"Native Bitcoin L2" and "sustainable yield"—we've heard these promises too many times, and they all ended in failure. Most of the so-called Bitcoin L2 solutions on the market are just layer-2 solutions with different appearances, relying on centralized cross-chain bridges and single sequencers.
But this raises an interesting question: if existing solutions all have these pain points, how should the next generation of Bitcoin L2 break through? Is the core in solving decentralized verification, sequencing mechanisms, or cross-chain security? How much room is there for innovation in technology stacks and economic models? These are the areas worth exploring in depth.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
11 Likes
Reward
11
6
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
NullWhisperer
· 01-21 16:29
lol the "sustainable yield" bait-and-switch never gets old... technically speaking most of these "bitcoin l2s" are just sidechains with better marketing. single sequencer = single point of failure, which audit findings suggest is basically asking for trouble.
Reply0
quiet_lurker
· 01-21 09:46
After hearing so many times about "revolutionary breakthroughs," it still feels the same old story, and I'm a bit exhausted.
View OriginalReply0
MEVictim
· 01-18 18:07
Tired of this rhetoric, another "revolutionary" plan, but in the end, it's still the same old story.
View OriginalReply0
degenwhisperer
· 01-18 18:06
Tired of this spiel? Always about decentralization and sustainability, talking up a storm, but isn't it just a rug in the end?
View OriginalReply0
RugPullAlarm
· 01-18 18:05
Here we go again, with the "sustainable yield" rhetoric. Last year, I analyzed the fund flow of a leading L2, and the concentration of large addresses was as high as 73%. Do they still dare to boast about decentralization? On-chain data never lies; it all depends on whether the project team dares to disclose wallet addresses.
View OriginalReply0
Degen4Breakfast
· 01-18 17:52
It's the same old story... I just want to know who can still fool us next time.
"Native Bitcoin L2" and "sustainable yield"—we've heard these promises too many times, and they all ended in failure. Most of the so-called Bitcoin L2 solutions on the market are just layer-2 solutions with different appearances, relying on centralized cross-chain bridges and single sequencers.
But this raises an interesting question: if existing solutions all have these pain points, how should the next generation of Bitcoin L2 break through? Is the core in solving decentralized verification, sequencing mechanisms, or cross-chain security? How much room is there for innovation in technology stacks and economic models? These are the areas worth exploring in depth.