Hasu Dialogue with Su Zhu: Ethereum VS New Public Chain Dragon Slayer is becoming a giant

Su Zhu (now known as Zhu Su on Twitter), founder of Three Arrows Capital, one of the most powerful men in the crypto world, now has an additional identity tag, and was selected by Cryptobriefing as the top ten “villains” in the crypto world in 2021. Everything stems from the previous debate between Su Zhu and Synthetix founder Kain Warwick on the new public chain of Ethereum\L2\. Almost most of the well-known KOLs participated in it, and gradually evolved from a personal quarrel to a public chain. Controversy.

Su Zhu, who questioned Ethereum and L2, suddenly stood on the opposite side of the Ethereum community. According to Qianfu, what is Su Zhu’s real thoughts and why he changed from a staunch supporter of Ethereum to a doubter? Where are the opportunities for the new public chain? ?

This dialogue will answer your questions. This article is compiled from the podcast audio “Ethereum vs. Alt L1s” of Paradigm’s co-researcher Hasu’s dialogue with Su Zhu. The two are tit-for-tat on many points of view. You come and I are very exciting.

The content of this article was written and compiled by TechFlow community volunteer 0xz, and I would like to pay high tribute to the great and noble comrade 0xz, Ruisby.

Shenchao TechFlow is compiled and compiled with Su Zhu’s authorization

TL; DR: (too long, didn’t read)

Su Zhu:

1. Early Bitcoin and Ethereum players like me are very likely to make a mistake of becoming an extremist.

2. The current situation of Ethereum is very similar to that of Bitcoin in 2017. New users do not necessarily have to choose them, even if they are indeed the best public chain. For the public chain, the acquisition of new users is crucial, and Ethereum cannot do this now.

3. The fact is that a big reason for people entering the field of encryption now is to enjoy the benefits of early Bitcoin and Ethereum holders, so they will actively participate in those new public chains, but now Bitcoin and Ethereum are more important to them. It’s like a philosophy coin.

4. When the price of gas continues to rise, no one has the ability to defi on the chain in the end, and then the price plummets and people stop using it. This negative effect can also be verified on nft. When the price of nft continues to rise, no one buys nft in the end, and people stop using it.

5. I think that Ethereum today is less aware of users and developers than ever before. And the current Ethereum community has a kind of arrogance similar to the Bitcoin community back then, but this arrogance will be present in every developed community. Because when people become billionaires, their ideas are usually how to maintain, not how to change.

6. Ethereum and Bitcoin are two ancient currency technical representatives. Everyone knows that holding these two tokens alone cannot make people truly wealthy, and only the elderly hold these tokens. But with a lot of new tokens, people can get rich if they participate.

7. At present, Ethereum has become a money-first public chain due to over-optimization, and it is also the only target that may compete with Bitcoin in terms of value storage. But the biggest difference with Bitcoin is that it has a permanent inflation model with a security model.

8. New public chains start from scratch. They have no technical debt, nor do they need to think about how to surpass Bitcoin like Ethereum. The only thing they need to do is how to attract more new users, which makes them grow faster .

9. Once Ethereum loses innovation, the only thing left in Ethereum is EVM, and those L2 things, their methods are not worthy of the name.

10. When Web2 investors came to the crypto space, one of the indicators they valued most was the growth rate of the network. If they had already invested in Ethereum, they would think, why is this happening? If Ethereum is waiting for its own expansion, then Ethereum sounds more like Bitcoin, so they will consider hedging and choose to invest in a new public chain.

11. Although many of the current new public chains cannot be decentralized, we must understand that even now, Ethereum is considered by some big people to be not decentralized.

12. My biggest worry is that in the final game of cryptocurrency, people like you and me may not decide the direction of the game. There are many people from Web2 who have entered the crypto field, and they don’t care about decentralization at all.

13. They overlooked one point. New users do not have the need or patience to wait for Ethereum to be truly perfected. In addition, for projects like Starkware, he does not belong to Ethereum. He only belongs to himself. I don’t think they intend to contribute to Ethereum. Paying rent, the conclusion is that all Layer 2 does not intend to pay rent to Ethereum, and they also want to gradually develop to Layer 1.

14. In a previous community discussion, someone asked why the Ethereum Foundation is not worried about the lack of network effects in Ethereum. People in Ethereum said that they are waiting for zk-rollup to become huge enough, and then they will have it. zk-rollup to solve this problem. But the problem is that zk-rollup is not exclusive to Ethereum, it can exist in any public chain.

15. Everyone should keep an open mind, but currently in the Ethereum community, Ethereum extremists are too active, which is very dangerous.

16. Dragon slayers will always become giant dragons. When the forerunners become giants, they will ask latecomers to follow their rules, but there will always be an endless stream of challengers, and it is difficult for them to cope with the challenges of latecomers, because latecomers will always There are various shortcuts.

17. When I chatted with Arthur and talked about LUNA, the attitude at the time was that LUNA was not built on the Ethereum chain and was not worthy of attention. But the facts are quite the opposite. At first, I thought that only Ethereum is the only real smart contract public chain, so I made such a wrong judgment, so I have to admit that I have cognitive blind spots, and at the same time I have to be brave to break it.

