The recent “we need to split” drama in the ETH ecosystem—after reading the original proposal, I found it doesn’t match what the headline is saying.
The trigger was two technical drafts: EIP-8141 by Vitalik and several researchers, focused on programmable verification, gas payments, and key rotation; and EIP-8130 by Coinbase engineers, which tailored verification rules separately for L1 and L2. With 15 big reposts and 60,000 views, it was simplified into “Ethereum is going to split.”
But on closer inspection: this isn’t a dispute over who’s right and wrong between L1 and L2. It’s each side making differentiated choices based on its own economic model and security needs. If L2 wants speed, it simplifies the verification path; if L1 wants neutrality, it makes verification more programmable. The account layer and settlement layer are still compatible. What truly becomes more diverse is the transaction layer and the mempool layer.
For ordinary users, the wallet is where this complexity will really have to be carried. Whether a wallet can support two sets of standards at the same time, whether it can front-load gas, and whether it can switch across chains without friction—these will become competitive points for wallet vendors, not a signal of an ETH ecosystem split.
My take: this message is still only at the draft stage right now—there’s no client implementation, no testnet data, and no real user migration yet. The clickbait conclusion of “Ethereum splitting” is too early. The real thing to watch is which wallet/middleware teams deliver a dual-compatible solution first.
$ETH #Arbitrum
The trigger was two technical drafts: EIP-8141 by Vitalik and several researchers, focused on programmable verification, gas payments, and key rotation; and EIP-8130 by Coinbase engineers, which tailored verification rules separately for L1 and L2. With 15 big reposts and 60,000 views, it was simplified into “Ethereum is going to split.”
But on closer inspection: this isn’t a dispute over who’s right and wrong between L1 and L2. It’s each side making differentiated choices based on its own economic model and security needs. If L2 wants speed, it simplifies the verification path; if L1 wants neutrality, it makes verification more programmable. The account layer and settlement layer are still compatible. What truly becomes more diverse is the transaction layer and the mempool layer.
For ordinary users, the wallet is where this complexity will really have to be carried. Whether a wallet can support two sets of standards at the same time, whether it can front-load gas, and whether it can switch across chains without friction—these will become competitive points for wallet vendors, not a signal of an ETH ecosystem split.
My take: this message is still only at the draft stage right now—there’s no client implementation, no testnet data, and no real user migration yet. The clickbait conclusion of “Ethereum splitting” is too early. The real thing to watch is which wallet/middleware teams deliver a dual-compatible solution first.
$ETH #Arbitrum