剥离layer2消极影响:如何Make Ethereum Great Again?

币界网Published on 2024-08-21Last updated on 2024-08-21

币界网报道:

作者:Haotian

就在我思考接下来以太坊layer2何去何从的时候,不少海外社区已经发出了“Make Ethereum L1 Great Again”的声音。确实,过去Rollup-Centric为重心的发展策略,市场把以太坊命脉过多寄托在layer2上了。倘若剥离开L1和L2,从以太坊自身性能优化视角来看又如何?

1)@VitalikButerin 之前称以太坊是Rollup-Centric的整体Roadmap路线图,先用坎昆升级EIP-4844来降低费率来激励layer2,又提出增加layer2之间的可交互操作能力,甚至都削弱甚至改变了原有的Sharding分片策略来支持layer2。

以Rollup layer2为战略重心可以承载更高的TPS,让更多高频交易应用场景比如:游戏等能够在以太坊大生态内落地。这个发展策略其实是让出了以太坊Execution执行层角色,只提供安全、共识、结算等重要功能。毕竟,碍于EVM的数据存储结构、节点客户端硬件性能、区块大小出快速率等种种局限性,发展layer2为执行层重心肯定要优于以太坊L1自身。

但当L1的gas费降到1Gwei下,L2发展暂时又不及预期的时候,就会有人思考,重新把以太坊主网作为执行层重心,仅让layer2提供锦上添花的价值如何?(潜台词:layer2自身的币价不行但不能连累到以太坊本尊。)

2)不无道理,事实上除了坎昆升级直接利好layer2之外,以太坊接下来包括Verge和Purge等在内的路线图发力重心都是以太坊本身。

比如:Verge升级中集成Verkle树采用“无状态客户端”来优化节点存储成本,而Fully SNARKed以太坊和ASIC硬件加速计划的引入都是为了优化存储成本,提升执行性能,进而增加以太坊L1的扩展能力。

SNARKs可以大幅减少存储和传输的数据量提升验证和复杂计算的执行效率,ASIC则通过硬件性能提升来降低SNARK执行的损耗并提升执行效率。应该讲,在给layer2提供一系列的基础设施保障后,以太坊接下来的升级更多都是围绕自身链的组件性能在优化。

3)然而,以太坊L1 Execution执行层能承载更多的交易和大举发展Layer2战略并不冲突。准确来说,layer2和layer1是在并行赛跑。l

Layer2方面, @arbitrum 、@Starknet 、@MetisL2 、 @megaeth_labs 等都基于各自领先优势和发展侧重点在持续耕耘生态,在此不多赘述了,不过还远不到唱衰的地步,请大家多给一点耐心;

layer1方面,除了以太坊接下来的几次重大围绕自身性能的升级,ZK底层框架协议和ZK硬件加速两个关键领域的技术突破也会直接助力Make L1 Great Again:

比如: @ProjectZKM 基于zkMIPs微处理器指令架构做ZK通用协议,除了之前所说给比特币生态带来Bridgeless的Native资产跨链方案之外,ZK通用协议可以让以太坊作为“结算层”来接入更多同构或异构链的liquidity。这意味着,其他链都可以通过ZK协议来和以太坊链进行交互,继而给以太坊主网输入更多的关键结算交易和流动性,这自然也是强化以太坊做“Execution”的表现;

又比如: @cysic_xyz 通过FPGA、GPU及ASIC等芯片级的硬件加速方案来致力ZK技术的大规模采用。作为ZK新锐和硬件加速赛道的标杆项目,Cysic目标所指正是未来以太坊的全面ZK底层化。当以太坊Fully SNARKed之后,以太坊相应节点也会强化硬件性能,硬件加速则是逃不开的选择。

以上。

总而言之,无论是侧重发力推进L2中心策略还是进一步优化L1性能,都不是此消彼长的对立关系,更是一种长期并存的竞合关系。

短期看,layer2依然是以太坊扩展的主旋律,而长期视角看,以太坊基于ZK底层和硬件加速,作为安全共识结算层,能承载和实现的扩展能力也同样充满想象空间。以太坊不需要Great Again,以太坊一直保持Great。

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

From SpaceX to Galaxy Digital: A Detailed Look at 37 New AI Companies and 7 Crypto Dark Horses Added to the Russell Indexes

