Ansgar Dietrichs

This is more of like a goal, an ambitious statement.

It's not clear that every single year we'll be able to hit that, but we think we see a path at least.

It's a possible outcome.

And in practice, the first three years of that scaling with traditional means

And then from that point on, basically, we have the smooth handover into the ZKVM paradigm.

So it's not all just black and white and Ethereum is only doing ZKVM, but actually now I think we have the best of both worlds now.

We have like the next two, three years, we'll be doing this ZKVM in parallel.

but we're still doing the traditional scaling.

And then we jump into the ZKVM paradigm.

And so that means if you're a builder and you're considering building on Ethereum L1, you have this like, instead of having to like exactly think, okay, one is this hard fork and what is the exact, no, you can just say 3X every year.

You look at the throughput today, you can, and you can just like very simply calculate like, you know, what throughput needs do I have?

Is the L1 a good fit or not?

It's a very simple story, but under the hood, it has this like, these like two synergistic elements to it.

Sorry, that was long answer there.

So to answer that question directly, ZK EVM, indeed, it's not a panacea.

It specifically addresses the throughput level.

So it gives us much, much, much bigger blocks in the same kind of time constraints.

It's even, to be fully transparent, it is a small extra strain on the timing just because you have one extra step, right?

You have to have this proving step that's in between block creation and block verification.

You have to have proving.