为什么总有人唱衰以太坊?

比推Published on 2024-08-13Last updated on 2024-08-13

以太坊生态此刻要考虑的不是重塑 DeFi Summer,而恰恰是走出纯 DeFi 文化阴霾。

撰文:Haotian

为什么市场唱衰以太坊的声音总是此起彼伏?简单来说:以太坊生态系统确实面对内忧外患的焦灼处境,内有 layer2 等扩展方案一直挺不起脊梁,外有 Solana 等杀手始终亡我坊之心不死,创新乏力和竞争压力下的以太坊迎来了至难时刻。接下来,简单谈谈我的看法:

1)以太坊 Rollups 的大小生态系统已经成型,坎昆升级 EIP-4844 之后,以太坊短期技术层面的利好已然落定。更长期的分片链在 Rollup 冲击下已不再预期,而降低节点成本、简化协议以及底层 ZK-SNARKs 化等升级又仅是锦上添花。整个区块链行业都在等龙二以太坊交出一份满意的 layer2 答卷,然而截止目前,layer2 并没有承载以太坊的「增长」预期。

2)实在讲,Rollups 能从 Plasma、Validium 甚至平行链等多种扩展方案中脱颖而出,全在于 Rollups 采纳了一种执行和状态、结算等分层处理的主次链组合交互范式。正常逻辑下,layer2 在确立一种和主网交互的安全共识之后,接下来就该强化并放大执行层上的性能处理优势,给以太坊主网输入增量用户和生态才对。

然而事实是,大部分 layer2 却选择了进行商业叙事级别的叠杠杆套娃,走 Stack 战略拉同盟,共享组件牵入 layer3 应用链,还有 Rollup as a Service、DA as a Service、甚至 AVS as a Service 等等。这些乍一看能无限放大 layer2 商业和叙事想象空间的策略,都只能更长期叠加市场的预期杠杆,在扩大应用生态和赋能币价等方面并不能立竿见影。

3)很长一段时间,总有人嘲笑以太坊 Gas 费 1Gwei,以此来讥讽以太坊 layer2 战略方向的失败,但换个角度看,这何尝不是以太坊靠 layer2 解决拥堵、Gas 费高等问题的阶段性成功?只不过,糟糕的是 layer2 不仅没有以太坊带来预期的巨大生态和交易量,甚至还分流了一部分流量出走了。

实际上,layer2 在解决以太坊性能不足能力上算成功的,OP-Rollup 和 ZK-Rollup 阵营的竞争内卷也到达的白热化的程度,但选阵营搞 infra 而非纯应用创新暴露了以太坊开发者社区一个很尴尬的现状:过度依赖 VC 融资驱动发币而并非真正的价值创新。

尽管这是 web3 行业流入开发者人才越多,以及 VC 的资金流入趋多,进而竞争内卷加剧的直接结果。虽然创业门槛变高本来可以是市场趋于成熟的表现,在 Crypto 早期阶段,过度的内卷则成了项目高 FDV 扼杀创新的始作俑者。试想一个项目顶着巨大的 FDV,一切努力只为快速 Go to Market,怎么会有时间来沉淀价值创新。而 to VC 最有效的就是堆叠 B 端的商业叙事,C 端应用这类紧迫但却不性感的方向则一直不温不火。所以,才让市场感知到 infra> application 的失衡吧。

4)尽管,以太坊杀手的性感叙事已经在上一轮牛市中被证伪了,但这一轮 Solana、Sui、Aptos、Sei 等高性能公链都直戳以太坊 EVM 的「低性能」软肋。虽然都不再喊着杀死以太坊,但不可否认它们在性能上的高并发和特殊 Move 语言安全机制等层面确实能冲击到以太坊,尤其是可能成为新一代 web3 应用生态滋生的沃土,比如:DePIN、大型游戏、intent 交易、AI Agent 等等。

这是我认为新一代高性能公链最大的机会,不再堆叠 infra 预期,直接凭应用崛起来向以太坊宣战。

或者说根本就无需宣战,用模块化思想把以太坊归置到「结算层」的单薄叙事上,用新模块化执行层,DA 层、Unified 流动性层等对对以太坊过去建立的话语权体系进行重构,不也是一种竞合成功?对其他链是,对以太坊又何尝不是,然而,这是我在其他高性能链或模块化、链抽象链上看到的趋向,但似乎以太坊还只是「被动挨打」的姿态,即使在 ETF 这等超前性利好的前提下,也没能放下架子来应对。

