we're about to kick out the eternal one
/t theorem to transition and I think
that Danny is the right person who will
introduce you the topic
yeah I'm Danny I work at the theatre
foundation on a lot a to stuff the
question of what the existing theorem
chain does and is in relationship to the
theorem 2.0 has been kind of an open
question over the past year as the
etherion 2.0 protocol has emerged as
people have begun to work on it for a
while it was maybe be rolled in as a
smart contract within one shard that was
also floated maybe it just exists in
parallel forever and we let it die both
of those one of those have seemed kind
of complex and the challenges were not
so clear how to solve them and then the
other it just letting it exist forever
kind of didn't feel like the the
humanist approach as Casey likes to put
it it didn't know all of these humans in
this room work on the etherion protocol
so it's been a priority to figure out a
better way to slot eath one into eath
two there's a lot of conversations this
week around execution execution
environments and it turns out this like
very highly abstracted execution notion
of execution might allow us to more
easily slot eath one into eath two as
its own execution environment but it's a
lot of things to figure out what that
actually looks like and then more
importantly even if you do that we now
have this we essentially we have all
these developer interfaces on how we
interact with the existing theorem chain
and one of the big upcoming challenges
is how do we take all these developer
interfaces and once we've made this
prior to making this migration how do we
kind of rework the internals of these
exposed very similar if not the same
interfaces such that the developer
experience
is fluid and continuous through that
migration it's definitely the this is
kind of the lay of the land of the
problems it's the technical problem of
how how eath one becomes any if during
that transition what we what things we
might choose change there's been talks
about changing the Merkel tree structure
how certain things like block difficulty
and things like that are translated some
of these old op codes and things might
change do you open up the sharded
universe to this de and and expose new
things to theorem one within a theorem
to a number number of other challenges
like that so it's kind of the technical
challenges of that migration and the
developer layer challenges of masking
the complexity and kind of like shifting
the entire community over is that the
kind of stuff that we wanted to talk
about today okay cool way is going to
introduce yourself it's so it shall we
found some foundation research thing and
I've been working for joining for a
while and now it's two
okay hi I'm Alex Stokes I work on
Trinity which is the Python client
sponsored by the foundation focused on
82 I've also been looking into some of
the research around the finality gadget
which would be one stuff where we start
to kind of merge the two systems looking
towards a longer term transition I go by
my online tech presidenta and I've been
picking up more and more of the testing
work for a firm to just respect across
in the world yes hi I'm Adriene Sutton I
work for Pegasus a part of consensus and
I've been working on our each one client
which is basic and also our Artemis
client which is - hey I'm well I'm in
quote have been doing phase to research
and been working on various execution
environments and pieces like that hi
everyone yeah tech coming from status
research where in this context working
on a theorem one and then the theorem to
client both of incoming hello my name is
Trent I work with white block which is a
network protocol testing platform hi my
name is call me theorem research and I'm
mostly working on migrating validators
over to e3 at the moment Oh Kiki I'm not
a researcher I'm kind of just like an
angel investor and I also work for
circle my name is Alex and I work in the
Russia forest intake Association right
now and we are looking at the theorem
from the compliance point of view and
developing this software for the
national standard cryptography hey
everyone my name is Victor I'm over at
bison trails we help people run nodes
and so we currently support one point ax
extremely excited for 2.0 and validate
hi my name is Joseph I am an engineer at
go packs Korea's crypto currency
exchange I'm John I'm an advisor to go
packs hi I'm Justin Drake research at
the firm foundation mostly working on
Eve - I'm Felix again I worked on eath
one
so Jason Carver working with the
etherion foundation on the Trinity
client more on the eath one side Vitalik
you probably know about me because I
already introduced myself on the
previous panel and one other component
of this migration that I wanted to
mention is that ease and execution
environments which is the notion of
state instead execution in e2 are
stateless
so there are depending on the e you'd
have to have some notion of state in a
separate piece of software or something
like that so the theorem one clients
then likely become that interface to the
eath one he e in terms of the state and
provide our state and sync and things
like that so there's also this component
of how death parity another mind nimbus
things like that that piece of software
integrates into this new stack to
provide services to the eath 1e e I'll
just start with a very basic question
what can regular users expect from the
transition how would they be impacted in
any sense in the short term not and
unless you personally choose to take
your 32 ether and stick it into the
deposit contract and start running an
Easter node and become a validator and
and if you do then you'll be able to
start experiencing the wonderful world
of ease to early and if you do not then
if you do not then nothing will happen
eventually if there will be some form of
eath ones to eat to transition and with
the kind of a road map as exami
suggested of eath one transitioning into
