Answer:

The Blockchain technology has reached mainstream users, and a large number of enterprises and government agents have at least considered the benefits of having a blockchain in an array of industries from agriculture and real estate to health care and voting.Consequently, dozens of new projects are emerging each year, competing with each other in the somewhat futile task of developing the “best” blockchain. Often, they would emphasize their product’s alleged market readiness, arguing that it is secure, scalable and overall better compared to a supposed rival. Currently, one blockchain has no knowledge of information that might exist in a different blockchain. For instance, the Bitcoin (BTC) blockchain exists fully independently of the Ethereum (ETH) blockchain — in the sense that it has no knowledge of any information recorded there — and vice versa. Blockchain-based projects are isolated from each other, despite existing within the same industry and working with the same technology.Ethereum-centric development company ConsenSys has described this phenomenon as the “balkanization” of the crypto industry, as it involves “a series of unconnected systems operating alongside, but siloed from each other — in the face of competition and commercial pressure.” Blockchain interoperability, in turn, is the ability to exchange data between different blockchains seamlessly, as if there were no boundaries. on the other side if we consider scalability no one would need it as if the blockchain is not interoperable and secure then scalability will not  matter let understand this in a better way

Because the crypto space has become highly competitive, some projects tend to put a lot of effort into beating their opponents’ numbers instead of focusing on the general infrastructure. The scalability race is a particularly good example. Originally tasked with the idea of topping BTC’s insufficient performance — the original blockchain can handle just seven transactions per second (TPS), at best — various blockchain projects have eventually started to report numbers as high as 40,000 TPS.In contrast, the estimated capacity of the Visa network is around 24,000 TPS, although it ostensibly only has to do just 1,700 transactions each second on average, despite the ever-present demand. Any blockchain, even the one for Bitcoin, is far from beating Visa in terms of engagement — hence, 40,000 TPS could be seen as a bit of a stretch. No corporation would want to process its payments with a blockchain, no matter how scalable, if the overall infrastructure is not interoperable and secure. While its output might be better than Visa’s, it won’t have the same usability across the world if it stays isolated. Meanwhile, cards issued by global card schemes (i.e., Visa, MasterCard, American Express, etc.) are interoperable across merchants and ATMs worldwide. Similarly, the internet allows for access and modification numerous datasets through application specific interfaces (APIs). If it wasn’t interoperable, it wouldn’t be able to grow into what it is today — a truly global and easy-to-use network. The same applies to blockchain. In order to gain mainstream appeal, they have to show that they can work with each other seamlessly. hence this concludes the answer and depict that interoperability will be more important than scalability

the three question will be :

1)who did blockchain interoperability better than scalability ?

2) can blockchain exchange data between different blockchain ?

3)can blockchain remain secure if we consider scalability above interoperability ?