ETHETFS

#traderumour @rumour.app #Traderumour $ALT  

Rollups are at the heart of Ethereum's roadmap. It's not news. For years, Vitalik has been stating it. While Ethereum offers security and data availability, Rollups scale execution. Ethereum developers and experts agree that the future will be rollup-centric. However, the majority of cryptocurrency investors are still unaware of the true implications of this or how to prepare for it.

Allow me to clarify the macro thesis that AltLayer's presence supports and why it is more significant than any immediate price movement.

Ethereum is unable to scale Layer 1 execution. It's not a critique. It's a decision in architecture. Ethereum maximizes security and decentralization. Every Ethereum node verifies each transaction. Although it reduces throughput, this redundancy offers security. Perhaps 15–30 transactions are processed by Ethereum every second. Applications require millions or thousands.

Ethereum isn't becoming quicker thanks to the scaling solution. While maintaining settlement and data availability on Ethereum, it is shifting execution from Ethereum to rollups. Hundreds of transactions are combined into single proofs and sent to Ethereum using rollups. Rather of recalculating each transaction, Ethereum validators verify the proofs. This preserves security while cutting Ethereum's labor by orders of magnitude.

Ethereum will serve as the settlement layer beneath dozens, hundreds, and eventually thousands of rollups if this rollup-centric vision is successful. Every rollup caters to particular groups or applications. A DeFi rollup with trading optimization. A throughput-optimized gaming rollup. A privacy-focused corporate rollup. An assortment of economic models in a social rollup. Optimization is made feasible by variety, which is not achievable in monolithic chains.

However, this is the issue that no one discusses. How can they bootstrap security when there are thousands of rollups? How do they get to finality so quickly? How do they prevent the centralization of sequencers? There are a few rollups that have these issues currently. With hundreds, they get exponentially worse.

The cold start issue is a problem with every new rollup. Until you have validater sets and financial support, launch with lax security and pray nothing is abused. It's a huge risk. Rollups might be worth billions of dollars. Early security flaws encourage assaults that might end initiatives before they reach maturity.

Training wheels and centralized sequencers are the initial components of the present method. The two biggest optimistic rollups, Arbitrum and Optimism, both functioned over long periods of time with security committees that had the authority to override protocol regulations if needed. Although this centralization is short-term practical, it goes against the decentralized philosophy that makes blockchains so useful.

These tradeoffs in centralization increase as additional rollups are launched. Censorship risk arises with every rollup using a centralized sequencer. Override risk is created with every rollup with security councils. Every rollup without financial support increases the potential of exploitation. When you take into account hundreds of centralized points of failure, the rollup-centric future begins to become less tempting.

The restaked rollup structure from AltLayer comes into play here. They use EigenLayer's restaking method to borrow security from Ethereum rather than separately bootstrapping each rollup security. Through economic backing, they achieve swift finality rather than the delayed finality that comes with hopeful ideas. They receive decentralized sequencing with less risk in place of centralized sequencers.

The issues that would ordinarily stop rollup proliferation are resolved by the framework. Rollups may be launched by developers with decentralized infrastructure, quick finality, and day-one security. The obstacles become bearable instead of insurmountable. Instead of being theoretically feasible, the rollup-centric future becomes realistically doable.

Think about the figures. There are presently five to ten rollups of Ethereum with significant usage. a few more, such Polygon zkEVM, StarkNet, zkSync, Arbitrum, and optimism. The development and deployment of each took years. Both needed a lot of money and technological know-how. Significant security trade-offs are nevertheless made by each.

Imagine that there was infrastructure in place that would allow developers to release rollups that are ready for production in a matter of weeks rather than years. where years of bootstrapping were not necessary and security was integrated. Finality is measured in minutes rather than days. where sequencers were not permanently centralized but rather dispersed from inception.

In such scenario, how many rollups launch? When the infrastructure friction decreases by 90%, how many rollups customized to a given application become feasible? In a matter of years, the number can skyrocket from dozens to hundreds. Every significant dApp may launch a rollup of its own. Each game may have its own infrastructure. Each DeFi protocol may optimize its own environment for execution.

The need for services that enable rollups to function effectively is greatly increased by this growth. using a tool like VITAL to verify security. Quick finality using MACH or a similar tool. decentralized sequencing using a system similar to SQUAD. common standards for interoperability. protocols for cross-rollup communication. The market for infrastructure and tooling may be worth more than the rollups themselves.

