$STRK tripled in a month and doubled in a week—is this the launchpad for takeoff or the start of a new wave of bagholders?
StarkWare’s CEO dropped a bombshell: Starknet is considering leaving Ethereum’s security umbrella to establish its own Layer 1 blockchain.
It aims to have quantum-resistant protection in place by 2027, achieving comprehensive quantum security.
Ethereum’s roadmap, meanwhile, targets 2029.
Honestly, I think this is a false premise.
Starknet originally pitched itself as a way to help Ethereum scale while borrowing Ethereum’s security.
Now, the reason it gives for building its own chain is that relying on Ethereum would slow down its security upgrades.
Would leaving Ethereum and gaining the ability to upgrade independently necessarily make it safer?
Is it worth giving up Ethereum’s security just to achieve quantum resistance two years earlier?
And as far as $STRK ’s quantum-resistant protection goes, I don’t see any urgency for ordinary users either.
They’ve made plenty of promises before, like becoming Bitcoin’s execution layer,
and decentralizing the sequencer and proof systems.
Those roadmaps haven’t been fully delivered on yet, and now they’re considering building an L1?
It was only at the beginning of this year that the market was mocking Starknet for having 8 daily active users and 10 transactions a day.
Now, all of a sudden, it’s back in the spotlight.
The news broke a few days ago, and the price is still climbing.
Coincidentally, 127 million $STRK tokens are set to unlock on October 15.
Other Layer 1 blockchains are all pivoting to find new paths forward,
while Starknet is charging headfirst into this.
I can’t help wondering: is this a genuine technological breakthrough, or just another pump driven by hype?
StarkWare’s CEO dropped a bombshell: Starknet is considering leaving Ethereum’s security umbrella to establish its own Layer 1 blockchain.
It aims to have quantum-resistant protection in place by 2027, achieving comprehensive quantum security.
Ethereum’s roadmap, meanwhile, targets 2029.
Honestly, I think this is a false premise.
Starknet originally pitched itself as a way to help Ethereum scale while borrowing Ethereum’s security.
Now, the reason it gives for building its own chain is that relying on Ethereum would slow down its security upgrades.
Would leaving Ethereum and gaining the ability to upgrade independently necessarily make it safer?
Is it worth giving up Ethereum’s security just to achieve quantum resistance two years earlier?
And as far as $STRK ’s quantum-resistant protection goes, I don’t see any urgency for ordinary users either.
They’ve made plenty of promises before, like becoming Bitcoin’s execution layer,
and decentralizing the sequencer and proof systems.
Those roadmaps haven’t been fully delivered on yet, and now they’re considering building an L1?
It was only at the beginning of this year that the market was mocking Starknet for having 8 daily active users and 10 transactions a day.
Now, all of a sudden, it’s back in the spotlight.
The news broke a few days ago, and the price is still climbing.
Coincidentally, 127 million $STRK tokens are set to unlock on October 15.
Other Layer 1 blockchains are all pivoting to find new paths forward,
while Starknet is charging headfirst into this.
I can’t help wondering: is this a genuine technological breakthrough, or just another pump driven by hype?