18. But the current attitude of Ethereum extremists to other public chains is the same as the attitude of Bitcoin extremists to Ethereum during the initial bear market. I hope people can think about this issue.

19. For me, any point of view is neither persuading people to sell ether, nor persuade people to buy ether. I simply point out the huge gap between what Ethereum should be and what Ethereum is currently.

Hasu:

1. The ideas and practices of Bitcoin extremists have not allowed Bitcoin to develop towards a better network and better investment.

2. These new public chains can be understood as a centralized database at a certain moment, but it also means that they may be like this from the beginning, so the worst case is that these new public chains will have nothing; but if the most Good things happen, given that they have a very similar roadmap with Ethereum, there may be a very good sharded database, following the old road of Ethereum.

3. At present, the development of new public chains is mostly maintained by high incentives. This is not a sustainable development. In addition, even if they can develop, they will encounter similar problems with Ethereum. I don’t think They can do better.

4. I am a person who firmly believes that the future is a multi-chain world, and cross-chain is very important in the future; in addition, I also agree that in the future, people will not interact directly with the blockchain, but will interact through applications. The program is the only interface for people to contact the blockchain in the future. Users have no right to decide which chain to use, only developers have the right to decide this matter; I also agree that the existing public chain will be split, and the computing database will be different. Steps are split, because after splitting, a highly optimized layer can be built for faster execution.

text:

Hasu: Suzhu, congratulations on your winning the title of cryptocurrency villain in 2021. Your article has recently been ranked No. 1 in reading volume. This is very impressive. Do you have anything to say to your fans?

Suzhu: This is really interesting. Over the years, my image has been portrayed by the media. Around 2019, I am a very professional Ethereum and Bitcoin believer. With the development of the market in the past two years, my My fans have increased by 20 times, and I have gradually entered other fields.

Now I like analysis, and especially like making predictions. It expresses bad opinions on BTC and ETH, and is not liked by others in many cases, so I am now described as a villain.

For example, I now think that Ethereum’s GAS is a big problem, but those early entrants to the Ethereum community believe that Ethereum’s high GAS should be the eternal and sacred truth.

Then, I posted some tweets attacking Ethereum GAS. These tweets received 15,000+ Likes, indicating that many users, especially new users, very much agree with this view. This also shows that these new users believe that the encryption field is not Should belong only to the elders of the community, but should belong to everyone.

We will discuss this matter in detail later. So is Ethereum’s high GAS a sacred truth? What is the sacred truth in the field of encryption?

Ethereum and Bitcoin have many similarities. First, Layer 1 needs to be as decentralized as possible, and then expanded through Layer 2, such as Bitcoin’s Lightning Network and Ethereum’s Zk-roll up and Optimism Rollup. This is because Users attach importance to the decentralized public chain infrastructure as well as the network quality and community quality of the public chain. So, I don’t mean to say that the sacred truths of high GAS claimed by the veterans of Ethereum are wrong. I just want to say that maybe they are right, but there are many other truths that are more correct at the same time.

Recall that in the bear market, institutions like Multicoin had different views on cryptocurrencies from most funds and investment institutions at the time. At that time, most people thought that Bitcoin and Ethereum were enough for two chains, but Multicoin firmly Investing in new public chains, investing in public chains that can be used by billions of people at the same time, such as Solana, they invested in many things that seemed incomprehensible at the time, but in 2021 they received extraordinary returns. Looking back at last year’s market, the current price compared with April, Bitcoin and Ethereum are basically the same, but those public chains, such as SOL, AVAX, have risen dozens of times.

So, I read some articles to analyze and saw the problems that new institutional investors were thinking about last year, and I was finally shocked by a cognitive dissonance. I think that in the current market, old players and new players are thinking about encryption. There is a very big split between the way the project is treated and the way it treats the project. An obvious data is that more than half of the users who currently use Metamask only use BSC, which to a large extent shows that people are more willing to participate in the new network because they can eat the dividends of the early development of the network. A Bitcoin/Ethereum player like me is very likely to make the mistake of becoming an extreme Bitcoin/Ethereumist.

As a member of the Ethereum community, I very much agree that ETH is an asset that we should make bigger, and I also think that Bitcoin and Ethereum are the most reliable currencies in cryptocurrencies. They have the best issuance version and the most decentralized power. . But this is not very helpful for the introduction of new users on the network, which is why the market value of Ethereum has gradually approached Bitcoin last year. At the same time, this is also the reason why the market value of those new public chains can gradually approach Ethereum.

From the point of view of the number of addresses, the current active address of Ethereum is not much higher than that of 17 years, and it has not even reached twice. We have analyzed before and the reason given is that the whales will choose Ethereum. Because of the good security and stability, the whales hold a large amount of Ethereum; but at the same time, this has also led to new users choosing to go to Layer 2 or other new public chains.

The current situation of Ethereum is very similar to that of Bitcoin in 17 years, that is, new users do not necessarily have to choose them, even if they are indeed the best public chain. If no new users come, I am not sure that Ethereum can eventually defeat other public chains. There is no doubt that users will pay rent for the public chain of their choice, but from a business logic point of view, users are not willing to pay too high rent. I do think that Ethereum can compete with Bitcoin because Bitcoin has a very different trade-off pool. But I don’t think that Ethereum can be used by most people if it is used as a network, because they don’t need a highly decentralized network like Ethereum.

