Honey Migration to Ethereum (signalling/suggestion)

[rgszhou]

Why not consider Polygon network？

[project_uwb]

hey, I would suggest that you have a quick read of the hackMD doc link in the original post. I am not a big techie, but from my minimalistic understanding, its to do with security and decentralisation.
So Polygon is a sidechain and not a proper L2, which means the funds in Polygon are basically secured by a multi-sig who can collude (not that they will) and so result in a less secure network.
Arbitrum and other L2s are based on ‘roll-ups?’ which settle back to the ETH main net, have a more robust and secure narrative.
Well thats how I understand at-least. I think if you want a more technical explanation, may be visit the Discord!

[sadhiq]

Hi all,
I have read this post and the hackmd with interest.
What is the current state of this suggestion? The hackmd last modification was 12 days ago, so I guess that this is still active.

@willjgriff

The future of xDai, where Honey is native, is unknown, therefore the future of Honey on xDai is arguably insecure. There is a chance xDai will upgrade to a Layer 2 at some point but details surrounding this are yet to be made. In the mean time Layer 2 solutions are becoming available, the most promising of which seems to be Arbitrum.

I have a question about this assumption, “the future of xDai is unknown” - from what I read and know, it doesn’t seem as unknown as that. There are plans for the chain, more and more projects are deploying on it, it’s bridged to most of the other important chains and there are plans for Stake Beacon Chain.

Don’t read me wrong, I fully understand that real L2s are way more secured than any sidechain can be. Being very pragmatic, I believe that numbers should be the main explanation for things.

Hence, do we know what it would cost to succesfully attack the xDai chain? Has there ever been a succesful attack on the network?

A lot of use cases on xDai are only possible here, it’s one thing to have cheap transactions on sidechains and on L2s, but the difference between 0.01$ and 1.5$ is huge if these are repeated actions, I think this should be taken into consideration.

I’m active on xDai as well as on available L2s and the experience of xDai is unique in that, it has this strong sense of community, experimentation and it feels like ethereum in the old days.
I understand that these are not technological arguments to prevent a move, but there is a vibe, that I don’t think will be felt on Arbitrum. Arbitrum is however great and the UX is amazing with instant confirmation, etc. but I’m not sure these things are needed for governance and the questions should be more:

1. Is xDai sufficiently decentralised and secured to host the 1hive governance?
2. Will the move break some dynamics with other projects?
3. Will users be priced out by the move (I mean the actual moving and not the interactions on Arbitrum)?

Cheers!

[fomosapien.eth]

my quick suggestion would be to change the title and be more specific that it is for migrating to L2 like Arbitrum. Otherwise many wont even try to open it considering the high gas cost.

[fomosapien.eth]

Also considering that Uniswap v3 and all is going to migrate to polygon, I think we can revisit if we can consider polygon too.

[gabi]

Hi @sadhiq you nail it with your analysis. We have been going back and forth in the last couple of months since we first started discussing the migration. Also, the space is moving at a super rapid pace and several of the assumptions we had proved to be wrong or not applicable in the new landscape. Our last stance was to pause the migration plans until we have a clearer picture of the xDai future, which started to manifest in the last few weeks, while keep advancing on other initiatives (like deploying Celeste on polygon) using Honey as an xDai native asset.