Just so yall know I'm still holding my $DTJR
Has a tg and official X + dexs is updated now...
Was up 100 sol and down 30 sol now.
I still think the narrative is really good and could be picked up as long as $TRUMP coin is around...
CA: 6wkLq4E1A8aA9WawSkANdfwGju2ACDQF8GFjGfDMpump
BIG SUPDATE: @HoudiniSwap is now integrated on Supra Mainnet 🪄
You can now do permissionless cross-chain swaps from most tokens across all leading chains to $SUPRA on Supra L1 Mainnet 🚀
Throw down a SUP for @HoudiniSwap and try it out!
🔗 https://t.co/NrpxiOjw1O
🚨SUPRA vs HYPE - THE NEW WAVE OF L1s BATTLE‼️
$SUPRA > @SUPRA_Labs
- First Fully Vertically Integrated L1
-High performance, with 500,000 transactions per second (TPS)
-Compatibility with multiple virtual machines (EVM, MoveVM, SVM, CosmWasm)
- 512k KYCed users
-$200M market cap
$HYPE > @HyperliquidX
- L1 with built-in Decentralized perpetual exchange
-Up to 200,000 orders per second
- HyperEVM
- 350k users
-$8B market cap
Which one is undervalued atm?
Supra is the world's first fully vertically integrated L1. The next L1 that went to market right after us with a similar idea is HyperLiquid!
Key differences:
SupraBFT (aka Moonshot Consensus) and our Oracle protocol (DORA) have been accepted to top academic venues and peer-reviewed by top computer scientists. I can't find any scientific whitepapers produced by them.
Moonshot outperforms (faster finality) all known classical consensus algorithms including HotStuff and its variants, which is what HyperBFT is based on.
Hyper is running on a very small set of nodes. Supra is running on around 200 nodes right now and we plan to expand.
Our 500K TPS throughput on 300 globally distributed nodes clocked in sub-second consensus finality (latency). We are routinely finalizing blocks around 300ms on 200~ nodes on mainnet. They apparently are running their algos on, checks notes, 4-16 nodes?!
DORA is often finalizing data in 600-900ms, whereas Hyper's Oracle is producing values every 3 seconds (3-5X slower than Supra's!). Our calculation method is more robust as well.
Native Bridging:
We both have a similar approach it appears, but they don't actually have any whitepapers on any of their protocols... if I'm wrong, please share, I looked for them.
HyperNova Cross-chain communication (we may rebrand to "SupraNova"): https://t.co/zprYHSPqrB
Here's our core Whitepapers:
Moonshot Consensus: https://t.co/nQSJwPlKSK
Formal Verification of Moonshot: https://t.co/7MV3M0SQIh)
DORA Oracle: https://t.co/LNqTjP30xP
Supra's Novel Dynamic Function Market Maker DEX:
https://t.co/E6fbFTftrr
We are also about to roll out Automation on testnet towards the end of this month, which is going to be a game changer! We're the first ones to do this natively on a high-performance L1. Automation enables on-chain limit orders and sophisticated cross-chain strategies with conditional logic -- and here's the kicker, with Zero-Block Delay execution!
Oh yeah, our parallel execution strategies are off-the-chart too, we'll be publishing this more soon!
It is remarkable to see that we both have a vision for a fully integrated L1, in fact, directionally, we are racing to build a similar stack.
We just went to market with more decentralization than them, which is much harder to do later btw. And our protocols are better defined and, frankly, as far as I can tell, better designed.
Similar aspiration and vision in the end, though.
It'll be very interesting to see how this all plays out. I have even more faith in our vision seeing their great success.
Supra has a lot of room to grow. Lots of amazing things coming out in Q1, and by Q2 we are completely flat-out competing with them, and everyone, with what I believe will be a much more decentralized, superior stack. We took a more robust approach towards protocol design, are way more advanced in cryptography, and are far more decentralized in the end...
Nonetheless, hats off to them and welcome to the club. Great minds think alike! Full Vertical Integration is the future of blockchain tech and Supra and HyperLiquid are leading the race.
Keep in mind, the race has only just begun (like literally we're both mainnet for only about a month so far!)
Let us all compete with class. We both took different go-to-market approaches. We wont know which strategy is better in the end, only time will tell.
LFG!
The first Ethereum <> SUPRA Bridge is live on Testnet!
The @DexlynLabs bridge opens up pathways between Supra L1 and Ethereum enabling assets to flow across networks 🚀🚀🚀
Closed beta testnet access has been opened for few active users in their Discord: https://t.co/Bmgf19SpDj
Open for all on testnet in the days ahead!
Hey there,
Following up a bit:
Re: Supra uses Solana's approach of designating state ahead of time
Actually, no. Solana/ Sui’s approach is to explicitly indicate which accounts you’ll be touching in the tx, and including this information in the tx payload itself. This can often bloat tx size to even 3x, and since bandwidth is a huge bottleneck for blockchains, it dampens the max txs that payloads can carry.
At Supra, we are exploring the following for parallel execution (with some updates coming soon):
1. Execution sharding across Clans, which are randomized sub-committees that only require a simple majority to execute (instead of 67% of all nodes in the system to execute).
Each Clan can be running a variety of VMs btw, as Supra is designed to support multiple VMs.
This is the first layer of parallelism on the network level.
2. At the time of smart contract deployment, we can perform static analysis and define access specifications/call data/functions.
This provides visibility to understand the limits of which contracts can interact with which others allowing for partial order parallel execution strategies. All nodes have this information and thus we don’t need to include it in the tx payload itself, unlike Solana and Sui.
We also innovated a concept call Supra “Containers” which provides an appchain-like experience on the Supra L1 itself. This naturally provides a semblance of a logical partition of the execution space further allowing efficient partial order execution.
3. Coupling this access specification awareness with various STM approaches, we believe, creates the most efficient parallel execution strategies possible.
We are still early in r&d here but the initial data seems promising.
In short, parallel execution on the network level alone (execution sharding across Clans) brings huge added capacity, additionally, parallel execution strategies across cores and threads via access specification and STM techniques may yield the state of the art, which we at Supra are constantly interested in pursuing.
Let’s see, we’ll publish our latest ideas in the weeks and months ahead as we collect more data implementing our novel ideas further.
🎄 Spread the Christmas Cheer with Atmos! 🎄
How to participate:
QRT this tweet.
Comment your wallet address along with your Christmas wish.
Tag 3 degens who could use some holiday magic.
🎁 Today’s Reward: 2500 SUPRA $
Winner takes it all! 🌟
Winner will be announced after 24 hours ⏰
Let’s make this festive season unforgettable. Enter now and spread the joy! 🎅✨
#SupraChristmas #CryptoGiveaway
🎄 Spread the Christmas Cheer with Atmos! 🎄
How to participate:
QRT this tweet.
Comment your wallet address along with your Christmas wish.
Tag 3 degens who could use some holiday magic.
🎁 Today’s Reward: 2500 SUPRA $
Winner takes it all! 🌟
Winner will be announced after 24 hours ⏰
Let’s make this festive season unforgettable. Enter now and spread the joy! 🎅✨
#SupraChristmas #CryptoGiveaway