以太坊第二层生态系统的未来 - The Daily Gwei 补给 #856 - 以太坊动态更新

大家好，欢迎来到另一期《LEGO Refuel》，在这里我们将回顾Etherumica系统中的最新动态。

Everyone, and welcome to another episode of the LEGO Refuel, where you recap the latest news in the Etherumica system.

我是你们的主持人丹。

I'm your host, Dan.

今天是地球时间2026年2月4日。

This is on Earth as of 02/04/2026.

好了，各位。

Alright, everyone.

我们开始吧。

Let's get into it.

所以，是的，就在上一期几天后又来了一期Refuel，这背后是有原因的。

So, yes, another Refuel a couple of days after the last one, and there is good reason for this.

如果你还记得，我说过我会每周定期做Refuel，但每当生态系统中发生重大事件时，如果在常规安排之外我有什么想说的，我就会额外做一期。

And if you remember, I said that I would be doing the Refuels weekly as kind of the regular cadence, but whenever there's something kind of major happening in the ecosystem, I would do one if, you know, outside of that schedule, if I had something to say.

而今天，我确实有很多话要说。

And well, I have a lot to say today.

所以，对于那些不了解这个背景的人，Vitalik 今天发了一条关于二层网络及其在以太坊生态系统中作用的推文。

So those of you who don't know the context around this, Vitalik put out a tweet today about layer twos and their role within the Ethereum ecosystem.

这条推文对我来说特别有趣，因为它完美地体现了一种罗夏墨迹测验。

Now this tweet is so funny to me because it is the perfect example of a Rorschach test.

我所说的意思是，你可以以多种不同方式解读这条推文。

Now what I mean by that is essentially you can read this tweet in many different ways.

对吧？

Right?

这条推文很长，就像 Vitalik 一贯的风格，但你可以从很多不同的角度去理解和诠释它。

It's a long tweet as Vitalik usually does these these long tweets, but you can read and interpret this tweet in many, many different ways.

这就是我说它是罗夏墨迹测验的原因，因为人们只是看到他们想看到的东西。

And that's what I mean by it being a Rorschach test because people are just seeing what they want to see.

正因如此，围绕 Vitalik 真正想表达的意思，引发了大量讨论。

And because of this, there has been a lot of discussion around what Vitalik actually means by this.

你知道，二层网络已经死了吗？

You know, are l twos dead?

我们现在只在L1上做扩展吗？

Are we only just doing scaling on the l one now?

这里有很多误解。

A lot of misconceptions going on here.

所以今天我想做的，就是单纯聚焦于这条推文。

So what I wanted to do today, and I'm literally just going to be focusing on this tweet today.

今天没什么别的可谈的了。

There's nothing else to kind of talk about today.

但我想要做的是，逐行分析这条推文，解释Vitalik到底想表达什么——当然，这是我的解读，但也基于他实际写出的文字，因为看到大家对这条推文的各种反应真的很有趣。

But what I wanna do is I just wanna run through this tweet line by line essentially and kind of explain exactly what Vitalik is saying from, I guess, my interpretation of course, but also from just the words that he's putting out there because it's it it has been funny to see all the reactions to this.

有些人兴高采烈地说：看吧，我们早就告诉过你，L2不是以太坊，只有L1才是以太坊，我们应该只专注L1。

You know, some people are doing victory labs being like, see, we told you that l twos aren't Ethereum and, you know, at the l one is Ethereum and we should just focus on the l one.

其他人也有不同的解读。

Other people are interpreting it as well.

Vitalik其实想表达的是，L2不应该只关注扩展，而应该差异化发展，做其他事情——至少这是我理解的，当然我接下来会详细说明。

Vitalik's just basically saying that l twos shouldn't just focus on scaling, they should differentiate themselves and do other things, which at least my interpretation, but I'm gonna get into that of course as well.

然后，有些人说，维塔利克说了，L2 不是以太坊，但他在这条推文中根本没这么说，我觉得这也很有趣。

And then, you know, some people were saying that, oh, Vitalik said, you know, l twos aren't Ethereum, which he literally doesn't say in this tweet, which which I found kind of funny as well.

但不管怎样，我们先从这里的第一句话开始，维塔利克基本上说：最近有一些关于 L2 在以太坊生态系统中持续作用的讨论，尤其是在面对两个事实的情况下。

But anyway, let's let's start off with the the kind of first line here where Vitalik basically says, there recently been some discussions on the ongoing role of l twos in the Ethereum Ethereum ecosystem, especially in the face of two facts.

这两个事实是：L2 在第二阶段的进展比预期慢得多、困难得多，而 L1 本身也在扩展，费用非常低，且预计在 2026 年气体上限将大幅增加。

And these two facts are l twos progress to stage two and secondarily on interop has been far slower and more difficult than originally expected, and the l one itself is scaling, fees are very low, and the gas limits are projected to increase greatly in 2026.

所以，我们先聚焦在这两点上。

So let's focus on those two points here first.

对于维塔利克所说的 L2 向第二阶段的进展比我们希望的要慢得多，我表示同意。

So, I would agree with Vitalik in that the progress towards stage two has been a lot slower for the l twos than we would like.

尽管我们非常希望它们能实现第二阶段，但其中有很多非常充分的理由。

And there is a lot of very good reasons for that even though we would love them to get the stage two, but there are a lot of very good reasons for that.

显然，我们有 L2 Beat 网站，可以追踪所有这些信息，我现在就打开屏幕给你们看一下。

And obviously we have the l two beat website that allows us to track all of this, which I'll bring up on my screen now for you to kind of have a look here.

