diff --git a/src/components/ArticleInternalOne/ArticleInternalOne.jsx b/src/components/ArticleInternalOne/ArticleInternalOne.jsx
index 5448c2d..a59ea97 100644
--- a/src/components/ArticleInternalOne/ArticleInternalOne.jsx
+++ b/src/components/ArticleInternalOne/ArticleInternalOne.jsx
@@ -42,7 +42,6 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
color="white"
sx={{
"@media (max-width: 600px)": {
- minHeight: "28px",
minHeight: "40vh",
width: "100vw",
},
@@ -142,19 +141,22 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
bottom: "0px",
top: "inherit",
display: "block",
- width:'100%',
- marginBottom:'20px',
- marginTop:'20px'
+ width: "100%",
+ marginBottom: "20px",
+ marginTop: "20px",
},
}}
>
- Share
+
+ Share
+
{
-
+
BlockSpace is the number of transactions which the blockchain
will order before appending to the chain of previous
@@ -203,7 +204,7 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
Transactions that compete with each to pay higher fees are
likely to be validated faster.
-
+
The BlockSpace limit is intended to protect the decentralized
nature of monolithic blockchains from centralization via large
blocks. It protects small miners from being outcompeted by large
@@ -230,7 +231,7 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
>
BTC vs BCH
-
+
Bitcoin has a BlockSpace of 2000 to 2500 transactions per block
(block size of 1mb) created every 10 minutes. Bitcoin Cash (fork
of Bitcoin) on the other hand has a BlockSpace of up to 70,000
@@ -239,7 +240,7 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
transaction processing speed is close to 200 transactions per
second as the BlockSpace in BCH is much higher.
-
+
Since Bitcoin is designed for homogeneous transactions (ledger
for BTC transfers, not applications of heterogenous
transactions), gas fee caused by limited BlockSpace is less of
@@ -265,7 +266,7 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
>
ETH vs SOL
-
+
Ethereum has borrowed most of the monolithic design concepts of
Bitcoin, but with blocks being added in less time compared to
Bitcoin. However, unlike Bitcoin, Ethereum intends to power
@@ -283,7 +284,7 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
thousands of TB, meaning only few nodes can run full nodes,
running against the thesis of decentralization.
-
+
Further, most of the activity on Ethereum chain is miners
extracting value from users using a technique called MEV (Miner
Extractable Value). Most of the MEV extracted in arbitrage
@@ -296,7 +297,7 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
security, hindering wider adoption of Web3 by Web2 apps or
enterprises.
-
+
While Ethereum community aims to reduce congestion issues by
promoting Layer 2 solutions (L2), L2’s tend to be less
decentralized. Even with some good Zero Knowledge solutions
@@ -306,7 +307,7 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
potentially undermining the L1 token itself, which in turn
compromises security of the underlying L1 chain.
-
+
SOL allows for more flexibility in the BlockSpace. To increase
TPS, Solana overcame the requirement for validators to order
transactions in the block before being validated by using a
@@ -321,7 +322,7 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
be linked to inefficiency of the network to handle traffic even
before the network is mainstream.
-
+
Monolithic chains like SOL, while trying to solve the scale
constraints of Ethereum, usually end up attracting bots to clog
the enhanced BlockSpace. Bots have caused significant issues to
@@ -337,24 +338,29 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
src="https://www.rubix.net/wp-content/uploads/ethereum-with-limited-blockspace.webp "
/>
-
-
+
Rubix with unlimited BlockSpace
-
+
Rubix is designed for subnets and app chains to enjoy the
benefits of being in the same network without having to share
data or resources among them. People or Apps can bring their own
@@ -385,10 +391,10 @@ const ArticleInternalOne = () => {
perhaps the single biggest thought change in the web is owned &
used.
-
+
To learn more about Rubix Subspaces, please DM us at @rubixchain
-
+
Co-authored with K.C Reddy and Gokul P S