Given that most users do not value decentralization and are unwilling to pay for decentralization, more than half of Metamask users use BSC. This is really a very impressive number for me. But this does not mean that they love this network, but it means that new users now want to enter the new public chain as soon as possible, so as to eat the early dividends.

This is actually in line with the utopian spirit of encryption. For example, you are an early Ethereum or Bitcoin veteran, and you hold a lot of Ethereum or Bitcoin in your hand. Of course you hope that others will come in and buy your coins; But if you are a new user, you will most likely choose a currency that is not so diverse and old. For encryption to develop, you need a steady stream of new users.

The performance of this bull market is very different from the predictions of many mainstream currency veterans. For example, many people predict that Bitcoin will exceed $100,000 and Ethereum will exceed $6,000. But this is not the case. Since April, SOL has risen 8 times, and AVAX has risen 6 times.

The fact is that the big reason people now enter the encryption field is that they want to enjoy the benefits of early Bitcoin and Ethereum holders, so they will actively participate in those new public chains. Bitcoin and Ethereum are now like philosophical coins. If you are an ordinary person holding 1,000 or 10,000 dollars, you have not touched the basics of the public chain, heard from others what Bitcoin is, and then just bought it in the Coinbase trading account, but never Conducting on-chain transactions is like philosophy. It is only because of hearing and understanding, but there is no actual participation.

But the holders of BSC, SOL, and AVAX tokens are different. These tokens have attracted many new users, and most of the holders of tokens have also conducted corresponding on-chain transactions, so new users of these public chains The number of active addresses is increasing very fast, increasing by incredible multiples every month.

Some people think that the user growth on the new public chain comes from those defi Ponzi schemes, but in fact there are defi Ponzi schemes on Ethereum in 2019-2020, right?

The current development of Ethereum actually makes me feel a little disappointed. I think Ethereum has fallen into a founder’s dilemma, that is, the veterans of Ethereum occupy a large part of the market share. They also proved the market, but in the end they did not Win the market. I still think that Ethereum has a great opportunity to win the market and share this market with Bitcoin, but not now. Because for the public chain, the acquisition of new users is very important, and Ethereum cannot do this now.

Multicoin pointed out the negative effects of the network in the last cycle, and it is now happening: when the gas price continues to rise, no one has the ability to defi on the chain, and then the price plummets and people stop using it. This negative effect can also be verified on NFT. When the price of nft continues to rise, no one buys NFT in the end, and people stop using it.

I think that in the future, there may be a lot of public chains, because Ethereum has good times and bad times, and they have not yet expanded to the extent that people need. And I think that Ethereum has become a money-first public chain due to over-optimization, and it is also the only target that may compete with Bitcoin in terms of value storage. It is very different from Bitcoin in that it has a permanent inflation model with a security model.

There are a lot of developers on new public chains like BSC, because there are many users there, and many innovative projects this year originated from the new public chain.

Many Ethereum holders now have a bad mentality, that is, I am so rich, so new users must understand why I became rich and must follow the path I have traveled again. And in fact, holding Matic is not the best answer, because when new users ask why they choose to hold Matic instead of holding the new public chain, we cannot give an answer.

Ethereum has indeed made efforts. Through EVM, developers can quickly deploy applications to where users need it. If it was last April, I would say that Ethereum will benefit a lot from this multi-EVM because it can Bring ether to different bridges and use it as collateral. But the performance of doing this is much lower than using other public chains directly. I think performance is very important because high performance can attract more people to participate. So it can be seen that the Ethereum defi project has depreciated in the past time based on the dollar standard.

The early participants in the Ethereum community were indeed committed to using Ethereum as a network, but when the network developed, the early participants owned a large number of tokens and became very wealthy as a result, so the motivation for construction also declined. A lot. Most people also choose to cross-chain instead of acquiring new users.

Many Ethereum developers I know are cross-chain masters. They are very proficient in cross-chain. I asked them why they chose to cross-chain. They said that I am too rich, so I think that cross-chain is right. The cost is very low for me.

In fact, the current projects on Ethereum are not the most innovative. Many Ethereum projects are copying what LUNA does, such as ecosystem airdrops.

I think the current Ethereum community has a kind of arrogance similar to the Bitcoin community back then, because of the founder’s dilemma, in fact this kind of arrogance is present in every developed community.

The reason is that when people become billionaires, their ideas are usually how to maintain, not how to change. And now the new public chain projects are usually better, because the developers there are not rich yet, they need to maintain a passion for innovation, and try to create programs that millions of people use at the same time.

Hasu: To some extent, I think you made the same mistake, as you warned me a few months ago, that the ideas and practices of Bitcoin extremists did not make Bitcoin a better one. Network and better investment development.

Suzhu: My confirmation is that the issue that was warned last time is very important, and the main issue now lies in the direction of investment. If you can look at what Ethereum is hyping up now, and you can find that they are doing poorly. We can make a complete list for this.

In this way, we can find a lot of commonalities, the biggest of which is that these things are considered to be executed on Ethereum.

For example, we have invested in a project called Monaco. Its founder is like an Ethereum believer. In order to help the development of the project and even help everyone who casts the project’s NFT to provide full GAS subsidies, it cost nothing. The cost is so low that we finally decided to release tokens on BSC and AVAX.

