Most chains argue about incentives.

𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘈𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮'𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘝𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘉𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳.

This move could redefine how smart contracts run and scale long-term.🧵
------------------------------------
Here it is..

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘢𝘵 @Offchain 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘢𝘭 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮
@VitalikButerin 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘱𝘵 𝘙𝘐𝘚𝘊‑𝘝 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘌𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘶𝘮’𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘞𝘦𝘣𝘈𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘭𝘺 (𝘞𝘈𝘚𝘔) 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘶𝘯 𝘰𝘯‑𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘯.

The researchers suggested that one instruction set architecture could serve both the proving layer for zkps and the smart contract delivery layer.

The question goes thus:

𝘋𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮?

They propose one ISA for contract delivery and another for proof generation instead of separation. In their prototype they show that WASM‑based smart contracts can be compiled to RISC‑V for proof generation while using WASM as the delivery ISA.
------------------------------------
𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐀𝐫𝐛𝐢𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐦’𝐬 𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦?

> It strengthens @arbitrum's position as a top-tier infrastructure platform rather than just a scaling layer.
By pushing for WASM as the delivery layer and maintaining flexibility in the proving layer, Arbitrum signals that it wants to stay adaptable as proving technologies evolve.

> WASM offers advantages such as wide hardware support, mature tooling, and type safety which lowers opportunities for vulnerabilities. Many existing Ethereum nodes don’t run RISC‑V natively, so enforcing RISC‑V for contract delivery might impose emulation overheads and reduce efficiency.

𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘖𝘧𝘧𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘓𝘢𝘣𝘴 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘩𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘙𝘐𝘚𝘊‑𝘝 𝘮𝘢𝘺 𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘹𝘤𝘦𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘧 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘪𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘙𝘐𝘚𝘊‑𝘝 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘡𝘒‑𝘝𝘔 𝘴𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴.
------------------------------------
𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈𝐭 𝐌𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐃𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬

For developers building on Arbitrum, this shift means greater flexibility.

WASM support means more languages can be used, potentially more efficient contracts can be written, and the ecosystem expands beyond the typical Solidity/EVM stack.

Moreso, Arbitrum is opening its doors to a wider category of apps by providing a path where smart contracts can be developed in WASM and still benefit from proof‑generation efficiencies,

On the strategic level, this debate shows that Arbitrum is thinking long term. It wants to balance performance, security, and adaptability.

The team’s prototype shows they are already acting on this by implementing the WASM‑to‑RISC‑V translation path. For the ecosystem, it means the infrastructure may evolve without forced migration pain, and projects built today can still benefit from future innovation.
------------------------------------
𝘐𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘐 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘈𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘴.

𝘛𝘰 𝘮𝘦, 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘰𝘣𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘖𝘧𝘧𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘓𝘢𝘣𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘳𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘢 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘙𝘐𝘚𝘊-𝘝 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘴𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴, 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘻𝘬 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩 𝘦𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘭𝘺.

𝘉𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘞𝘈𝘚𝘔 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘮𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺, 𝘈𝘳𝘣𝘪𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨-𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮 𝘧𝘭𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘬𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘴.

Your thoughts on this? 👇