- Ethereum should promote its own layer two, competing with other layer twos.

From my current understanding of the Ethereum Foundation, the probability of them doing this is very small—not because they technically cannot, but because it does not align with their principles and ways of operating.

Why is that?

Because they will try to isolate themselves from trading and business operations, avoiding substantial operational activities as much as possible—even before this recent sell-off and self-reduction, they have always acted this way.

For example, many people have questioned over the past years why they do not stake their many Ethereums. Or more simply, why not keep the Ethereums in a borrowing protocol?

This way, they could earn considerable staking income and lending income annually, allowing the foundation to sustain itself.

Their response is very simple:

They avoid such actions not only to steer clear of commercial operations but also to minimize conflicts of interest.

For instance, if they put their own Ethereums into a certain lending protocol (like AAVE), outsiders would naturally regard this action as endorsing the AAVE project, which would break their neutral image and violate their neutrality principle.

Thus, they have always preferred to leave the Ethereums there without engaging in any DeFi activities or project operations.

Similarly, if they built their own layer two expansion and participated in commercial competition within the ecosystem, it would also bring various conflicts of interest and entanglements.

There is, however, one situation they might consider: that is launching a test-net-like layer two network, which is not intended for real business operations but to test technical ideas, rather than launching a truly operational layer two expansion running real transactions on the main network.

- Last Friday, there was feedback from readers on "The pace of changing times is beyond personal perception," expressing confusion about what the article intended to convey.

That was a tumultuous article.

Writing that article stemmed from the feeling that the pace of change in the times was too rapid, catching people off guard.

I wrote the first draft in one go, without any modifications in between.

However, after finishing and reading it, I felt something was off and realized this type of article couldn’t be published, so I modified it repeatedly, deleting anything I felt was too straightforward.

This is the second version.

The original text of the second version was posted on Friday afternoon around 5 PM. However, it was informed within 20 minutes that the article violated regulations and got blocked.

This surprised me; I truly couldn't see what was inappropriate in the text.

A colleague suggested using AI to "filter" the entire article and make modifications, which led to the third version.

I read this AI-filtered and modified article, and it had basically removed the "flavor" and "traces" of my original text, making it look somewhat like a "publication."

However, I felt some words in this version were too AI-like, so I deleted part of the AI-written content. This became the fourth version, which is what readers ultimately saw in the public account.

This was the finalized version after three modifications.

Since it had removed almost all of the "flavor" and "traces" of my first version, especially eliminating some logical connections and conclusions that should have been coherent, I can understand why some readers provided feedback that they couldn't quite grasp it.

Fortunately, the article still retained some examples of phenomena occurring in society, hoping readers could connect these phenomena and think about them, especially considering what we might see and what might happen in the future.

These are all closely related to every ordinary person.

Recently, many people have been worried about the crypto ecosystem, but I am not worried at all. The peaks and valleys of the crypto ecosystem are like the normal change of the seasons. Right now is a valley, but in the future, we can still see peaks. For this ecosystem, we can welcome brightness by waiting patiently.

However, some matters showing a "valley" are not a normal change but may indicate a complete change in logic and direction. For those matters, waiting will not solve the problem, but only delay the opportunity. That is what every ordinary person should pay more attention to and reflect on.

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。