Michael J. Casey is chairman of CoinDesk’s advisory board and a senior advisor of blockchain analysis at MIT’s Digital Currency Initiative.
The following report initially appeared in CoinDesk Weekly, a custom-curated newsletter delivered each Sunday exclusively to our subscribers.
Welcome to the “Layer 2” era.
We are now getting into an thrilling new phase of blockchain improvement in which the lightning network and other programming solutions that operate “on best” of current blockchains promise large strides in scalability, interoperability and functionality.
There is nevertheless a lot operate to be accomplished. The early tech is buggy, and new safety and trust options need to be figured out when considerably of the computing activity in individual transactions or wise contracts is taken “off chain.”
But in mitigating the heavy, multi-party computation that blockchains carry whilst guaranteeing that transaction histories are at some point anchored by “on-chain” consensus algorithms, there’s anything of a greatest-of-each-worlds guarantee in these suggestions.
As Neha Narula, director of the MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative (exactly where I function) describes it, the defining function of Layer two is that “computation is moved off-chain, either to allow privacy or to save computing resources.”
Rather than possessing the script of a distinct program executed by each and every computer in the blockchain network, it ”is implemented simply by the two or a lot more computer systems involved in the transaction.”
And but, she said, “you get equivalent safety protections as with on-chain transactions simply because the blockchain acts as the anchor of trust.”
Where this all goes is anyone’s guess. That’s what tends to make open-source, extensible platforms fascinating: they offer the creating blocks upon which unimaginable new applications can be created.
We’re not completely driving blind, however. The development of the Planet Wide Internet in the 1990s provides a beneficial source of contrast and comparison, when a comparable, second layer solution transformed the World wide web from getting a clunky network of mostly academic users into a ubiquitous international phenomenon.
Similarly to then, I think, we can expect an avalanche of innovation and development.
Stepping back, the 1989 implementation of Tim Berners-Lee’s Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) on best of the base-layer Transmission Handle and Net protocols (TCP/IP) paved the way for Marc Andreessen’s Mosaic Netscape browser in 1994.
That then gave rise to a host of internet-based applications, which in the end fostered all the on the internet solutions that now form portion of every day life.
In some respects, the sequencing will be different for the blockchain sector. We may already have had our version of the late-nineties dot.com bubble, for instance, with final year’s ICO mania coming just before the enabling Layer two technologies were in spot.
Nevertheless, a great quantity of the billions raised in these token offerings will most likely uncover its way into Layer 2 improvement, hopefully accelerating their march toward wider adoption.
Also, whereas HTTP was universally adopted as an almost instant standard, there’s a great deal of competition in Layer 2 blockchain solutions.
Lightning’s payment channels have been initially developed for bitcoin transactions, but it supports interoperability and has particular smart contract capability.
That could put it up against alternative “state channel” Layer two solutions for ethereum (Plasma, Raiden) as nicely as with projects aiming to enable cross-chain transactions (Polkadot, Cosmos, Interledger).
And, as seen at the L2 Summit hosted recently by MIT DCI and Fidelity Labs, there are many other lightweight off-chain ways to expand transactional capacity.
For example, developers at the startup Abra and elsewhere are using established, decentralized blockchains such as bitcoin and ethereum to settle futures contracts that are denominated in various currencies or tokens.
Currently a lot more than 2,000 nodes are on the Lightning Network, managing a lot more than 7,000 channels. It is a long way from getting a ubiquitous worldwide network, but that growing neighborhood gives a excellent foundation for experimentation.
Now that a unique type of privacy-protecting sensible contracts has been created by Tadge Dryja, a co-author of the original Lightning white paper and now also at the DCI, there’s an even greater possible for improvement.
Layer 2 projects developed around ethereum are also producing interest. At the Event Horizon conference on blockchain energy in Berlin last month, significantly buzz was generated by presentations on the capacity of Polkadot and Slock.It’s Incubed client to enable off-chain, device-to-device transactions.
Meanwhile, with Ripple joining the Hyperledger consortium, corporate engineers will have possibilities to develop enterprise makes use of for the startup’s Interledger protocol.
In this atmosphere, we will see a competitive dance pit the interests of established corporates against Layer 2 startups such as Lightning Labs, Blockstream, Ripple and Parity, as properly as potentially hundreds of independent coders about the globe.
Eventually, standards will arise, producing winners, with consortia like the World Wide Web Consortium, better known as W3C, emerging to shepherd that approach.
And what of the economic fallout from all this? If the nineties are a lesson, we can expect that, at some point, several legacy industries could be disrupted.
Lightning’s payment channels point to the kind of low-charge, quick-paced payments that bitcoin early on promised but failed to provide. That would, in theory, take organization away from banks, credit card organizations and funds transmitters.
Nevertheless, there is no assure normal Joes will get more than their apprehension toward cryptocurrencies &ndash not with no as-yet-unavailable options for price volatility, for example.
There are also inquiries about how regulators will deal with a system that could make transactions very hard for them to track. Ultimately, it’s nevertheless not clear that these off-chain solutions will accomplish the sort of scale essential with no the emergence of effective corporate interests.
Will such participants impose unwieldy costs on the technique or just provide much-necessary liquidity? It is too early to say.
Another question is who will be the winners and losers in the crypto community. Might Layer two solutions deny miners the charges they require to continue securing the underlying blockchain? That was the topic of a recent Twitter exchange among Ryan Selkis and Jameson Lopp.
Right here, the lessons from Wall Street in the late 1990s may also be instructive. Some investment banks worried about the hit to revenue as web-based e-trading slashed brokerage fees. In reality, on the internet technology expanded the pie for stock market trading, benefiting incumbent players even as their per-trade margins shrank. It was an example of what’s identified as the Jevons Paradox.
History does not often repeat, of course. Miners could indeed be hurt by activity going off chain. But it shouldn’t be our job to worry about them per se.
The objective right here, as clearly defined in the Segwit debate that in the end resulted in lightning’s implementation on the bitcoin principal-net, is for optimal decentralization and maximum security.
Accurate innovation, by definition, is disruptive. So buckle up.
Wood layers image through Shutterstock
The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic requirements and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.
Published at Wed, 30 Could 2018 12:00:40 +0000