熱門話題
#
Bonk 生態迷因幣展現強韌勢頭
#
有消息稱 Pump.fun 計劃 40 億估值發幣,引發市場猜測
#
Solana 新代幣發射平臺 Boop.Fun 風頭正勁
大體上同意這個觀點。需要注意的是,使用 Celestia 進行數據可用性(即帶寬)並不意味著他們必須押注於 TIA,但隨著時間的推移,這可能會帶來顯著的成本節約和互操作性好處。
就像使用 AWS 或 Azure 並不意味著他們必須押注於 AMZN 或 MSFT 一樣。
目前企業推動獨立鏈的趨勢並不意味著 Rollups 不是最終目標,在我看來,這更像是當前的基礎設施還不夠好。
例如,在以太坊的案例中:數據可用性並沒有以足夠快的速度擴展以滿足他們的雄心(而且由於技術挑戰和未解的問題,這裡存在平台風險),慢最終性是一個問題,最大化對齊遊戲(例如,規範橋接 = Rollup)充其量是一個分心(而且大多數情況下會妨礙構建優秀產品),所有 Rollups(除了 Facet)都可以由管理員升級……我可以繼續說下去。
事實上,我認為我們所建立的基礎設施在很大程度上與實際需要的東西是正交的。
順便提一下,AWS 大部分收入來自於長尾企業,擁有正確基礎設施的互操作網絡效應可能會對基礎層產生顛覆性影響。
但我們仍然有很多工作要做。不過好消息是,我認為我們很快就會看到 Celestia 雲計算理論是否在方向上是正確的(即接下來的 3 - 12 個月)。
進一步闡述一下,我認為 Celestia 的成功與其能夠讓路並允許其他人創造和捕獲價值的能力密切相關——你甚至不需要知道它的存在。它應該僅僅存在於為企業及其用戶提供更好的鏈上產品體驗(高性能 + 用戶可驗證性——如果需要的話)。
這裡的主張是,你可以在用戶所在的地方發行和結算,同時節省成本。沒有對齊遊戲需要應對。你可以專注於在一個儘可能簡單的基礎上構建一個 10 倍更好的產品。
同樣重要的是要記住,在 AWS / 雲計算的早期,華爾街的共識是這是一項瘋狂的賭注。即使是像拉里·埃里森這樣的業內人士也無法理解這一點。



8月13日 21:11
This isn't a 1 off. This is the start of a massive trend of real businesses building their own L1 blockchains. We're in talks with tons of other companies (including some major fortune 500s) who are considering launching their own L1s.
Years ago, enterprise blockchains failed and have been a 3rd rail for a long time. So why now? Why are mature businesses starting to build blockchains again?
And why are they building L1s above anything else?
There are two major reasons enterprise blockchains are coming back:
1/ Stablecoins are maturing: The finance teams we talk to are not afraid or unfamiliar with stablecoins anymore. Thanks to the Circle IPO and coming regulation, they see stablecoins as a powerful and safe technology that can help them cut costs, streamline operations, and earn more on their cash reserves or customer deposits. Most big companies are putting in place infrastructure to hold and move stablecoins. The U.S., Japan, and many other countries are pushing forward stablecoin regulations, and the dust is settling in our favor.
2/ Payments, not provenance: In the previous wave of enterprise blockchain hype most of the use cases were around provenance (aka tracking the origin and lifecycle of some multi-company process, like tracking raw materials across a supply chain or tracking the usage of donor capital). This was always a weird use case that could technically be done with a database. The problem was trust.
Now, the corporations we're talking to are looking at payments as their first use case, almost no matter what industry they're in. Most B2B and B2C payments providers and networks charge merchants and businesses high margins, take days to settle, and have real settlement risk. These problems are much worse as soon as you go cross-border or need to deal with FX. So for multinational corporations (especially marketplaces like Airbnb), in-house blockchain-based payment solutions could lead to billions in savings and better experiences for customers, employees, and gig workers.
And why are they building L1s, not L2s, or contracts?
1/ L1s are battle-tested and familiar to technical decision makers: L1s as a technology platform are well-understood and familiar after 10+ years of development. Ethereum, Bitcoin, Solana, Sui, Aptos -- every blockchain that people who don't work in the industry know about is an L1 (base maybe being the exception). Cosmos tech alone supports 200+ chains and $70b of assets across almost every vertical, and Hyperliquid, the biggest breakout of the last year, cemented this. (Plus the most successful enterprise blockchains like Canton are L1s).
L2s are exciting but they are still nascent and poorly understood by comparison. (Try explaining the difference between a stage 1 and stage 2 rollup or what a validating bridge is to the CTO of a consumer marketplace business). Decision makers who operate mature businesses usually don't want to take risks on emerging new platforms. They're already taking a big enough risk by getting into crypto, so they need to do it in the way that is most legible to their stakeholders.
2/ Minimizing platform risk: Most of these companies don't want to bet on ETH or SOL or TIA or anything else. They just want to bet on themselves. Building an L1 is the best way to do that. Remember, big companies usually use multiple cloud providers to avoid platform risk from AWS or Microsoft. And you can bet they see Ethereum or Solana as much riskier than those partners.
3/ Control and connectivity: Open, transparent L1s give these companies a great balance of control (so they can own their own platform) and connectivity (so they can plug into and interoperate with the broader crypto-corporate landscape as it evolves). Interop between L2s and other chains like Solana relies on 3rd parties, and often struggles from finality issues due to fraud / Zk proving windows and Ethereum's slow finality. L1s don't have this issue. Settlement happens instantly and deterministically, so interop can function the same way. That is a killer feature when combined with the ability to have your own walled garden where you implement any necessary KYC/AML and application specific logic.
Very excited for the next wave of the internet of blockchains
13.87K
熱門
排行
收藏