FAQs
Basics
How does Facet differ from traditional Layer 2 solutions?
Facet operates as a unique scaling solution distinct from traditional Layer 2 (L2) rollups like Optimistic and ZK rollups in two key ways:
Traditional L2 solutions batch transactions off-chain (centralized sequencers) and later submit them to Ethereum, introducing risks associated with liveness, censorship, and neutrality. Facet eliminates these centralized sequencers; transactions are sent directly on Ethereum for decentralized sequencing by Ethereum's own consensus mechanism, enhancing the security and neutrality of the network.
L2s have a strict dependency on their L1 bridge smart contract and other related smart contracts. Typically these contracts are upgradeable by small groups of people with little notice. Facet, by contrast, has no privileged official bridge, and avoids these trust assumptions. Facet users interact directly with Ethereum, avoiding the need to trust L2 operators who manage enshrined contracts.
These features make Facet a robust and secure alternative to traditional L2 scaling solutions. A more detailed comparison between Facet and traditional L2 solutions is best illustrated by reviewing Comparison with Other Rollups.
I've heard Facet described as a "Sovereign Based Rollup" - what is that?
A "sovereign rollup" is a type of L2 blockchain that (1) publishes its transactions to another blockchain (in our case, Ethereum), typically for sequencing and data availability, and (2) manages its own settlement (e.g. does not use a bridge with the data availability to settle the chain). This departs from typical L2s that enshrine a set of smart contract bridges (with privileged keys) into the protocol that serve to settle the rollup chain.
A "based rollup" is a type of layer 2 blockchain that leverages the L1 (in our case, Ethereum) for transaction sequencing (as opposed to a centralized sequencer). "More concretely, a based rollup is one where the next L1 proposer may, in collaboration with L1 searchers and builders, permissionlessly include the next rollup block as part of the next L1 block." - Justin Drake
Facet's combined use of both paradigms above make it a "sovereign based rollup."
How does the recent release of Facet differ from the approach launched in 2023?
Facet has been significantly upgraded from what was originally launched in winter 2023. From an end-user perspective - the upgrade will be relatively seamless - we do not expect users to notice a material difference.
Meanwhile, developers will be delighted with the below feature updates:
Contract deployment is now permissionless! Originally, Facet contracts had to be allowlisted for deployment, given the need to protect the network from spam attacks. That barrier has been removed.
Facet is now an EVM-compatible blockchain! Not only can anyone deploy a contract, but anyone can copy-paste an existing Ethereum contract over to Facet!
The original environment required developers to write Facet smart contracts in a custom language - Rubidity. We've removed that requirement. Facet's EVM-compatibility allows for smart contracts to be written in Solidity, Ethereum's native programming language.
Developers accustomed to the Ethereum ecosystem will find it easy to build on Facet, as the same tools and workflows apply. This includes standard Ethereum testnets for testing and popular IDEs like Remix and Visual Studio Code.
With this new launch of Facet, what happens to all of Facet's transaction history dating back to 2023?
All history and state from Facet has been migrated to the Genesis block of Facet's new EVM-compatible chain.
How does Facet guarantee 100% liveness (uptime)?
Facet guarantees 100% availability by directly using Ethereum's network for transaction initiation and finality. Anyone can send Facet transactions directly to Ethereum with no intermediaries. Since every Facet transaction is inherently an Ethereum transaction, Facet remains fully functional as long as Ethereum is operational.
Facet also has no privileged party responsible for broadcasting the state of the protocol, and whose ceasing to function could limit access to Facet state. Rather Facet state is equally available to anyone through the open source Facet Node software.
Why Facet? Aren't other L2s "progressively decentralizing?"
Many Layer 2 solutions claim they are "progressively decentralizing." However, several factors make it questionable whether these solutions will ever fully achieve true decentralization.
To decentralize for parity with Facet - an L2 rollup would need to:
Abandon centralized transaction sequencing, and
Revoke privileged keys (multi-sigs) on enshrined bridges/smart contracts
Rollups may justify centralized sequencers for high transaction throughput, low latency, and optimized performance - but the real reasons are likely "control" and "revenue." The expectation that existing entities will sacrifice network control and revenue to decentralize their sequencing is hard to fathom. Even with initial intentions to decentralize, control and revenue create significant inertia and resistance to change - not to mention the significant technical, governance and community buy-in challenges associated with such a change.