For people like AC, he understood this a long time ago, so users only need to pay a small gas fee to get a good experience when using Phatom and Solana to interact. AVAX is also trying to do this. It is not difficult to see that the current pressure of Ethereum on other new public chains is gradually fading.

The fact is that culture is really important. This is a concept that every smart contract community needs to transmit to new users and new developers.

Starkware is an interesting example. As the dark web becomes larger and larger, a question arises, that is, does it need to pay rent to Ethereum, and does it owe anything to other public chains?

The answer is of course no, but it also introduces another point of view that people will continue to develop along technical routes that are useful to them. This point of view expands, just like the new cryptocurrency players entering the market now, they need to go to the oldest Players pay rent to continue to use their technology. This view is very popular in the current Ethereum community. Part of the reason is that EIP1559 has proved its correctness. EIP1559 has benefited Ethereum holders a lot, and EIP1559 has been copied To other chains, such as BSC.

But because the current ideas of the Ethereum community have been verified by EIP1559, I think that the challenges that Ethereum is facing now are getting bigger and bigger. The main reason is that the current state of Ethereum has lost enough network effects, cannot attract new users enough, and does not have relatively good expansion capabilities.

At the beginning of the year, I communicated with many people in the Ethereum community. They told me that Optimistic roll-up can become very huge, and it can be done once and for all, and it will definitely win the entire market.

But what I see now is that it takes seven or eight days to build a bridge, and the things that market makers can do are also greatly restricted. What I can see now is that there is a huge gap between Ethereum’s ambitions and goals and its actual implementation.

Although compared to Bitcoin, Ethereum is currently doing better. But this has also given birth to many dangerous opinions in the community. The biggest one is to flip Bitcoin. I think if Ethereum is to beat Bitcoin, Ethereum will have to become more valuable than Bitcoin, and there is still a distance.

And it is very likely that while both coins are retreating, the other coins are advancing.

This situation is like the max payne scenario of cryptocurrency. Ethereum and Bitcoin are two ancient currency technical representatives. Everyone knows that just holding these two tokens does not make people truly rich. And only old people hold these tokens, and there are many new tokens, people can get rich if they participate.

Hasu: I understand why you say that this is a cultural issue. It is indeed very meaningful, but what I want to say is that as the basic argument of the technical argument, culture is meaningless, because in the worst case, What other public chains are doing is just to calculate part of the integrity during transactions, or to propose a certain blockchain-based accountability system, so as to obtain better performance and better throughput of the public chain. In fact, this is not true scalability, it can only make them develop very well temporarily, but after a period of time, they will encounter exactly the same problem, that is, their capacity will reach the upper limit, which means Public chains like AVAX, BSC, and SOL need to selectively discard some of their users. These new public chains can be understood as a centralized database at a certain moment, but it also means that they may be like this from the beginning.

In the worst case, these new public chains will have nothing. On the contrary, they may have a very similar roadmap (the old way) to Ethereum, becoming a very good sharded database and becoming like Ethereum, but this also means that it will be a high-stakes gas model.

Suzhu: This is a way we agree. The ultimate roadmap of all public chains may be very similar, but the question is which public chain is willing to follow this roadmap to implement it faithfully.

If Ethereum only tries to surpass Bitcoin, then I think it will fail in the execution of the roadmap.

Other public chains start from scratch. The only thing they need to do is how to attract more new users. They don’t need to think about how to surpass Bitcoin, which makes them grow faster.

As you know, after the recent upgrade of AVAX, the gas fee has dropped dramatically. Assuming that Ethereum and AVAX are implementing the same roadmap, who will implement it more thoroughly and who will be more likely to provide new users and new developers with better, faster, and lower-cost services? I think this is the point.

If it is a competitor in the same field, there has never been a saying in the world that the winning rate of starting first is higher. In fact, it is very likely that the late starter has a greater winning percentage.

Taking the operating system as an example, BlackBerry was born earlier than IOS and Android, and BlackBerry also dominated the mobile operating system market for a period of time, but it turned out that IOS and Android won the market.

The first movers often have a lot of constraints. For example, the previous technology limits the follow-up development direction, which is what we call technical debt. But latecomers don’t have any technical debt. They have a completely different mentality. They don’t need to serve existing users, but try to acquire more new users.

I firmly believe in the meaning of value storage in the encryption field, which is why I think Bitcoin and Ethereum are better than other tokens in terms of value. But if you look at the implementation of the roadmap and see which network follows the roadmap to better attract new users into the encryption field, I don’t think Bitcoin and Ethereum can really do this.

I firmly believe that the price of Bitcoin will continue to rise, because Bitcoin, as the leading store of value in the encryption field, is worth investing in.

But I also see more and more people like zamani’s point of view: at some point in the future, BNB will have hundreds of millions of users, even if it is a centralized database.

Bitcoin holders need to persuade new users to buy Bitcoin as a store of value, instead of letting new users buy a new public chain that benefits people cannot refuse. Once Bitcoin investors say this, in the eyes of new users, Like a cult.

Therefore, we really need to consider how to attract more new users into the encryption field, as well as the inner thoughts of new users when interacting with cryptocurrencies, rather than thinking that they are wrong. This is also one of the biggest problems that cause cruel fluctuations in cryptocurrency prices.

