Why do I think BTC layer2 needs more "modularization"?

Author: Haotian, independent researcher Source: X, @ tmel0211

Why do I think BTC layer2 needs more "modularization"? I would like to add some additional points:

1) The capabilities of the BTC main network are very limited and have clear boundaries. Beyond the scope of payment, any complex transaction logic with state is difficult to effectively execute. This makes modular epitaxial components not an option for BTC, but a must.

In other words, the BTC main network does not have DA capabilities, that is, there is no room for optimization and improvement. Unlike Ethereum’s DA, which can start a war, Ethereum’s own DA Ability is just costly, not impossible. The only thing BTC layer2 developers can do is to choose an outsourced DA solution that meets the characteristics of the BTC main network, or build it independently. There is no other choice.

2) Modularization is the inevitable result of competition for development resources to a certain extent. Many developers are vying to develop it. When involution reaches a certain level, it will There are more lightweight, one-click chaining, and pluggable modular solutions.

Sponsored Business Content

Modularization allows developers to build and deploy new applications and services faster by reusing existing, proven components, which not only speeds up development process, can also reduce costs and increase system security and stability. It is well known that the Ethereum layer 2 field has been impacted by modularization. This is actually a manifestation of the high saturation of layer 2 development resources, which is a good thing. It shows that the entire market has become mature and professional.

In comparison, BTC layer2 used modular thinking to advance earlier, which will also accelerate the implementation of more excellent L2 solutions. BSquare promotes modular strategies. The ambition to export module standardized components to a BTC layer 2 market that has no standards at all is not small.

3) Modularization is essentially a C2B2C strategy. Originally, the development of layer2 chain required core components such as DA layer and interoperable layer. It is necessary to develop ecological landing applications, and layer2 has become a market-based business that purely competes for operational capabilities.

However, the imagination space of pure To C business is very limited and bottlenecks are prone to occur. The To B business is very different. Optimism has launched the Stack strategy to expand the Superchain strategic alliance. , integrating a large number of industry resources and integrating them into multiple ecological links, almost exponentially amplifying the business prospects of its own platform. Moreover, To B will eventually be implemented for To C, and after some modular packaging, the size of the crowd in the C-end market will also be greatly enlarged.

I am very optimistic about the "modular" direction projects that can play the To B strategy well, compared with those that engage in independent comprehensive chains and TVL to engage in points wars Projects will have an advantage in terms of explosiveness and durability, especially in terms of valuation space.