AIP Idea: Otherside as an Avalanche Subnet

The validator set. Avalanche subnets do NOT share security.

Shared security is a bad thing. Why do you think Luna shut down IBC after their attack?

Yuga would have to bootstrap a new validator set and this would undoubtedly be extremely centralized.

Not necessarily. Ava Labs would likely gift the DAO lots of AVAX to add more validators. Avalanche is the only form of decentralized consensus that scales in the number of validators while keeping throughput extremely high. Other systems simply aren’t as “decentraliz-able” - nowhere remotely close.

for @mg :

Liquidity. Highly liquid markets can handle big sells without impacting price as much (aka slippage)

This is the biggest issue but it’s highly debatable. I think it’s mostly an optics issue. L2s are not Ethereum. We’ll be bridging somewere one way or another. Existing L2 exhibit issues attracting liquidity from ETH’s L1. I personally have not been impressed with what’s available on ETH L2s so far.

It’s harder to build on a chain that goes backwards and requires rent payment back to some other chain on a regular basis. I think of readers this proposal will gain a lot of insight over the months as more subnets roll out, and we compare the experience to that of L2s.

Shared security is a bad thing. Why do you think Luna shut down IBC after their attack?

This is a bad take. Sharing security from an ultra-decentralized validator set is not bad at all. ETH will never need to shut down like Luna because there is no algo-stable coin directly tied to the chain’s security.

Not necessarily. Ava Labs would likely gift the DAO lots of AVAX to add more validators. Avalanche is the only form of decentralized consensus that scales in the number of validators while keeping throughput extremely high. Other systems simply aren’t as “decentraliz-able” - nowhere remotely close.

The DAO adding a few validators to their subnet without shared security is not the same as inheriting many billions of dollars worth of security with 0 effort by launching this on a rollup.

2 Likes

It’s a bit dangerous to assume that rollups are risk free just because someone told us that they “share ethereum security” we really need to be super objective and evaluate these technologies by their own merit. The sequencers have been going down a lot for these rollups. Honestly speaking, Avalanche has a pretty good track record and we should keep an open mind to all possibilities.

3 Likes

How familiar are you with immutable X starkware etc. As far as I know, Immuntable doesn’t generic support smart contracts yet. Starkware has dedicated nodes that construct the zk-proofs. There’s a lot more to this than just saying something “inherits ethereum secruity” imo

1 Like

Arbitrum and Optimism have been working extremely well. “The sequencers have been going down a lot for these rollups” is definitely not true and happened once early on.

I still stand by my statement, Ethereum has the best security and I’m most comfortable storing my high-value assets there.

Immutable does not have EVM compatibility yet, agreed. But ZkSync does and will launch testnet soon. The nice thing is even with these “dedicated nodes that construct the zk-proofs”, there’s no risk of collusion or fraud, unlike if the Avalanche subnet was taken over.

Okay, this is a little frustrating to see. We have recieved no further messages here from the Ava Team, but they are talking to news outlets. Here are some quotes of how they are taking our feedback.

Source: https://decrypt.co/101530/why-ava-labs-wants-bored-ape-metaverse-apecoin-avalanche

“Some of the conversations that have been generated and driven from this initial proposal, and folks we’ve met in the community, have been extremely productive,” said Chang. “We’re excited about continuing down this path.”

Ava Labs has not yet communicated directly with Yuga Labs, as of now, but Liu and Chang told Decrypt that they’ve seen positive feedback from the Bored Ape community.

For Ava Labs and Avalanche, Chang said that education may be key, as people who are immersed in Ethereum may not understand Avalanche’s differences. However, he also said that they can “get creative” about bridging—such as only partially transitioning the ecosystem to Avalanche, and perhaps leaving some Bored Ape NFTs on Ethereum.

“It doesn’t necessarily need to be all-or-nothing right off the bat,” said Chang. “There are ways that we can work with the team to make this a graceful transition, if you will—including even the ETH maxis.”

This isn’t the only article and outlet they’ve been speaking to. This closes in one day without a single direct team response to the DAO regarding this proposal nor updates to exclude Otherside.

6 Likes

This is frustrating to see. There is no good faith discussion going on here and this proposal should not move to AIP Draft.