几乎没有任何主要的滚动链达到了第二阶段。

Pretty much none of the major rollups are stage two.

第一个阶段二的rollup是排名第18的ZK Money v1，但几乎没人使用。

The the first stage two rollup is rank 18 here, ZK Money v one, which is barely used.

对吧？

Right?

其余的不是阶段零就是阶段一。

The rest of them are either stage zero or stage one.

不过，我不认为这一定是坏事，因为这里有个细微差别。

Now I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing because there's a nuance here.

比如，Arbitrum一阶段和Base一阶段就不同，体现在这里的退出窗口上。

Like for example, Arbitrum one stage one is is different to Arbitrum, sorry, is different to base stage one, based on the exit window here.

它和StockNet一阶段也不一样。

And it's different to, you know, StockNet stage one as well.

对吧？

Right?

它们在各自的机制上各有不同，你可以在L2Beat网站上看到这些差异，可以去查看一下。

They have different kind of, yellows in their pie here as you can see on on the LTB website, which you can go check out.

但确实，我同意Vitalik的观点，他说这方面进展缓慢，互操作性也是如此，原因多种多样。

But yeah, I agree with Vitalik when he says that, you know, progress on that has been slow and it has been slow on interop as well, for various different reasons.

我认为这里没有任何恶意行为。

You know, there there's nothing I think malicious here.

我不认为这些L2项目没有走向第二阶段是出于恶意，或者是因为它们想成为不良行为者。

I don't think the l twos are not going towards stage two because of malicious reasons or because they're trying to be bad actors.

我认为最主要的原因是，在考虑安全性和链的开发时，要做到这一点非常非常困难。

I think that the number one reason is because it's very, very difficult to do that while factoring in things like security, and development of the chain.

如果你直接跳到第二阶段，那么安全假设会比原本大得多，而你应对链上任何安全事件的能力也会大大降低。

If you go straight to stage two, then the security assumptions are much greater than they would otherwise be and your power to react to any kind of like, I guess, security incidents on that chain is greatly diminished.

因为要成为完整的第二阶段，我认为你需要在安全委员会上设置一个时间锁，但如果出现严重漏洞，尤其是在早期阶段——而早期出现严重漏洞的可能性可能更高——这显然不是好事。

Because to be full stage two, you're I I believe you require a time lock on the security council, which, you know, isn't isn't great if there's like a critical bug, especially early on where the chance of critical bugs is probably much higher.

对吧？

Right?

而在互操作性方面，同样，我认为这并非恶意。

And then on the interop side of things, again, I don't think this is malicious.

老实说，我不认为对原生互操作性有那么大的需求，或者说‘需求’这个词可能不太准确，我只是觉得从盈利角度来看，还没有足够的动力推动人们去这么做。

I honestly don't think there's that much demand for native interop or at least maybe demand's the wrong word here, but I just don't think there's enough to kind of push people to wanna do it from like a profit perspective.

那这里的商业逻辑是什么呢？

Like what's the business sense here?

比如，如果你是Arbitrum One，你的生态里有人在做各种事情，人们可以通过跨链桥在你这里进行交互。

Because if you are Arbitrum One of your base, example, you have your ecosystem, people are doing stuff on there, and people are able to interrupt between you through bridging.

而如今，跨链桥的速度已经非常非常快了。

And bridging is really, really fast these days.

当然，那里仍然有更多信任假设。

Yes, there's there's, obviously more trust assumptions there.

这些跨链桥很多都是中心化的，但用户确实在使用它们。

These bridges, a lot of them are centralized, but, you know, users are using them.

因此，对这些链来说，它们并没有很强的动力去实现原生的互操作性。

So for these chains, they don't really have that huge drive to go be native natively interoperable.

而且，技术本身也还没完全成熟。

And also the technology is not exactly there yet either.

所以这些就是一些原因。

So those are just some of the reasons there.

所以我同意Vitalik的观点，这些事情的进展比最初预期的要慢且更困难。

So I do agree with Vitalik that it has been, slower and more difficult than originally expected to do these things.

因此在这方面并没有争议。

So there's no controversy there.

然后他说，L1本身正在扩展，费用非常低，且预计到2026年Gas限制将大幅增加。

Then he says, you know, the l one itself is scaling, fees are very low, and gas limits are projected to greatly increase in 2026.

这涉及到关于L1整体扩展以及我们过去大约十二到十八个月、或许更接近十二个月以来对L1所赋予的优先级的整个讨论。

This goes into the whole discussion around kinda l one scaling generally and the priority that we've put on the l one over the last, I guess, twelve to eighteen months now, maybe more like twelve months.

但关键是，L2作为一个概念已经存在很长时间了。

But the thing is is that l twos have been around as a concept for a very long time.

如果你看一下2020年左右成为主流的Rollup中心路线图，但L2在那之前就已经存在了。

If you if you wanna look at like the roll up centric road map that became a I guess thing in 2020, but L twos have been around before then.

最初是从状态通道开始，然后我们有了乐观Rollup，接着是ZK Rollup，对吧？

Know, started off with things like, state channels, then we did optimistic roll ups, then ZK roll ups, right?

这些年来发生了各种各样的事情，时间已经非常非常久了。

There's there's there's all these kinds of things that have kinda happened over the years, and it's been a very, very long time then.

在这段时间里，L1 的扩展性并没有被优先考虑，因为我们还有其他事情在进行，比如信标链，对吧？

And during that time as well, the l one scaling wasn't prioritized because we had other things going on like the beacon chain, right?

把权益证明推上线，也就是合并。

Getting proof of stake out the door, like the merge.

