「Fraxtal 时代」雏形显现,Frax Finance 的 DeFi 野望行将落地?

foresightnewsPubblicato 2024-02-07Pubblicato ultima volta 2024-02-08

Introduzione

Fraxtal 启动在即,又一个独特的空投与积分激励系统,撸么?

「最重要版本」的 Fraxtal 启动在即,又一个独特的空投与积分激励系统,撸么?


撰文:Frank,Foresight News


今日,Frax Finance 宣布推出模块化 L2 区块链 Fraxtal,测试网和主网已面向特定的启动合作伙伴开放,普通用户将能够在接下来几天内连接至该链,并称之为「2020 年 Frax Finance 诞生以来最重要的版本」


那 Fraxtal 究竟是一条什么链,有什么独特之处,又承载着 Frax Finance 怎样的 DeFi 野望?


Fraxtal:基于 OP 堆栈的模块化 Rollup


早在 2023 年 11 月,Frax 创始人 Sam Kazemian 就曾在官方 Telegram 透露,Frax Finance 计划推出以太坊 L2 网络 Fraxchain,且测试网希望在 2024 年 1 月初上线(目前看是鸽到了 2 月)。


他也专门强调该 L2 链「不是一个应用链」,且 Frax Finance 流动性质押产品 frxETH 将作为 Gas 支付代币,FXS 则是 Fraxchain 的定序器质押代币,用于捕获 Rollup 定序器收入。



随后在今年 1 月,Sam Kazemian 又披露该链计划在 2 月份首周推出,并正式定名为「Fraxtal」。


而按照最新的官方文档信息,作为 L2 网络的 Fraxtal,也是一个模块化的 Rollup 区块链,具有「分形扩展」(fractal scaling)的路线图,功能和特性包括:


  • EVM 等效性。Fraxtal 利用 OP 堆栈作为其智能合约平台和执行环境,使得项目方们部署应用程序与 Optimism、Base 一样快速、安全且低成本;
  • 模块化 Rollup。Fraxtal 将有多个组件和中间件,供其他链和网络使用、连接、部署 L3 并在其上构建,目前 Fraxtal 使用由 Frax Finance 核心团队开发的单独数据可用性(DA)模块;
  • 区块空间激励措施(称为 Flox)。该功能用于奖励用户和开发人员——任何花费 Gas 并与网络上的任何智能合约进行交互的账户和智能合约,将根据 Flox 算法获得「Fraxtal Point System」(FXTL)积分奖励,这些积分以后可以转换为代币;
  • frxETH 作为 Gas 支付代币


此外根据官方披露,Fraxtal 将与主要以太坊基础设施提供商一起推出,包括 Etherscan 的 Fraxscan 和 Safe、Chainlink、Axelar Network 和 LayerZero 等各式 DeFi 相关服务。


就在今日官宣信息之后,Frax Finance 联合创始人 Travis Moore 就在官方 Telegram 群组中表示「主网浏览器将很快启动」。


Fraxtal 独特的区块激励机制


在 Fraxtal 的所有功能特性中,最吸引眼球的莫过于 Fraxtal 独特的区块激励机制,其中具体包括积分系统 FXTL 及「区块空间激励」(Flox)算法。


Fraxtal 积分系统 FXTL


什么是 FXTL?


它是 Frax Finance 针对 Fraxtal 专门推出的积分系统「Fraxtal Point System」,用于奖励和激励生态系统中的参与者——包括创建智能合约并与之交互、利用部署到链上的新协议以及持有特定类型的资产 / 代币


也就是说,任何一个用户和开发人员,只要在 Fraxtal 上花费 Gas 进行创建合约、合约交互等操作,就有机会获得对应的 FXTL 积分奖励,且这些积分的积累通过 FraxtalPoints 主合约进行跟踪和管理:


该合约作为所有 FXTL 相关交易和余额的分类账,用户可以通过此合约访问和查看累积的 FXLT 积分。


与此同时,FXTL 积分将在 Fraxtal 链创世后 12 个月内被代币化,但目前尚不清楚 FXTL 积分是否会被代币化为链上的单独质押代币(FXTL) ,或以指定比例转换为 FXS。


