$ETH Base and Ethereum Split on Account Abstraction Standard, Who Pays the Price?
The Account Abstraction (AA) standardization collaboration between Base and Ethereum has officially collapsed. EIP-8130 (led by Base) and EIP-8141 (led by L1 Ethereum, also known as Frame Transactions) will no longer share the same path.
The root cause:
According to Derek Chiang from Ethlabs, there's a fundamental difference in core objectives between L1 and L2:
L1 Ethereum targets: censorship resistance, privacy protection, quantum resistance
L2s like Base prioritize: high performance, regulatory compliance, customizability
Both sides tried to find a common standard, but any solution required at least one side to compromise on core objectives. Ultimately, no consensus was reached.
Who pays the price?
Not Base, not Ethereum. The fragmentation burden shifts to wallet developers.
When two different AA standards coexist, wallet developers must choose one or build support for both. This increases complexity and development costs, while end users may not even notice the difference.
Derek Chiang suggests two directions:
Build multi-stakeholder coordination mechanisms to jointly govern shared resources like the EVM
Accept fragmentation as inevitable, focus on building wallets and apps that abstract away and hide platform differences
This is a pivotal moment in Ethereum's evolution. L1 and L2 don't just differ in speed or cost they now have different philosophical directions.
Base prioritizing regulatory compliance and high performance isn't inherently bad. But it shows the Ethereum ecosystem is diverging: one side is "pure Ethereum" censorship-resistant, maximally decentralized; the other is "pragmatic Ethereum" performance, compliance, customizability.
The real question is: does this divergence weaken the Ethereum ecosystem, or does it reflect a reality that no single standard fits all?
News is for reference, not investment advice. Please read carefully before making a decision.
The Account Abstraction (AA) standardization collaboration between Base and Ethereum has officially collapsed. EIP-8130 (led by Base) and EIP-8141 (led by L1 Ethereum, also known as Frame Transactions) will no longer share the same path.
The root cause:
According to Derek Chiang from Ethlabs, there's a fundamental difference in core objectives between L1 and L2:
L1 Ethereum targets: censorship resistance, privacy protection, quantum resistance
L2s like Base prioritize: high performance, regulatory compliance, customizability
Both sides tried to find a common standard, but any solution required at least one side to compromise on core objectives. Ultimately, no consensus was reached.
Who pays the price?
Not Base, not Ethereum. The fragmentation burden shifts to wallet developers.
When two different AA standards coexist, wallet developers must choose one or build support for both. This increases complexity and development costs, while end users may not even notice the difference.
Derek Chiang suggests two directions:
Build multi-stakeholder coordination mechanisms to jointly govern shared resources like the EVM
Accept fragmentation as inevitable, focus on building wallets and apps that abstract away and hide platform differences
This is a pivotal moment in Ethereum's evolution. L1 and L2 don't just differ in speed or cost they now have different philosophical directions.
Base prioritizing regulatory compliance and high performance isn't inherently bad. But it shows the Ethereum ecosystem is diverging: one side is "pure Ethereum" censorship-resistant, maximally decentralized; the other is "pragmatic Ethereum" performance, compliance, customizability.
The real question is: does this divergence weaken the Ethereum ecosystem, or does it reflect a reality that no single standard fits all?
News is for reference, not investment advice. Please read carefully before making a decision.
