区块链关键词Rollup是什么,一文搞懂为什么要让它去中心化

老雅痞Опубліковано о 2022-12-26Востаннє оновлено о 2022-12-26

Анотація

rollup顾名思义,就是把一堆交易rollup(卷)起来,变成一个rollup交易,所有节点接收到这个rollup交易之后,不去执行被卷起来的逻辑,而只去接受这些逻辑的执行结果。

rollup顾名思义,就是把一堆交易rollup(卷)起来,变成一个rollup交易,所有节点接收到这个rollup交易之后,不去执行被卷起来的逻辑,而只去接受这些逻辑的执行结果。而在今天这篇文章中,我们探讨了rollup去中心化的定义和高层思想,而并没有涉及关于去中心化rollup实现的深层技术细节。在开始之前,先让我们了解一下去中心化rollup的基础知识。

“”

去中心化rollup的定义是什么?

“”

在去中心化rollup的定义上存在一些分歧。但其被广泛接受的定义是:在去中心化rollup中,任何用户都可以确保他们的交易将被执行。

“”

我们应该花点时间问问为什么人们会关心rollup是否去中心化。鉴于rollup依赖L1来提供安全保障,用户不是无论如何都会受到保护吗?

“”

rollup保证只要L1(数据可用性层)存在,用户就可以通过在L1上强制进行交易来重建L2状态并退出rollup。如果系统不满足这个条件,那么我们会说它不构成一个rollup,而是另一种L2或侧链。这应该清楚地表明,选择一个高度去中心化的(始终是实时的,抗审查的)L1是至关重要的。另一个细微差别是,比起特定于应用的rollup,对于通用目的的rollup,用户必须能够强制包含任何任意交易,而不仅仅是“退出”交易。

定义一个rollup去中心化与否的区别在于,用户强制将其交易包括在内的难度或现实程度。例如,他们是否需要非常强大的计算资源来生成ZK证明?或者他们是否可以使用消费类硬件,或者短期租用廉价的服务器?是否有一些特权行为者长期享有自由支配权,从而降低了一个人试图被包含在内的能力,使之推迟?限制越少,去中心化程度越高。

在现实中,普通用户可能想要避免运行完整的rollup节点,在ZK-rollup的情况下则是避免运行验证程序附加组件。他们希望看到,他们进行交易的rollup有助于让广泛而多样化的参与者履行必要的职能。而且,新的参与者可以无许可地加入网络来执行这些功能。

“”

考虑到上述情况,让我们用去中心化rollup的另一个定义来结束本节,以帮助我们更好地理解:在去中心化rollup中,各方可以参与每个网络角色——即作为提议者、验证者和节点运行者。

“”

这将引导我们进入下一部分。

“”

如何去中心化rollup?

“”

鉴于上述定义,特别是第二个定义,你可能会看到,我们可以通过确保所有角色都可以由多方执行来去中心化rollup。这些角色是:

“”

>提议者

>验证者

>节点运行者

“”

在我们回顾每个角色之前,让我们简单回顾一下上一节中提到的一点:rollup作为L2解决方案,会决定他们希望扩展哪个L1,或者更准确地说,他们将使用哪个L1来保证安全。这里的“安全保证”是指依赖L1达成共识和数据可用性(DA)。虽然这不是说rollup本身可以调整到去中心化,但选择一个充分去中心化的L1是个关键的决定,Taiko选择了以太坊,以获得最强大的安全保证。

“”

接下来让我们看看各个角色。

“”

提议者

“”

提议者从用户的L2交易中构建rollup区块,并将其提交给L1。有时这些人在其他rollup系统中被称为排序者。

“”

提议者决定在区块中包含哪些交易,以及如何对它们进行排序。这是一个重要的角色,因为它可以从交易排序中提取利润,并决定排除哪些交易,从而能够审查某些交易、应用或用户。

“”

一个去中心化的rollup应该允许用户期望包含他们所有有效的交易。

“”

验证者

“”

验证者生成SNARK证明,断言上述提议区块的L2交易和区块的有效性。

“”

验证者决定将哪些提议的区块转换为链上验证区块。这个角色会决定一个区块何时可以达到链上验证状态,但无法决定哪些txs进入区块或它们如何排序。在这种链上验证状态之前,验证者可以挂起那些依赖于有效性证明的交易,或者挂起某些等待其母区块被链上验证的准链上验证区块。

“”

一个去中心化的rollup应该允许用户期望验证他们所有的有效交易。

“”

节点运行者

“”

节点运行者从链上(L1)数据执行交易,以与rollup状态保持同步。

“”

提议者和验证者需要运行完整的rollup节点来履行他们各自的角色。其他参与者也想要运行节点,例如提供块浏览器等服务的节点、基础设施提供商以及出于其他原因希望与链状态保持同步的用户。

“”

一个去中心化的rollup应该允许用户期望所有有效交易的执行。

“”

去中心化rollup有什么权衡?

“”

从中心化到去中心化的转变过程暴露出了一个权衡空间。

“”

在本节中,利弊两方面都适用于提议者和验证者(我们统称之为操作者);如前所述,我们将不考虑节点运行者,但请记住,运行rollup节点对这些角色都是必需的。

“”

在rollup提议者/验证者的背景下,我们看到了以下几点:

去中心化的实施与治理

“”

Vitalik最近写道:“去中心化的治理结构可以抵御内部的攻击者,而去中心化的实施可以抵御外部的强大攻击者。”这是在DAO的背景下说的——也就是说,治理结构和实施都与DAO有关。具体来说,它针对了DAO去中心化的一个目的:稳健性。

“”

我们认为,将这种框架广泛地用于rollup非常有帮助。

有鉴于此,到目前为止,我们已经讨论了rollup如何通过去中心化的实施来抵御外部威胁(审查、失效)。我们绝不能忽视rollup如何抵御内部威胁——抵御最初负责建设和维护它的组织和社区。这里可供rollup使用的工具是治理,或简单的说,其DAO。

“”

现在描述DAO的细节以及我们建议它采用哪些治理机制还为时过早,但这将是未来文章的主题。

“”

作为对这个话题的最后思考,我们可以看到,实施提供了对rollup属性的时间点分析,而治理可以描述实施如何随时间变化,以及哪一方可以做出这些决定。

Пов'язані матеріали

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手5 год тому

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手5 год тому

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit7 год тому

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit7 год тому

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手9 год тому

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手9 год тому

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit10 год тому

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit10 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片