当时还有其他一些大事在发生。

There were there were just other big things happening at the time.

但自从我们开始优先关注 L1，并且在 ZKVM 和其他 L1 扩展技术上取得了很大进展后，我们越来越清楚地看到，L1 已经能够在一定程度上实现扩展，我们不再像以前那样依赖 L2 来解决扩展问题。

But since we've put priority on on l one, and since we've kind of made a lot of headway with ZKVMs, and other l one scaling technologies there, it's become clearer that the l one can scale to an extent and that we don't need the l twos for scale as much as we did previously.

这是否意味着 L2 已经死亡或不再需要了？

Does that mean that the l twos are dead or they're not needed?

不是。

No.

完全不是。

Not at all.

我会在我们逐步分析这条推文时解释原因。

And I'll explain why as we progress through this tweet here.

但我也觉得有点好笑，Vitalik 说费用非常低。

But I also kind of find it funny that Vitalik says, you know, fees are very low.

我的意思是，以太坊一层上的费用确实很低，但同时也没有保证它们会一直保持这么低。

I mean, they are on l one, but at the same time, there's no guarantee they're gonna stay that low.

是的，目前费用确实很低。

Like, yeah, they're low right now.

它们还没有二层那么低，但随时可能再次上涨。

They're not as low as l two still, and they but they could go back up at any time.

只要一有需求出现，费用就会立刻回升。

As soon as some demand comes in, they go they go back up.

我们计划在2026年提高气体上限，但这种提升并不是十倍或数量级的飞跃。

And, we're gonna increase gas limits in 2026 as well, but at the same time, it's not like a a 10 x or an order of magnitude increase here.

到2026年，我预计乐观的气体上限提升将达到1.8亿。

Like in 2026, I think the optimistic, gas limit increase is to a 180,000,000.

也许我们能达到三亿，但我不确定。

Maybe we can get the 300,000,000, but I I don't know.

我不这么认为。

I don't think so.

我认为一亿八千万已经是这里最好的情况了。

I think a 180,000,000 is like the the best case scenario here.

我们今天是六千万，所以这是三倍的增长。

We're at 60,000,000 today, so that's a three x increase.

而且，是的，从最初的三千万增长到一亿八千万，这超过了三倍，对吧？

And, yeah, a 180,000,000 is more than a three x increase from where we started out at 30,000,000, right?

这是六倍的增长。

It's a six x increase.

但同样，这与二层网络相比并不是一个数量级的提升。

But again, it's not an order of magnitude here over the l twos.

而且，显然，一层网络和二层网络非常不同。

And, yeah, obviously, the l one is very different to the l twos.

比如，Mega Earth最近上线了，他们对网络进行了压力测试，能够实现数万笔每秒交易。

Like, example, Mega Eath went live recently and they did a stress test on their network and they're able to do tens of thousands of TPS.

但Mega Earth使用的是链下数据可用性。

But Mega Eighth is using off chain DA.

他们没有使用blob数据。

They're not they're not using blobs.

对吧？

Right?

而且Mega Earth仍然是完全中心化的。

And and Mega Eighth is still, completely centralized.

还有LIDAR，情况也差不多。

And then there's LIDAR, same same kind of thing there.

对吧？

Right?

LIDAR虽然使用了blob，但它并不是一条通用链。

LIDAR is using blobs, but LIDAR is not a general purpose, chain.

他们自己在做PerpDex这一套东西。

They have their own thing doing the PerpDex thing.

这里其实是有区别的，对吧？

Like there's there's differences here, right?

但这样很好。

But that is good.

这正是我们想要的。

That's what we want.

我们希望这些L2各自做不同的事情。

We want these l twos to be doing different things.

我们不希望它们只是单纯地扩展以太坊。

We don't want them to just be just just be like scaling Ethereum.

我们希望它们能做些区别于以太坊的事情。

We want them to be doing things like differentiating themselves from Ethereum.

这正是整个关键所在。

That's that's the kind of whole whole point here.

所以，是的，虽然L1本身在进行扩展，但我仍然认为L1无法足够扩展以满足世界的需求。

So, yeah, while in itself in it in itself l one is scaling, I still believe that l one is not going to scale, enough to to meet the demands of the world.

我认为我们需要L2来解决扩展问题，同时也正如我刚才提到的另一个方面，我稍后还会再谈，因为Vitalik也在这里提到了这一点。

I think that we need l twos for that, on the scaling side, but also on the other side that I was just talking about, which I will get into again because Vitalik, is talking about this here too.

于是，他推文的下一部分说，这两个事实各自都有其独立的原因，意味着L2的原始愿景及其在以太坊中的角色已不再合理，我们需要一条新路径。

So then the next part of his tweet, he said, you know, both of these facts for their own separate reasons mean that the original vision of l twos and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path.

我认为这句话正是许多人停止阅读的地方，他们读到这里，而这正是罗夏墨迹测验的所在。

I think this sentence is where a lot of people stopped reading and they read this, and this is where the the Rorschach test comes in.

对吧？

Right?

他们读到这里，却没有看到Vitalik字面上所说的：L2的原始愿景及其在以太坊中的角色已不再合理，我们需要一条新路径。

They read this and instead of seeing what Vitalik is literally saying where he says the original vision of l twos and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense and we need a new path.

我认为人们会误解为L2已经死亡。

I think people take this to mean that l twos are dead.

我们不再需要L2在以太坊中发挥作用了。

We don't need it to we don't need l twos in Ethereum anymore.

他根本不是这个意思，他原话就是说，L2在以太坊中的角色不再合理，我们需要一条新路径。

When he's literally not saying that, he is literally saying word for word, he his actual words here is that the l two role in Ethereum, no longer makes sense and we need a new path.

