data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b9837/b9837b2f733d90eab3328e6855fb84022b07bf66" alt="veri22 pfp"
veri22
@veri22
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
17 replies
19 recasts
118 reactions
10 replies
72 recasts
213 reactions
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c39e1/c39e165af260a266a1aff1cc573b534a8456bfce" alt="polynya pfp"
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
43 recasts
167 reactions
35 replies
58 recasts
433 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
6 replies
30 recasts
152 reactions
250 replies
3453 recasts
5717 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
20 replies
69 recasts
552 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
6 replies
1 recast
7 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
2 replies
1 recast
15 reactions
2 replies
1 recast
11 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
28 reactions
14 replies
1488 recasts
2078 reactions
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
15 replies
14 recasts
50 reactions