being in e2 execution environment it's
theoretically possible to write the
software so that you experience like
very close to no disruption at all like
though the two kind of the worst things
that might that might happen one is that
the chain might have to like halt for
some period of time to make this
transition go smoothly to allow the
merkel roots to be recomputed according
to some more efficient tree structure
and so on and the second thing is as I
mentioned in the previous panel gas
costs for op codes that touch state are
going to have to be increased massively
both for you through compatibility
reasons and for kind of other scalable a
scalability reasons as well and so some
applications might have to and have
changed the way that they're implemented
in order to contain and to be optimal so
in that and I I mention it explicit at
the beginning the challenge and a lot of
these challenges cannot necessarily be
tackled today the research around phase
two although is progressing quite
rapidly especially compared to where we
were say six months ago we're not at the
point where we're interfacing where
we're actually dealing with kind of like
the user level and developer level
interfaces into these things but when we
do cross that road say early next year
it's going to become extremely valuable
and important for the maintainer zuv the
developer interfaces to web three
libraries the the developer all the
developer tooling to begin to
collaborate to start to define these
interfaces and kind of like realign
these interfaces to plug into eath - so
early mid next year I think forming some
sort of group that of people that do
work on these toolings
to
kind of get get ahead of the curve
because it's gonna be important for
migration I had a question on the shifts
to proof of stake are there any specific
points in time or they're really events
that are important for this transition
in terms of like maintaining the
security of the network if it becomes
more secure than secure at some point
and what the parameters are you know so
the parameters that probably matter are
the kind of the events that you need to
care about one is the time that the
deposit contract gets published and so
if you're a validator you will be able
to kind of pre join the other is the
time when the chain launches and
basically if you're a valid air you
should be sure that you have a client
running at that point and when the chain
launches that you'll have a proof state
chain running the next major milestone
after that would be the phase one switch
and the phase one switch is important
because that's the time when shard
chains will turn on and so that's the
time when especially if you have a lot
of ether your computational requirements
will increase like because your
computational requirements will
basically be proportional to the amount
of ether you have the more you have the
more value doors once you have and some
of the more shard blocks you will be
called to make a cross link on and then
after that there will continue to be
Forks but kind of the general way the
chain works will continue to be fairly
similar in and then after that of course
these one two if to merge these also
which haven't been fully figured out yet
so in that roadmap we still don't have a
way to exit from being a navigator
that's that's a good point this is
something I missed is one or two not
fully this not fully decided if will
become transferable the kind of default
roadmap is that it will become trance
but it will become a transferable and
more and more people just wants to have
their eath on the east
suicide I mean if desired there's also
of course the alternative of like making
an exploit that eats you back to eat one
bridge which of course I can absolutely
be absolutely be done but it's something
that thick is extra work as well so yeah
I'm thinking of the scenario where
sudden where you buy in in phase zero
and suddenly you end up with lots of
more responsibilities in Phase one that
you realize that you cannot can no
longer support so first of all you can
muster oh and you can just have your
eats a sit there and what when transfers
are repla mented then you could also
just sell your ether to some to some
well or just anyone there is probably
going to be a bunch of like basically if
the thing is right that if the price of
kind of eighth on the east suicide kind
of goes below the price I'll be fine on
the east one side by even a tiny amount
then everyone who would have joined by
joining through the normal process would
instead wants to join by by just
treating the wreath one for a little bit
more to and then joining directly from
the ether side so there's this kind of
natural demands pressure that you would
be able to turn to or kind of trade into
and you would in order to convert your
Eve to back into if one side if you want
to and if this natural pressure is too
weak and practice then you know it's
possible that the beacon Eve will go
lower but the bigger the price
discrepancy the more of an incentive it
is for us as a community to build a to a
bridge so in the way it's kind of
self-healing because the possibility of
the bridge will reduce the gap the
suggestion was to commit to doing the
bridge and then kick the can down the
curb for as long as possible I so some
of the like peripheral peripheral work
that we can do to unify these systems
and kind of give value to the systems
out of out of e to anything on I think
the decision on whether to actually do
this work is probably contingent upon
where we're at with eath to add any
points so I I mean we can commit to if
we if we need to do it we'll do it but
more importantly I think kind of
assessing it's always like it would
detract it would it would take work and
take effort and take you know focus away
from shipping eath to the more that we
kind of income encumber the two systems
together and we have made a commitments
because like once we have the native
