What you learn from books is always shallow, the concept of chain abstraction is too broad❓

These few days, I happened to experience the bridge service again when adjusting the data related to the cross-chain bridge

It is better to use it yourself than to say that chain abstraction ≠ cross-chain bridge

Only after using it can you "know that you must practice it yourself"

Chain abstraction itself will not subvert the bridge, but just put the interaction of the bridge to the back end

Let users experience a smoother and multi-chain scenario on the front end

I think it is easier to understand this way

A more intuitive point is that the cross-chain bridge itself does not have the concept of unifying the liquidity of each chain

📍Therefore, in theory, a single asset is constantly transferred between chains, and it will be constantly worn out due to gas problems

As for chain abstraction, you don’t need to consider this problem

I have said before that the cross-chain bridge protocol is actually the most motivated to do chain abstraction. The reason is this. For example, the three protocols I counted yesterday have already seen corresponding modules

In addition, the launch of chain abstraction protocols such as Particle and Xion this quarter will also make the paradigm of this track clearer