📰 Starknet suddenly threw a major curveball: from an Ethereum L2, it is considering becoming an independent L1. The reason is the security challenge in the post-quantum era. StarkWare co-founder Eli Ben-Sasson believes the network needs to take more autonomous control over cryptographic upgrades, and Starknet is expected to complete its quantum-safe upgrade as early as 2027.
🔥 The reason this has sparked controversy is that Starknet previously relied on Ethereum’s security to attract liquidity and ecosystem resources, but now it is considering “going solo.” Once it separates from Ethereum, it will have to handle underlying security maintenance, upgrades, and attack protection on its own, and developers, users, and capital will also need to regroup.
To be honest, the security rationale sounds solid, but the real-world issues are there too. As of October 9, Starknet’s TVL was about $160 million, down more than 50.6% from its historical peak; over the past two years, daily on-chain revenue has mostly been only a few thousand dollars or even less, which is a stark contrast to the hundreds of thousands of dollars seen at its peak.
💡 Even more awkwardly, Starknet has not yet put forward a concrete, executable quantum-resistant solution, and the transformation plan has not formally entered the on-chain governance proposal stage either. The community worries that this might just be using industry anxiety about AI, quantum computing, and cryptographic security to create a new narrative for the project.
🤔 Turning from L2 into L1 means the technical path can be chosen again, but the ecosystem and liquidity will not automatically move with it. Is Starknet really trying to solve a security problem this time, or is it trying to escape the L2 dilemma through transformation? What do you think?
#Starknet #STRK #以太坊 #区块链安全
🔥 The reason this has sparked controversy is that Starknet previously relied on Ethereum’s security to attract liquidity and ecosystem resources, but now it is considering “going solo.” Once it separates from Ethereum, it will have to handle underlying security maintenance, upgrades, and attack protection on its own, and developers, users, and capital will also need to regroup.
To be honest, the security rationale sounds solid, but the real-world issues are there too. As of October 9, Starknet’s TVL was about $160 million, down more than 50.6% from its historical peak; over the past two years, daily on-chain revenue has mostly been only a few thousand dollars or even less, which is a stark contrast to the hundreds of thousands of dollars seen at its peak.
💡 Even more awkwardly, Starknet has not yet put forward a concrete, executable quantum-resistant solution, and the transformation plan has not formally entered the on-chain governance proposal stage either. The community worries that this might just be using industry anxiety about AI, quantum computing, and cryptographic security to create a new narrative for the project.
🤔 Turning from L2 into L1 means the technical path can be chosen again, but the ecosystem and liquidity will not automatically move with it. Is Starknet really trying to solve a security problem this time, or is it trying to escape the L2 dilemma through transformation? What do you think?
#Starknet #STRK #以太坊 #区块链安全