Hasu: Yes, my confirmation is that for any new user, if you are just a user and only have $1w, you should not use Ethereum, but BSC, SOL, AVAX. Because the first layer of Ethereum will not be extended for any ordinary users, because that is not necessary.

So, if we fast forward two years, we can see that there will be no ordinary users on Ethereum, and there are some whales on the first layer of Ethereum. The interaction of ordinary users may be through Roll-ups. Roll-ups sends their proof to the first layer, and then they update their database like dydx, so that they can achieve decentralized applications and decentralized trust.

I think the above model is a roadmap applicable to all layers of public chains. You can say that you have a larger scale and higher throughput to attract more new users, but I think you have also said that such a network effect will not bring anything beneficial in the long run, because the total There will be a variety of new public chains. Those new public chains do not even need to do any new and different things technically. They only need to provide rewards to attract more new users. Therefore, other new public chains will also Follow the example and provide more rewards.

This is why I am not interested in participating in the new public chain, because the current development model of the new public chain is not a reliable way to extend the chain.

But Ethereum is a global, reliable and highly decentralized public chain with a sharding mechanism. If you start from the reliability of the calculation at the first layer, I think Ethereum is the only trustworthy one. And I am very interested in any public chain that adopts a development model similar to Ethereum, but for other public chains, I think they are short-sighted.

Suzhu: But what I think is that you lack an objective attitude. What you said above is too affirmative. You must be XXX, affirm XXX, so you are only interested in XXX. You know, what you said above are some bad opinions about SOL in the early days. But the fact is that SOL has attracted a lot of grassroots developers and a lot of interest in applications.

In addition, what I want to say is that of the last 20 applications we invested in, more than 15 are non-Ethereum applications. The main reason is that we are more willing to invest in those that can do better in places with a large enough number of users. program of.

For many funds, even those very fiercely opposed to SOL, are also trying to enter the new public chain to invest. So I hope you can jump out of the purely technical point of view and change to a more objective perspective.

Now I see that the development model of the encryption industry is more pragmatic, which means that I want to join users and think from the perspective of ordinary users. So I think that the Ethereum community does need to give more respect to ordinary users, but this does not seem to be the case.

You can argue that this is not necessary, after all, Ethereum is currently expanding in another powerful way. But take the Bitcoin Lightning Network as an example. Although you can do whatever you want there, the Bitcoin network does lose its powerful network effect.

Although people can profit by buying Bitcoin and Ethereum as a store of value, as far as the Ethereum network is concerned, given that the Optimistic Roll-up is not so competitive, the Ethereum network is being challenged by the new public chain and it is important to know , The Ethereum network will not have updated network expansion in the short term.

The builders of other public chains started to do better, because since they chose the new public chain, it means that they want to reach more users, so Luna is currently developing very well.

This fact is actually contrary to the culture of Ethereum to a large extent, because Ethereum is currently unable to provide space for such builders.

I remember that in the AC’s conversation, maybe last March, he said that if you are an evm builder today, you should go to BSC immediately. Sure enough, a lot of people went to BSC later.

I think from the perspective of users and developers, Quxin Public Chain is indeed the future. I really miss the defi era last year, I miss it very much, and hope it can get better.

But I also think that in the future, the mistakes that happened to Bitcoin extremists will be repeated in Ethereum extremists. But the problems that arise in Ethereum are not that important to Bitcoin, because we will not do anything with Bitcoin, but we need to do things on Ethereum.

When developers turn to any other better public chain, this is a dangerous sign, because in the next period of time, Ethereum can not say that it can have more and better innovations.

Once Ethereum loses its innovation, the only thing left in Ethereum is EVM, and for those second-tier things, I think their solution is not worthy of the name.

Hasu: I think that Vitalik said he has 5 cents of Bitcoin, which shows that he still wants to better develop Ethereum.

Suzhu: I also think that I even own more Ethereum than anyone I know, but what I said above is a very dangerous signal for Ethereum.

Hasu: But I think Vitalik is a very smart person.

When BCH claimed to sacrifice a certain amount of decentralization to achieve an efficient network, and failed, vitalik issued the same statement, but he also failed. But now I understand that this kind of statement is very short-sighted and will eventually fail. I now see that these new public chains are doing the same thing over and over again, so I think these new public chains will not succeed either. They will fail just like BCH and Vitalik.

This is why I look at the problem from a technical standpoint.

Although from a technical point of view, purely technical public chains have limitations on expansion, and when gas fees increase, if there is no reliable roadmap, the story surrounding this public chain will not go on and it will lead to a death spiral.

But for me, I have seen what the new public chain is doing many times. It has not been successful before, and it will not be successful now.

Suzhu: I will give the shortest and strongest rebuttal.

You just have to look at the network growth rate of other networks, and then assume that they have encountered an expansion bottleneck, and assume that they have solved the growth problem in a way that is unacceptable to the Ethereum community.

Although the expansion method of Ethereum is also completely unacceptable in the eyes of the Bitcoin community. But I think these current public chain competing products are more suitable for the market. The core is that I see these teams are more motivated to integrate with users, so I predict that all the first-level public chains will develop better and better.

When I was talking with investors on Web2, I confirmed the correctness of this prediction.

