zkSync 创始人「亲手裁掉」核心团队，曾经的以太坊扩容明星全面转向服务银行

marsbitPublished on 2026-06-18Last updated on 2026-06-18

Abstract

zkSync母公司Matter Labs创始人Alex Gluchowski于6月17日宣布裁员，这是公司两年内的第二次人员缩减。同时，公司宣布将全面转向开发名为Prividium的“许可制”隐私区块链，专注于为受监管的金融机构（如德意志银行、瑞银）提供服务。 这一战略转向与zkSync早期倡导的公开、无许可理念形成鲜明对比，引发了加密社区的强烈反应。社区质疑公司累计融资约4.58亿美元的资金去向，并对裁员决定表示不满。 伴随战略调整，zkSync的代币$ZK价格表现低迷，现价约0.019美元，较历史高点下跌约93%。分析认为，在竞争激烈的以太坊L2赛道中，转向服务银行的细分市场是寻求差异化与商业化的现实选择，但这也意味着背离了部分早期支持者所信奉的“自由与开放”的原始叙事。

作者:克洛德,深潮 TechFlow

深潮导读:zkSync 母公司 Matter Labs 创始人 Alex Gluchowski 于 6 月 17 日宣布再次裁员,公司全面押注一条名为 Prividium 的「许可制」隐私链,专门服务受监管的金融机构。

这是该公司两年内第二次裁员。一位自称「自由极大化主义者」的创始人,最终把项目带向了合规、许可与银行。社区反应分裂,最尖锐的质问是:融了 4.58 亿美元,钱去哪了?$ZK 代币现价约 0.019 美元,较历史高点已跌去约 93%。

zkSync 的故事,正在朝着它最初承诺的反方向走。

6 月 17 日,Matter Labs 创始人兼 CEO Alex Gluchowski 在 X 平台发文,宣布缩减公司团队规模。「今天我们裁减了 Matter Labs 的团队规模。这是我的决定,我想解释一下。」他在帖子开头写道。

被裁的包括资深工程师、设计师和运营人员,Gluchowski 称他们是「我共事过的最强的一批人」。这是 Matter Labs 自 2024 年 9 月以来的第二次裁员,本次裁员比例官方未披露。

真正值得关注的不是裁了多少人,而是这家公司决定成为什么。

从「服务所有人」到「服务银行」,一次彻底的方向转身

Gluchowski 在帖子里把这次裁员的逻辑讲得很清楚:公司从 2024 年起就开始为受监管的金融机构构建产品,这项工作后来变成了 Prividium,「整个公司现在都投入到一个目标上:构建让企业和受监管金融机构上链的基础设施,并以隐私为核心。」

Prividium 是什么?

简单说,它是一条「许可制」的区块链,和 zkSync 一直标榜的公开、无许可、任何人都能用的链相反。许可制意味着只有经过批准的机构才能接入,普通用户进不来。

Matter Labs 的官网把 Prividium 描述为面向金融机构和金融科技公司的以太坊平台,目前已经在和德意志银行、瑞银(UBS)跑试点。

这个转向的反差在于 Gluchowski 本人。

他的 X 简介写着「自由极大化主义者」(Freedom maximalist),信奉「自由→进步→繁荣」。zkSync 这套技术过去一直被加密社区当作公共物品来对待,2024 年 Matter Labs 想注册「ZK」商标,被零知识研究者集体反对后撤回,理由就是这类技术不该被任何单一实体垄断。

如今,这家公司主动把重心从面向散户和开发者的公链,挪到了服务持牌银行的许可链上。

4.58 亿美元的拷问,社区当场翻脸

Gluchowski 大概预料到了帖子下面的反应。

Matter Labs 累计融资约 4.58 亿美元,背后是 Dragonfly、Blockchain Capital 等知名机构。2022 年的 C 轮就拿了 2 亿美元。社区的反应分成两派,一派对 Prividium 的方向表示期待,另一派直接质问钱的去向。一条被广泛转发的评论写道:「能解释一下吗?你融了 4.5 亿美元来开发产品。钱在哪?为什么你一边还在要钱、一边裁人?」

