一切都真的在向AppChains发展吗?

币界网Publicado a 2024-08-19Actualizado a 2024-08-19

币界网报道:

作者:Pavel Paramonov 来源:X,@paramonoww 翻译:善欧巴,

应用链是 Dapps 的终局吗?是的,但其实也不完全是。

去中心化应用(dApps)转向主权链的主要原因是他们觉得自己在被“抢劫”。这并非完全没有道理,因为大多数dApp都没有盈利。你可以看看最近关闭的@zkxprotocol,以及之前的许多应用,如@utopialabs_、@yield、@FujiFinance等。

但这引发了一个重要问题:商业模式真的有那么不堪一击,还是这些协议实际上在被“抢劫”?

dApp的收入问题

dApp的主要收入来源(通常也是唯一的)是手续费。用户支付这些费用是因为他们直接从中受益。然而,用户并不是唯一从dApp使用中获益的一方。实际上,有多个参与者从交易供应链中获利,主要是区块提议者,尽管他们是最后看到交易的人。在L2(第二层扩展解决方案)中,这些人是排序者。

MEV(最大可提取价值)被大量提取,这并不总是坏事,但dApps创造的价值却被夺走,因此他们没有获得自己提供的全部价值。

当前解决方案:三种选择

目前有三种方法可以解决这个问题:

  1. 成为一个AppChain。

  2. 选择一个能返还价值的L1或L2。

  3. 实施特定应用的排序。

像加密领域中的一切一样,每种解决方案都有其权衡之处。

1. 成为AppChain:高成本 + 高价值

成为AppChain有无数的优点:你可以尽可能地提取价值,控制自己的网络(如果是L2),更容易扩展,避免竞争区块空间等。缺点是:这真的很贵,非常贵。而且更难做到,因为你不仅要构建应用程序,还要构建区块链。

即使你想要构建一个L2并使用像@alt_layer这样的解决方案,认为每个应用最终都会变成AppChain的论点总体上是错误的,原因有三:

  • 并不是每个dApp都大到需要转移到AppChain。

  • 一些dApp直接从底层链的架构中获益。

  • dApps在其他链上感到相当舒适。

2. 选择能返还价值的L1/L2:低成本 + 中等价值

在Rollup或L1上部署应用成本低得多,因为你不需要为验证、交易包含、共识、交易流程等制定新规则。对于Rollup来说,将应用从以太坊迁移到Rollup非常简单,因为Rollup要么是EVM兼容(如@arbitrum),要么是EVM等效(如@taikoxyz)。

你仍然需要考虑底层链的架构,但不必从头开始构建。也许将来我们会有真正的链抽象,开发者只需要关心他们的dApp,但那是另一回事了……

开发者获得的回报是中等价值,因为虽然不高(你不拥有链的经济),但也不低(除了手续费,你还能获得一些回报)。目前,这种模式的实现很少,因为与dApp共享MEV仍然是一个复杂的过程,我们需要更多的研究与开发。

3. 特定应用的排序:中等成本 + 不确定的价值

特定应用排序的概念相对较新,人们经常将其与AppChain混淆,区别很简单:

  • AppChain关心排序和执行。

  • 自排序dApp只关心排序,将执行“外包”给L1/L2。

这是中等成本,因为除了构建dApp外,你还需要考虑交易的排序。价值不确定,因为这个概念相对较新,存在不同的担忧。首先,你仍然依赖提议者,因为包含游戏:你可以发送任何想发送的交易包,但是否包含你的包取决于提议者。如果你要拿走所有MEV,提议者没有明确的动机将你的包包含在区块中。

因此,这为提议者打开了另一个激励市场。他们(dApp+提议者)应该合作,否则双方都没有任何价值或权力。此外,价值不确定,因为我们不确定从L1/L2共享的价值是否会超过dApp通过排序交易为自己创造的价值。

回到最初的问题:一切都真的在向AppChains发展吗?