When Web2 investors came to the crypto field, one of the indicators they valued most was the growth rate of the network. If they had already invested in Ethereum, they would think, why is this happening? If it is because Ethereum is waiting for its own expansion, then Ethereum sounds more like Bitcoin, so they consider the need for some hedging, and they will choose to invest in a new public chain.

Although many new public chains are currently unable to achieve decentralization. But we have to understand that even now, Ethereum is considered by some bigwigs to not be decentralized.

The above is my prediction. Fortunately, I formed this view during the bear market and found that many public chains of the first layer are greatly underestimated, such as DOT, KSM, AVAX, NEAR. Like the rapid development of Ethereum, they have also developed rapidly this year.

Moreover, the interaction between real-world applications and the blockchain is still at a zero stage. For example, XTZ recently cooperated with Ubisoft to provide Ubisoft users with 1,000w wallets and deposit some tokens in them. This is the interaction between the blockchain and real-world entities, which means that future development can be achieved. better.

Although the new public chain may sacrifice some decentralization, it is healthy for interacting with the larger world more widely. From this perspective, Ethereum’s public chain dominance has indeed been challenged. If Ethereum can achieve the 2025 roadmap ahead of time, its position will be consolidated and it will be able to challenge the market value of Bitcoin.

In today’s world, I see more and more copycats of Bitcoin or Ethereum, their gains are very high, it is not to agree, but to point out this phenomenon.

Hasu: Yes, Ethereum also experienced extreme growth in the early stage. For some time in the past, we thought that Ethereum is more suitable for value storage than Bitcoin, and in the development of these years, we have indeed seen any development of Ethereum The indicators perform better than Bitcoin, but time has proven that Bitcoin is still more suitable for value storage. The challenges of the new public chain that you are talking about are not the same as when Ethereum challenged Bitcoin in the first place? I don’t think they will succeed.

Suzhu: The growth of these new public chains has been much faster than Bitcoin and Ethereum , and their growth rate can even be faster, because they do not have any technical debt. Bitcoin and Ethereum have very huge technical debt.

In addition, these new public chains have almost completed POS, but Ethereum has not completed POS until now, and it is estimated that it will take several months. Even if Ethereum does complete the POS, it is estimated that there will be many problems at that time, so it is important that there is no technical debt.

Another very important point is the community atmosphere. The early community atmosphere is very easy to arouse people’s interest in participation. But at present, Ethereum has a huge community debt, and there is no early community atmosphere.

The community atmosphere of Ethereum in 2019 is very good. For example, I was very active in ENS in 2019, registered to use it, and the experience was very good, just like some products at the end of 2020. In the end, there were about 2000-5000 people from this project. Benefit from it.

But now, because of the high amount of Gas, Ethereum’s user growth on the first floor is basically zero.

Although, you will say that Ethereum will do roll-ups and become better, but my counterargument is that if you think that roll-ups will really succeed, then the growth rate on other public chains will be higher than this. Faster, because people don’t have time to wait for your Roll-ups to achieve the ultimate success, they need to participate in the encryption field all the time.

For me, the growth rate of the number of users and transaction activities on other public chains will definitely be faster than that of Ethereum.

If calculated on the dollar standard, SOL has risen by 1,000 times, and we are also trying to calculate a question: What should be a reasonable proportion of the market value of Ethereum?

But when it comes to the number of user accounts, when it comes to the activeness of developers’ new development projects, especially when it comes to the number of developers who want to create a multi-billion dollar project, I think the market value of SOL continues to expand. It is reasonable, and it is also reasonable that the market value of other public chains such as AVAX continues to expand. And compared to the one-layer Ethereum, developers are more willing to deploy on the second layer.

The conclusion is that Ethereum has indeed lost the network effect, and it is difficult to attract new developers to the Ethereum layer for development, and I admit that it is a bit late to realize this . If I realize this earlier, I will sell it. Some all ETH to buy SOL, AVAX.

I know many young people who play crypto with small money. Many of them hold 50 SOL or AVAX, but they rarely hold Ethereum. These people never think about why it is better to hold Ethereum and Bitcoin. What is the better meaning of Bitcoin and Ethereum? They just feel that buying these new public chains will return better.

This is what I need to remind myself at all times: young people are indeed very important, every round of encryption will bring new people, and I respect those young people. But your point of view is very different from mine, and you think they should follow the path we have traveled.

Hasu: I don’t think so. I have also seen the fact that newcomers entering the market now will not buy Bitcoin and Ethereum . But in the long run, this is not the right way for newcomers to do so.

For those newcomers who have not even half a period of time to come in, there will be an obvious cognitive ranking problem. They will overestimate the new things and underestimate the long-existing things. This is too idealistic.

I consider myself a pragmatist, far from an idealist. As far as Ethereum’s current roadmap is concerned, the addition of Roll-ups will greatly improve the experience of users and developers. In the future, Ethereum will continue to suppress other public chains. This is only a conclusion that can be drawn from pragmatism, without any subjective color.

Suzhu: For someone like me who invests heavily in applications, what we are seeing is that the most powerful applications are not built on Ethereum.

If you shared your conclusion with me a year ago, I totally agree. But things are different now. Now I feel sad for Ethereum, its current development is not the same as I originally imagined.