我理解这意味着L2需要从今天的形态进化，专注于它们擅长的、超越扩容之外的领域。

I take that to mean that l twos need to evolve out of what they are today and focus on what they're, diff you know, focus on what they're good at outside of scaling.

对吧？

Right?

这就是我的理解。

That's what I take this to mean.

当然，Vitalik随后又发了一条推文，我会读一下。

And and and Vitalik follows up obviously with more of a tweet here, which I'll which I'll read.

但我认为，推文的这一部分是大多数人停止阅读的地方，因为这条推文很长，而这一部分很可能就是你刷到时需要点击‘显示更多’才能继续阅读的内容。

But I think this part of the tweet is where most people stopped reading because it's a long tweet and this is probably the part of the tweet where it comes up in your feed and you have to click like show more in order to read the rest of the tweet.

当然，人们会按照自己的理解来解读。

And of course, people take this as as they will here.

但在下一部分，他写了一整段话，重新梳理了原版的‘以rollup为中心’路线图的愿景。

But then in the next part, he's got a whole paragraph here where he kind of recaps the original vision of of of the rollup centric roadmap.

他说以太坊需要扩展。

He says Ethereum needs to scale.

以太坊扩展的定义是存在大量由以太坊完全信用背书的区块空间。

The definition of Ethereum scaling is the existence of a large quantities of block space that is backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum.

这种区块空间意味着，只要你在这个区块空间内进行操作，包括使用ETH，你的活动在以太坊正常运行的前提下，将被保证有效、无审查、不可撤销且不被篡改。

That is block space where if you do things including with ETH inside that block space, your activities are guaranteed to be valid, uncensored, unreverted, untouched as long as Ethereum itself functions.

如果你创建了一个每秒处理一万笔交易的EVM，但其与L1的连接通过多重签名桥接实现，那么你并没有扩展以太坊。

If you create a 10,000 TPS EVM, where its connection to l one is mediated by a multisig bridge, then you are not scaling Ethereum.

每个人都有自己的解读，我也不例外。

I have my own interpretation of this as everyone does.

我认为，正是他所说的‘你并没有扩展以太坊’这一部分，引发了大量争议。

I think that this is where a lot of the contention is also coming from where he says then you are not scaling Ethereum.

我认为这种说法是错误的，因为从严格意义上讲，如果你是在扩展L1以太坊区块空间，确实你没有扩展L1以太坊区块空间。

I think that's wrong because like in the strict sense of scaling l one Ethereum Blockspace, yeah, you're not scaling l one Ethereum Blockspace.

对吧？

Right?

但他并没有这么说。

But he didn't say that.

我认为，这正是词语容易被误解的地方。

And I think that that's where, again, words can be misinterpreted.

人们会自行填补这些空白。

People can fill in the holes.

是的。

Yeah.

当然，我在这里是在表达我自己的理解。

I'm filling in my own interpretation here, of course.

但我一直认为，二层网络是在扩展以太坊，但它们扩展的是以太坊生态系统，而不是以太坊一层的区块空间。

But but what I kind of have always said is that I think the l twos are scaling Ethereum, but they're scaling Ethereum as an ecosystem, not scaling Ethereum l one block space.

说它们在扩展以太坊一层区块空间是愚蠢的。

It would be stupid to say that they're scaling Ethereum l one block space.

它们并没有这么做，因为以太坊一层区块空间只存在于一层。

They aren't doing that because Ethereum l one block space only exist on l one.

L2除非是原生的滚动扩容方案，否则无法做到这一点，但那样的话，这就与我所定义的L2C，或者说是普遍理解的L2C定义大不相同了。

L twos cannot do that unless they're native roll ups, but then that's a very different definition as to what I'm defining as L2C or what the, I guess, well understood definition is of L2C.

从这个角度来看，我其实不同意Vitalik的观点。

When you look at it from that lens, I actually disagree with Vitalik here.

我不认为他们没有在扩展以太坊。

I don't think that's, that they are not scaling Ethereum.

我认为他们确实在扩展以太坊。

I think they are.

他们只是在扩展以太坊生态系统，而不是L1区块空间。

They're just scaling the Ethereum ecosystem, not the l one block space.

但同样，他在这里并没有真正这么说。

But again, he didn't actually say this here.

他只是说了‘以太坊’，而我假设他指的是以太坊L1区块空间。

He just said Ethereum, which I am assuming he means Ethereum l one block space.

那么，如果他确实指的是这个意思，那我同意他的观点。

Well, then if he does mean that, I agree with him.

但如果他指的是一个宽泛的、包容性的概念，认为整个以太坊生态系统，那我就不同意这种说法。

But if he means it as like a broad, kind of tent thing where he says that, you know, the Ethereum ecosystem that I disagree with that.

但没错，他还没这么说，这有点遗憾。

But yeah, he didn't say that yet, which is unfortunate.

我希望他在这里能说得更具体一些。

I wish he would have been more specific here.

但接着他在下一段中说，这个愿景不再合理了。

But then he goes on in the next paragraph and he says, this vision no longer makes sense.

L1 不需要将 L2 打包成分片，因为 L1 本身正在扩展，而 L2 既没有能力也不愿意满足真正‘品牌分片’所要求的特性。

L one does not need l twos to be branded shards because l one itself is scaling, and l twos are not able or willing to satisfy the properties that a true branded shard would require.

我甚至看到至少有一方明确表示，他们可能永远不会超越第一阶段，这不仅是因为 ZK-EVM 安全性的技术原因，也因为他们的客户在监管方面需要拥有最终控制权。

I've even seen at least one explicitly saying that they may never want to go beyond stage one, not just for technical reasons around ZK EVM safety, but also because their customers regulatory needs require them to have ultimate control.

这或许对你客户来说是正确的做法，但如果你这么做，显然你就没有按照‘rollup 中心路线图’所定义的方式扩展以太坊，不过这也没关系。

This may be doing the right thing for your customers, but it should be obvious that if you were doing this, then you are not scaling Ethereum in the sense meant by the roll up centric roadmap, but that's fine.

这没关系，因为以太坊本身现在正通过直接提升 L1 的区块气体上限，在今年及未来几年实现直接扩展。

It's fine because Ethereum itself is now scaling directly on the l one with large plan increases to its gas limit this year and the years ahead.

同样，这里还有另一件事情可以有多种不同的解读。

Again, another thing that can be interpreted in many different ways here.

我的理解是，他基本上想说的是，你并没有在扩展以太坊L1的区块空间，而你确实从未做过这一点。

My interpretation is that, you know, what he's basically saying here is that you are not scaling Ethereum l one block space, which you aren't, and you were never doing that.

如果你是一个处于零阶段或一阶段、使用链下数据可用性的L2，那么你是在扩展以太坊。

If you were an, an l two at stage zero, stage one using off chain DA, You were scaling Ethereum.

是的。

Yeah.

你是在扩展ETH这种资产。

You were scaling, ETH as an asset.

你是在扩展以太坊生态系统，但你并没有扩展以太坊L1的区块空间。

You were scaling the Ethereum ecosystem, but you weren't scaling Ethereum l one block space.

而且，我本人从未真正说过这些L2在做这件事。

And I I don't think I've ever actually said that these l twos were doing that, like, personally.

如果我确实说过，那我说错了，但我认为我并没有这样说。

If I have, then I was wrong to say that, but I don't think I've said that.

我认为我一直都很明确地表示，它们并没有扩展L1区块空间。

I think I've always been pretty explicit about the fact that they're not scaling the l one block space.

要做到这一点，你需要提高以太坊L1的Gas限制，或者像ZKVM或原生Rollup这样的方案，它们从一开始就是与L1紧密耦合的。

To do that, you need to increase the gas limit on Ethereum l one or you do things like ZKVM or native roll ups, which are just coupled with the l one to begin with.

所以它们甚至算不上L2。

So they're not even l twos.

它们实际上是协议的一部分。

Like, they're literally part of the protocol.

所以当我读到这个时，这就是我所理解的意思。

So when I when I read this, that's what that's what I kinda take from it.

同时，我也理解到，当他说某些L2出于监管原因希望保持中心化时，这同样符合我对L2的愿景。

And at the same time, I take from it that, you know, when he says that these some of these l twos wanna just stay centralized for regulatory reasons, that again falls into the l two vision for me.

也许这并非Vitalik五年前发布的那种严格以Rollup为中心的路线图，但自那以后，L2的愿景已经自行演进了。

Maybe not the original strict roll up centric roadmap that Vitalik posted five years ago, but the l two vision evolved on its own since then.

对吧？

Right?

而L2的愿景逐渐演变为将以太坊生态系统扩展到可定制的新链上，这些链可以做任何它们想做的事。

And the l two vision became more about expanding the Ethereum ecosystem out into customizable new chains that, that can do whatever they want.

它们不必是去中心化的，而且很多也不会是。

They don't have to be decentralized, and a lot of them won't be.

这没关系，因为这正是商业所需。

And that's fine because that's just what the business needs.

我认为从来没有人真正反对过这一点。

And I don't think anyone has ever actually pushed back against that.

我认为没有人会说，不，所有东西都必须是去中心化的。

I don't think everyone is saying that no, you know, everything needs to be decentralized.

不，完全不是这样。

No, not at all.

你可以拥有中心化的链。

You can have centralized chains.

人们从中获得价值，这很常见。

People get value out of that all the time.

我的意思是，已经有很多中心化链存在了，人们从中获得了价值，这没什么问题。

I mean, are plenty of centralized chains out of the out there that, people get value out of and that's fine.

我不认为这削弱了二层网络正在并将继续扩展以太坊这一事实。

I don't think that that takes away from the fact that l twos have and will continue to scale Ethereum.

我应该具体说明一下，指的是以太坊生态系统，而不是一层的区块空间。

The Ethereum ecosystem, I should be specific here, not l one block space.

接着他进一步表示，我们不应该再把二层网络视为具有社会地位和相应责任的、真正意义上的以太坊分片。

So then he goes on to say, we should stop thinking about l twos as literally being branded shards of Ethereum with the social status and responsibilities that this entails.

相反，我们可以把二层网络看作一个完整的光谱，既包括那些完全依托以太坊信誉、具备各种独特特性（如EVM）的链，也包括一系列与以太坊连接程度各异的选项，每个人或机器人可以根据自身需求选择关注或不关注。

Instead, we can think of l twos as being a full spectrum, which includes both chains backed by the full faith and credit of Ethereum with various unique properties, just the EVM, as well as a whole array of options at different levels of connection to Ethereum that each person or bot is free to care about or not care about depending on their needs.

这对我来说是整个问题的核心。

This is the crux of the the the whole thing for me.

这基本上是Vitalik的简明总结：二层网络显然不是在扩展一层以太坊的区块空间，二层网络将成为独立的存在。

This is basically Vitalik saying in TLDR is that l twos are not obviously scaling l 1 ethereum block space and l twos are gonna be their own thing.

它们本质上是在扩展以太坊的能力，因为它们可以拥有自己的虚拟机。

They're basically kind of extending Ethereum's capabilities because they can have their own VMs.

对吧？

Right?

它们不一定非得使用EVM。

They don't have to have the EVM.

它们可以有自己的设计，权衡中心化与去中心化。

They can have their own, trade offs with with centralization, decentralization.

它们可以有自己的做事方式、自己的编程语言，诸如此类的东西。

They can have their own, ways of doing things, their own programming languages, stuff like that.

对吧？

Right?

但再说一遍，这并不是什么新观点。

But again, this is not new.

这已经被人讨论多年了。

This is something that's been talked about for years.

我可以翻出早在2021年左右的通讯和Refuels，那时我就已经谈过这个了。

I can go back and find newsletters and Refuels as early as probably 2021 where I spoke about this.

我认为，这更说明了Vitalik很少花时间在Twitter上，也很少深入参与这些讨论。

And I think what this says more than anything is that Vitalik doesn't spend much time on, you know, Twitter, doesn't spend much time in the thick of it in these conversations.

他确实活在自己的泡泡里，而我们也都活在自己的泡泡里。

He's definitely in his own bubble and we're all in our own bubbles.

但我认为，这仅仅是Vitalik没有意识到，我们早已超越了他早在2020年提出的那种严格的L2定义。

But I think that this is just Vitalik not understanding that we already moved past his strict definition of l twos from way back in 2020.

我们已经超越了那个阶段，整个社区也在不断进化。

We moved past that we evolved as a community.

而一直以来，普遍的理解都是：L2可以做自己的事情，我们对此感到满意。

And I think the general understanding was always that l twos can do their own thing and we're happy with that.

我们乐见企业前来表示：我们要在以太坊之上构建一个L2。

We're happy with businesses coming in and saying, we're gonna build an l two on top of Ethereum.

是的。

Yeah.

它不会是去中心化的。

It's not gonna be decentralized.

是的。

Yeah.

它可能看起来和以太坊完全不同，但仍然是以太坊生态系统的一部分。

It's gonna look probably nothing like Ethereum, but it's still part of the Ethereum ecosystem.

它接入了以太坊生态系统。

It taps into the Ethereum ecosystem.

它利用了那里的流动性，等等。

It taps into that liquidity, so on and so forth.

这一直是我对二层网络的理解，但我只是觉得Vitalik发这条推文很奇怪，因为这似乎表明他并不一定了解社区早已对二层网络形成了这种共识。

That that has always been what l twos have been to me, but I just find it weird that Vitalik would tweet this because it seems like he doesn't necessarily understand that the community already had this shared understanding of the l twos.

也许这仅仅是因为，正如我所说，他不像我，也不像你们中很多听这个节目的人那样，花那么多时间在公共圈子里。

And maybe that's just because, as I said, like, doesn't spend as much time in the in the public circles as as as I do and as I I'm sure a lot of you do, listening to this.

但没错，他实际上说的，至少在我看来，正是我们所有人都已经认同的观点。

But but yeah, that that again, like he's literally saying what we all already think in my mind at least.

这再次只是我对事情的解读。

That's again, my interpretation of things.

但没错，这就是我对此的理解。

But but yeah, that's that's how I kind of read this.

但我想，这正是这里所有事情的完整总结。

But that's I think like the the complete summary of things here.

我觉得有趣的是，多年来一直有人这么说，但有些人却会拿这个大做文章，说‘看啊，Vitalik都说L2已经死了，我们不再需要L2了，应该停止把它们当作以太坊的组成部分，它们根本不是以太坊’。

And what I find funny is that, again, this is what's been said for years and then some people will take this and run with it and say, oh, look, Vitalyx, you know, saying that l twos are dead and we don't need l twos anymore and they should stop that we should stop thinking of them as being literally part of Ethereum and, like, they're not Ethereum.

而我的看法完全不是这样。

And I'm just like, I don't read it like that at all.

我认为，Vitalik可能只是对社区普遍关于L2的理解不够及时，但另一方面，他只是在重申我们已经谈论了多年的观点。

I read it as Vitalik maybe not being up to date with the general understanding of of the community on l twos for one, but also he's just reiterating the point that we're already been talking about for for many years now.

但他接着又说，如果我是L2，我会怎么做？

But then he goes on to say, you know, what would I do if I were an l two?

他说，我会寻找超越扩容之外的价值点。

He says, I would identify a value add other than scaling.

而这正是L2早已在做的事情。

Again, this is what the l twos have already been doing.

像扩展性只是基本要求。

Like scaling is table stakes.

我已经说了好几年了。

I have said this for years.

L2构建者应该明白，扩展性只是基本要求。

The l two builders should understand that scaling is table stakes.

仅仅靠扩展性无法让你与其他项目区分开来。

You're not differentiating yourself from anything with just scaling.

你需要超越这一点。

You need to go beyond that.

然后Metallic举了一些例子。

And then Metallic gives some examples.

围绕隐私的非EVM专用功能虚拟机。

Non EVM specialized features VMs around privacy.

同样，这是我们所有人都说了好几年的事，并不新鲜。

Again, something we've all been saying for years, not new.

高效且针对特定应用的专用化。

Efficient specialized, efficiency specialized around a particular application.

同样，这并不新鲜。

Again, not new.

我们已经拥有这些实际应用了。

We already have these live.

Lido 就是一个例子。

Lido is an example here.

针对永续合约的高效专用化。

Efficiency specialized around perps.

对吧？

Right?

即使将一层扩展到极致的水平，也依然不够。

Truly extreme levels of scaling that even greatly expand l one will not do.

