Original author: TechFlow

After Blast’s airdrop a few weeks ago, no one seemed to be paying much attention to this project.

However, as long as there are enough eyes in the community, all the details can be easily caught.

Yesterday, sharp-eyed netizens discovered that Blast changed the name of its official X account from @Blast_L2 to @Blast.

Official accounts often represent their own brands and positioning. The difference of one word can have very different meanings.

Although this is just a small account name change and does not require an official news announcement, from a brand and cognition perspective, this is most likely "part of the plan."

At the same time, the profile of Blast’s official account also began to describe itself as “The Fullstack Chain” rather than an L2. This seems to be deliberately downplaying the general impression that it is Ethereum’s L2.

However, is this just a brand innovation to highlight differentiated selling points, or is it a technological independence to separate from Ethereum and create an independent chain of its own?

Helping Ethereum is important, but developing yourself is more important

There is no doubt that Blast is the best at operations and activities among many L2s, perhaps the only one.

Tieshun is certainly not going to simply issue airdrops to gain popularity. Blast becoming a full-stack chain has actually been written into its second-phase development plan.

Judging from the official diagram, this full stack means that Blast is not just a ledger that processes transactions and records changes in transaction status. Blast also wants to integrate upstream and downstream related to the chain.

From fiat currency deposits and withdrawals to wallets, Telegram robots, and Dapps in the ecosystem, all become part of the Blast chain, allowing its business to reach even further.

From infrastructure to applications, from capital flow to information flow, it feels like everyone wants a piece of the pie.

It has to be said that this is indeed an ambitious and very reasonable strategic choice. L2s all look similar, and in order to make themselves more recognizable, they must build around the upstream and downstream that can radiate around the chain.

However, the original intention of L2 was actually to help Ethereum deal with performance issues. Now looking at Blast's full-stack chain initiative, it is no longer as simple as a performance issue.

It has more of the meaning of helping one's own development, but if you say that it also improves the experience of Ethereum users, that's fine too.

But from L2 to full-stack chain, does it mean that we should not do L2 but build an independent L1?

Not at the moment.

In the most viewed post on this topic yesterday, Twitter user @0x jim interpreted it as leaving Ethereum to form a separate chain.

Wang Qiao of Alliance DAO interpreted it as an "integration" in the comment section - that is, having its own deposit channels, wallets and chain-related facilities, rather than directly cutting off from Ethereum.

Other voices in the community are more pointed, pointing out that in the future there may be more Rollups calling themselves chains; this is not about setting up a separate L1 to separate from Ethereum, but rather:

This makes the cut with all L2s looking the same today.

Technology homogeneity is the original sin, and standing out is the obsession

Every L2 has some grand statements when it is first created.

Although the descriptions vary, the goal is to make Ethereum better.

This also precisely points out the relationship between L2 and Ethereum --- alignment with Ethereum and being a parasite in the Ethereum ecosystem.

Help you process transactions faster, help you relieve congestion, help you expand capacity...

If there are external L1s acting as Ethereum killers, then L2s including Blast should be Ethereum's assistants.

It’s just that the technologies of these assistants are too homogeneous. Whether it’s ZK or OP, Rollup as a service has already appeared, and you can quickly build an L2 of your own.

When the assistants start to involute themselves, standing out becomes an obsession.

The attention and funds of the crypto market are limited, and users don’t really care about the technical selection of different L2s. Because the effects that L2s can achieve are basically the same, just choose 1-2 and use them.

When everyone's experience is similar, dozens of L2s are competing on the market. Sometimes a half-body lead in brand and recognition can bring about significant changes.

As a result, it is becoming increasingly easy to see these Ethereum assistants, starting from their original intention of helping Ethereum, gradually embarking on the road to success.

If you look through different L2 official accounts, you will find that they are surprisingly consistent:

No L2 is willing to say that they are Ethereum’s L2 in their profile.

The thing that fits with Ethereum is that it is becoming more and more like a MEME.

After all, each project lives for itself, and no project will use its passion to help Ethereum without asking for anything in return.

Knowing this, you need to be more careful when surfing in the crypto world:

The original slogans and narratives are always means, not ends.

Original link