My biggest worry is that in the final game of cryptocurrency, people like you and me may not decide the direction of the game in the end. There are many people from Web2 who have entered the crypto field. They don’t care about decentralization at all. They choose With many centralized chains, some people even told me that they don’t need encryption, they only need tokens.

They believe that tokens are important because they can inspire anyone and get rid of the constraints of the blockchain. If the existing Ethereum cannot make some feasible extensions to attract enough new users, then it will be difficult to issue new tokens. Without enough token incentives, those new players may give up ether. Fang.

The encryption field itself is a balancing game. There is no doubt that the market has a role, new users have a role, and new builders have a role.

Therefore, I think the new public chain’s approach is a correct prediction of the future development of encryption, and the market will also advance in their own way.

Hasu: I totally agree.

Your view can be simplified as follows: If fast forward to the next five years, people will not have to interact with the chain, they will interact with the chain through applications such as Web2 now, and although they also know that the future applications are all It is decentralized, but they don’t know which chain those applications are running on, and they really don’t need to know.

Users do not have any preference for public chains, and which chains can win are entirely up to the developer. If there is a public chain that can attract better developers and retain them for a long time, I would definitely choose that chain.

But unfortunately, I have not seen such a public chain now. And I think the current development of the new public chain will not continue. The core is that the data for their rapid development comes from huge incentives, not how good the chain itself is.

Suzhu: My biggest objection to your point of view is that the short-sighted incentives you mentioned have been going on for several months. This can already partially prove that our view a year ago was wrong. And your question should be, when our views a year ago will be correct in the future.

I know that most people in the Ethereum community believe that when Ethereum has a Layer 2 extension that can greatly improve the user experience, it will be right.

But they overlooked one point, new users do not have the need or patience to wait for Ethereum to be truly perfected.

Another problem is that for projects like Starkware, it does not belong to Ethereum. It only belongs to themselves. They do not intend to pay rent to Ethereum. And I think that all Layer 2 do not intend to pay rent to Ethereum, they also want to gradually develop to Layer 1.

Regardless of whether there is incentive, the executive layer is the environment that provides the best experience for the application. Once there is a good execution layer and a flywheel added by users, this public chain will become very powerful.

One fact is BSC. You can see how well BSC has developed this year. Even if BSC’s technical roadmap is not so good, it attracts the most users.

This is why all new GameFi projects are released on BSC, because users are there.

I think that Ethereum currently has less understanding of users and developers than ever before. Of course, I also admit that if the second-tier roll-ups of Ethereum can be truly perfected, users may return, but I really don’t believe this is easy to do.

Hasu: If we think that developers just choose the lowest cost chain for development, and to improve the reliability of the user experience as much as possible, I confirm that it is the best for developers to choose Ethereum Layer 2 to build, such as dydx In the dydx environment, the cost is really low, and on average it is even cheaper than SOL. We will see more such applications in the future.

Suzhu: dydx itself is a very good application, the example you gave is not very suitable.

Just like Antonio said, they built this application on Starkware at the beginning, and finally decided on Ethereum. If they had the opportunity to choose another chain, they would definitely do that.

And I think that the current Ethereum OGs don’t seem to have roll-ups or zk-roll-ups. The Ethereum Fund did provide funding at the beginning of these projects, but they did not have their ideas at all.

In a previous community discussion, someone asked why the Ethereum Foundation is not worried about the lack of network effects in Ethereum. People in Ethereum said that they are waiting for zk-rollup to become large enough, and then they will have zk- rollup to solve this problem. But the problem is that zk-rollup is not exclusive to Ethereum, it can exist in any public chain.

Hasu: What I think is interesting is that some facts can support your views and mine at the same time.

Suzhu: Because your views and assumptions are supported: those who leave Ethereum will eventually return to Ethereum, just like you are optimistic about Bitcoin.

But my point is that I am not sure what the future will look like. I am not sure that users will return to Ethereum, because other new public chains are emerging with a large number of users and a large number of innovative applications.

After all, for me, having a certain future is more dangerous than having a future with infinite possibilities.

Hasu: What I need to clarify is that I absolutely agree with you. I don’t think everything will necessarily return to Ethereum.

I am a person who firmly believes that the future is a multi-chain world, and cross-chain is very important in the future; in addition, I also agree that in the future, people will not interact directly with the blockchain, but will interact through applications. The applications are In the future, the only interface for people to contact the blockchain, users have no right to decide which chain to use, only developers have the right to decide this matter; finally, I also agree that the existing public chain will be split, and the computing database will be different. The steps of splitting are very meaningful, because after splitting, you can build a highly optimized layer for faster execution.

I also think that Ethereum has indeed not realized the importance of spin-offs. They believe that Ethereum can be used as a high-confidence data layer for storage, but I don’t think so. So I agree that the activity of Ethereum will gradually decline, and other optimized Layer 1 or Layer 2 will become more and more active. But it seems that the current situation of other public chains is worse in this regard, so I am cautiously optimistic about Ethereum.

Suzhu: That’s it. I do agree with all of your previous points, but your final criticism is a bit like the original Bitcoin extremists.

Almost half of their tweets at the time were about how Ethereum is centralized. In the last bear market, Ethereum was almost dead, and people agreed that Ethereum entered a death spiral.