Eliminating privileged keys from existing L2 protocols is perhaps even more difficult to imagine, requiring that all protocol upgrades and changes be managed via consensus (and thus, hard forks). Simply stated, existing entities (often private companies) are in no way incentivized to take such a risk. Not to mention the potential legal ramifications involved with revoking permissions to protocols with millions (or billions) of total value locked (TVL).
While many Layer 2 solutions promise to "progressively decentralize," the reality is that they face substantial technical, economic, and governance challenges in achieving true decentralization. Facet's approach, which emphasizes decentralization from the outset by eliminating centralized sequencers and privileged keys, offers a more secure, trustless, and genuinely decentralized alternative. This commitment to decentralization ensures that Facet aligns with the core principles of blockchain technology and provides a robust foundation for long-term growth and security.
Facet Compute Token (FCT)
Is there a native Facet Token?
The Facet Compute Token (FCT) serves as the native gas token within Facet, essential for paying gas fees for transactions and computational operations within the network. Learn more in Facet's Gas Mechanism.
How do I acquire (mint) FCT?
FCT is issued (minted) when users burn L1 gas (ether) to send Facet transactions on Ethereum. Facet mints the user an amount of FCT based on their ether burned. This FCT is then used to pay the FCT gas fee required to process the Facet transaction. Any residual FCT is then credited to the user's wallet on Facet.
This issuance model is the only way to mint FCT. Users secure FCT by contributing to the network, burning ether on regular Ethereum transactions. By tying FCT issuance to L1 ether expenditure, the model emulates the "electricity" analogy seen in Bitcoin mining, where participants exert resources to secure issuance. This approach aligns economic incentives with protocol utility, rewarding those who contribute real value to the network. Genuine users earn FCT passively as a natural byproduct of interacting with Facet Apps, creating a feedback loop where network utility drives issuance, and issuance reinforces network growth.
Learn more in Facet's Gas Mechanism.
How is FCT used for gas payments?
The gas fee amount is determined by the complexity and resource requirements of the transaction, modeled after Ethereum's EIP-1559.
The cost of each transaction is determined by how much computational power and storage it requires, and this base fee adjusts depending on how busy the network is. When the network is crowded, the fee increases to manage demand, and when it’s less busy, the fee decreases. This dynamic approach ensures that users pay a fair price based on the network’s activity, and the total cost reflects the complexity of the transaction.
Those familiar with EIP-1559 will note one key departure: since Facet transactions are already sequenced by L1 validators, there are no additional validators on Facet to reward with a priority (tip) fee. As a result, Facet’s gas calculation only involves the base fee component.
Learn more in Facet's Gas Mechanism.
Will I need to manage an FCT balance?
In most cases, users won't need to actively manage their FCT balance; it will be handled in the background. Users initiate Facet transactions via Apps on L1 Ethereum, and Facet will credit and consume the necessary FCT behind the scenes.
Given the passive utilization of FCT, while you may not actively manage your FCT balance, Facet transactions may result in residual FCT credits that will accumulate.
What is the total supply of FCT?
Because the amount of FCT minted is directly tied to the calldata gas used in future Facet transactions, predicting an exact total supply is not realistic. Factors such as network usage and the proportion of gas spent on calldata will influence how much FCT is ultimately issued.
To regulate the total supply, the target FCT per block undergoes annual halvings (every 2,630,000 blocks), reducing the mint rate by half. This mechanism serves to de-risk early adoption by issuing more FCT in the earlier years.
The protocol’s issuance model ensures FCT is minted in response to genuine network demand. This approach allows the supply to evolve naturally while incentivizing early users, even without a rigid supply cap.
How do I redeem FCT for ETH?
Facet does not enshrine a two-way bridge to redeem FCT for ETH. Recall, FCT is minted based on Ether gas burned on L1 to execute Facet transactions.
Will there be a FCT token airdrop?
The only way to earn FCT is through the sending of Facet transactions on L1 Ethereum to the Facet Inbox Address.
What happens to the ETH spent on Facet Transactions sent on L1?
ETH spent on L1 gas is either burned (base fee) or awarded to L1 validators (priority fee).
The gas associated with the Ethereum transaction's calldata size (bytes) is used as a basis for FCT issuance. The priority fee is not used in minting of FCT. This ensures only legitimate TX costs contribute to FCT creation, preventing potential exploitation where a validator could artificially inflate FCT issuance by setting an excessively high priority fee in a self-serving TX.
Can I send FCT to another wallet?
Yes, you can send FCT to another wallet. This process is similar to transferring any other token within the Facet network.
Advanced
How does Facet maintain security and decentralization?
