Web3 Bridges on Arbitrum

Karolina

27 Sep 2023
Web3 Bridges on Arbitrum

The relentless evolution of blockchain technology never ceases to amaze. Over the past few years, the industry has shifted its focus from simply understanding what decentralized ledgers are, to scaling and interoperability solutions that pave the way for mass adoption. Among these innovations, Web3 and Layer 2 scaling solutions stand out, promising to redefine how we perceive and interact with decentralized applications. Today, we'll be diving deep into one of the most groundbreaking topics in the realm of Ethereum scalability: Web3 Bridges on Arbitrum.

Arbitrum, a Layer 2 scaling solution, not only offers faster transactions and reduced fees but also a platform for projects to effortlessly interact with the broader Ethereum ecosystem. And this is where Web3 bridges come into play. Acting as connectors between different blockchain realms, these bridges ensure that value and data flow seamlessly, securely, and transparently across networks.

Whether you're a blockchain enthusiast, a developer eager to understand the underpinnings of Arbitrum, or someone merely curious about the next wave of decentralized tech, this post promises to enlighten. We'll demystify the intricate workings of Web3 bridges, shed light on their importance in the Arbitrum ecosystem, and, ultimately, help you grasp how they're pushing the boundaries of what's possible in the blockchain world.

So strap in and get ready for a journey through the sophisticated architecture and promising potential of Web3 Bridges on Arbitrum!

LayerZero

Chains: Ethereum, BNB Chain, Avalanche, Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism

LayerZero is a protocol that facilitates interaction between separate blockchains and ecosystems. It does so with its underlying oracle and relayer that allows for cross-chain messaging and verification. LayerZero supports a wide array of blockchains including Aptos, Avalanche, Polygon, and Harmony.

Connext

Chains: Ethereum, Polygon, Avalanche, BNB Chain, Arbitrum, Optimism

The ethos of Connext is to herald a time when the end users would not even know the actual chain they are using, as it aims to strike a high-level composability in the blockchain industry. Connext has a decentralized network of routers that earn as they facilitate the activities of the bridge and secure it at the same time.

Router Protocol

Chains: Arbitrum, Ethereum, Polygon, Optimism, BNB Chain

Router Protocol is a cross-chain interoperability layer connecting different blockchains. Currently, Router Protocol's infrastructure is live on nine different EVM chains: Ethereum, BSC, Fantom, Polygon, Optimism, Arbitrum, Avalanche, Aurora, and Kava. Router Protocol's current offerings are: (1.) Flagship DApp: Voyager provides any asset to any asset cross-chain swap; and (2.) CrossTalk: Creates a communication layer for cross-chain smart contracts and enables use cases such as cross-chain lending, staking, etc. For more information, visit our docs!

deBridge

Chains: Arbitrum, BNB Chain, Avalanche, Ethereum, Polygon, Multichain

deBridge is a generic messaging and cross-chain interoperability protocol that enables anyone to build powerful cross-chain applications where value and messages flow seamlessly. The protocol is a secure infrastructure and framework for: (1.) cross-chain composability of smart contracts; (2.) cross-chain swaps between any assets with deSwap, one of the applications built on top of deBridge; (3.) bridging of any arbitrary asset and message in one transaction; (4.) interoperability and bridging of NFTs

Across

Chains: Ethereum, Arbitrum, Polygon, Optimism

Transferring native tokens across several native blockchains in the Ethereum ecosystem gets easier with the surfacing of Across. Across allows users to tap into a rich network of relayers in moving funds across two distinct blockchains. Once the relayers approve the bridging, Across itself has an in-built optimistic validation.

LayerSwap

Chains: BNB Chain, Optimism, Starknet, Arbitrum

LayerSwap is a unique bridge that can move funds from centralized exchanges to layer-2 blockchains. For instance, a user can move funds from FTX to Arbitrum mainnet.  Layer swap has an intuitive interface that is simple to use for swapping, and it makes cross-chain transactions easier, lessening transaction fees by almost 10%.

Conclusion

Diving deep into Web3 bridges on Arbitrum has underlined a vital truth: blockchain's future is as much about interconnection as it is about decentralization. Through platforms like Arbitrum, we're witnessing the dissolution of silos, making way for faster, smoother, and more cohesive decentralized applications. These bridges are more than just technological marvels—they are the linchpins of an evolving blockchain landscape. As we move forward, embracing such innovations will not only be beneficial but essential. Here's to a united, decentralized future, bridged by the power of technology.

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.