温馨提示：本站仅提供公开网络链接索引服务，不存储、不篡改任何第三方内容，所有内容版权归原作者所有
AI智能索引来源：http://www.bee.com/ar/55451.html
点击访问原文链接

Defection and Independence: Revisiting the Lisk ArgumentRecommended Articles | Bee Network

进入原网站 导航首页
Defection and Independence: Revisiting the Lisk ArgumentRecommended Articles | Bee Network Login الأخبار الشائعة منصة إطلاق ميمي وكلاء الذكاء الاصطناعي ديسي مستكشف السلسلة الأعلى لنوبي 100x عملات معدنية لعبة النحل المواقع الأساسية يجب أن يكون لديك التطبيق مشاهير التشفير ديبين الناشئين الأساسية كاشف الفخ الأدوات الأساسية المواقع المتقدمة التبادلات أدوات NFT أهلاً، خروج عالم الويب 3 ألعاب تطبيق خلية نحل منصة النمو إعلان يبحث إنجليزي إعادة شحن العملات تسجيل الدخول تحميل ويب 3 يوني ألعاب تطبيق خلية نحل إعلان بيت•تحليل•النص الرئيسي Defection and Independence: Revisiting the Lisk ArgumentRecommended Articlesتحليلمنذ 7 أشهرجديدوايت 24٬4201 21 Original author: Jiawei @IOSG

Source: IOSG Ventures

Three years ago, we wrote an article about Appchain, which was triggered by dYdX’s announcement that it would migrate its decentralized derivatives protocol from StarkEx L2 to the Cosmos chain, launching its v4 version as an independent blockchain based on the Cosmos SDK and Tendermint consensus.

In 2022, Appchain may be a relatively marginal technology option. As we head into 2025, with the launch of more and more Appchains, particularly Unichain and HyperEVM, the market’s competitive landscape is quietly shifting, and a trend centered around Appchain is forming. This article will explore our Appchain Thesis from this perspective.

The choice between Uniswap and Hyperliquid

▲ Source: Unichain

The idea of Unichain emerged quite early. Nascent founder Dan Elitzer published “The Inevitability of UNIchain” in 2022, highlighting Uniswap’s scale, brand, liquidity structure, and demand for performance and value capture, pointing to the inevitability of its launch. Discussions about Unichain have been ongoing ever since.

Unichain officially launched in February, and over 100 applications and infrastructure providers have already built on it. Its current TVL is approximately $1 billion, ranking it among the top five L2 blockchains. Flashblocks with a 200ms block time and the Unichain Verification Network will be launched in the future.

▲ Source: DeFiLlama

As a perp, Hyperliquid has clearly had a need for Appchain and deep customization since day 1. In addition to its core products, Hyperliquid also launched HyperEVM, which, like HyperCore, is protected by the HyperBFT consensus mechanism.

In other words, in addition to its own powerful perp products, Hyperliquid is also exploring the possibility of building an ecosystem. Currently, the HyperEVM ecosystem has exceeded $2 billion in TVL, and ecological projects are beginning to emerge.

From the development of Unichain and HyperEVM, we can intuitively see two points:

1. The competitive landscape between L1 and L2 is beginning to diverge. The combined TVL of the Unichain and HyperEVM ecosystems exceeds $3 billion. These assets would have previously been deposited on general-purpose L1/L2 platforms like Ethereum and Arbitrum. The independent development of top applications has directly led to a loss of these platforms’ core value sources, including TVL, transaction volume, transaction fees, and MEV.

In the past, L1/L2 and applications like Uniswap and Hyperliquid enjoyed a symbiotic relationship: applications brought activity and users to the platforms, while the platforms provided security and infrastructure. Now, Unichain and HyperEVM have become platform layers themselves, entering direct competition with other L1/L2 platforms. They are not only competing for users and liquidity, but also for developers, inviting other projects to build on their chains. This has significantly changed the competitive landscape.

2. Unichain and HyperEVM’s expansion paths are fundamentally different from the current L1/L2 models. While the latter often build infrastructure first and then use incentives to attract developers, Unichain and HyperEVM’s model is “product first”—they first establish a market-proven core product with a large user base and brand recognition, and then build an ecosystem and network effects around this product.

