For the ZK Rollup project party, it should balance technological pursuit and actual market demand, with the goal of improving the practicality and user experience of ZK technology.

Author: Haotian

Everyone is looking forward to @Starknet's airdrop injecting a shot in the arm for the Layer2 industry. How much to distribute and how to distribute it is still unclear, but one thing is certain: the ZK-Rollup camp is at a point where it has to airdrop to "rescue the market."

In my opinion, this wave of airdrop catalyst will be a self-redemption action for ZK-Rollup. Why?

1) It is said that ZK-Rollup is the ultimate solution for layer2 Rollup, and in the face of ZK-Rollup, OP-Rollup is just a transitional solution that will eventually be eliminated.

In terms of absolute technology, the debate over the superiority of OP-Rollup and ZK-Rollup has been going on for too long.

Compared to the 7-day optimistic challenge period of Finality Proof for determining the state of each transaction, from the perspective of individual Sovereignism, the future of Rollup must be ZK-Rollup, without a doubt.

According to L2Beat data, among 65 Rollup projects, there are 26 ZK-Rollup solutions, while in comparison, there are only 21 OP-Rollup solutions.

Among these ZK-Rollup solutions, projects like Scroll and Taiko pursue ultimate EVM equivalence, aiming to improve compatibility with the Ethereum mainnet; zkSync and Starknet pursue comprehensive scalability of the chain, attempting to increase the mainnet's user base by improving transaction processing speed and throughput; Aztec focuses on solving transaction privacy issues through ZK; others like dYdX and zkSync Lite explore the potential of ZK technology in the transaction and payment directions.

Overall, ZK-Rollup technology is becoming increasingly specialized, beginning to excessively pursue details to achieve a more extreme technical narrative: for example, strict circuit efficiency and complete EVM equivalence. Pursuing extreme technology is not wrong, but don't forget that ZK itself is a high-threshold technology, and excessive pursuit of technology will make teams overlook user experience and the original intention of using ZK to solve practical problems.

This is not just my observation, but it is a real voice from the market. For ZK-Rollup project parties, they should balance technological pursuit and actual market demand, with the goal of improving the practicality and high user experience of ZK technology, and not get immersed in the self-satisfaction of the technical narrative to VC (not naming names).

2) Although the airdrop distribution standards of Starknet are not yet clear, its airdrop value orientation and purpose are well known, such as distributing STRK to DApp developers to incentivize them to build projects; distributing STRK to early contributors of the ECMP community (contents, meetups, workshops, etc.); distributing 9 billion STRK for future user rebates, and so on.

It is not difficult to see that Starknet's airdrop distribution will focus on individual contributions and value, and will also attach more importance to the long-term ecological incentive effect of the airdrop. Therefore, I judge that the scale of the STRK airdrop will definitely reach the "sweet spot" for most people, which is the switch to inspire everyone to continue contributing to ZK-Rollup. In addition, most tokens will be linearly released as GAS fee subsidies in future ecological contributions through Paymaster and Transaction binding.

Just take a look at the disastrous TVL data and the poor user trading experience of Starknet, and you will understand why there is a need for trading rebates. Although the "contributors" have already contributed a large number of TXS early on, it is not enough. It might as well be straightforward and do rebates. You guys keep coming to trade, and preferably more aggressively.

After all, the contribution of the "contributors" is real. This seems to imply that retrospective airdrops may be weaker than potential future airdrops. Starknet's airdrop incentive game is just beginning, and it won't let you come and grab the cake and then disperse.

Tokenomics is a double-edged sword. For projects like Starknet, which have a solid team, strong backing, and solid technology, they will not easily use the weapon of Tokenomics. There have been many precedents in history where the ecosystem became desolate after the excitement of distributing airdrops. For an ecosystem like ZK, with high technological thresholds and poor user experience, this is even more challenging.

But in the face of the current bleak ecological situation, besides Tokenomics, this last trump card, how else can the story of ZK-Rollup continue?

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。