'great' advancement but in fact doesn't gives real new things for the user, ok they said they'll withelist more token by again when? at which pace, why do have to wait so long all the time ? (pls don't tell me for security reasons, yes security reasons, but again I don't want to wait weeks for another token, users don't want to wait so long), if a SC is working well then you can go ahead, it's technically secure... so what are the reasons why we do not list tokens at a faster pace? sorry I don't really see great justifications ..
The new bridge is not only a different version, easier to say it is a different product altogether. Upgrades included are: 1) Login requirement on both sides. This proves ownerships of the addresses, eliminates risk of exchange addresses involvements, wrong token transactions and even if, it’s still your address. It takes a lot of resources to recover unsupported tokens, especially on multisig wallets where it’s difficult to sync all the required parties. 2) The new bridge allows new tokens to be listed easily. If you have such a token, get in touch and ask for listing/approval of your token. 3) Security, obviously audits are performed, so no need to highlight this anymore, but the infrastructure itself is an extreme upgrade as it’s not provided by Elrond only, but also by trusted partners, thus increasing availability and security with 7/10 quorum required by 10 standalone relayers. 5 relayers are operated by independent entities. 4) Support for additional EVM compatible chains. It’s easy to say that it looks similar to the previous bridge on the front end, but the underlying infrastructure is completely different, much more robust and secure. If you remember, numerous hacks have been performed against bridge architectures on various chains and you cannot take this step lightly anymore. Elrond has 0% downtime on its blockchain, let’s carry this to the bridge as well. Hope this helps a bit in understanding how quickly future integrations and migrations will come now.) @RisoSedo's valuable insight👌
Ok, but from a tech point of view, why did they choose to go only for USDC? Seems like they're not sure about its security, they want to prevent load on the shard the bridge is placed on or it isn't already automatic as the team says(and that part is still in development). Or there is another reason? It's not simply FUD, just simply a bit strange to see this huge hype to see a delusional launch compared to bridges of other competitors blockchains that didn't have this type of limitations. We always need to compare to others that's the way we can valuate the work of the team. We don't even know the reasons :/
Обсуждают сегодня