This approach is more efficient and sustainable. Instead of “buying” the ecosystem through high developer incentives, they “attract” it through the network effects and technological advantages of their core products. Developers choose to build on HyperEVM because of the high-frequency trading users and real demand scenarios there, not because of vague incentive promises. This is clearly a more organic and sustainable growth model.

What has changed in the past three years?

▲ Source: zeeve

First, the maturity of the technology stack and the development of third-party service providers. Three years ago, building an Appchain required teams to master the full blockchain stack. However, with the development and maturity of RaaS services like OP Stack, Arbitrum Orbit, and AltLayer, developers can now combine modules on demand, from execution and data availability to settlement and interoperability, much like using cloud services. This significantly reduces the engineering complexity and initial capital investment required to build an Appchain. The shift in operating models from self-built infrastructure to purchased services provides flexibility and feasibility for innovation at the application layer.

Secondly, brand and user mindset are key factors. We all know that attention is a scarce resource. Users are often loyal to an application’s brand, not its underlying technology: they use Uniswap for its user experience, not because it runs on Ethereum. With the widespread adoption of multi-chain wallets and further improvements in UX, users will become almost unaware of using different chains—their first points of contact are often wallets and applications. When applications build their own chains, users’ assets, identities, and usage habits are embedded within the application ecosystem, creating a powerful network effect.

▲ Source: رمز مميز صالة

Most importantly, applications are increasingly pursuing economic sovereignty. In the traditional L1/L2 architecture, we can see a clear “top-down” trend in value flow:

Application layer creates value (Uniswap trading, Aave lending) Users pay fees for using the application (application fees + gas fee), part of these fees go to the protocol, and part goes to LPs or other participants 100% of the gas fees go to L1 validators or L2 sorters MEV is divided among searchers, builders and validators in different proportions Finally, L1 tokens capture other values besides app fees through staking In this chain, the application layer that creates the most value actually captures the least.

According to Token Terminal, of Uniswap’s $6.4 billion in total value creation (including LP returns, gas fees, etc.), the protocol/developers, equity investors, and token holders have received less than 1%. Since its launch, Uniswap has generated $2.7 billion in gas revenue for Ethereum, which is roughly 20% of Ethereum’s settlement fees.

But what if the application has its own chain?

They can collect gas fees for themselves and use their own tokens as gas tokens; internalize MEV, minimize malicious MEV by controlling the sorter, and return benign MEV to users; or customize the fee model to achieve a more complex fee structure, etc.

In this light, seeking to internalize value becomes the ideal choice for applications. When an application’s bargaining power is sufficiently strong, it will naturally demand greater economic benefits. Therefore, high-quality applications have a weak dependency on the underlying chain, while the underlying chain has a strong dependency on high-quality applications.

ملخص

▲ Source: Dune@reallario

1. The chart above roughly compares the revenue of protocols (red) and applications (green) since 2020. We can clearly see that the value captured by applications has been gradually increasing, reaching approximately 80% this year. This may, to some extent, overturn Joel Monegro’s famous theory of “fat protocols, thin applications.”

We are witnessing a paradigm shift from the “fat protocol” theory to the “fat application” theory. Historically, the pricing logic for تشفير projects has primarily focused on “technical breakthroughs” and the development of underlying infrastructure. In the future, pricing will gradually shift to a more focused approach based on brand, traffic, and value capture. If applications can easily build their own chains based on modular services, L1’s traditional “rental collection” model will be challenged. Just as the rise of SaaS has reduced the bargaining power of traditional software giants, the maturity of modular infrastructure is also weakening L1’s monopoly.

In the future, the market capitalization of leading applications will undoubtedly exceed that of most L1s. L1 valuations will shift from prior focus on “capturing the ecosystem’s total value” to a focus on becoming a stable, secure, decentralized “infrastructure service provider.” This valuation will be closer to that of public goods generating stable cash flows, rather than “monopolistic” giants that capture the lion’s share of ecosystem value. This valuation bubble will be squeezed to a certain extent, and L1s will need to rethink their positioning.