  1. 是的(确实有一些dApps在拥有自己的链上比留在现有链上获益更多)。

  2. 不完全是(还有其他适合dApp需求的解决方案)。

这个森林足够大,适合探索所有选项。世界上的每个景观(加密领域)都有一些多样性,所以选择最适合你的需求,或者构建你自己的解决方案吧!

Lecturas Relacionadas

SpaceX Faces Heavy Selling After IPO Followed by Massive Bond Issue 'Angers' the Market

Following a record-breaking IPO, SpaceX's massive $25 billion bond issuance faced fierce selling pressure in the secondary market. The aggressive financing pace of the long-unprofitable rocket and AI company quickly backfired, eroding investor confidence and causing its bond spreads to widen sharply, nearing speculative-grade ("junk") levels. Within 48 hours of pricing, SpaceX's bonds plummeted. The 10-year bond yield rose to nearly 6%, with its spread over US Treasuries widening to over 160 basis points (bps). Longer-dated bonds saw spreads surge to 193 bps and 201 bps, significantly worse than the average spread for BB-rated junk bonds at 167 bps. This rapid deterioration shocked fixed-income traders. Initial strong demand, with nearly $90 billion in orders, was driven largely by short-term speculative "fast money" rather than traditional buy-and-hold investors. When these funds sought quick profits, heavy selling ensued. Analysts describe a "perfect storm" caused by SpaceX's post-IPO market cap decline, technical selling pressure from the enlarged deal size, and investor uncertainty in pricing its unique risk profile. The core concern for bond investors is SpaceX's fundamentals: while it reported $18.7 billion in 2025 revenue, it posted a net loss of $4.9 billion. Creditors focus on actual cash flow for debt repayment, not future growth expectations tied to AI. Heavy reliance on CEO Elon Musk's leadership and weak corporate governance were also cited as key credit weaknesses. The selloff highlights broader systemic risks as tech giants embark on a massive debt spree to fund AI projects. AI-related debt issuance has soared 357% year-to-date. This supply surge is increasing sector leverage and putting pressure on credit spreads across the market, potentially threatening the tech capital expenditure cycle if the pace continues.

marsbitHace 15 min(s)

SpaceX Faces Heavy Selling After IPO Followed by Massive Bond Issue 'Angers' the Market

marsbitHace 15 min(s)

Metrics Ventures Market Observation: The World's Fragility is Rapidly Accumulating

Metrics Ventures' market observation highlights the rapid accumulation of global fragility. Since 2022, persistent supply chain disruptions have progressively eroded the economic resilience and policy autonomy of nations like Japan, South Korea, and Europe, building momentum for potential future capital market shocks. Market trends reveal a liquidity drought across most sectors except AI and specific commodities. Vulnerable economies are increasingly doubling down on concentrated trades—a risky strategy unlikely to succeed in the current geopolitical climate. For cryptocurrency markets, these global pressures have formed a significant overhang since late last year, raising the unprecedented need to evaluate the possibility of MSTR liquidating part of its BTC holdings. Furthermore, the appeal of BTC as a short-side hedge against other assets is growing, presenting a challenging medium-term outlook. Technically, key markets are at critical junctures: Japanese and Korean equities face major resistance, the US Dollar Index has broken past a year-long ceiling, and the US 2-Year Treasury yield shows an upward trend. A potential sudden liquidity contraction could trigger algorithm-driven sell-offs from leveraged funds, amplifying global volatility. While precious metals like gold and silver may face short-term pressure, such a shakeout could precede a major rally. For Bitcoin, a deeper-than-expected correction is a plausible scenario within this risk-release cycle. Despite unforeseen events like the Hormuz situation shaping H2, this period of elevated risk also presents significant opportunities.

marsbitHace 18 min(s)

Metrics Ventures Market Observation: The World's Fragility is Rapidly Accumulating

marsbitHace 18 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片