While traditional Layer 2 solutions deploy centralized sequencers for transaction ordering and batching (at the expense of decentralization), Facet leverages Ethereum's existing consensus mechanism to ensure all transactions are transparently ordered and finalized into blocks by Ethereum’s validator network. Thus, no single party is in a position to exploit MEV opportunities (as is the case with centralized sequencers). Moreover, Facet’s off-chain transaction processing is only used for deterministic tasks to enhance scalability without compromising security. This approach ensures that Facet’s operations are neutral, fair, and reliable, embodying the core principles of blockchain technology.
What if a Facet Node acts maliciously by reporting an invalid state?
Facet's security model is based on the innate, objective reality that is derived from (1) immutable transaction history and (2) deterministic computation. Facet nodes don’t create that objective reality - they merely report it.
If two people agree on the state of Ethereum, they will also agree on the state of Facet.
On-Chain Transactions: Every Facet transaction is an Ethereum transaction that is sequenced and finalized by Ethereum’s consensus mechanism. This means that the immutable integrity of the transaction history is maintained, irrespective of the number of Facet Nodes computing the state. Thus, the foundational data (inputs) that Facet operates on is always secure and decentralized.
Deterministic State Computation: The key to Facet’s security lies in deterministic state computation. Facet Nodes operate deterministically, meaning that given the same inputs (i.e. transactions), every Facet Node will always produce the same output (i.e. state). This deterministic nature ensures that the state is an objective reality, independent of how many Facet Nodes are computing it.
While having multiple Facet Nodes might create a perception of increased security because they would independently compute and align on the same state, the actual security of Facet does not rely on the number of Facet Nodes. This contrasts with proof-of-stake operating models, where more validators equate to greater security. With Facet, anyone can independently verify the correctness of the state by running the Facet Node themselves.
Even if you do act on incorrect Facet state data it is unlikely to cost you money because the transactions you send will be conditional. For example, if someone reports to you that an asset you hold is worth 10x what it’s actually worth, and you decide to sell on the basis of that knowledge, your transaction will include a slippage value that will cause the transaction to revert.
The concept of an "honest operator" is central to Facet's security model. As long as there is at least one honest operator running a Facet Node, it is difficult for any malicious party to alter the state without being detected. This honest operator can independently verify the state and call out any discrepancies, maintaining the integrity of the system.
And of course - you yourself can run the Facet Node and be that “honest operator.”
"Be the [honest] Facet Node state validator you want to see in the world."
How does Facet relate to "Ethscriptions?"
Facet was originally built (2023) atop the Ethscriptions Protocol - a standardized approach for creating and indexing on-chain digital artifacts by embedding an asset’s uniform resource identifier (URI) within the transaction’s calldata field. This proved an efficient way to put data (such as images, even tokens) on-chain without a smart contract. Facet leveraged Ethscriptions not to represent a “digital artifact” but rather to represent a command to a Facet smart contract.
Fast forward to the latest release: The concept remains the same - but Facet has evolved beyond encoding Facet payloads as Ethscriptions to a more standardized and efficient way of encoding EVM transactions. This change is designed to empower developers with familiar tools and streamline the development process. While Ethscriptions provided the inspiration for a unique approach, transitioning to a binary format (RLP-encoded EVM transactions) ensures better compatibility, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness.
Meanwhile, the Ethscriptions protocol remains open-source, allowing anyone to continue its development and use.
How might the potential pruning of calldata and/or blob data impact Facet?
The potential pruning of calldata and blob data, as proposed in certain Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs), poses considerations for the Ethereum ecosystem, including Facet and Layer 2 solutions. However, it’s important to clarify that these prunings do not threaten Facet's operation.
This is because of two factors:
Even if the Ethereum protocol allows nodes to prune calldata and blob data, this data remains immutable and cannot be forged. As long as one person has this historical data it can be verified as authentic and used by everyone else.
There is great demand for historical Ethereum data that extends far beyond Facet. Layer 2s obviously have an interest in validating their history, but even more people are interested in validating the history of Ethereum itself, and you can’t do this without the data Facet needs to operate.
Even today, most people, operating according to this principle, get their Ethereum data from a third party provider instead of a node they themselves operate. This is a secure practice today because all such data can be verified, and it will remain a secure practice even when data is pruned.
Pruning would only become an issue for Facet if (2) was no longer true, but such a massive loss of Ethereum historical data would indicate a much larger systemic failure beyond just impacting Facet.
Last updated