Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Vitalik Buterin pfp
Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
How do people feel about "strong L2" vs "light L2" as umbrella terms for things with unconditional security (rollups, plasma, channels) vs things with partial security (validiums, pre-confirmations...) that's still better than a multisig? See discussion: https://twitter.com/VitalikButerin/status/1747374271717138827
27 replies
18 recasts
128 reactions
Vitalik Buterin pfp
Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
Copying over this diagram from a few months ago: Proposing to rename "security-favoring" and "scale-favoring" to "strong" vs "light", to be more succinct.
2 replies
3 recasts
7 reactions
phil pfp
phil
@phil
Light feels like it's worse than strong, when in reality it is a different tradeoff entirely.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Michael Pfister pfp
Michael Pfister
@pfista
How about Fortified L2 vs Agile L2 Focus on the benefits of each. Fortified's strength is security, and Agile's strength is speed/scalability
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Josh Stark pfp
Josh Stark
@js
if we could do it all over, I’d propose using “L2” as now and “L3” for the next category of security-guarantee. Make the dominant term we use (and which ordinary users are exposed to) about security-level and not architecture.
0 reply
0 recast
5 reactions
tldr (tim reilly) pfp
tldr (tim reilly)
@tldr
"You're not weak, honey... you're just... light."
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
daivd 🎩👾🧢🧾 pfp
daivd 🎩👾🧢🧾
@qt
Regular vs diet
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
tldr (tim reilly) pfp
tldr (tim reilly)
@tldr
"Tight L2" – full security, fine speed "Loose L2" – fine security, full speed
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Brunny.eth pfp
Brunny.eth
@brunny
'full security' vs. 'partial security'? 'partial' is a good way to describe training wheels rollups in general, as they are still getting something but the name by itself highlights that the rollup is not fully inheriting security
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Ayush pfp
Ayush
@ayushm.eth
i like this...light implies light weight in my mind so it inherits some of the properties of a full L2
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Dwayne 'The Jock' Ronson pfp
Dwayne 'The Jock' Ronson
@dwayne
I prefer Chad L2 vs Virgin L2
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
not parzival pfp
not parzival
@shoni.eth
seems fine- might go with lite (limited integration tradeoff efficiency)
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Latetot pfp
Latetot
@latetot
I would say “Full L2” or “Complete L2” vs “L2 Validium”
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Hexidethmal 🟪 pfp
Hexidethmal 🟪
@hexidethmal
Tbh it’s the most concise way of delineating I’ve heard to date
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Aaron Ferguson 🎩🏰📚🔵 pfp
Aaron Ferguson 🎩🏰📚🔵
@aaronrferguson.eth
Strong kinda implies the other is weak Light kinda implies the other is heavy I am by no means qualified to judge if either of these are/aren’t true, but people will subconsciously make the mental inference based on those terminology
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
ash pfp
ash
@ashrafstakala
I’m not sure strong and light works well together. “Closed Loop L2” - rollups, plasma… “Open Loop L2” - validiums…
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
sha is going to FarCon pfp
sha is going to FarCon
@sha
why not unconditional L2 vs partial L2?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Liang/degencast@Farcon🎩 pfp
Liang/degencast@Farcon🎩
@liang
L2 Lite: Fast, cheap, not as robust
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
QUID pfp
QUID
@qd
Gifted! 🎩
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
pgpg pfp
pgpg
@pgpg.eth
Who is your audience? I talk to ecosystem people (devs, investors etc) who can't figure out which category half the chains fit in. Much less normals. I don't think this wording helps that at all... So...
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction