Golden Observation｜Re-discussion on public chain infrastructure and application diversity

The entire international market is bearish, and most of the projects that raised funds and issued coins during this cycle have earned huge assets. Isn't it time to concentrate on the project?

This question remains unanswered.

Today we are going to discuss the issue of "public chain infrastructure and application diversity", the key core of which must be the people who make the project. Now that the market bubble has burst and the tide has receded, everyone is swimming naked. That is, whether you can set your heart down and do some good deeds is the key to future development.

Under the circumstances of no longer advocating the future, no longer fishing in troubled waters, no longer blindly worshiping, and no longer pretending to be false, practitioners need to think again about the public chain infrastructure and application diversity.

The public chain is layered, how to divide it?

The bottom layer is the network, that is, pure infrastructure, and the upper layer is the application, that is, the people who use the infrastructure.

Here you need to know that at this time, those who directly develop applications to use the infrastructure have a relatively high threshold. It is required to understand the use of infrastructure from the bottom layer, so the market has been born. There is an intermediate layer between the bottom layer and the upper layer. This layer has some platforms that help application development, some protocols that help applications add services, and some that help management software.

Therefore, there will be a distinction between the bottom layer, the middle layer, and the upper layer.

Who are these responsible persons?

The person in charge of the bottom layer is the infrastructure project party who takes the lead, but under the requirement of stability, decentralization is required, so the person in charge becomes the network node builder.

The person in charge of the middle layer is those who want to provide services in the public chain market, and some of these people join spontaneously, and some join under the leadership of the infrastructure project foundation.

Those responsible for the upper layer are those application creators, and many of these application creators issue coins, so there will be some foundation organizations, and these foundations and DAOs may also be established under the leadership of the infrastructure foundation.

To sum up, infrastructure foundations have many responsibilities, and entrepreneurs in the ecosystem have many responsibilities.

Moreover, in a chaotic and immature market, many projects confuse boundaries and concepts.

For example, if an application says that it is an agreement party rather than an application operator, the team may not have thought clearly about the team's tasks and functions, because the application is made through the agreement, but the application is the application, and the goal of the application is to make profits through the application. To make money through the model, rather than the agreement to move towards DAO, if you do not use the application to make DAO with the agreement, and do not consider directly using the operation application to make profits, it is confusing the audition.

It's a pity that many projects with no products are doing this.

The responsibility of an underlying infrastructure network is to build a good network, make tools for ecological project development, and then conduct project guidance to control the currency price in the secondary market.

For other middle-level and upper-level projects, the middle-level, since it is the middle-level, do a good job of technical services for the project. Appropriate use of application drainage and demonstration is fine. Don’t use the application to grandstanding, enjoy the benefits of the application but use the middle-level service as a cover.

For upper-level applications, since we are making applications, we must first polish the product. Only when the product is profitable can we pass through bulls and bears, and there is no need to rush to issue coins.

It’s bearish now, so 2020-2021 is the last round of bull market. In this cycle, all public chains and self-proclaimed infrastructure projects are engaged in ecology, all kinds of projects, and the functions of these projects may be ridiculously simple . But they have all issued coins, have liquidity, and have investors and users.

This is financial play tricks.

How about a technical perspective? What about diversity in infrastructure?

After the public chain has built the network, developed the application development tools, and completed the wallet and browser, it is the turn of such a structure to appear.

First of all, for example, Uniswap ’s code is public, and a Dex can be easily developed on Ethereum or a chain compatible with Ethereum using Uniswap’s code.

The same is true for other protocols. After the emergence of Compound, many lending protocols can make lending applications by copying Compound’s code changes.

In the same way, the protocol applications of stablecoins, IDOs, and derivatives are all like this.

The idea behind these applications is to perform replication work under the same standard, but face different markets and users.

This will again lead to competition and refined innovation.

Most of these innovations are reflected from the protocol layer of the middle layer to the application layer.

For example, in trading applications, the order books of uniswap's amm and dydx are completely different. At the same time, amm, Curve, Bancor, and Balancer are different.

And in the IDO category, the price ideas of Balancer's BLP and DODO's IDO are completely different.

These refined distinctions screen users and determine the market.

However, these are all diversity distinctions for the sake of market competition.

Some markets are derived from application requirements, such as currency mixing, which is a market application that takes advantage of anonymous privacy requirements, and such a protocol can be an example of designing a middle-level protocol based on requirements, even if the project should not be respected .

Another example is that the liquidity in a single protocol is limited, and the transactions on the chain are open, so the demand for transaction aggregation has led many project parties to take a fancy to the transaction aggregation portal and create an aggregation Dex. Many also have wallets.

But there is one thing to say, these diversity is far from facing a huge market. It's just that in certain categories, you can see the obvious logic of attracting users, the logic of profitability, and the logic of market demand, and do it.

Can gamefi, p2e, and x2e derived from defi and nft represent diversity?

First of all, these projects may not have thought about the idea of making profits with core products, like gmt, which makes profits by selling shoes and trading shoes, but what attracts users is the subsidy for token investment, and two liquidity pools have been issued for users Between each other. This seems to be the logic of opening a chess and card room, rather than the idea of normal sports products, but these are regarded as examples of the web3 Internet, which is a big mistake.

The diversity of this product may become the mainstream in the future, which means that under the magic of openness and freedom, bubbles are always emerging.

Under such diversity, cryptocurrency and blockchain will always be industries with high leverage. When the leverage of tens of thousands of times is opened, the market is correct for certain stakeholders. When the lever is out, the tide goes out and it's all skinny swimmers because they cover their faces with one hand while water skiing with the other.