这不是 Matter Labs 第一次因为裁员被质疑。

2024 年 9 月,公司裁了 16%、共 24 名员工,把总人数降到 126 人。当时官方反复强调「财务状况依然稳健」,裁员是为了「保持精简」,不是缺钱。两次裁员的措辞高度相似,都是「团队结构和当前需求不匹配」。

问题在于,当一家融了近 5 亿美元、还在持续募资的公司两年裁两轮,「不是缺钱」这个说法的说服力会被反复消耗。

$ZK 跌去 93%,代币持有者为转向买单

战略转向最直接的代价,落在了二级市场的散户身上。

$ZK 代币当前价格约 0.019 美元,而它 2024 年 6 月上线后不久创下的历史高点是 0.27 美元,跌幅约 93%。这枚代币在上线后的绝大多数时间里都待在发行价之下,市值目前约 1.8 亿美元,在加密资产里排到 150 名开外。

代币的尴尬之处在于,它的价值捕获逻辑和公司的新方向是脱节的。Prividium 服务的是银行,走的是「企业授权费」这种链下商业模式。

L2 红海里的一种求生姿势

把视角拉远,Matter Labs 的转身也是整个以太坊 L2 赛道内卷的一个切面。

以太坊二层网络(在主网之上跑、追求更快更便宜的扩容方案)这几年挤进来一大批玩家:Coinbase 的 Base、Arbitrum、Optimism、Polygon,个个都在抢同一批开发者和用户。zkSync 曾经是 ZK 系 L2 里活跃度最高的,但 2024 年 6 月空投之后用户迅速流失,活跃地址从 7 月超过 20 万的峰值,到年底 7 日均值只剩约 3 万。在一个同质化严重、谁都做不出差异的通用赛道里,转去啃「服务银行」这个利润更高、对手更少的细分市场,是一个能讲通的商业决定。

只是这个决定有它的代价。它意味着放弃一部分最早相信「无许可、属于所有人」这套叙事、并因此持有$ZK 的人。Matter Labs 选择了一条更现实、也更能赚钱的路,代价是亲手拆掉了自己当年立起来的那块招牌。

Gluchowski 在帖子最后对离开的人说:「谢谢你们在这里建造的一切,谢谢你们立下的标准。」

这句话用来形容这家公司本身,也成立。

Trending Cryptos

ctr
CitreaCTR
wstusdt
wrapped stUSDTWSTUSDT
apr
aPrioriAPR
ctx
Cryptex FinanceCTX
audio
AudiusAUDIO
mantra
MantraMANTRA
xvs
VenusXVS
waxl
AxelarWAXL
bill
Billions NetworkBILL
pyth
PYTH (Pyth)PYTH
rune
THORChainRUNE
velodrome
Velodrome FinanceVELODROME
brev
BrevisBREV
zrx
ZRX（0X）ZRX
cake
PancakeSwapCAKE

Related Questions

QMatter Labs 创始人 Alex Gluchowski 宣布裁员并调整公司战略，新战略重点是什么？

A新战略重点是全面投入构建一条名为 Prividium 的‘许可制’隐私区块链，专门为受监管的金融机构（如德意志银行、瑞银）和企业提供上链基础设施，核心是隐私保护。这标志着公司从服务公众的无许可公链转向了服务特定金融机构的许可链。

Q社区对 Matter Labs 战略转向和裁员的主要质疑是什么？

A社区的主要质疑集中在公司巨额融资的使用上。Matter Labs 累计融资约4.58亿美元，但两年内进行了两次裁员。社区成员质疑巨额资金的去向，以及为何在公司宣称财务状况稳健并持续募资的同时，却需要裁员来‘保持精简’。

