Users treat exuberant fees as a defacto liveness failure. To those users Ethereum was down for all of 2021.  Ethereum fees were so bad that 99.5% reliability but guaranteed low cost was better, and thats how solana managed to get pmf.

Using Ethereum was prohibitively expensive in 2021 which led me to explore and tinker around on Solana more 

There’s design tradeoffs that each Ethereum and Solana made which resulted in their respective issues. For Eth, it was high fees. For Sol, it was downtime. Neither are perfect but we’re lucky to have both.

Stay Curious // iixii // Head of Crypto at https://www.lazertechnologies.com/  // Prev: CoinDesk, Roc Nation // based @basedevo

Aviator, diver, Etherean, nexialist, PhD in aviation and climate science, host of /diving /ethfinance /forteantimes /geopolitics /science /singapore /thomas

Offloading the cheapest part of the L1 congestion to L2s and blobs has solved a big part of the fee problem, though. And just now we’re heading toward 60M gas per block, which will effectively double the TPS to ~30 for L1 alone. The average gas price for the last week has been on the order of <1 to ~6 cents despite a near-ATH tx volume. We’re far from the crypto kitties days

Ethereum hasn’t solved the fee problem until it properly scales the L1 which it hasn’t 

And because they didn’t, it has resulted it a ton of fragmentation across ETH 

The consumer experience is still better on Solana overall imo bc there’s less fragmentation across chains/wallets/etc

Thankfully Ethereum has solved the high fees (but Solana hasn’t solved the downtime)

Solana has a per-contract (account) fee market. Ethereum has a global fee market.

To make Ethereum fees go up, the entire chain has to be congested. To make Solana fees go up, only the contract you're using needs to be congested.

With this goal post, Solana is always experiencing defacto liveness failures.

the real pmf of narrow fee markets is being able to claim "lower median fees" and gaslight users with "works for me" while they try to interact with congested contracts

at the limit, load balancing hot spot contracts runs into similar interop challenges as based rollups, without any of the other benefits of rollups

That's not the tradeoff, that's the psyop.

IMO the tradeoff is making it viable and cheap to spike a single contract hot spot (reducing the reliability of urgent actions like liquidations, oracle updates, etc) vs forcing to DoS the entire chain to censor a transaction.

A doodler and computerer. I like permissive/permissionless open source, smart contracts, p2p systems, room-scale VR, and NixOS.

shazow.net

Currently: WhatsABI

That tradeoff makes sense though.  If I want to use a specific application/contract then it's better if usage of a separate app/contract doesn't affect my ability or price to access the app/contract I want to 

This seems like a good solution for users who want to use the chain but don't want to have to worry about network-wide congestion

That's not the tradeoff, that's the psyop.

IMO the tradeoff is making it viable and cheap to spike a single contract hot spot (reducing the reliability of urgent actions like liquidations, oracle updates, etc) vs forcing to DoS the entire chain to censor a transaction.

https://warpcast.com/shazow.eth/0x339e1e90
https://warpcast.com/shazow.eth/0xdcc14ff4

explored solana because the eth fees too and found that solana was not too much dev friendly (now it is a bit better) and really don't love how some programs are centralized or how you need to pay extra fees for storage on too of network fees, mixing both in gas is better imo

I’m stoked for some of the onchain experiments cooking like neonevm, which lets you run solidity on Solana. Just cool stuff to build/experiment with rn

People have options for ar eason - 

I don't use a car to pick up lumber, and i don't use a truck to drive across country.

I use a pot to boil pasta, and a skillet to fry eggs.

simple examples but an important reminder that options create space for innovation and convenience for specific use cases.

People who think only one chain will win are not anticipating the volume of onchain activity we will have in the future, imo.