What is Account Abstraction?

Karolina

10 Nov 2023
What is Account Abstraction?

Account abstraction is a new way of thinking about how users interact with blockchains. Instead of using traditional externally owned accounts (EOAs), account abstraction allows users to create and manage their accounts using smart contracts. This has a number of potential benefits, including improved security, enhanced privacy, and increased flexibility.

What is account abstraction?

Account abstraction is a concept that, at its core, aims to simplify the user's interaction with blockchain networks. It is a transformative approach that seeks to mask the technicalities of blockchain operations from end-users. It is making transactions as straightforward as sending an email. Account Abstr. allows users to interact with the blockchain without worrying about the underlying technical details.

How does account abstraction differ from the traditional model?

In the traditional account model, each user has an EOA. EOAs are controlled by private keys, which must be kept secret in order to protect the user's funds. Acc. abstraction allows users to create and manage their accounts using smart contracts.

Historical Context

The journey towards acc. abstraction began with the first generation of blockchain technologies, characterized by their "one-size-fits-all" approach to account management. Bitcoin, for instance, introduced the concept of accounts and transactions in a form that was accessible to tech-savvy individuals but remained perplexing to the layperson. Ethereum expanded on this by introducing smart contracts, which opened the door to programmable transactions but did not alter the fundamental account structure. The idea of acc. abstraction has been discussed in the Ethereum community for several years as a part of various Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs), particularly as a feature to be potentially implemented in Ethereum 2.0. It is a direct response to the need for a more versatile and user-centric design that can cater to a broader audience and spur the widespread adoption of blockchain technology.

The Technicalities of Account Abstraction

Account abstraction is not merely a theoretical construct but a technical innovation with specific mechanisms underpinning its operation. In essence, it alters the way transactions are initiated and executed within a blockchain network.

How Account Abstraction Works

Under traditional blockchain models, initiating a transaction involves an externally owned account (EOA) signing a transaction with a private key. This transaction is then broadcast to the network for validation and inclusion in the blockchain. Account abstraction, however, replaces this process with a more flexible one. Here, every account is a smart contract, and transactions are messages sent through these contracts. These smart contracts can encode complex rules for transaction validation, beyond what EOAs can do, such as multi-signature requirements or conditional transactions based on certain triggers.

The technical crux of account abstraction lies in the smart contract’s ability to define its own conditions for transaction execution. This means that user accounts can have unique security protocols or automated operations without the user needing to understand the underlying smart contract code.

Hey! Are you interested in the latest technologies in the blockchain area? be sure to read the article 'Top Zero-Knowledge Proof Projects to watch in 2023'

The Benefits of Account Abstraction

The implications of account abstraction are profound, offering a range of benefits that can enhance the blockchain experience for users and developers alike.

Improved User Experience

One of the most significant advantages of account abstraction is the improvement it brings to user experience. By abstracting away the complexities of key management and transaction rules, it presents a more intuitive interface for users.

Enhanced Security Features

Account abstraction also allows for the implementation of advanced security measures. Since each account can define its own logic, users can tailor their security settings to their specific needs. For instance, one might set up an account that requires additional verification for transactions exceeding a certain value or restricts withdrawals to certain addresses.

Future Implications

The future implications of account abstraction are vast. As the technology matures, it could become a standard feature of blockchain networks, potentially making the current distinction between user accounts and smart contracts obsolete. This could lead to a new wave of blockchain applications that are both powerful and accessible, bringing us closer to the vision of blockchain technology as a seamless part of everyday life.

Challenges and Considerations

Technical Limitations

One of the primary technical challenges of Acc. abstraction lies in its integration with existing blockchain protocols. Current networks are optimized for the EOA model, and introducing a new account structure necessitates significant changes to the core protocol. This includes modifications to the way transactions are propagated in the network, how gas fees are calculated, and how the state of the blockchain is managed. Ensuring that these changes do not compromise the network's performance or security requires careful planning and extensive testing.

Compatibility with Current Systems

Another consideration is the compatibility of account abstr. with the vast ecosystem of existing blockchain applications and services. Wallets, exchanges, and other services have been built around the traditional account model. Transitioning to an acc. abstraction model will require these services to update their infrastructure, which may be a complex and resource-intensive process. Furthermore, there is a need for standardization across the industry to ensure that different implementations of account abstr. can work seamlessly together.

Conclusion

Acc. abstraction represents a significant leap forward in the quest for a more user-friendly blockchain experience. By streamlining the transaction process and offering enhanced security features, acc abstraction has the potential to make blockchain technology more accessible to a broader audience. However, the path to widespread adoption is not without its obstacles. Technical challenges and compatibility issues must be carefully navigated to integrate it into the existing blockchain landscape.

Key Takeaways

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.