Author: YQ, Crypto KOL

Translation: @Golden Finance xz

Since 2015, I have been deeply engaged in research in the field of scalability. From sharding technology, Plasma, application chains to Rollups, I have experienced the iteration of all technical routes. In 2021, I founded AltLayer, focusing on app Rollups and Rollup-as-a-Service solutions, maintaining deep cooperation with all mainstream Rollup technology stacks and teams in the ecosystem. Therefore, when Vitalik proposed a fundamental reconstruction of our understanding of L2, I naturally paid close attention. His recent article marks a milestone moment.

What Vitalik has done is not easy. Acknowledging that the core assumptions of 2020 have not been realized as expected—this candid attitude is something most leaders lack. The roadmap centered on Rollups was built on the premise that "L2 will serve as Ethereum's branded sharding." Four years of market data, however, have shown a different picture: L2 has evolved into autonomous platforms with independent economic incentives, and the scaling speed of Ethereum L1 has exceeded expectations, rendering the original framework disconnected from the current situation.

Continuing to defend the old narrative would be easier. It would also be simpler to push teams to chase visions that have been disproven by the market. But true leadership should not be like this. Acknowledging the gap between expectations and reality, proposing new paths, and moving towards a brighter future—this is the responsibility that should be taken. And Vitalik's discourse does just that.

1. What is the reality?

Vitalik actually pointed out two intertwined realities that together constitute the necessity for strategic adjustment. First, the decentralization process of L2 is slower than expected. Currently, only three major L2s (Arbitrum, OP Mainnet, Base) have reached the first stage of decentralization, while some L2 teams have clearly stated that due to regulatory requirements or business model constraints, they may never pursue complete decentralization. This is not a moral flaw but reflects the economic reality of sequencer revenue as the main business model for L2 operators.

Secondly, Ethereum L1 has achieved substantial scaling. Transaction fees are low, the Pectra upgrade has doubled the data block capacity, and the Gas limit will continue to increase before 2026. When the initial Rollup roadmap was designed, L1 fees were high and congested, but this premise is no longer valid. Currently, L1 can handle a large number of transactions at reasonable costs, which changes the value positioning of L2: from "a necessity to ensure availability" to "an optional choice for specific scenarios."

2. Reconstructing the Trust Spectrum

Vitalik's core theoretical contribution is redefining L2 as existing on a continuous spectrum, rather than as a single category with uniform obligations. The metaphor of "branded sharding" once implied that all L2s should pursue second-stage decentralization and operate as extensions of Ethereum's value and security guarantees. The new framework acknowledges that different L2s serve different goals, and for projects with specific needs, stage 0 or stage 1 may very well become a reasonable endpoint.

This reconstruction has significant strategic implications, as it eliminates the implicit judgment that "L2s that do not pursue complete decentralization are failures." An L2 that serves institutional clients needing asset freezing functions and is regulated is not a flawed version of Arbitrum, but a differentiated product targeting different markets. By legitimizing this spectrum of existence, Vitalik allows L2s to honestly position themselves rather than making decentralization commitments that lack economic incentive support.

3. Native Rollup Precompilation Proposal

The technical core of Vitalik's article lies in the native Rollup precompilation scheme. Currently, each L2 has built its own system for proving state transitions to Ethereum: Optimistic Rollup uses fraud proofs with a 7-day challenge period, while ZK Rollup relies on validity proofs from custom circuits. Each implementation requires independent audits, may hide vulnerabilities, and must synchronize upgrades when Ethereum hard forks change EVM behavior. This fragmented state poses security risks and maintenance burdens for the entire ecosystem.

The native Rollup precompilation will be directly embedded as EVM execution verification functions in Ethereum. Each Rollup will not need to maintain a customized proof system but can simply call this shared infrastructure. This move will bring significant advantages: replacing dozens of independent implementations with a single audited codebase, automatically maintaining compatibility with Ethereum upgrades, and potentially eliminating the security committee mechanism after the precompilation function has been tested in practice.

