The Data Availability Problem - Vitalik Buterin | Silicon Valley Ethereum Meetup
Why Ethereum Stack Exchange recommends it
Ethereum Stack Exchange answerers and askers point to it as a primer on the data availability problem and the background for light clients, fraud proofs and rollup-style scaling.
Recommended by 1 people across 1 different months, 2018 to 2023.
What it is
A recorded talk by Vitalik Buterin at the Silicon Valley Ethereum Meetup in September 2017 on the data availability problem in blockchains. It covers what happens when a block producer withholds part of a block's data and how that affects light clients and scaling designs.
What people said
Recommends shonjs · 2018-03 · Ethereum Stack Exchange · on “Data/Information Availability”
Data availability problem is basically, that if someone withholds some data in a block, we cannot verify 100% the state, even if the block is valid as a whole. So its like a valid block but with some data not available to the network. Read more here [LINK] or watch here [this video]
Cites Symbol 1 · 2022-06 · Ethereum Stack Exchange · on “How to prove to a light client that the hash of some transaction is incorrect?”
In the context of A note on data availability and erasure coding [LINK] and The Data Availability Problem [this video] , I learned that in order to scale up a coin, we need to allow light clients to join the party, and we need to teach light clients whether to trust a block or not. In particular, if a block contains an invalid transaction, a full node can generate a fraud proof that convinces light clients not to trust this block. But what about the following attack: A miner fakes a transaction tx1 and computes its hash value h1. He then uses h1 along with other honest transactions' hash values to construct the Merkle tree and block, etc. However, when he is requested to reveal the preimage of h1
Cites YodaDefi · 2023-03 · Ethereum Stack Exchange · on “Plasma - "If owner does not care about their asset, then an "invalid" outcome may result"?”
From Vitalik's article "An Incomplete Guide to Rollups" ( [LINK] ): Additionally, Plasma and channels share a key weakness in common: the game theory behind why they are secure relies on the idea that each object controlled by both systems has some logical "owner". If that owner does not care about their asset, then an "invalid" outcome involving that asset may result. I just didn't get it. Can anyone explain this implication to me, please? So how I understood Plasma: Users sends here tokens to the L1 smart contract, let's say 10 ETH for Alice Smart contract locks them in Same amount of "bridged" tokens are minted on the L2 Now Chain Operator builds a Merkle tree for all transferred assets (