5)很多人还在对另一次 DeFi Summer 抱有期待,但反思以太坊 layer2 的不及预期,我很无奈的接受了,DeFi Summer 或许永不复来的事实。 @VitalikButerin 自己也很清楚,以太坊最大的困局可能就是过度的金融属性,DeFi 这种承载金融属性的完美载体,既往成功经验和 DeFi 组合的无限套娃属性都让它天然契合人的投机偏好。以太坊生态此刻要考虑的不是重塑 DeFi Summer,而恰恰是走出纯 DeFi 文化阴霾。

上一轮牛市横空出世的 NFT,OpenSea 由盛转衰也都未曾完全嵌套进 DeFi 框架内,但这并不影响 NFT 带领上一轮以太坊走出超强牛市,这一轮 PolyMarket 去中心化预测市场被重视,虽然并非新玩法,也不知道能不能掀起新生机,但好在,它也并非纯 DeFi、或者说已经扩展重构了 DeFi。如何把以太坊最大可能向 web2 世界融合,脱虚向实,才是大家应该真正预期的新 Summer 所在。

以上。

Note:作为一个长期的以太坊 Holder,真心盼望以太坊能够走出内忧外患的至难时刻。但还是想强调,以太坊生态汇聚了最大规模的 Geeker,也是对创新最敏感的领地,只要市场走出当下困局,相信以太坊还会是力挽狂澜最靓的仔。

说明: 比推所有文章只代表作者观点,不构成投资建议

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

Ethereum's Next Stop Glamsterdam: The Core Upgrades You Must Know

The Glamsterdam upgrade, scheduled for late 2026, is a major Ethereum hard fork combining the Amsterdam execution layer and Glasgow consensus layer updates. Its primary goal is not simply increasing throughput but restructuring Ethereum's block production, validation, and resource pricing to enable future scaling. Key technical changes include **EIP-7732 (ePBS)**, which formally enshrines proposer-builder separation into the protocol. This decouples consensus and execution tasks, extending the execution payload propagation window to ~9 seconds. This provides more time for node verification, allowing for safer increases in block capacity (Gas limit) in the future. Another core component is **EIP-7928 (Block-Level Access Lists - BAL)**. It mandates a list of all state accessed within a block, moving this feature from an optional transaction-level (EIP-2930) to a mandatory block-level requirement. This explicit access list enables client optimizations like parallel disk reads and state root computations, paving the way for parallel execution. To manage long-term state growth, **EIP-8037** increases the cost of creating new state (e.g., accounts, storage slots), separating the pricing of permanent database bloat from temporary computation. This allows execution capacity to scale more aggressively without causing state size to explode proportionally. The planned upgrade bundle includes around 10 EIPs categorized into: 1) Core protocol restructuring (ePBS, BAL), 2) Resource pricing adjustments (state costs, calldata costs), and 3) EVM/developer improvements. Several other EIPs, including those potentially improving staker exit liquidity (EIP-8061, EIP-8080), are under consideration. The technical development coincides with significant personnel changes within the Ethereum Foundation's Protocol team. The Foundation's official communications frame this as part of a broader shift towards a "coalition of organizations" working on the Ethereum roadmap, citing new entities like ethlabs and the Ethereum Economic Zone. In summary, Glamsterdam represents a foundational re-engineering of Ethereum's block pipeline and economic model—focusing on ePBS, BAL, and multi-dimensional resource pricing—to prepare the network for sustainable, high-throughput scaling in the years ahead.

Foresight News9m ago

Ethereum's Next Stop Glamsterdam: The Core Upgrades You Must Know

Foresight News9m ago

The Ethereum Foundation Has Split?! An In-depth Look at Ethlabs' "Bright Future"

"Ethereum Foundation Splits? Understanding Ethlabs and Its 'Bright Future'" Former Ethereum Foundation members Ansgar Dietrichs, Barnabé Monnot, Caspar Schwarz-Schilling, Josh Rudolf, and Julian Ma have announced the launch of Ethlabs, an independent non-profit research and development lab. Announced on June 22nd, the initiative comes amidst discussions about the need for new organizational structures within the Ethereum ecosystem, a point highlighted by Bankless founder David Hoffman. Ethlabs' mission is to establish Ethereum as the foundational settlement layer for the global economy. The organization positions itself as a bridge connecting frontline developers, applications, and user needs with the core protocol. It aims to translate real-world demands into protocol improvements, industry standards, and deployable products. The founding team brings significant expertise: Dietrichs and Monnot are highly cited researchers in areas like Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) and MEV, while Schwarz-Schilling, Rudolf, and Ma contribute backgrounds in economic modeling, consensus research, and applied cryptography. Initial supporters include BitMine, a major corporate ETH treasury; Sharplink, another treasury firm; and Consensys founder Joe Lubin in a personal capacity. Community backers include figures like Uniswap's Hayden Adams and Base's Jesse Pollak. The timing coincides with internal Ethereum Foundation discussions about "spinout" projects. While Ethlabs and the Foundation share research interests like MEV mitigation, Ethlabs frames its role not as a competitor but as part of a shift from a "single-core coordination model" to a "multi-R&D entity collaboration model." It views Ethereum as a public project belonging to all builders, with Ethlabs as one node in a broader governance network. Ultimately, Ethlabs represents an organizational evolution within the maturing Ethereum ecosystem. The key question is whether multiple research bodies can collaborate effectively to advance Ethereum as a competitive global settlement infrastructure.

