观点:L2s 的真正价值是一个「实验性创新沙盒」

深潮Published on 2025-09-01Last updated on 2025-09-02

放弃 General-Purpose 链的大而全思路,如何针对全新 Mass Adoption 需求下进行 Sepecific-Chain 的探索才是正途。

撰文:Haotian

非常有意义的视角,这似乎是许久以来看到的对以太坊 layer2 的积极意义解读:layer2s 的真正价值是一个「实验性创新沙盒」。

比如,@arbitrum 可以探索 DAO 治理,@Optimism 可以进行 RetroPGF 资助机制,@base 可以尝试 CEX 融合, @zksync 可以推进账户抽象等等,这些创新如果直接在主网上实施风险就太大了,但在 layer2 上即使失败了也不会危机整个生态。

而且有意思的是,貌似不同的 layer2 可以服务完全不同的用户群体,比如,主打合规的企业链,标榜抗审查的隐私链,能实现高频交易的游戏链等等。

好像回顾下,形形色色的 Stack 堆栈基础上构建起来 layer2+layer3 解决方案还真的有不少,虽然他们都没有成为预期中为以太坊引流输血的救赎者,但在实验扩展性方案的「多样性」可能方面确实也功勋卓著啊。

当然,大家也可以说他们最终都是为了发 Token,但有一个底层逻辑是:他们至少一定程度上延续并继承了以太坊的去中心化安全特性。

否则,用当前的明星产品 @HyperliquidX 以及一些华尔街 Giant 大企业要做的独立专属链 layer1 思维,虽然能达成体验上的丝滑升级,但是本质上都是牺牲去中心化来换取极致性能,而且这些独立链也大概率发 Token,他们做的事情也许和 layer2 并无本质区别甚至还不如,但这一步却是对 layer2 实验田的全盘否定。

所以,摆在 layer2 面前其实有一条很明确的道路,放弃 General-Purpose 链的大而全思路,如何针对全新 Mass Adoption 需求下进行 Sepecific-Chain 的探索才是正途,比如,如何引进知名的游戏 ip、如何满足隐私交易和合规,如何服务 AI Agent 的高频交互需求,如何为 RWA 资产提供合规化上脸通道等等。

换言之,Layer2s 只要放弃单纯技术架构上的内卷,摒弃通用链的大而全执念,把重心放在和 TradFi 的业务融合上,layer2 的局面可能没大家想的那么悲观。

Related Reads

Retail Investors' 'Lead Brother' Serenity vs. Newly Minted Stock God Leopold: How Are the Two Top Hunters Mining AI's 'Physical Limits'?

The article profiles two prominent figures, Serenity and Leopold Aschenbrenner, who are gaining attention for their unconventional investment strategies focused on the physical constraints of the AI boom, moving beyond mainstream software narratives. Serenity, an anonymous online trader, advocates a "shiso leaf" theory. He targets small-cap companies with monopolies on critical, overlooked components in the AI hardware supply chain, such as specific semiconductor materials. His deep, technical analysis of bottlenecks in areas like co-packaged optics (CPO) has reportedly yielded massive returns, though his anonymity and focus on illiquid micro-cap stocks pose significant risks for followers. Leopold Aschenbrenner, a former OpenAI researcher, founded a multi-billion dollar hedge fund. His macro thesis argues that physical infrastructure—power grids, land, data centers—is the true bottleneck for AI growth, lagging far behind chip production. Consequently, his fund employs an infrastructure arbitrage strategy: heavily investing in storage and compute infrastructure companies while placing massive bearish bets (put options) against major semiconductor stocks, betting their valuations will correct as physical constraints become apparent. While their methods differ—Serenity drills into microscopic supply chain details, while Leopold takes a macroscopic, infrastructure-focused view—both share a core belief: the real power and investment alpha in the AI era lie in controlling scarce physical resources, not just software. The article concludes by noting the inherent risks in both approaches, such as liquidity issues for micro-caps and timing risks for macro bets, but suggests they signal a broader market re-evaluation of AI's foundational assets.

marsbit2h ago

Retail Investors' 'Lead Brother' Serenity vs. Newly Minted Stock God Leopold: How Are the Two Top Hunters Mining AI's 'Physical Limits'?

marsbit2h ago

Who Will Make Money in the Age of Agents?

In the Agents era of blockchain, traditional value capture theories face challenges. The "Fat Protocol" theory, dominant since 2016, suggested protocols capture most value as their tokens are essential for network use. However, the proliferation of interchangeable L1s, L2s, and modular layers has eroded protocol scarcity and pricing power. Conversely, the "Fat App" theory posits that applications capturing user relationships (like wallets and exchanges) become the primary value layer by controlling distribution and transaction flows. This aligns with the current "Great Repricing" cycle. Agents disrupt this logic. As software users, they lack brand loyalty, prioritize cost and efficiency, and switch between platforms seamlessly. This undermines the front-end UX moats that "Fat Apps" rely on. The article explores several potential futures: 1. **Headless Applications:** Current leading apps could strip their front-ends and become backend API infrastructure for Agents, preserving their role. 2. **Protocol Resurgence:** If integration becomes trivial, Agents might bypass aggregators and interact directly with protocols, reviving "Fat Protocol" dynamics. 3. **Pricing Power Collapse:** Agents' rational, frictionless routing could commoditize the entire stack, compressing margins toward cost and leaving little profit for intermediaries. 4. **Unprecedented Activity:** Agents may enable new, high-frequency, machine-to-machine economic activities, expanding the total value pie even if margins are thin. 5. **A New, Unnamed Model:** Historically, major tech shifts (like the internet's attention economy) create unforeseen business models. The Agents era may spawn entirely new ways to capture value. The most likely outcome is a coexistence where "Fat Apps" continue to serve human users valuing UX, while a separate, Agent-driven economy emerges governed by different rules—where loyalty is based on factors like liquidity, latency, and settlement guarantees rather than brand.

marsbit3h ago

Who Will Make Money in the Age of Agents?

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片