But there were many strong holders of Ethereum at the time. They had a good community culture inside. They believed that they wanted to defend the assets they believed to be valuable. This was one of the reasons why I was very interested in Ethereum investment at that time.

At that time, Ethereum only had more than one hundred dollars. As a public chain, it was really far underestimated.

Hasu: But people lost most of their money at that time.

Suzhu: Even so, people in the community are still working hard to build it. I attended all the Ethereum gatherings that can be attended in Southeast Asia. I really realized that I was at a turning point in the history of Ethereum.

But now, I see the same energy in the new public chain, which makes me feel scared.

There is a phenomenon in the world: once you become rich, then everything you say is right.

When Bitcoin holders become rich, they hope that latecomers will learn from their practices, and some even become Bitcoin extremists. I think that there are some people in the Ethereum community who are also very extreme Ethereum extremists.

We need to realize that not all people in the Ethereum community are right, and we need to realize that if the current cultural atmosphere continues to deepen, then the final route of Ethereum is likely to become the same as Bitcoin.

I think everyone should keep an open mind. At present, the Ethereum extremists in the Ethereum community are too active, which is very dangerous.

Hasu: I totally agree. I have also seen the trends you mentioned. Although I have not participated in these trends, especially the expanding trend of Ethereum extremists, I generally mute them. But I think the lucky thing is that the current community culture of Ethereum is still more open than Bitcoin.

Suzhu: Actually, the Bitcoin community culture is becoming more and more open. When chatting with our mutual friend LEO recently, he said that there is a lot of motivation in the Bitcoin community to add scripts and make Defi It becomes possible there.

Then, when I was chatting with another person in the Bitcoin community, he said that he had proposed to fund Bitcoin developers through nfts, but failed in the end, but he thought nfts was very interesting, he was an anonymous Bitcoin Coin billionaire.

I think the current culture of the Bitcoin community is gradually recovering, which is a good thing. Although they say they do not recognize nft and defi, they really want to try the right things to promote development. The current trend of increasing extremists in the Ethereum community is indeed forcing new users to enter other public chains.

This may indeed be a simple repetition of human civilization. Dragon slayers will always become giant dragons. When the forerunners become giants, they will ask latecomers to follow their rules, but there will always be an endless stream of challengers, and it is difficult for them to cope. Challenges for latecomers, because latecomers always have various shortcuts.

In general, when a community goes too fast, he does run the risk of getting out of touch with what the market really wants. An example of no disconnection is Optimistic roll up. They want to be market makers to bridge the gap, which is pretty good.

Therefore, I think there is still a great opportunity for Ethereum to stay out of touch. Fundamentally speaking, people in the Ethereum community are very eclectic, and there are many different people who are studying different solutions. But I think that the growth of new users is indeed neglected in the community, and I have no other unkind meanings.

Hasu: I can hear that when you criticized Ethereum before, at least you felt a little guilty in your heart, hahaha.

Suzhu: I have clearly discussed SNX before. It was the first defi project I discussed publicly, and I introduced SNX to people. But the current situation is that SNX really hasn’t become as good as I said at the beginning, let alone LUNA. It is basically the same thing as LUNA, except that LUNA performs better.

I think about why this happens?

In the past, I also owned a lot of LUNA, but I sold it and replaced it with many other defi items. I didn’t have a clear answer. But at least it proved that my choices were not all right. I also made the wrong choice and misled people into defi.

I remember when Arthur and chat, we talked to LUNA, when the attitude is: LUNA not based on Ethernet Square chain does not deserve re- view. But the fact is just the opposite. The market value of LUNA is higher than the combined market value of all defi items.

Therefore, I admit that when I look at things, there are indeed blind spots. The main reason for this blind spot is that I thought that only Ethereum is the only real smart contract public chain, so I made such a wrong judgment. Looking back, it was also because of this factor that I made a wrong judgment on SNX.

This is why optimistic roll-up is currently liked by everyone except Ethereum extremists.

At present, what is the difference between the attitude of Ethereum extremists toward other public chains and the attitude of Bitcoin extremists toward Ethereum during the initial bear market? There is no difference, I hope people can think about this issue.

There is a huge difference between whether Ethereum can become a good investment asset in the future and whether it can become a good network. These two things are quite different.

I doubt whether Ethereum’s dominant position in the smart contract field will continue to be maintained in the future. Regarding assets, I am not sure that it will perform better than Bitcoin in the future, but in general, its future performance will not be worse than that of most currencies because it has a broad consensus and huge liquidity.

All my views are not to persuade people to sell ether, nor to persuade people to buy ether. Just point out what Ethereum should be? And what is Ethereum currently? There is a huge gap between.

Hasu: We all like encryption. Even though we have been immersed in the encryption field for a long time, we still have big differences on how to develop in the future. But I think this is also the most interesting place in the encryption field. It is like the most intelligent space in the world and the most interactive market in the world. I am very grateful for our honest dialogue today, thank you.

Posted by:CoinYuppie,Reprinted with attribution to:https://coinyuppie.com/hasu-dialogue-with-su-zhu-ethereum-vs-new-public-chain-dragon-slayer-is-becoming-a-giant/
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.

Like (0)
Donate Buy me a coffee Buy me a coffee
Previous 2022-01-03 22:46
Next 2022-01-04 08:47

Related articles