  1. Avalanche has not followed up on any of the questions/concerns posed here
  2. The forum votes in favor of this proposal, intended as a “temperature check” are from new users who have largely only interacted with this specific post
  3. The press push feels disingenuous—there has been no such discussion within the community that would back up the claims (see point #1)
6 Likes

I am open-minded about moving apecoin to an L2 to reduce transaction costs, and I love the enthusiasm to make progress. To get my vote though, any proposal would need to be opt-in, which I think implies an Ethereum L2, and it would need to be as incremental is possible. It’s too much to ask that the community get comfortable with Avalanche tech in 1 week. I know this DAO favors bold action, but to me, this is too much risk too fast. For now, I’m a NO.

1 Like

But if these nodes go down, wouldn’t liveness halt? In Avalanche I believe there’s ways to parameterize the protocol to be resistant to 51% attacks. I also do not have much faith in ETH 2.0 with the 12 minute finality, how is that a good user experience?

1 Like

If such a thing were to happen, it would still be possible to pull the ripcord on L1 and return funds from the L2.

1 Like

Right now the Avalanche team is trying to infiltrate our community in order to use us as a source of profit, and I believe they will damage us until the project is exhausted and destroyed.

This is a parasite attack.

And they have already started to benefit from parasitizing on us, even before voting. The Avalanche team is actively pitching crypto media using our name and getting promotional publications for their brand.

Check one of the articles that they got, it’s from Andrew Hayward for Decrypt it looks more like a sponsored content than a regular news. I can’t say intentionally or not, but it seems like the author did not even bother himself to check the community opinions for the proposal, giving full voice for the Avalanche team.

Also, the Avalanche team members (Head of Strategy Phillip Liu and Head of Gaming Ed Chang) are misleading the reporter saying that “they’ve seen positive feedback from the Bored Ape community”.

As was mentioned above by a few community members, the Avalanche team also tries to create the illusion of support from our community by using dirty tricks, for example the forum votes in favour of this proposal are from new users who have largely only interacted with this specific post". Almost all posts that support the proposal are from new users.

I believe if the Avalanche parasite attack succeeds, then we will not only get reputational harm, but also huge risks of low liquidity and security, so we should protect ourselves actively.

  1. If the proposal will move to AIP Draft and voting, then we should vote against the proposal

  2. To vote for and support the proposal to Keep ApeCoin within the Ethereum ecosystem

  3. PM me if fyou have ideas on how to collaborate our efforts

2 Likes

Do you think normal users will be able to post proofs? Again it goes back to user experience.

Our responses took into consideration all of the feedback we gathered both on and off of this forum. Many folks who understood the tech behind subnets were extremely excited about this proposal.

We all genuinely believe that an Avalanche Subnet can bring a lot of value to the APE community for the following reasons.

  1. Lower transaction fees enabled by Avalanche Consensus

  2. Ability to accrue value to the APE community by using the native APE token for transaction fees

  3. Most stable reliable solution on the market. Subnet tech has been in development for 3+ years, and Avalanche EVM-based subnets have been live for 2 months now with no issues.

We’ve monitored this forum closely and would like to take everyone’s feedback into consideration. We’d also like to host an open forum (twitter spaces) where we can address some of your concerns and ensure the subnet adds substantial value to the APE ecosystem and also puts user security and safety first.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.

Hi @Avalanche,

Are you content with the feedback received, or do you wish to extend community discussion for a further 7 days?

We look forward to hearing from you.

- river

1 Like

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@Avalanche has requested to extend the community discussion period for this AIP idea. This topic will automatically close a further 7 days from now. We encourage the community to continue to engage in thoughtful discussions through constructive criticism, honest feedback, and helpful suggestions.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

- river

I would prefer Immutable X

This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.

Hi @Avalanche and ApeCoin DAO Community,

Thank you for your ideas and thoughtful discussions. Since AIP-41 has passed, this proposal is now in conflict with an approved AIP and as per the governance process, this proposal has been withdrawn. The DAO cannot accept any additional AIP Ideas which are in conflict with the passed AIP until three months have passed, which is on September 8, 2022.

If you so desire, you’re free to submit this proposal or a similar one in General for community discussion. Once this window of time has passed, it may be resubmitted as an AIP Idea and go through the standard governance process.

Thanks.

-moderator

3 Likes