Odaily星球日报13m ago

The Ethereum Foundation Has Split?! An In-depth Look at Ethlabs' "Bright Future"

Odaily星球日报13m ago

'Bear' Doomsday Prophecy: AI 'Reaching Its Peak', U.S. Stocks to Top Out Fastest in Q3, Down 30-50%

"A Short Seller's Dire Prediction: AI Boom Fading, US Stocks to Peak by Q3 with 30-50% Decline" Prominent macro investors Jeffrey Gundlach and Felix Zulauf warn that the AI-driven market rally is nearing its end, forecasting a major US stock market correction of 30-50%, potentially beginning as early as Q3. Their analysis points to alarming parallels with historical market tops, citing extreme concentration in the top AI-related stocks within the S&P 500. Zulauf's bearish thesis hinges on unsustainable capital expenditure trends among major cloud companies, negative free cash flow emergence, and soaring semiconductor prices. Gundlach highlights dangerous parallels to the 1999 tech bubble peak. A key divergence from conventional wisdom is Gundlach's view that long-term Treasury yields will not fall meaningfully even during a recession, due to America's structurally out-of-control fiscal deficits and soaring interest costs. He warns this could force the government into yield curve control or even a sovereign debt restructuring. Both investors express severe concerns about the opaque private credit market, drawing parallels to the pre-2008 financial crisis environment. They allege widespread rating inflation, misrepresented credit quality, liquidity illusions, and fraudulent asset valuations within this sector. The analysis links the AI boom and private credit crisis through financing costs. They argue that as AI companies' cash flows weaken and they seek funding, a high and sticky long-term interest rate environment will severely stress lower-rated corporate borrowers, exposing cracks in credit markets. Finally, they predict a regime shift where the US dollar weakens and US equities underperform global markets, marking the end of their long dominance. The stage is set for a significant market reversal.

marsbit21m ago

'Bear' Doomsday Prophecy: AI 'Reaching Its Peak', U.S. Stocks to Top Out Fastest in Q3, Down 30-50%

marsbit21m ago

Why Does No One Buy DeFi Insurance?

**Title: Why Isn't DeFi Insurance Being Bought?** DeFi insurance, which promised automated, unbiased payouts via smart contracts, has failed to gain traction. The core issue is economic: high premiums severely erode the yields that attract users to DeFi in the first place. For example, insuring a USDC deposit on Aave V3 could cost 1.5–2.5% of the annual yield, leaving a net return barely above a savings account. For riskier platforms like Maple Finance or Ethena, premiums can even turn net yields negative. Consequently, users often forgo insurance, as it nullifies their profit motive. The market also suffers from structural flaws. First, DeFi risks are highly correlated (e.g., an oracle failure can impact multiple protocols simultaneously), unlike the independent risks in traditional insurance. This makes large-scale events potentially catastrophic for insurers. Second, the total capital in DeFi insurance pools (e.g., Nexus Mutual's ~$81.5M) is minuscule compared to the hundreds of billions in total value locked (TVL), creating a massive capacity gap. A single major hack could drain the entire industry's reserves. Furthermore, the governance model where tokenholders vote on claims creates a conflict of interest, incentivizing them to deny payouts to protect their own funds. As a result, the sector is shrinking. While pioneers like Nexus Mutual are pivoting to preventative measures (bug bounties) and seeking external capital via reinsurance, the fundamental problems remain. DeFi insurance represents a public good—its stability benefits the entire ecosystem—but without a mechanism to share costs, a "tragedy of the commons" ensues where no one is willing to pay, leaving the system vulnerable.

marsbit35m ago

Why Does No One Buy DeFi Insurance?

marsbit35m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片