integration that is a two-way bridge I
guess the question is do we have
something in between which is a high
latency to a bridge as opposed to a
really fast native integration a
hypothetical question if it's if it's
gonna cause a contentious hard fork on
each one to make a bridge from east to
back to ease one is is it still
something that that you would so okay
listen are you here I'm thinking is that
okay ease to happens and something
really bad happens and a bunch of extra
ether gets created and then this kind of
price discrepancy happens and there's a
demand to make this bridge to return the
path to the s chain so the nice thing
about phase zero and one is that it
allows us to architect the system this
complex in many respects system in a
production context but without having
users yet so if some underflow happened
and we had 20 billion Heath created we'd
likely fix it the because it's an early
system there's not that many users you
know users are validators and that's one
of the that's one of the reasons that
transfers aren't enabled necessarily in
phase zero but there's a class of books
where it's not explicitly a problem
right now you can't have this kind of
misaligned incentives or something and
there can be either created and some
people say oh this is totally fine this
is part of the protocol but other people
say no this is a serious problem and
it's difficult to tell the difference
between the two not in a way that would
generate a bunch of ether there
potentially slash like may like if
half of the validators that got slashed
you could see that being very
contentious right if it was some sort of
like bug in the software or things like
that but 10 times the supply of ether
being created it is like explicitly not
an intended portion of the protocol so
but III hear you the more that you
encumber the systems the more that it
becomes more difficult to for coming
over one or the other or the more that
pull it politics over here might affect
politics over there
when you're thinking about designing a
bridge how much of your consideration is
around the work that it will take to
implement it versus the like social
construct of like being bought in and
having no way to leave I my personal
opinion is that like uterus paribus I
think like having a social like having
it beats you way is somewhat better than
not having it be two-way the reason
we're not into like enthusiastically
going toward implementing the bridge on
day one is because it would Jim Utley is
a lot of a lot of work and if it and in
the happy case that's work that we
expects to never need but I know
people's people's opinions on this my on
this might differ right and for better
or worse
each one takes a lot of time and effort
to fork and get things in and so the
longer that we can operate in eath to
very rapidly and can iterate quickly the
quicker we can get things out and kind
of get to the vision the sooner that we
choose to tightly couple these systems
the harder it is going to be rapidly
iterate and get out these phases of
production so definitely a trade-off
there I think the other aspect that I
quite like and you know at risk of
disagreeing with italic is there's a
real incentive that people are excited
about it too and and so I want to get in
and stake and there's then a real
incentive to actually make it work and
go all the way and get main it over to
it if that's the only way you can then
really use that if you just
putting in so kind of having it locked
up is is nice in some ways it makes it a
little harder to sell people on the idea
of becoming a validator but once you
manage to get them over that hump it's
kind of downhill in terms of getting
them to support moving forward which is
nice and if we want to go fold or die
then we can change the deposit contracts
to instead of locking the youth forever
it becomes accessible accessible by the
Dow hacker on January 1st 2027
just given liquidity alone can't we
expect a liquidity discount on the e to
ether and if you're one to one burning
your eighth one ether and then creating
one e - yeah I mean a decision is made
there and it's based off of how much
you're expecting to generate in new e -
as being a validator but granted it's a
very complex right so you might you
might expect some sort of discount for
some time horizon but if your time
horizon is longer than that with which
the systems are merged and unified then
you don't really need to necessarily you
don't externalize that that discount for
the time so I do expect early validators
to be hobbyists enthusiasts long-term
holders and I expect them I expect them
to get probably higher return than when
these systems are unified and there's
more institutional players and a lot
more people kind of willing to accept a
different risk analysis and so honestly
I hope that it's a boon for hobbyists I
hope that it's a boon for people that
are like deeply invested not just
finding it financially but like invested
in the technology and believers in
technology when what are the right
conditions for the eath one folks look
at using the finality gadget like
implementing the finality kitchen what
was the question what are the right
conditions for us to start talking about
implementing the finality gadget back
from the beacon change
maintain conditions technical conditions
or there's probably two things one is
one is the technical and two is
[Music]
understanding like better understanding
the time horizon of phase say phase two
if phase two is a hundred years from now
we should implement the finality gadget
if it's two months from now we probably
shouldn't and then somewhere in between
there's there's a line it doesn't have
to be like we as in everyone right like
a finality gadget could like the Roo I
think one of the reasons Jason's asking
is that is doing the Python client and
Python is slower than other language is
that executing history and so if you got
a fitting it finality gadget you will