Q根据文章，$ZK 代币的市场表现如何？其价格下跌与公司战略有何关联？

A$ZK 代币当前价格约0.019美元，较其历史高点0.27美元已下跌约93%。其市值排名也大幅下滑。价格下跌与公司战略转向密切相关，因为新的 Prividium 业务主要面向银行，采用链下的企业授权费模式，这使得原先为公链生态设计的 $ZK 代币的价值捕获逻辑与公司的新方向脱节，导致持有者信心受挫。

Q文章提到 zkSync 在 L2 赛道面临怎样的竞争环境？这如何影响了其战略决策？

A以太坊 L2 赛道竞争异常激烈，挤入了 Base、Arbitrum、Optimism、Polygon 等多个强大对手，大家都在争夺有限的开发者和用户。zkSync 在2024年空投后用户大量流失，活跃度骤降。在通用型 L2 赛道同质化严重、难以建立差异化的背景下，转向‘服务银行’这个利润更高、竞争对手更少的细分市场，成为一个可以理解的商业求生策略。

Q文章如何描述 zkSync 战略转向的讽刺性或矛盾之处？

A文章指出，这一转向与项目创始人的理念及最初的承诺形成了鲜明对比和讽刺。创始人 Alex Gluchowski 自称是‘自由极大化主义者’，zkSync 技术也曾被社区视为不应被垄断的公共物品。然而，公司现在却主动将重心从公开、无许可、面向所有人的公链，转向了只有经过批准的机构才能接入的‘许可制’隐私链，服务于传统银行体系。这被视作亲手拆掉了自己当初立起的‘自由、无许可’招牌。

Related Reads

SpaceX, AI, and XRP: Why the Next Wealth Transfer Might Be Different?

The article posits that the global economy is transitioning into a new phase of infrastructure investment. Capital, facing slowing traditional growth engines, is flowing towards emerging foundational systems. This includes space infrastructure (exemplified by SpaceX), AI computing power, satellite networks, data centers, and global payment systems. A key driver is a potential new commodity supercycle fueled by industrial demand from these sectors. Concurrently, the role of blockchain is evolving from speculative assets to a critical settlement layer for the future economy. Digital assets like XRP and XLM, focused on payments and interoperability, are highlighted as potential rails for cross-border settlement, tokenized assets, and machine-to-machine (AI Agent) transactions. The narrative connects figures like Ripple's Jed McCaleb to space ventures, suggesting convergence. The argument emphasizes a shift from speculative narratives to utility-driven value. As AI and space commerce generate new economic activity, and regulatory clarity improves, blockchain networks may underpin real-time value transfer. The conclusion urges investors to consider which networks will form the backbone of this integrated next-generation economic infrastructure.

marsbit37m ago

SpaceX, AI, and XRP: Why the Next Wealth Transfer Might Be Different?

marsbit37m ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit2h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit2h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit3h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit3h ago

Hyperliquid ETF Claim Draws Attention As HYPE Narrative Builds On X

A social media claim has brought attention to Hyperliquid (HYPE) and the growth of its related ETF products. According to a June 20 post on X by AlphaOnChain, three Hyperliquid ETFs launched in May 2026 have collectively amassed $158 million in assets under management, led by a Bitwise fund with $88 million and a 21Shares fund with $66 million. The article notes this claim is from social media and not verified by official issuer data, advising caution. Nonetheless, the report highlights that HYPE is gaining traction as a notable altcoin narrative. Its focus on on-chain perpetual trading and exchange infrastructure places it at the intersection of DeFi and derivatives, attracting traders looking for high-conviction plays beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum. The key takeaway is that while social momentum can influence short-term markets, sustainable growth for HYPE would require confirmed demand, liquidity, and continued ecosystem development.

bitcoinist4h ago

Hyperliquid ETF Claim Draws Attention As HYPE Narrative Builds On X

bitcoinist4h 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

Top Questions