Quote from: Abiky on June 30, 2023, 05:40:55 PM

Quote from: tsaroz on June 28, 2023, 03:25:32 PM

Yes, the huge transaction fees are making ERC tokens useless. I have a couple of tokens on my wallet of value around $20 but what I'll get by transacting them is net zero. Put some eth for fees allow access to uniswap, exchange the coins to Ethereum and get those ethereum back to my personal wallet, I'm getting exactly what I sent for tranaction fees. Ethereum is still a good trading pair is centralized exchanges but there's no way it could get volumes in dexs and dapps. There are many alternatives to it but whenever one of them gets much attention, the fees rises again making it less attractive. Still the fees would be much lesser than ethereum network.

There are some ERC-20 tokens that are true "gas guzzlers". That's because the developers of the token did not optimize the code to consume as less gas as possible. The same thing happens with dApps (smart contracts). There are too many useless ERC-20 tokens on the ETH blockchain making fees soar like there's no tomorrow. We can blame "meme" tokens like Shiba Inu for this.

Unless ETH developers increase transaction capacity of the Blockchain, things are only going to get worse in the long run. Not even off-chain scaling solutions (L2) such as Arbitrum or Optimism will work. These networks have ultra-low fees and blazing-fast speeds, but they require you to make a "deposit" on the main ETH blockchain which consumes gas. I wouldn't advise moving to other chains unless you don't care about decentralization/security/reliability. Let's hope someday ETH gets better with low gas fees for everyone. Just my thoughts Grin

Your analysis resonates with some of the major pain points plaguing the Ethereum ecosystem. Indeed, gas inefficiency is becoming the Achilles heel of many ERC-20 tokens and dApps, undermining the scalability of the Ethereum network. This problem, in essence, results from unoptimized code in smart contracts, often due to the developers’ neglect or sometimes, lack of expertise.

In terms of increasing transaction capacity, although it seems like an evident solution, the trade-offs could entail potential security vulnerabilities and centralization, thereby straying from Ethereum's decentralization ethos. Layer 2 solutions, while promising on the surface, are not the magic pill we all hope for. They do indeed necessitate interactions with the base layer, and hence consume gas.

Migration to other blockchains often entails compromising on aspects integral to blockchain's value proposition such as decentralization, security, and reliability. It's a bit like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. The pursuit for a silver bullet solution must continue, but we should brace ourselves for a world where high gas fees might be the inconvenient reality.