need to check like five hours of history
which is really nice you know yeah yeah
I think you definitely be a not being I
know optional and of white client type
thing that you can do question so going
back to the question about I guess they
have the first two phases before or like
a with regards to building the I guess
either one-way or two-way bridge between
eighth one and two the apologies if this
is orthogonal but within the risk
analysis have you guys considered let's
say some centralized exchange just
basically say create or allowing and
facilitating and encouraging their
customers basically deposit their
balances into the deposit contract and
basically creating this like weird
futures 2.0 like market before there's
even like on chain liquidity and like if
you guys considered at or is that just
completely orthogonal to the rollout I
guess like actually one question with
that is that like if there was a kind of
futures market for if two
then like why would anyone I guess like
voluntarily participated in that
construction because I give that if the
price is if the price is lower than one
then you'd see why people would want to
buy but if the price is lower than one
then like why would you even want to
kind of move your eath on to be suicide
and lock it up
unless you're also going to be a roof
Staker I guess like at some point I
think our transfers on the easier side
are gonna be enabled and so like up
price between the two sides is going to
exist and like I do think there will be
I I do think there will be a lot of
pressure to kind of push that price code
to be very close or equal to the one
level any other questions
can you please come over to the front
because we have cables and we can like
have there been any considerations of
like test implementations for some of
that we're testing the the ecosystems
whether they're like a deterministic
test net or possibly like a like a
confrontational test net where you know
actors are incentivized to try to
disrupt the network as much as possible
or just any any ideas around that front
these things are certainly on the
horizon and after the Interop workshop
where we're kind of doing initial
interoperability testing that is
definitely the next phase although some
private more scaled out networks we're
probably on the immediate horizon before
we open it up but I'd certainly like to
do some adversarial stuff I've had a
couple conversations with some guys at
cosmos to hear about their experience
over there for better or worse we have a
lot of clients so some of the
complexities of doing that and managing
the complexities of many implementations
of software in these public test nuts
gonna be interesting
in equivalent to what we did with
Olympic in 2015 with incentives to dose
the hell out of the thing would be great
hi my name's dan from corn base
I didn't hey I'm curious what your what
your mind set is around leveraging
exchanges and other entities to migrate
'if 1.02
to point out in terms of adoption I
guess like the first question is kind of
what role exchanges would have right
because like the default process for
moving eath over to become a validator
doesn't really require any kind of
special third parties I mean I guess
like in the case where there are if two
people that wants to migrate back to the
eath one side then there's these one
people that wants to a deposit then you
could kind of act as a matchmaker
between those groups and create an easy
interface for that yeah I certainly
expect when transfers are enabled on the
beacon chain for exchanges to kind of
step up and provide liquidity options to
validators and kind of expect you all to
do that are you gonna help organize that
I just expect us to I've talked to
people at coinbase so cool
[Music]
but I don't know kind of explaining
especially when transfers come into
existence
having literature maybe focus for
exchanges to better understand what's
going on
would it help enabling exchanges to
enable our users so yeah sorry can we
expect eat to eat to be traded as a
separate token yeah well that's what I'm
saying like it's an expensive lean
exchange decision like we could have
exchanges this okay yes okay sorry I
didn't mean to be like blunt but yeah if
in exchange were to like similar to I
guess BCH for the fork for that like
yeah okay yeah thank you for your answer
yeah I mean the thing to think about
there is ultimately whenever you've got
anything that's a deliverable currency
you have to be able to deliver it to the
right place so if theif two and eath one
is separate you can't transfer it back
then anything doing deliverable trading
absolutely has to trade it to as a
separate thing to the each one if it's
non-deliverable you can get more fancy
and people in fine it's like to get
fancy but I won't try and speculate on
that well I will say one thing about if
you look at existing like shafts and OTC
markets like there's already like
well-established processing islands were
how people trade these illiquid like
promises essentially and so it's not out
of the question that the same thing
would happen for if to as long as some
liquidity providers or changes were
supporting it it's the reason why I
asked this question is because I feel
like you know from like regular human
standpoint it would make sense if you
know like the transition would be kind
of seamless but
it's clearly not like it is like you
know like it's it's it's also an
investment opportunity and you know so
there are certain issues there which I
feel like it would be maybe that would
be one reason to like go for the bridge
like right away so we wouldn't have this
problem even like from it just from a
user standpoint like they would be
really clear that like you know we would
never get into the situation where you
kind of like gamble with like eath 1 vs
e 2 or on an exchange so when instead of
right away another option right there is
at the moment that transfers are enabled
so anytime at the moment there's a