On June 26th, following its annual reconstitution, the Russell US Indexes finalized their new components, with changes taking effect for market trading on June 29th. The Russell 3000 Index, representing approximately 98% of the investable US equity market, saw significant turnover. A record $334 billion was traded during Nasdaq's closing cross on reconstitution day, highlighting the massive passive fund flows tied to these benchmarks. Companies newly added to the index are set to benefit from mandatory buying by these funds. The reconstitution raised the market cap threshold between the large-cap Russell 1000 and small-cap Russell 2000 by 24% to $5.7 billion. Overall, 224 new companies entered the Russell 3000. Of these, 19 joined the Russell 1000, and 205 joined the Russell 2000, while 118 firms were removed. Notably, among the newcomers, approximately 37 are companies operating in the AI and semiconductor ecosystem, accounting for roughly 17% of new additions. The most prominent is SpaceX, which, following its recent IPO and soaring valuation, was fast-tracked directly into the Russell 1000 and Top 200 indexes. Additionally, about 7 cryptocurrency-related companies were newly included, representing about 3% of new entrants. These include Galaxy Digital, Bitmine, and Tron, among others. The inclusion of several Decentralized Autonomous Trust (DAT) entities signals the model's sustained market presence. For these smaller AI and crypto firms, index inclusion boosts visibility, potentially attracting further institutional investment and supporting their stock performance.

Odaily星球日报3m ago

From SpaceX to Galaxy Digital: A Detailed Look at 37 New AI Companies and 7 Crypto Dark Horses Added to the Russell Indexes

Odaily星球日报3m ago

Token Uneconomical

"Token Inefficiency" explores the rising economic burden of AI model token usage in enterprises, where escalating costs often fail to match tangible productivity gains. Major companies like Microsoft, Uber, and Meta are facing "token inefficiency"—characterized by budget overruns for tools like Claude Code with unclear returns. This inefficiency stems from supply-side factors like strategic model price hikes by leaders (e.g., Anthropic) and price increases in budget-friendly models, alongside technical waste in Agent systems through context traps, tokenizer inflation, redundant skill calls, and multi-Agent coordination overhead. A deeper demand-side challenge limits token value: their primary utility remains confined to highly digitalized domains like programming, which benefits from automatic, low-cost feedback loops. Extending tokens to physical world tasks or less digitalized industries faces the "Sim-to-Real Gap," where real-world validation is costly and slow, unlike in code compilation. The article warns that this inefficiency concentrates financial risk in mid-tier model developers, potentially fueling circular financing schemes and shadow credit bubbles. It also highlights societal externalities, as data center expansion strains local power grids and inflates utility costs for residents. To achieve a positive net token economy, the path forward requires dual efforts: technical optimizations (context compression, skill reduction, model routing, budget constraints) and business-side discipline (governance, cost attribution, ROI focus). The ultimate goal is shifting from showcasing AI capabilities to maximizing value per token, finding scalable commercial applications that justify the investment and bridge the digital-physical divide.

marsbit22m ago

Token Uneconomical

marsbit22m ago

Stock Price Halved in 45 Days, Is Circle Actually the "DeFi Barometer"?

Over a 45-day period, Circle's stock price plummeted by approximately 50% to around $63, coinciding with a significant $70 billion decline in the circulation of its USDC stablecoin from its peak. In contrast, Tether's USDT saw a much smaller reduction. Analyst Ed Engel posits that Circle acts as a barometer for DeFi activity, as a high correlation exists between USDC supply and ETH price movements. The vast majority of USDC is concentrated within crypto exchanges and DeFi protocols for yield generation, rather than for widespread daily use in payments or commerce, unlike USDT which has stronger real-world adoption in various regions. The recent contraction in DeFi Total Value Locked (TVL), following security incidents like the Kelp DAO attack, appears to mirror Circle's declining stock performance. While Circle is actively promoting USDC's use as a settlement asset on platforms like Hyperliquid and in institutional payment corridors—where its organic transfer volume surpasses USDT's—these efforts have not sufficiently driven growth in USDC's overall supply. The company's revenue remains heavily tied to DeFi's expansion. For Circle's investment narrative to change, it must either significantly reduce its reliance on the volatile DeFi sector or demonstrably prove that real-world adoption can substantially and sustainably increase USDC circulation. In the near term, market confidence hinges on DeFi addressing its inherent risk-reward imbalances.

marsbit55m ago

Stock Price Halved in 45 Days, Is Circle Actually the "DeFi Barometer"?

marsbit55m ago

Trading

Spot

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