2. Regarding Appchain, our view is that due to its brand, user awareness, and highly customized on-chain capabilities, Appchain can better capture long-term user value. In the era of “fat apps,” these applications not only capture the direct value they create, but also build blockchains around them, further externalizing this value and capturing the value of the infrastructure. They are both products and platforms, serving both end users and other developers. In addition to economic sovereignty, top applications will also seek other sovereign rights: the right to decide on protocol upgrades, transaction ordering and censorship resistance, and ownership of user data.

3. Of course, this article primarily discusses top applications like Uniswap and Hyperliquid, which have already launched Appchain. Appchain’s development is still in its early stages (Uniswap’s TVL on Ethereum still accounts for 71.4%). Protocols like Aave, which involve wrapped assets and collateral and rely heavily on composability on a single chain, are also less suitable for Appchain. Relatively speaking, per-platforms whose only external requirements are oracles are more suitable for Appchain. Furthermore, Appchain is not the best choice for mid-tier applications, requiring specific analysis. I will not elaborate on this here.

هذا المقال مصدره من الانترنت: Defection and Independence: Revisiting the Lisk ArgumentRecommended Articles

Related: A complete review of the 15 projects shortlisted for Binance MVB Season 10Recommended Articles Author | Asher ( @Asher_0210 ) Last week, BNBChain announced the tenth season of MVB investment projects. MVB is an incubator project launched by Binance called “Most Valuable Builder”. This season of MVB is jointly hosted by BNBChain, YZiLabs and CMCLabs, aiming to provide all-round support for start-up projects from financing strategies, token economic design to team building, and promote BNBChain’s vision of “popularizing one billion Web 3 users”. The projects announced for investment include AI, DeFi, DePin, DeSci, Payment, and RWA, totaling 15 projects across six sectors. Alex Odagiu, Investment Director of YZi Labs, said: “At YZi Labs, we remain committed to supporting visionary founders who are at the forefront of real-world utility and long-term impact. After completing a series of offline events in New York (from EASY Residency…

تحليل #عملة # المشفرة# ديفي# ايثريوم# السوقرمز #© 版权声明المصفوفة 上一篇 The DeFi Veteran's 2025 Summer Counterattack and Ecosystem InnovationRecommended Articles 下一篇 a16z's comprehensive advice to TradFi on developing crypto businessRecommended Articles 相关文章 Bitcoin surges on expectations of a Federal Reserve rate cut: Can the cryptocurrency rally continue? 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 15٬737 Trivia: The first DApp on Ethereum was a prediction market 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 17٬838 1 Dialogue with Solana founder Anatoly: The market is over-pursuing stablecoins but underestimating their true potential 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 26٬429 7 Crypto whale trading highlights: Insider loses $40 million weekly, followers suffer massive losses. 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 16٬001 1 The next SEC chairman candidate is announced, and Reserve Protocol becomes the biggest winner 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 51٬312 31 December started with a flash crash, and BTC’s key support level of $80,000 is in danger. 6086cf14eb90bc67ca4fc62b 14٬736 1 1 تعليق يجب عليك تسجيل الدخول لتترك تعليق! تسجيل الدخول على الفور Harrison ضيف If you refuse to change, you can’t stop the world from changing. The algorithm is real~there we go.

منذ 4 أشهر Bee.com أكبر بوابة Web3 في العالم الشركاء كوين كارب بينانس CoinMarketCap كوين جيكو كوين لايف الدروع قم بتنزيل تطبيق Bee Network وابدأ رحلة web3 ورق ابيض الأدوار التعليمات © 2021-2026. جميع الحقوق محفوظة. سياسة الخصوصية | شروط الخدمة تحميل تطبيق Bee Network وابدأ رحلة web3 أكبر بوابة Web3 في العالم الشركاء CoinCarp Binance CoinMarketCap CoinGecko Coinlive Armors ورق ابيض الأدوار التعليمات © 2021-2026. جميع الحقوق محفوظة. سياسة الخصوصية | شروط الخدمة يبحث يبحثفي الموقععلى تشيناجتماعيأخبار العنوان: صيادو الإنزال الجوي تحليل البيانات مشاهير التشفير كاشف الفخ العربية English 繁體中文 简体中文 日本語 Tiếng Việt 한국어 Bahasa Indonesia हिन्दी اردو Русский العربية

智能索引记录