With its central location in this infrastructural expansion, AltLayer benefits from the whole trend. Each rollup that uses VITAL results in costs. Fees are generated for each rollup that uses MACH. Fees are generated for each rollup that uses SQUAD. Fee generating increases in proportion to the rollup count. With Ethereum's widespread usage, the business model grows.

This macro concept is consistent with token economics. ALT is utilized in conjunction with restaked assets for economic bonding. In order to deliver services, operators stake ALT. Operator demand for ALT increases with increasing rollups. Price pressure results from increased demand while supply is kept at a maximum. If the macro premise of rollup proliferation turns out to be accurate, tokenomics will be successful.

In contrast, consider layer-one token models. Value from transactions on that particular chain is captured by layer-one tokens. Value capture is lost when applications switch to different chains. Regardless of which particular rollups are successful, AltLayer's methodology still extracts value from them. It's similar to owning cloud computing infrastructure as opposed to placing bets on certain cloud apps.

This dynamic is exacerbated by the restaking tendency. EigenLayer makes restaking possible. Rollups can benefit from restaking thanks to AltLayer's AVS. The ecosystem as a whole becomes increasingly accepted and legitimate as more initiatives build upon restaking. Due to their early production AVS launch, AltLayer is positioned as a standard that future projects may choose to integrate with rather than compete with.

The argument is supported by Ethereum's data availability plan. For rollups, EIP-4844 proto-danksharding lowers the cost of data availability. They are further reduced by full danksharding. Rollup economics improves as data availability becomes more affordable. Rollups are more common when the economy is doing well. More infrastructure is required for more rollups. That infrastructure is provided by AltLayer.

Interesting dynamics are produced by alternative data availability layers such as Celestia, Avail, and EigenDA. Certain rollups may choose for less expensive data availability with varying security compromises. No matter where users upload data, AltLayer can offer rollups because to its support for different DA layers. This adaptability avoids being locked into rollups that are exclusive to Ethereum.

Certain application cases are validated by the gaming trend. Although still in its infancy, blockchain gaming has potential. General-purpose rollups are unable to provide the specialized infrastructure that games require. For games, application-specific rollups make sense. The model's effectiveness is demonstrated by AltLayer's success in games like Double Jump Tokyo, Cometh, and others. The need for rollups with a gaming focus could rise sharply as blockchain gaming develops.

Another vertical is RWA tokenization. Conventional on-chain assets require infrastructure that is safe, compliant, and efficient. Institutional criteria may not be met by general rollups supplying DeFi degens. Asset-specific rollups may offer the functionality and control that organizations want. The fact that Allo is developing its RWA rollup on AltLayer indicates that this vertical is genuine and expanding.

Consideration should be given to the counterarguments. Rollup proliferation may never occur. Perhaps everything can be captured in a few powerful rollups. Apps may continue to run on monolithic layer-ones. Perhaps the security presumptions in restaked rollups turn out to be incorrect. Perhaps AltLayer is unable to realize value because of competition from other AVSs or rollup frameworks.

These dangers are genuine. Macro theses can seem convincing but fall flat when put into practice. Many potential infrastructure initiatives are destroyed by the disconnect between theory and practice. As a result of the rollup proliferation thesis' failure, AltLayer might create fantastic technologies that no one utilizes.

However, the argument is supported by the preliminary data. The rollup count is increasing rather than decreasing. For new projects, developers are favoring rollups over layer-ones. Infrastructure is getting better thanks to initiatives like EIP-4844. Tools like OP Stack and Orbit are explicitly provided by major ecosystems like Optimism and Arbitrum to facilitate additional rollups. Although time and amplitude are yet unknown, the trend appears to be directionally true.

If the macro thesis is correct, AltLayer's placement appears to be appropriate. first to market with functional goods. support from leading investors who are aware of Ethereum's future plans. collaborations with initiatives that verify use cases. Rollup expansion was in line with token economics. Technology that addresses actual issues and stops the spread of rollups.

Investing in infrastructure for a trend you support rather than selecting successful apps is sometimes the best course of action. Value would be created by cloud computing. AWS was set up to create that value. Applications on mobile devices would take off. That value was recorded by the app store infrastructure. The technology that makes Ethereum's rollup-centric future possible will be extremely valuable if it comes to pass.

It's unclear if AltLayer particularly prevails. Results will depend on execution, competition, and unforeseen circumstances. However, the general argument that improved rollup infrastructure is necessary seems sound. The issues that SQUAD, MACH, and VITAL address are actual ones. Their target market is expanding. That's sufficient to wager on at times. Not absolutely. However, with the belief that the directional thesis is sound. That's frequently the best somebody can do in crypto.