It’s the flexibility, stupid

A bone of contention between sidechain and layer2

Thanks Gwen for translating the post.

Original Facebook post link: https://www.facebook.com/100000981176857/posts/5589024204473563/?d=n

The long term survival of the sidechain model, which requires a certain number of validator sets attached to Ethereum, will be difficult after the launch of Ethereum 2.0. (This is true even if each validator has been selected from permissionless unidentifiable parties. If it’s permissioned, the problem becomes even bigger) This is because sidechains being highly decentralized cannot be lightweight.

The key difference between [layer 2] and [sidechain] is how it gains data security. Layer 2 doesn’t need multiple validators. Sidechains, on the other hand, require at least dozens or hundreds of validators to ensure data security.

Some argue that sidechains, which have already secured dozens or hundreds of validators, will still be able to grow as they are not much different from layer 2 in terms of decentralization. Yes, security will not be a problem. The problem is flexibility.

The fact that hundreds of validators have been secured means that it is not easy to change protocols and functions because it is structurally heavy. In the metaphor used in the previous article, the argument that the launch of new high-performing cars doesn’t affect the tuning companies presupposes structural scalability and flexibility. Layer 2 doesn’t require a heavy validator pool for security, enabling easy protocol updates and function addition. Sidechains do not.

If Ethereum 2.0 is released on the market with scalability as its strength, it is highly likely that sidechains which cannot provide the same level of convenience and various functions at the infrastructure level will no longer be sought for.