- Vitalik proposes zk-EVM for faster verification.
- Zero-knowledge EVMs ensure decentralization.
- zk-EVMs simplify running full Ethereum nodes.
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin envisions a future where zero-knowledge Ethereum Virtual Machines (zk-EVMs) are integrated into Ethereum’s layer 1, enhancing the blockchain’s verification process. Buterin detailed the potential of zk-EVMs in a recent blog post, emphasizing that they could be added without sacrificing decentralization or security.
According to Buterin, Ethereum $ 1,888.79 -1.90% was built on a “multi-client philosophy” to maintain decentralization at its core. By incorporating zk-EVMs into Ethereum’s layer 1, a third type of client would emerge, joining the existing consensus and execution clients. Consensus clients use proof-of-stake to achieve network agreement, while execution clients execute new transactions in the standard EVM and store the latest blockchain state.
In advocating for zk-EVM verification on Ethereum’s base layer, Buterin assessed the pros and cons of relying on layer 1 as a “clearinghouse” and shifting most activity to layer 2. He noted that many layer 1 apps could become economically unsustainable, and smaller funds could be trapped if gas fees soar.
To avoid these issues, Buterin envisions an “open” zk-EVM system, where various clients have distinct zk-EVM implementations. Each client would wait for a proof compatible with its implementation before accepting a block as valid. This approach maintains the multi-client paradigm, enabling new clients to be developed and further decentralizing Ethereum’s base layer.
Buterin believes that zk-EVMs could be the key to “The Verge,” a phase of Ethereum’s roadmap focused on simplifying base layer verification. By implementing the zk-EVM ecosystem, running a full node on Ethereum would become more accessible, contributing to the platform’s ongoing evolution.
In other news, following a $1 billion token allocation decision, Arbitrum Foundation, the corporation responsible for the layer-2 protocol, is engulfed in a storm of controversy. The ARB community was angered when the Foundation acknowledged that it was only ratifying a previously made decision, which sparked the outcry.
