- Matter Labs has drawn backlash for comparisons made to its multichain structure.
- Matter Labs’ chain verification claims have develop into clouded in suspicion
- Matter Labs continues to be the topic of scrutiny amongst friends in current weeks.
Flying jabs are commonplace in each aggressive area, and the burgeoning Ethereum Layer 2 ecosystem isn’t any completely different as main scaling resolution suppliers sq. off for supremacy. Amid the frequent squabbles, Matter Labs, the developer of the favored zkSync Period chain and the ZK Stack, has typically discovered itself on the middle of controversy.
On Tuesday, July 2, the agency unveiled its Elastic Chain imaginative and prescient, a multichain structure that bears a putting resemblance to Polygon‘s AggLayer. Whereas the newly unveiled structure guarantees to function a boon for the zkSync ecosystem, claims made by Matter Labs about competing architectures compared to the Elastic Chain have drawn vital backlash.
Matter Labs Propping up Elastic Chain with “Made up Metrics”?
Matter Labs has drawn backlash for evaluating its multichain structure to Optimism’s Superchain and Polygon’s AggLayer. In the July 2 blog post asserting the Elastic Chain’s structure, Matter Labs in contrast it to Optimism‘s Superchain and Polygon’s AggLayer on 5 metrics. These metrics included their tech stack, verifiability, shared interoperability, native interoperability, and throughput, all of which appeared to mix to offer Matter Labs’ Elastic Chain the sting over the competitors.
Nevertheless, a number of Polygon and Optimism workforce members say Matter Labs’ presentation of the details is deceptive.
The builders highlighted a number of points with Matter Labs’ claims in a number of X posts. For one, entry to the Polygon AggLayer shouldn’t be restricted to chains constructed with Polygon’s CDK. On the similar time, whereas Matter Labs claims that chains in Optimism’s Superchain weren’t verifiable, fraud proofs are already stay on the OP mainnet. Furthermore, throughput has nothing to do with the AggLayer, the Elastic Chain, or the Superchain.
Surmising the gripes of a number of neighborhood members, crypto content material creator Jesse Eckel argued that Matter Labs seemed to be propping itself up with “made up metrics.”
The current uproar over Matter Labs’ claims in regards to the AggLayer and the Superchain is the most recent in a rising record of situations in current weeks wherein the agency has been the middle of criticism.
Matter Labs x Controversy
Matter Labs has incessantly confronted backlash in current Ethereum Layer 2 squabbles. In Could 2024, the agency drew the ire of a number of crypto neighborhood members for deciding to make use of “ZK” as its ticker when one other challenge, Polyhedra Community, had already claimed it.
Barely every week later, with the mud but to choose the ticker dispute, Matter Labs once more discovered itself within the line of fireplace, this time for filing to trademark “ZK” in a number of jurisdictions.
Regardless of the continual controversies surrounding Matter Labs, zkSync Period stays the biggest ZK-powered Layer 2 chain by TVL with $1.3 billion, in line with L2Beat data on the time of writing.
On the Flipside
- Matter Labs founder Alex Gluchowski maintains that the desk evaluating Elastic Chain to the AggLayer and the Superchain painted an accurate image of the present technological maturity of every challenge.
- Whereas becoming a member of the Elastic Chain requires builders to construct with the ZK Stack, becoming a member of the AggLayer doesn’t.
Why This Issues
The current dispute over Matter Labs’ Elastic Chain claims highlights the escalating tensions amongst Ethereum Layer 2 builders within the battle for dominance.
Learn this for extra on Matter Labs:
zkSync’s Matter Labs Faces Pushback Over “ZK” Trademark Efforts
Keep updated with the most recent within the authorized battle between Consensys and the SEC:
Consensys Fast-Tracks SEC Lawsuit Following Enforcement Action