4. Synchronizing Composability Vision

The post on ethresear.ch elaborates on the mechanism for achieving synchronized composability between L1 and L2. Currently, transferring assets or executing logic across L1 and L2 boundaries requires waiting for a final confirmation period (Optimistic Rollup requires 7 days, ZK Rollup requires several hours) or relying on fast cross-chain bridges that carry counterparty risk. Synchronized composability will allow transactions to atomically call L1 and L2 states, enabling cross-chain read and write operations in a single transaction, ensuring that transactions either fully succeed or fully roll back.

The proposal designs three types of blocks: regular ordering blocks for low-latency L2 transactions, boundary blocks that mark the end of a slot, and based blocks that allow permissionless construction after boundary blocks. During the window of these blocks, any builder can create blocks that interact with both L1 and L2 states.

5. Responses from L2 Teams

Major L2 teams responded within hours, showcasing a healthy strategic diversification. This is precisely the situation that the trust spectrum framework proposed by Vitalik aims to promote: different teams can pursue differentiated positioning without deliberately creating the illusion that "everyone is on the same road to the same destination."

Diverse responses reflect a healthy market. Arbitrum positions itself as an independent ecosystem, Base focuses on applications and user experience, Linea closely follows Vitalik's native Rollup direction, and Optimism emphasizes its progress while acknowledging challenges. These strategic choices are not about right or wrong; they represent differentiated strategies for different market segments—which is the legitimacy granted by the trust spectrum framework.

6. Vitalik's Profound Understanding of Economic Realities

One of the most important insights in Vitalik's article is the implicit acknowledgment of the economic models of L2. When he points out that some L2s "may never exceed the first stage" due to "regulatory demands" and "ultimate control" considerations, he is essentially acknowledging that L2s, as commercial entities, have legitimate economic interests that fundamentally differ from the idealized "branded sharding" model. Sequencer revenue is a real commercial demand, and regulatory compliance requirements are unavoidable realities. Expecting L2s to abandon these interests for ideological consistency is itself inconsistent with business logic.

7. The Path Forward Planned by Vitalik

Vitalik's discourse is constructive, rather than merely diagnostic. He provides several specific directions for L2s that wish to maintain value in the context of ongoing L1 scaling. These are not hard mandates but differentiated development suggestions for L2s—when the selling point of "cheaper Ethereum" is no longer sufficient, they can use these to build their own advantages.

8. Conclusion

The article published by Vitalik Buterin in February 2026 marks a strategic recalibration of Ethereum's L2 strategy. Its core insight is that L2 has evolved into independent platforms with legitimate economic interests, rather than Ethereum's obligatory "branded sharding." Vitalik does not attempt to resist this trend but advocates for embracing reality by establishing a trust spectrum that recognizes diverse paths, providing native Rollup infrastructure that can enhance L1-L2 integration for those in need, and designing mechanisms for synchronized composability across layers.

The responses from the L2 ecosystem demonstrate healthy diversity. Arbitrum emphasizes independence, Base focuses on applications, Linea aligns with the native Rollup direction, and Optimism continues to push improvements while acknowledging challenges. This diversity is precisely the expected outcome of the trust spectrum framework: different teams can follow different strategies without masquerading as if everyone is on the same path.

For Ethereum, this route correction maintains its credibility by acknowledging reality rather than defending outdated assumptions. Given the maturity of ZK-EVM technology, the relevant technical proposals are feasible. The strategic proposals create space for the healthy evolution of the ecosystem. This exemplifies adaptive leadership in the tech field: recognizing changes in the environment and proposing new paths forward, rather than stubbornly adhering to old strategies after the market has made its choices.

After ten years of deep research in scalability and four years of operating a Rollup infrastructure company, I have seen too many crypto leaders refuse to adjust when reality differs from expectations, and none of those outcomes were good. What Vitalik has done is difficult—publicly acknowledging that the vision of 2020 needs adjustment. But it is the right decision. Clinging to a narrative that cannot keep up with the market is unhelpful for anyone. The path forward is becoming clearer by the day. This in itself holds significant value.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。