liquidity an option on 8th to there
being a fungibility option and that's
that's interesting
I think that um there's many factors
that play here but looking historically
coins like Zillow or like what die is
about to do there's a lot of a lot of
things going on here it's hard to
predict but looking at previous coins
that have migrated to other blog chains
that support their old blocking as well
their new blockchain such as silica and
and I may set precedent for what can
happen here or what can't happen here
something that's really interesting
coming out of this conversation is at
least the people that are speaking it
seems like the biggest concern is value
and liquidity and all the questions
around the token stuff yeah yeah ok
is that not if that representative of
everyone in the room who cares about
value
you know you can care about valuable
lives there's a probably other someone
said no yeah I'm Barry and I don't think
that it's represented about the group I
think that the people who were sitting
closer towards the front self selected
as as like having having some kind of
strong motivation to interact in this
conversation bigger bags strongest
motivation a very strong motivation is a
financial motivation except for me
I just said here I will say something
that I'm very curious to hear is how
much of the work that is being done for
each one point X is repeatable so if
we're like pushing back state rent and
it'll get implemented let's say like a
year or two from now like is it an easy
drag and drop onto 2.0 or will we have
to rehash a lot of the same issues it's
a the East 2.0 kind of core design is
designed around and if state minimalism
in sort of state is a kind of somewhat
higher level a level concept than
consensus but like basically all of the
stateless client work that's happening
on the one point X side is also
simultaneously work that prepares if one
point X for and if being a transplanted
into being an executor into being an
execution environment inside of each to
I can also say that from a technical
point of view like a lot of the work
that we've been doing is kind of like
shared in-between like you know the
clients I mean after all we we do share
like for example we are making like the
goal based eat one client and there is
like sharing of libraries going on with
the east to implementation so it's not
the these projects aren't completely
separate when it comes to the actual
tech it's more like they are
conceptually different of course and
they do implement different protocols
and there are different products in a
way but the software is there is a lot
of sharing going on and the same can be
said about Trinity I guess because it
has both so it does share a lot of code
tacking on to that question and like
between these 1 & 2 we're doing the same
thing but changing everything so we're
changing the consensus we're changing
the networking protocol we're changing
the execution environment and we're
changing the cryptography what are we
hold constant
[Laughter]
it is my smile I mean the fact that
current applications will continue to
work through the Train really transition
kind of isaiah's like modulo concerns
about opcode repricing z' I think is one
major thing I have a question about as
clients so we have what seven clients in
development for e - would there be a
efficiency to be gained if efficiencies
to be gained if we had less client teams
and more work being done on getting to
the end and also a second part of that
is if there are seven clients the
performance of the blockchain is going
to be held back by the slowest one so
that increases the chance that is not at
full performance right so if you could
take all of the people working on all
the clients and put them on half the
clients maybe so these are independent
companies and entities that you can't
necessarily just do that with that's
just the cat herding problem that said
there's probably diminishing returns
after five but we've had kind of an
incredible amount of technical sharing
and idea of sharing and I think it's
actually a been a boon to the process in
many respects with the upcoming tests
nets and move to production I do have
some concerns about managing complexity
and managing user expectations on what
which software to run right it's hard to
know it's hard to choose and we will
have to speak to the second question
metrics minimum set of criteria that to
be production-ready so if you can't
handle a state transition with 4 million
validators and under this amount of time
then like you don't get the check in the
box and you're probably not ready for
production and that'll be very clear to
users and so much better to have three
great clients than seven that maybe no
all of them agree right and we probably
will have three great clients
and maybe more but we will certainly
have three great clients so I think we
end up in the same spot last question
please I was just going to add to that
that one of the problems we've seen eath
one is that gap is so popular that we're
gradually kind of converging and a lot
of that gas pricing is based on guest
performance which is good and gets a
great client ID you know but one of the
advantages of having so many clients
initially in e2 is it is it helps us
avoid that centralization so we do are
much more likely to stay with a good
broad range of clients with a broad
range of approaches to solving problems
yeah I'm really hoping that we don't
have a client with over 80% of the
network I think it's really valuable to
the security that network and I we will
see how many actually launched with a
zero as production-ready
I'm not I'm not sure we saw the problem
with each one that that a minority
client managed to slow down the network
until well in each one we also saw that
a minority net client managed to speed
up the network right like one that I did
in a particular instance yeah yes in a
particular very important instance than
what otherwise have killed us
you