpower minority interests on every issue.
  • Encourages Honest Voting: Voters are incentivized to allocate votes in proportion to their true preferences, reducing manipulation.

By understanding the foundation of Quadratic Voting, stakeholders in Web3 communities can appreciate how this system supports more representative governance.

Conclusion

Quadratic voting is a novel voting system that may be used within DAOs to foster decentralization. The key idea is to make the cost of voting on a certain issue increase quadratically. The leading player that makes use of this mechanism is Optimism. If you're pondering about the design of your DAO, we highly recommend taking a look at their research on quadratic funding.

If you're looking to create a robust governance model and go through institutional-grade testing please reach out to contact@nextrope.com. Our team is ready to help you with the token engineering process and ensure that your DAO will stand out as a beacon of innovation and resilience in the long term.