Been following your Project from September 2023. Really like the values you guys preserve. I can see the fire in the eyes of Zac as of team and the community.
I’m not really well experienced developer and would really appreciate if anybody could help me figure out the answers for the following questions:
Why Aztec is privacy-first L2 but not L1 like Aleo project with it’s rust based Leo language?
Starknet’s STARKs are kind of quantum resistant, does Aztec address this possible future problem?
Why I should invest time in learning Noir, when I can pick up Cairo and launch a project on the mainnet?
Hi - not an Aztec employee here but rather an enthusiastic member of the wider community.
To your Noir vs. Cairo question, which also seems to hint at the perceived lag between Starknet’s development and Aztec’s development:
One reason to be uniquely excited about Aztec (as opposed to Starknet in its current state) is that the Aztec team is focussed on creating a ZK rollup. Note that a ZK rollup is not the same as a validity rollup, although the terms are often used interchangably. Starknet is a validity rollup. A validity rollup (for current purposes) can be defined as a rollup that compresses tx data by posting proofs of valid transactions to an L1. A ZK rollup, on the other hand, is a validity rollup that is also zero-knowledge, i.e. enables private transactions. Starknet in its current design is not private. You would have to build something like Aztec, on top of Starknet, to make Starknet capable of privacy.
(Historically, members of the Aztec team didn’t use the phrase “ZK Rollup vs Validity Rollup” but rather “ZK ZK Rollup vs ZK Rollup”, in case you come across other confusing resources)
ZK rollups are arguably much harder to build than validity rollups. Both are obviously big undertakings, so kudos to the Starknet team. But when it comes to ZK rollups, none are live and working as hoped yet. Hence the delay in deployment. Innovation takes time!