As the cryptocurrency and blockchain sectors continually grow and mature, advancements and progress are inevitable. Polygon, an esteemed player in the arena, is on the cusp of initiating some significant changes. In an exclusive interview with David Schwartz, Co-Founder of Polygon, we dove deep into the new advancements, dissecting the core of Polygon 2.0, its contrast with its predecessor, and what it means for the blockchain community at large.
Polygon 2.0 emerges as a set of proposals forwarded to the community. Its purpose? To unify and improve the protocol on multiple fronts, particularly technology, governance, and token dynamics. Unlike the original version, which was a single network operation using the POS protocol, Polygon 2.0 aims to build an ecosystem that interconnects various technologies. David eloquently explains, "It’s about connecting all these dots to provide a unified solution that promotes liquidity and massive scalability."
On the differences between Polygon 2.0 and Polygon 1.0:
"Polygon 2.0 is a technical blueprint. It's a set of proposals that we send to the community to enhance and improve the project in several ways. These pillars revolve around technology, governance, and token. The difference with Polygon 1.0 is massive. Polygon 1.0 was the original version of MATIC token with Polygon. We started with a single network protocol called POS. Now, we're looking at a comprehensive ecosystem, including technologies like Polygon ZK-EVM and SuperNets."
Key elements of Polygon 2.0:
"We aim to transform the current POS network into an actual layer 2. We'll introduce a ZK prover to this network, change the bridge, and improve security assumptions for POS. The blueprint involves different layers, including a client layer, bridge layer, and a ZK prover stack. Additionally, a significant focus will be on a new governance model and the launch of a new token, POLL."
When asked about Polygon's early launch of the zkEVM, he stated:
"Our success in launching the zkEVM ahead of schedule was a result of clear vision and collaboration. Many said the project was impossible, but we had a clear roadmap on how to make it happen."
Comparing with competitors like Starknet, Optimism, or Arbitrum:
"The Optimistic rollups, like Optimism and Arbitrum, make certain security assumptions. We believed in the zk approach, where every execution has a corresponding proof. Unlike StarkNet, which is creating its own VM environment, we aim to provide an experience familiar to Ethereum users."
Why IMX chose Polygon's technology:
"Projects like IMX need sovereignty. They want their own chain. With our aggregation layer, projects can grow their ecosystem and have access to liquidity simultaneously. It's worth noting, we've shifted from calling it 'Supernet' to 'Polygon CDK'."
On Polygon's investment in specific regions, they mentioned:
"We plan to be more present, to understand better and to develop the community here."
Difference between ZK EVM chain and PoS ZK EVM chain:
"Today, they differ significantly. ZK EVM chain is secured by ZK technology while POS is secured by validators staking the MATIC token. In the future, they'll be more interconnected."
On changing the name from 'Polygon Hermez' to 'Polygon zkEVM':
"We changed the name to signal a convergence. 'Polygon zkEVM' better represents the project. It's an EVM equivalent ZK Rollup."
Impact of the upcoming Ethereum Cancun upgrade:
"The upgrade will affect us positively. The cost for users, especially in terms of data availability on-chain, will reduce dramatically. We're talking about an estimated 8x reduction in gas fees for users. We plan to adopt this change as soon as possible."
저작권자 © 비트코인 뉴스 무단전재 및 재배포 금지