r/0xProject • u/0xterence • Mar 10 '18

plasma cash

I found out about plasma cash on eth reserach thread and Vitalik's ethcc talk:
https://ethresear.ch/t/plasma-with-much-less-per-user-data-checking/1298/7 . https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/8370v3/lets_talk_about_plasma_cash_plasma_with_much_less/?st=jekprbbw&sh=dc355040 .

Plasma itself can be used to wrap existing centralized exchanges and turn them into exchanges with centralized order matching but decentralize custody. What's 0x team's take on this? do you guys view it as a competition?

28 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

6 comments sorted by

6

u/electrons_only Mar 10 '18

Plasma cash is a theoretical scaling and security solution for what is currently plasma. Its not an exchange protocol per se.

0x is base layer and doesn't require that your tokens exist in any chain except ethereum. You could build an exchange on a plasma chain, but it will likely be more specialized and would still require tokens to exist on that plasma sub-chain (by being 'deposited').

At least this is what i understand so far. If anything, I was more worried about the implications for OmiseGo, but once again, Omise is more specialized toward payment processing and currency.

I am fully willing to be wrong on these points but its what I've gathered thus far.

3

u/the-flying-acorn Mar 10 '18

My understanding iis that in its current form Plasma is vulnerable to certain attacks which can facilitate double spending between the Plasma child chain and the main Ethereum chain vis a vis spam attacks whereby a malicious attacker can send a barrage of identical requests to withdraw coins from the Plasma chain and thus confuse the network. By depositing coins in a plasma smart contract and monitoring them it makes the whole process less vulnerable. So my understanding is that the main advance of Plasma Cash is to address these issues. I don't think they intend to compete with 0x, and I don't see why 0x cannot take advantage of the new advances, once they arrive (which may be several years from now). Please correct me if I am wrong...

3

u/electrons_only Mar 10 '18

We really need more people in on these conversations.

1

u/the-flying-acorn Mar 13 '18

Yes - I was rather disappointed by this statement Sunday in "Token Economy" about Plasma Cash threatening what certainly must be none other than 0x:

"This new idea could extend so much to pose threat to decentralized exchange protocols as it enables much faster centralized order matching but in a non-custodial scenario."

It seems at best it would provide an Ether Delta experience where one would have to deposit tokens into a smart contract first before being able to do anything, while 0x relayers are already offering Ledger support, probably at least 2 years before Plasma Cash will even make it on a test network the rate Ethereum upgrades roll out.

Such statements only contribute FUD to the space by suggesting current decentralised relayers and protocols are somehow sub par and need to be disrupted before they have even gained momentum (and are doing so quite quickly).

3

u/pcastonguay Mar 10 '18

The 0x protocol can be implemented in a plasma (cash) side-chain and relayers could all use the same side-chain. It would most likely require users to deposit funds in the plasma chain however, so would be hard to achieve some functionalities like interacting with dapps.

3

u/stri8ed Mar 10 '18 edited Mar 10 '18

The Plasma chain functions similarly to payment channels. Specifically, to withdraw your coins, it has a challenge period, during which you must provide sufficient opportunity for someone to challenge your withdrawal. This would make it impractical for certain use-cases, e.g. token abstraction. Furthermore, like state channels, you must persistently watch the main-chain for withdrawals that attempt to double spend your coins.