Bitcoin Forum

I've read of this new term called "Layer-3" or L3 for short. It's basicially a network built on top of a Layer-2 network which also relies on a Layer-1 network for security. If L2s are supposedly enough for scaling, why bother making networks on top of them? It doesn't make any sense. Unless L2s have the same limitations as L1s and developers need to create L3 networks to keep fees low and speeds fast.

Do you think L3 networks are necessary? If not, why? Do you think they're overhyped? Your input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.  :)

We need lower transaction fees. So Layer 3s are needed. We don't know, there might be more congestion in the future and Layer 3s might be a good choice.

https://i.postimg.cc/Hs8WwQkZ/bjkvdasv.png

Look at how cheap the fees in the L2. How can we need L3 if there are so many L2s available in the market? Are you sure those blockchains will be invaded by human then they will be congested? The list are containing a few L2s. There have been so many new L2s still unlisted from that list like manta or even blast.

L3 is not even needed. It is being created as the purpose of making money only. There's no urgentcy to create L3 blockchain. L3 is only for grab your money. L2s are enough.

Either we need L3s, or the L2s find a way to make things more cheaper and more scalable.


Obviously L3s are not needed yet because the masses actually barely 'use' crypto to do swaps and DeFi and such; because most people are just in the Coinbase's or Binance's of the world.

But if we expect the masses to actually use on-chain crypto? These cheap fees would easily not hold and we're definitely going to need L3s. And the L3s need to be built before the herd actually comes, not when they're already here.

There is no official definition for what a Layer 3 is. Basically, any application or protocol that interacts with secondary layers and offers scaling benefits for the base layer can market themselves as an L3. The term “layer 3” is definitely being used for hype and to draw attention, but that does not mean they are unnecessary because they can enhance functionality of smart contracts so they can offer new feature which were previously not possible.

Depends on the market mate. From the last bull run like  2020 the users increases until now. So there would be massive growth on users, in the future and I already uses L3 network and somehow they are efficient but not yet massively used compared to famous l2 like arbitrum and optimism. Plus there are more coming L2s, so I think its just an upgrade of L2s, some could say money grabs but yeah for sure some are for that but there are serious projects too build on L3 that solves such problem on the previous ones. So I think its better that we anticipated already the potential use later on at least everyone is ready when the time comes.

Looking at a few responses here I now feel that congestion issues can happen in L2 and therefore L3 are being created. That doesn't completely nullify the whole purpose of L2 which was created to solve the scaling issue of L1. So considering that if the user base grows exponentially in the future, we might see L4, which is not what I expected as an answer. I came across this article from Kucoin (https://www.kucoin.com/learn/crypto/layer-2-vs-layer-3-blockchains) where they have explained the reason for creating L3, quoting it below.



 

Pretty much — Layer 3s are pretty much just Layer 2s but another layer down. You don't need an 'official' definition.


If anything, it's reverse hype because of more liquidity abstraction lmao. And there shouldn't be any new functionalities as it's mostly just better scalability. (Though you can argue that more scalability can unlock new functionalities!)


Sounds bizarre, but it's very likely. For millisecond payment streaming and such.

Layer 3 is just a buzzword, nothing different, just an another new network.

Here's the illustration:

Layer 1 was cheap because not many people use it, after many people use it, the network congested and it make L1 become expensive.

Then someone create a new network which is Layer 2, it was cheap because not many people use it, after many people use it, the network congested and it make L2 become expensive.

Then someone create a new network which is Layer 3, it was cheap because not many people use it, after many people use it, the network congested and it make L3 become expensive. Don't be surprised we will see L4,L5,L6,L7, L99...

https://i.imgflip.com/48r9pm.jpg

These layers function differently.

Layer 1 primarily functions to ensure the security of the blockchain. Layer 2 is for scalability while Layer 3 is to host applications that could be used for different kinds of utilities. Since these layers function differently, they also solve different kinds of problems.
Layer 3 is implemented to further improve a blockchain. Much lower fees and much faster transactions. I think there’s nothing wrong to add them especially they can make a blockchain more efficient.

I'm neutral on this, because I feel the new terms are used to hype and attract user attention, as well as a complete excuse for developers to create repetitive work.

Just like when we use laptops in the 2024 generation, there are many different brands but in terms of configuration parameters, they have no difference, similar to tricks in the crypto space. And users feel free to consider it a good product or an opportunity

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/06/05/cnSu9.jpeg

Hmmm. You made a valid point here. Although, I meant for future purpose if there is more congestion. But with this screenshot you shared. Seems even if the congestion becomes overloaded, the fee won't exceed 10 to 50 cents on layer 2.

There maybe a reason why developers need L3 but I am sure the hype will die before it begins. Just look at all these L2, people are not really warming to them, it as if they was to fragment Ethereum network into different ecosystem, If L2 don't get real adoption why do you think L3 will. I don't see them as investment proposition for now to build thesis around them

That's a good ass meme but saying it's "just a buzzword, nothing different, just an another new network" is an extreme oversimplification. The lower it goes down the layer, the less secure, the less decentralized, and the less amount of money people should trust the lower layer with. Higher layers(L1/L2) for bigger amounts of money, the lower layers(L3, etc) for 'pocket wallet' amounts of money(P2P payments, etc).

i have no idea what layer 3 projects, i just googled it and this is the answer i got. seem not a very unique idea after all but they are just services with tokens such as the quoted above. it must be true L3 is just a made-up word word to persuade investors.


seem to be the use case of the crypto. it's necessary as it adds up the adoption. if the community is using those services, it serves the purpose.

Of course it's a cash grab. Developers want to make hype just to fill their pockets with money. L3s aren't necessary, especially when L2s are still fast and cheap to use. I'd imagine layers built on top of others to remedy long-term scaling issues. So we would have L1s, L2s, L3s, L4s, and so on. All of this complexity will eventually confuse people. Especially those who are new to crypto/Blockchain tech.

Pascalcoin's (PASC) "Safe Box" mechanism already solves Blockchain's scaling issues. This eliminates the need to build additional layers. If developers from other projects used this tech, all of our problems would be solved. They won't do it because they want to keep filling their pockets with money. Just like how ETH devs are forcing users to move to centralized L2s networks instead of dealing of with on-chain issues first (increasing transaction capacity, etc). When will we learn?  ::)

Layer 3 networks provide blockchains more customizability which attracts more investors however I wouldn’t say it’s exactly necessary. What I think it’s doing is dividing the community more. It’s getting complex and complicated and not everyone can easily follow.
I get why they are being hyped. I also do see some advantages in Layer 3 networks but is it worth it to be added? Will the good outweigh its un-necessity ? Probably not.

I don't think L2s is fast and cheap and if it was fast and cheap there was no need for the L3 Blockchain. Ethereum uses the both layers. Upon using L2 as a backup Blockchain in the network it still face with congestion and high transaction fee. And if layer3 is created and inserted in the Blockchain, Solana and Ethereum will still face congestion because of the memecoins and the  shitcoins using the networks.

if we talk about the usability of the projects and the scope related to the problem solving then they have a very bright future. These projects are mostly based on the problem solving strategies which are integrated in their fundamentals.

Like layer3 projects of SoL solved the major problem that it's competition ETH was facing and that was congestion. So because of problem solving skill set in their base they have bright Future.

if we talk about the usability of the projects and the scope related to the problem solving then they have a very bright future. These projects are mostly based on the problem solving strategies which are integrated in their fundamentals.

Like layer3 projects of SoL solved the major problem that it's competition ETH was facing and that was congestion. So because of problem solving skill set in their base they have bright Future.

It's normal that users will only increase, the longer it gets. But I think I can agree when you say it depends on the market. There are times where the market is in demand and so as the fees rises, so some people will look for a cheaper alternative and they can check out these L3 because they are still underrated.

But, I think when lots of people uses and stick on them, they will be like the others who will also became slow and buggy. But at least, we have more options to choose from now, right? And other networks can now relax for a while. Obviously, L3's are only an upgrade of L2 and L2 is an upgrade of L1. I wouldn't be surprise if there will be L4, L5 and so on... later on :D.

Current projects advertising themselves as "L3s" are basically "sidechains with a 2-way peg of a sidechain token".

This can have some benefits. For example, let's say in the future billions of people use a particular cryptocurrency like BTC or ETH. We would need several L2s for this currency to be able to be used with reasonable throughput and fees by such a high number of people. A L3 could then offer 2-way-pegs for several L2 currencies and make it easier to interact with counterparties using other L2s.

I however generally see more potential for Lightning as a L3. Lightning could route payments between different channels opened on different L2 blockchains and thus provide the same benefit than a "sidechain L3", additionally bringing more privacy, instant payments and no dependency on a sidechain consensus (which may not be infallible). The only thing it needs are exchange nodes working with atomic swaps. Taproot Assets (ex Taro) for example has such a feature.

I hadn't heard about that tech and looked now briefly into it. I think it does not solve the issue. It seems to be simply a "mini-blockchain" coin similar to Kaspa or Cryptonite, where not all blocks are stored forever but basically the UTXO set is periodically exchanged between all nodes. This solves only the problem of storage but not the problem of transaction propagation and verification, and storage is not exactly the most urgent problem when we "scale" a blockchain.

L2s do solve this problem because not all nodes have to verify all transactions, and L3s could help too a bit.

However, I think most of current "L3s" are simply scams with completely awkward tokenomics.

Not really. They are expensive and complicated. A lot of investors do not even understand the concept of it. It requires a much complex set of knowledge and skills to be able to be utilized. Maybe if investors understood it in a simpler way then we could all use it to our benefits but instead we just don’t.

Why are you focused on the investor side? If a certain investor doesn't understand something he/she simply doesn't invest in it; it doesn't automatically make the asset bad lmao. And if the investor doesn't even understand the concept of a Layer 3 network, then why the heck are you still in the cryptocurrency space.

Yes. That's the #1 reason why blockchain ends up bloated. There are too many "shitcoins" and "meme" coins taking away unecessary block space. Constant interactions of tokens and dApps will greatly reduce network performance and cost-efficiency. Since Ethereum is the largest smart contract platform in the world, it suffers from severe network congestion. Developers need to roll out constant network upgrades to keep fees as low as possible. But they won't do it because they want everyone to move to centralized L2s instead.

L3s are nothing new as they're layers built on top of existing ones (L2s). They'll be overhyped so developers can keep filling their pockets with money. It's all a cash grab. "Infinite scaling" is what developers should've considered in the first place.

As I've stated before, Pascalcoin's "SafeBox" mechanism allows "infinite scaling" without compromising decentralization. Accounts usually have a record of the last recorded balance before previous blocks are purged from the system. Sort of like a "checkpoint" used by classical PoS coins (eg: Peercoin and Blackcoin). Unfortunately, there's not much interest in doing something like this for Ethereum because of the reasons mentioned earlier. Everyone is following the hype ("meme" coins, NFTs, AI tokens, etc). Perhaps, we'll see L4s become a thing after L3s reach their full capacity? Only time will tell. Hopefully, decentralization is preserved for generations.