Aleph Zero Bridges: Interoperability with Ethereum

Karolina

04 Mar 2024
Aleph Zero Bridges: Interoperability with Ethereum

The importance of interoperability within various ecosystems cannot be overstated. In a domain characterized by an abundance of isolated blockchain networks, the ability to transfer assets and information across different blockchains is indispensable. So, what is MOST?

The Genesis of MOST: A Bridge to Ethereum

Aleph Zero's Interoperability Vision

At the heart of Aleph Zero's strategy to forge a more interconnected blockchain world lies MOST, an avant-garde bridge designed to seamlessly connect Aleph Zero with the Ethereum ecosystem. MOST represents a critical step forward in Aleph Zero's commitment to building a robust, independent, and versatile platform. It embodies the vision of a blockchain ecosystem that is not only self-sufficient but also fully integrated with the broader digital asset landscape.

The Role of MOST in Enhancing Aleph Zero’s Interoperability with Ethereum

MOST is a strategic asset that enhances Aleph Zero's interoperability with Ethereum. By facilitating a direct pathway for asset transfer between Aleph Zero and Ethereum, MOST empowers developers and users alike to leverage the strengths of both platforms. This synergy amplifies the potential for decentralized applications (dApps) and decentralized finance (DeFi) projects to flourish, benefiting from the combined advantages of Aleph Zero's scalability and Ethereum's vibrant ecosystem.

READ: "What is Aleph Zero?"

The Design and Functionality of MOST

Overview of MOST's Guardian-based Design

The architecture of MOST is grounded in a guardian-based design, prioritizing security and simplicity in asset transfer. This design framework ensures that the bridge operates with utmost integrity and reliability. Guardians, selected through a meticulous process, play a pivotal role in maintaining the bridge's operational excellence. Each guardian oversees two instances of the setup—one for the Testnet and one for the Mainnet—thereby ensuring a robust testing and deployment framework that safeguards against vulnerabilities.

zParachain bridge
zParachain bridge, Source

The Selection and Role of Guardians

The guardians of MOST are not just custodians of the bridge's technical infrastructure; they are the linchpins of its governance model. With control over governance keys for both Aleph Zero and Ethereum, guardians possess the authority to enact changes to the committee's composition, perform contract upgrades, and undertake other critical governance functions. This multi-signature wallet setup ensures a decentralized control mechanism, crucial for maintaining the bridge's security and integrity.

Key Features: Reduced Fees, Incentivizing Liquidity, and a Focus on Security

MOST is engineered with several key features designed to optimize user experience and ecosystem growth. One of its standout attributes is the significant reduction in fees for bridging assets such as native ETH, stablecoins, and other tokens from Ethereum to Aleph Zero. This fee structure is strategically designed to attract liquidity to the Aleph Zero ecosystem, thereby enhancing its vibrancy and utility.

The Technical Cornerstone of Aleph Zero Bridges

The Technical Cornerstone of Aleph Zero Bridges

Security and Simplicity

MOST's design focuses on security, simplicity, and ease of use. It uses a guardian-based model for robust security and offers a straightforward interface for users. Development has been open and meticulous, with the project set to release its source code publicly, aligning with open-source principles and ensuring transparency.

Governance and Control

Governance in MOST uses a multisig wallet, allowing guardians to manage operations democratically. This setup ensures decentralized control, with mechanisms for contract upgrades and committee changes, enhancing security and flexibility.

Here you can stay tuned for the upcoming updates about Aleph Zero bridges: BLOG

Broader Impact on the Ecosystem

Enhancing DeFi on Aleph Zero

MOST facilitates the influx of liquidity and stablecoins into Aleph Zero, significantly boosting its DeFi sector. This bridge to Ethereum encourages innovation, user engagement, and ecosystem growth.

MOST and Beyond: Comprehensive Bridging Strategy

Integration with Router Protocol

Aleph Zero's partnership with Router Protocol expands its connectivity to various blockchains. The collaboration focuses on simplifying cross-chain operations through the Cross-chain Intent Framework (CCIP), broadening Aleph Zero's interoperability.

Aleph Zero Integration with Router Protocol
Aleph Zero's partnership with Router Protocol , Source

The zParachain Bridge to Polkadot

Using a parachain slot, the zParachain bridge connects Aleph Zero and Polkadot without making Aleph Zero a parachain. This innovative approach enhances cross-chain communication, strengthening Aleph Zero's interoperability position.

Aleph Zero MOST
Source: Aleph Zero

Why This Matters

Aleph Zero's bridging strategy highlights the need for stable, secure, and versatile connections across blockchains. By ensuring broad connectivity, Aleph Zero paves the way for a more integrated blockchain ecosystem, where seamless interoperability enhances the overall utility and accessibility of decentralized technologies.

READ: "Aleph Zero vs Solana: A Comparative Analysis"

Conclusion

Aleph Zero's efforts in bridging technologies mark a leap towards a unified blockchain world. Aleph Zero Bridges? Focusing on key areas like security, simplicity, and ecosystem integration, Aleph Zero is shaping the future of blockchain interoperability, fostering innovation and opening new possibilities for the DeFi and dApp sectors.

If you are interested in utilizing Aleph-Zero or other blockchain-based solutions for your project, please reach out to contact@nextrope.com

FAQ

1. What is the main purpose of the MOST bridge in the Aleph Zero ecosystem?

  • MOST is designed to enhance Aleph Zero’s interoperability with Ethereum, enabling seamless asset transfers between the two platforms.

2. How does the guardian-based design of MOST enhance its security?

  • The guardian-based design prioritizes security and simplicity in asset transfer. Guardians, who are meticulously selected, oversee the bridge's operations on both the Testnet and Mainnet.

3. What are the key features of MOST, and how do they benefit users?

  • MOST's key features include reduced fees for bridging assets like native ETH, stablecoins, and tokens from Ethereum to Aleph Zero. This design is aimed at attracting liquidity to Aleph Zero, enhancing its ecosystem's vibrancy and utility, and optimizing the user experience.

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.