Mega ETH。

Mega ETH.

对吧？

Right?

它是已经上线的。

Like, it's it's live.

这并不是什么新东西。

Like, this is not new.

一种为非金融应用设计的全新方案，比如社交身份。

A totally different design for non financial applications, e g social identity.

是的。

Yeah.

还有人工智能。

And AI.

是的。

Yeah.

我们已经做过这方面的实验了。

We have had experiments around this.

FarCaster 是那个，你知道的，最大的一个。

FarCaster being the, you know, the the biggest one.

是的。

Yeah.

他们已经转向其他方向了，但那件事已经做过了。

They pivoted away from that, but that was that was done.

对吧？

Right?

超低延迟和其他序列化特性。

Ultra low latency and other sequencing properties.

RISE 正在做这件事。

RISE is doing that.

你知道，RISE 链可能内置了预言机、去中心化争议解决或其他非计算可验证的功能。

You know, RISE Chain may be built in Oracles or decentralized dispute resolutions or other non computationally verifiable features.

Eigen 层面到处都是。

Eigen Eigen layers all over that.

对吧？

Right?

所以他说的这些，都已经在建设中、或者已经建成、或者已经上线多年了。

So everything that he's saying here is already being built or has been built or is live and has been live for years.

所以我不确定他只是举例子来帮助大家理解，还是真的不知道这些项目已经存在。

So I don't know whether he's just giving examples to clarify for people or whether he literally doesn't know that these things exist.

我肯定他知道这些项目存在，但这些都不是新东西。

I I I'm sure he knows that they exist, but this is not new.

像 L2 已经在做这些了。

Like and and l twos are already doing this.

所以我不太明白他到底想表达什么。

So I don't actually understand what he's really kinda trying to say here.

他是想说，我希望看到更多这样的东西吗？

Like, is he saying that I wanna see more of this?

当然。

Sure.

我也很想看到更多这样的东西。

I'd love to see more of this as well.

但，是的，我只是觉得他说这话有点奇怪，因为我读到并理解为他在暗示这些事情如今要么不存在，要么不够受重视，而我认为它们其实已经存在了。

But, yeah, I just felt it was weird that he would say this with the with where I would read and interpret this as him implying that these things either don't exist today or aren't focused on enough, which I think they are.

当然，大家现在谈论最多的还是扩展性，但这些事情已经具有差异化了。

And obviously, you know, scaling has been the main talk of the town, but but these things are already differentiated.

它们已经在做不同的事情了。

They're already doing things different.

然后他说，至少要达到阶段一。

And then he says, you know, b stage one at the minimum.

否则，你其实只是一个带桥接的独立L1，如果你在使用以太坊或其他以太坊发行的资产，你就该直接这么称呼自己。

Otherwise, you really are just a separate l one with a bridge, you should just call yourself that if you're doing things with Ether or other Ethereum issued assets.

当我想到这句话时，这挺有趣的，因为我并不反对这个观点。

This is maybe the it's it's funny when I think about this sentence in particular because I I don't disagree with this.

我认为，如果你处于阶段零，那你基本上就是一个独立的链，因为你完全是中心化的。

I think that if you're stage zero, you you are pretty much like a separate kind of chain because you are just completely centralized.

我觉得我过去也表达过这个观点，但与此同时，我不确定。

And I think I've argued this point in the past as well, but at the same time, I I don't know.

我觉得，对于这些L2——准确说是所谓的零阶段L2，本质上就是L1——自称属于以太坊生态系统，并不是什么坏事，因为很多项目在零阶段之后确实会升级到一阶段。

Like, I feel like it's not it's not a bad thing for these l twos to well, these, I guess, like, you know, stage zero l twos, are basically l ones, to say they're part of the Ethereum ecosystem because what if then they just get to to l one sorry, to to stage one, after stage zero, which a lot of them have.

那么，为什么我们就可以开始称它们为L2，或称它们属于以太坊生态系统呢？

Then why then is it permissible for us to start calling them l twos or start calling them part of the Ethereum ecosystem?

我不知道。

Don't know.

我觉得这样做会疏远一些人。

I feel like it alienates people by by doing that.

是的。

And yes.

好的。

Okay.

如果确实存在一些零阶段L2本质上是骗局或骗局行为，我们就应该指出来。

If we if there are stage zero l twos that are pretty much like scams and grifts, we should call that out.

但我很难去指出这些阶段零的项目，说你们只是L1，等你们到了L1再称你们为L2，因为我觉得这样做会把建设者们推远。

But I I struggled to to kind of want to call out the stage zeros and say, oh, no, you're just an l one, get to stage one, then we'll call you an l two because we we push builders away by doing that, I think.

这就像一种意识形态的纯洁性测试，我认为我们在处理这些问题时，确实需要一定程度上摆脱这种做法。

And it's it's very like ideological purity testing, which I think we we needed to definitely get away from, to an extent with these things.

但说实话，我不确定。

But, yeah, I I don't know.

我对这个问题其实持开放态度。

I I I can go either way on this.

我不会说我对其中任何一方有强烈的意见。

I'm not gonna say I have a strong opinion on on either way here.

我只是觉得，把人推远是不健康的，尤其是那些努力做正确事情的人，因为在加密领域这样的人本就稀少。

I just don't think it's healthy to push people away, especially people that are trying to do the right thing because those people are in short supply within crypto.

不幸的是，加密领域里的大多数人其实都在做错误的事。

Most people in crypto unfortunately are doing the bad thing.

所以我们不应该仅仅因为人们不符合我们强加给这些项目的严格定义，就把他们推到一边。

So we shouldn't push people away just because they don't fit some strict definition that we put into a box of these things.

