Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction

polynya pfp
polynya
@polynya
My post from 1.5 years about "assessing demand drivers for ETH" had the line "Needless to say, we’ll need to wait for EIP-4844 to assess this." Now that EIP-4844 is out for half a year, it's indeed time to do so. As such, I'd downgrade the significance of "L2 fee burns" from 2/10 to 1/10. While it's very likely demand for blobspace is gradually going up, supply is up even more with PeerDAS imminent, plus full sharding & Nielsen's Law making blob count up only. Cross-L2 interoperability has also been much less required than anticipated, as most users are happy to stick to their chosen L2, or bridge between only occasionally So, why was I (mildly) wrong? I did not fully understand the concept of strict global consensus then, which I only wrote about in depth later in 2023. With a better grasp of the true demand landscape for blobspace, the 1/10 is obvious Also, this is great for Ethereum/ETH in the same way as building public roads https://polynya.mirror.xyz/GPC26Y_rlwCyPpj_N3HeW_izY1-pIVwKW5bjuPNrGeQ
20 replies
20 recasts
94 reactions

pa7x1 pfp
pa7x1
@pa7x1
Did you expect for demand to magically appear and fill instantly 30x the blockspace capacity of the L1? 6 months after blobs are filled 85% of the target capacity and calling it a failure. By the end of the year we are likely saturating blobs and a fee marker starts to develop.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction