Can the “blockchain trilemma” be solved totally ?

[Tom Ronald]

There’s a couple of times i would read a project whitepaper and i would presume it’s just a stretch. I mean some recent projects are just rebranding what’s been done in the past years.

I came across this project Shardeum that claims to be an EVM-based L1 blockchain that uses dynamic state sharding to address scalability trilemma. To achieve low gas fees, high speed and a more decentralized system. Basically, it operates the sharding process.

Algorand also claimed to have solved the “blockchain trilemma” with PPoS(Pure Proof-of-Stake) but has this challenge been solved ?

[MArsland]

There’s a couple of times i would read a project whitepaper and i would presume it’s just a stretch. I mean some recent projects are just rebranding what’s been done in the past years.

I came across this project Shardeum that claims to be an EVM-based L1 blockchain that uses dynamic state sharding to address scalability trilemma. To achieve low gas fees, high speed and a more decentralized system. Basically, it operates the sharding process.

Algorand also claimed to have solved the “blockchain trilemma” with PPoS(Pure Proof-of-Stake) but has this challenge been solved ?

It seems that overcoming the trilemma is not that easy because we have seen many projects that carry this vision many times and end up unclear. It is too early to claim to have been able to overcome the problem, besides the trilemma above there is a fundamental thing where developers often make blunders just to get big funding, Shardeum is not 1 day old after being listed a few hours ago and you haven't seen anything there other than people selling tokens. Network issues will always be a debate especially when the number of L2s is too much then new competitors will come with the same vision.

[MAAManda]

Discussions about this have been going on for a long time & so far no one has been able to solve the blockchain trilemma problem. Maximizing one aspect requires sacrificing the other, that's the problem. Look at how Ethereum (ETH) changed their consensus from PoW to PoS, yes they finally solved the transaction density problem, but the level of decentralization there was reduced.

For me right now it's fine if it has lower TPS as long as a blockchain is truly decentralized, an example is the Bitcoin (BTC) main network.

[coyhasmon]

It is not possible, and those that are trying to tell you otherwise are just trying to defraud you with their new fancy project. Tell me this in the example of a physical item, a car:
Can a car be, the best in the world (highest build quality), the fastest, the easiest to drive, and the cheapest at the same time? Of course not.

You have to make tradeoffs in something, for example using high quality materials will lead the car to fail in the price cheapness quality. Similarly with cryptocurrencies, projects tend to massively sacrifice decentralization for scalability and underplay the cost of being more scalable.

[TastyChillySauce00]

All these three problems already solved by non EVM blockchain like sui, solana and so on.
It's not exactly a problem that needs to be solved. Although you can always argue that these two aren't that decentralized, so does any PoS in existence, even ethereum with its pectra upgrade already making things more centralized by increase cap of ETH for validator.

[doubletheprof]

Kaspa kinda solves it

[Tom Ronald]

There’s a couple of times i would read a project whitepaper and i would presume it’s just a stretch. I mean some recent projects are just rebranding what’s been done in the past years.

I came across this project Shardeum that claims to be an EVM-based L1 blockchain that uses dynamic state sharding to address scalability trilemma. To achieve low gas fees, high speed and a more decentralized system. Basically, it operates the sharding process.

Algorand also claimed to have solved the “blockchain trilemma” with PPoS(Pure Proof-of-Stake) but has this challenge been solved ?

It seems that overcoming the trilemma is not that easy because we have seen many projects that carry this vision many times and end up unclear. It is too early to claim to have been able to overcome the problem, besides the trilemma above there is a fundamental thing where developers often make blunders just to get big funding, Shardeum is not 1 day old after being listed a few hours ago and you haven't seen anything there other than people selling tokens. Network issues will always be a debate especially when the number of L2s is too much then new competitors will come with the same vision.

Exactly!! The trilemma has proven to be a tough challenge to overcome, as many projects that claimed to solve it often fall short or lose focus. Checked Shardeum on Bitget now but i won’t judge as it's still early but the performance is quite good. Let’s see how it plays out with time as the market is bullish. As it’s a L1 project, we’ll keep watching it’s long-term adoption and community growth. Every L2s just come up with the attempt to solve recurring issues, which at this point i doubt if it’s good thing.

[btc_angela]

It is not possible, and those that are trying to tell you otherwise are just trying to defraud you with their new fancy project. Tell me this in the example of a physical item, a car:
Can a car be, the best in the world (highest build quality), the fastest, the easiest to drive, and the cheapest at the same time? Of course not.

I do agree, because if there is a solution already for this so called blockchain trilemma, it might have been implemented years ago. The problem is that there are projects who claim to have the solution and yet problem is still ongoing.

You have to make tradeoffs in something, for example using high quality materials will lead the car to fail in the price cheapness quality. Similarly with cryptocurrencies, projects tend to massively sacrifice decentralization for scalability and underplay the cost of being more scalable.

And for crypto enthusiast, we don't want to sacrifice centralization just to have this kind of solution. Great example is ETH, when they moved their algorithm and became more centralized, everything is f**k up now.

[Theupdude]

There’s a couple of times i would read a project whitepaper and i would presume it’s just a stretch. I mean some recent projects are just rebranding what’s been done in the past years.

I came across this project Shardeum that claims to be an EVM-based L1 blockchain that uses dynamic state sharding to address scalability trilemma. To achieve low gas fees, high speed and a more decentralized system. Basically, it operates the sharding process.

Algorand also claimed to have solved the “blockchain trilemma” with PPoS(Pure Proof-of-Stake) but has this challenge been solved ?

Actually sometimes it genuinely feels like the same tech wrapped in fresh buzzwords merely to stir up investors.  Shardeum looks interesting on paper with the dynamic state sharding idea, but we’ve seen similar claims before. Algorand did come out strong with their PPoS approach, but even they haven’t totally evaded the trade offs. I don’t think the blockchain trilemma is totally addressed by anyone yet. It’s more like teams are just finding better tradeoffs between decentralization, scalability and security rather than genuinely solving it.

[coyhasmon]

All these three problems already solved by non EVM blockchain like sui, solana and so on.
It's not exactly a problem that needs to be solved. Although you can always argue that these two aren't that decentralized, so does any PoS in existence, even ethereum with its pectra upgrade already making things more centralized by increase cap of ETH for validator.

Repeating lies won't make them true, none of this is solved. All of the ones you listed are very centralized.

Actually sometimes it genuinely feels like the same tech wrapped in fresh buzzwords merely to stir up investors.  Shardeum looks interesting on paper with the dynamic state sharding idea, but we’ve seen similar claims before. Algorand did come out strong with their PPoS approach, but even they haven’t totally evaded the trade offs. I don’t think the blockchain trilemma is totally addressed by anyone yet. It’s more like teams are just finding better tradeoffs between decentralization, scalability and security rather than genuinely solving it.

Sharding does not solve scalability.

[Tom Ronald]

There’s a couple of times i would read a project whitepaper and i would presume it’s just a stretch. I mean some recent projects are just rebranding what’s been done in the past years.

I came across this project Shardeum that claims to be an EVM-based L1 blockchain that uses dynamic state sharding to address scalability trilemma. To achieve low gas fees, high speed and a more decentralized system. Basically, it operates the sharding process.

Algorand also claimed to have solved the “blockchain trilemma” with PPoS(Pure Proof-of-Stake) but has this challenge been solved ?

Actually sometimes it genuinely feels like the same tech wrapped in fresh buzzwords merely to stir up investors.  Shardeum looks interesting on paper with the dynamic state sharding idea, but we’ve seen similar claims before. Algorand did come out strong with their PPoS approach, but even they haven’t totally evaded the trade offs. I don’t think the blockchain trilemma is totally addressed by anyone yet. It’s more like teams are just finding better tradeoffs between decentralization, scalability and security rather than genuinely solving it.

Well said!! The trilemma still holds and until we see real results, it’s all just potential on paper because down the line there would be centralization issues.

[TastyChillySauce00]

Repeating lies won't make them true, none of this is solved. All of the ones you listed are very centralized.

It's a lot more decentralized than the like of shardeum where the developer got their allocation unlocked day 1 and they allocate big portion of SHM to founder and team while these two words basically means the same thing in the crypto world. There's a reason why they have FDV of sub $50m despite the investments.
PoS could never be as decentralized as PoW and doesn't matter what you do it will always be a lot more centralized than PoW.

In a nutshell, you want decentralization and security just go with bitcoin, none of these altcoins are decentralized.

[Virtualsnipe13]

IMO rebranding a project and not doing better than the project rebranded is what turns me off cause they are supposed to learn from the previous brand's mistake and improve it but instead, they do the opposite or even worse than the previous project, let's just hope Shardeum (SHM) does it better than other projects as it would be listed on various CEX with event for users to try.