「区块空间激励」(Flox)算法


「区块空间激励」(Flox)算法则是计算用户和智能合约获得 FXTL 积分具体数量的自动算法,它可根据 Fraxtal 链的使用情况,逐个区块进行奖励计算。


其中计算周期为每个 epoch(最初为 7 天),所有在 Fraxtal 上花费 Gas 的 EOA 地址和使用 Gas 的智能合约,都会根据 Flox 算法,获得按比例的 FXTL 积分奖励。


更重要的是,Flox 算法鼓励用户与大家广泛使用的合约进行交互,而不是试图通过较少使用或自有的合约来最大化他们的激励。


为了做到这一点,Flox 算法主要包含两项创新:


  • 可追踪任一智能合约使用的 Gas 的交易轨迹;
  • 在每个 epoch 的任一随机区块中,都可应用特殊算法对智能合约重要性进行排名(例如根据用户和合约持有的资产);


在此基础上,智能合约开发人员可以在部署时为每个合约指定一个 Flox 代理地址,该代理地址被授权代表指定合约管理 Flox 激励。


例如如果用户使用 1inch,实现了通过 Curve 池进行的 USDC/FRAX 兑换交易,那:


  • 用户奖励层面,FXTL 积分余额将在每个 epoch 结束时自动变化,直接添加到对应地址的 FXTL 积分余额中;
  • 智能合约奖励层面,FXTL 激励会智能分配给 1inch 路由器合约、Curve 池合约、USDC 合约和 FRAX 合约;



简言之,利用 FXTL 作为激励货币,Flox 计划以一种超越网络早期交易费用分摊模式的方式将价值分配给用户和开发人员,从而激励 DApp 出于利益考量在该网络上主动进行部署


面向 veFXS 的 FXTL 积分空投


veFXS 是 FXS 的质押代币,在 Fraxtal 启动前只能在以太坊主网上质押,伴随着 Fraxtal 的推出,用户将可以通过改进的质押合约在 Fraxtal 上质押 veFXS:


其中一个单独的 veFXSCounter 合约负责读取以太坊主网上 veFXS 合约的状态,并将其与用户在 Fraxtal 上的 veFXS 余额相结合,从而统一用户在以太坊主网和 Fraxtal 之间的 veFXS 余额。


且 veFXSCounter 合约中显示的组合余额用于 Fraxtal 实用程序,例如 Flox 提升、治理投票和各种新功能,一言以蔽之,在以太坊主网或 Fraxtal 上质押的 veFXS 功能相同。


此外,2024 年 3 月 7 日 7:59,Fraxtal 将根据 veFXS 余额向 veFXS 质押者空投 FXTL 积分,为期一周,具体数量和分配模式截至发文时尚未披露(或许会与质押数量与时间成正比)。


随后 Flox 机制将上线,部署 DApp 以及将资产带到 Fraxtal 的用户将开始在他们使用该链的每个区块中赚取 FXTL 积分。


小结


纵观过去两年的发展历程,Frax Finance 的产品力,在一众「DeFi 老炮」中称得上一骑绝尘:


从 2022 年与 Terra 齐名的「算稳巨擘」,到 2023 年的 frxETH 增速惊人,以及 sFRAX 等 RWA 布局后发先至,直至如今自称「最重要版本」的 Fraxtal 浮出水面。


虽然诸如去除算稳因素、推出 fraETH 等是被动调整战线,但 Frax Finance 总体尚属转向及时,并神奇地使各新产品之间互相耦合,搭建了一个自成体系的 DeFi 矩阵,且几乎没有落下一次热点叙事


而最新的 Fraxtal,某种程度上也承载了它的终极野望——构建以 L2 链为核心的 DeFi 宇宙,把费用、流量收归一处,打造自己的「Fraxtal」时代。


客观上看,这可能会助推其成为 DeFi 赛道走得最远的一个项目,但叙事性感,时机难料,2024 年的 Frax Finance 能否真正打造自己的「Fraxtal」时代,尚需持续观察。

Letture associate

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.

marsbit31 min fa

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

marsbit31 min fa

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.

marsbit48 min fa

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

marsbit48 min fa

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.

marsbit1 h fa

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit1 h fa

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit3 h fa

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片