Great question. The progress of ZK technology is gradually turning what used to be an almost irreconcilable conflict (performance vs. decentralization) into a positive feedback loop: the higher the throughput, the stronger the decentralization. 1. Lowering hardware barriers Before: Proving an Ethereum block required 50–160 high-end GPUs, costing $300K–500K, meaning only companies could afford to participate. After: 2–8 RTX 5090s will suffice (cost < $15K), giving individuals and small studios the chance to run full proving nodes. Evolution: Provers shift from being an "oligopoly" to "tens of thousands of miners," naturally becoming more decentralized. 2. Changes in economic incentives Before: Only centralized sequencers made money. After: Whoever provides proofs gets paid (e.g., Succinct PROVE, Brevis ProverNet's proof payment markets). Evolution: A true "proof-as-mining" market forms. The more participants, the more censorship-resistant the network becomes. 3. L1 itself will benefit When the cost of proving a massive block becomes acceptable, the community can safely raise the L1 gas limit without worrying about "validator nodes falling behind." Result: L1 throughput increases 3–5x, while running a full node still only requires a standard consumer-grade computer, leading to even stronger decentralization. 4. Privacy becomes the new moat for decentralization ZK technology enables contracts to trustlessly access historical and cross-chain data across the network. In the future, private DeFi, zkML, and RWA will no longer rely on centralized oracles → reducing attack surfaces and becoming even more decentralized. In short, ZK is no longer a "trade-off sacrificing decentralization for scalability." Instead, it has become a lever to "use verifiable computation to push decentralization to new heights." #ZK #Crypto #Blockchain