When it comes to zero-knowledge systems, most designs eventually face the same choice.
zk-SNARKs or zk-STARKs.
Both are powerful. Both have tradeoffs.
For an infinite compute layer that needs to push massive historical data off-chain, @brevis_zk made a very deliberate decision.
They built around zk-SNARKs.
Why this matters:
→ Extremely small proofs keep on-chain verification cheap → Fast verification enables near real-time dApp logic → Tooling is mature and battle-tested → Ideal for summarizing large historical datasets efficiently
This lets a dApp prove something like a user executed 100 swaps in the last 30 days without revealing which swaps or any sensitive details
All compressed into a proof only a few hundred bytes long.
Simple design choices like this are what make large-scale verifiable compute actually work.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
When it comes to zero-knowledge systems, most designs eventually face the same choice.
zk-SNARKs or zk-STARKs.
Both are powerful. Both have tradeoffs.
For an infinite compute layer that needs to push massive historical data off-chain, @brevis_zk made a very deliberate decision.
They built around zk-SNARKs.
Why this matters:
→ Extremely small proofs keep on-chain verification cheap
→ Fast verification enables near real-time dApp logic
→ Tooling is mature and battle-tested
→ Ideal for summarizing large historical datasets efficiently
This lets a dApp prove something like
a user executed 100 swaps in the last 30 days
without revealing which swaps or any sensitive details
All compressed into a proof only a few hundred bytes long.
Simple design choices like this are what make large-scale verifiable compute actually work.