我们确实应该对此保持透明，我们在L2 Beat上就是这样做的，但我认为我们不应当仅仅因为这些链一开始不是第一阶段就贬低它们。

We should definitely be transparent about it, which we are with l two beat, but I don't think we should be shaming these chains just because they're not stage one from the beginning.

至少这是我个人的理解。

At least that's my that's my kind of interpretation.

然后他说，我会支持与以太坊的最大互操作性，不过每个L2的情况会有所不同。

And then he he says, you know, I would support maximum interoperability with Ethereum though this will differ for each, l two.

我同意这一点。

I agree with this.

我认为互操作性是好的，而且更好，但与此同时，即使像现在这样通过跨链桥实现的互操作性还不够极致，我们也已经拥有足够好的互操作性了。

I think that interoperability is good, is better, but at the same time, we already have good enough interop even if like it's not maximally interop with bridging.

而且我明白这里显然还有额外的信任假设，但用户似乎对此感到满意。

And I think there's obviously additional trust assumptions there, but users seem to be happy with that.

所以，这在这里并不是什么大问题。

So again, it's not a not a huge deal here.

接着他继续说，从以太坊的角度来看，在过去几个月里，我越来越认同原生Rollup预编译的价值，尤其是当我们已经内置了ZKVM证明——而我们无论如何都需要这些证明来扩展我们的网络。

So then he goes on to say from Ethereum side over the past few months, I've become more convinced of the value of the native roll up precompile, particularly once we have enshrined ZKVM proofs that we need anyway to scale our one.

这是一个验证ZKVM证明的预编译合约，属于以太坊的一部分。

This is a precompile that verifies the ZKVM proof and it's part of Ethereum.

因此它会随着以太坊自动升级，如果预编译合约存在漏洞，以太坊将通过硬分叉来修复。

So it auto upgrades along with Ethereum and if the precompile has a bug, Ethereum will hard fork to fix the bug.

关于原生Rollup，这个话题已经讨论很久了。

So this is something that has been talked about for a while native roll ups.

我之前提到过。

I mentioned it before.

这背后有巨大的权衡，Vitalik在这里明确指出了这些权衡。

This has massive trade offs guys, and Vitalik basically names the trade offs here.

这种原生Rollup会受到以太坊的限制。

This native roll up would be limited by Ethereum.

它无法比以太坊协议本身运行得更快。

It cannot move faster than the Ethereum protocol itself.

以太坊L1协议。

The Ethereum l one protocol.

它是以太坊一层协议的一部分。

It is part of the Ethereum l one protocol.

你获得的可定制性要少得多。

You get way less customize customizability.

你的可扩展性也更差。

You you get less scale as well.

你无法做到在二层上能做的事情。

You can't do what you can do with l twos.

在所有实际用途中，我不认为原生滚动是一个二层。

For all intents and purposes, I actually don't think a native roll up is an l two.

再次强调，这其实是一个定义上的语义争论。

Again, this is a thing, definition kind of semantics argument here.

但如果一个原生滚动是L1的一部分，只能通过L1硬分叉来更改，出现漏洞时必须由L1进行分叉修复，那么从所有实际用途来看，它就是L1的一部分。

But if a native roll up is part of the L one can only be changed by an L one hard fork, has a bug and has to and the L one has to fork to fix that bug, then for all intents and purposes, it's part of the l one.

它不是一个二层。

It is not an l two.

它并不是位于L1之上的另一层。

It is not another layer sitting on top of the l one.

它是L1本身的一部分。

It is part of the l one itself.

因此，我不把这些称为L2。

So I would not call these things l twos.

也许Vertilek会这么叫，但我不会。

Maybe Vertilek does, but I just wouldn't.

对吧？

Right?

所以我会把这类技术归入L1扩展的范畴。

So I would put that into the bucket of l one scaling.

我根本不会把这些归入L2的类别。

I actually wouldn't put that into the l two bucket at all.

然后他说，原生Rollup预编译将使完整的安全理事会无信任EVM验证成为可能。

And then he says, you know, the native roll up precompile would make full security council free EVM verification accessible.

我们应该花更多时间来设计它，使得当你的 L2 是 EVM 加上其他内容时，原生滚动预编译可以验证 EVM，而你只需要为其他部分（例如 stylist）提供自己的证明者。

We should spend much more time working out how to design it in such a way that if your l two is an EVM plus other stuff, then the native roll up precompile would verify the EVM and you only have to bring your own prover for the other stuff, e g stylist.

这可能涉及一种标准方式，用于暴露合约调用输入与查找表之间的映射，并允许你提供自己独立证明的查找表值。

This might involve a canonical way of exposing a lookup table between contract call inputs and letting you provide your own values to the lookup table that you would prove separately.

所以，是的，显然 L2 仍然可以基于此构建，但在我眼中，这并不是真正的原生滚动。

So, yeah, obviously like an l two can still be built on top of this, but then it's not like, in my eyes, a proper kind of native roll up.

它更像是原生滚动与典型 L2 构造之间的混合体，而后者本质上只是一个 L2。

It is like a hybrid between a native roll up and and and a typical l two construction here, which again would just be an l two.

这里存在不同的方式和不同的权衡，归根结底，一切总是关于权衡，各位。

There So are different ways here and different trade offs here, and it's all about the trade offs always guys.

但同样，我认为这与 L2 并不矛盾。

But again, like I don't think that this is something that is at odds with l twos either.

我认为这只不过是另一种在以太坊上构建的方式。

I think that is just another way to build on Ethereum.

对吧？

Right?