Ethereum has been in trouble recently.

Market sentiment was subdued, with critics quick to point out that Ethereum (ETH) was underperforming in its competition with Solana (SOL), with much of the blame being put on the loss of users and attention to Layer 2 (L2) platforms.

This narrative raises an important debate: Does L2 belong in Ethereum? Like many questions in cryptocurrency, the answer is both complex and simple. Let’s analyze the relationship between Ethereum and L2 from two perspectives.

Symbiosis or separatism?

L2 has been a core component of Ethereum’s Rollup-based scaling roadmap. They are envisioned as a technical and cultural extension of Ethereum, designed to expand its functionality and appeal to a wider user base.

Essentially, L2 is closely tied to Ethereum. They rely on ETH as currency, benefit from Ethereum's security, and use Ethereum for data storage and settlement. It's like a startup leveraging its parent company's infrastructure and brand awareness, a win-win situation for both parties.

The symbiotic relationship between L2 and Ethereum is clear. L2s rely on Ethereum’s infrastructure and security, while Ethereum benefits from increased activity on L2 and increased demand for ETH, thereby enhancing ETH’s status as a store of value.

By offering lower fees and faster transaction times, L2s make it easier for developers to build a variety of applications. For example, the explosion of meme coins on Base and the rise of SocialFi platforms like Farcaster have created new markets for users.

In addition, L2 has become an important hub for decentralized finance (DeFi) activities, and ETH is the core asset of this ecosystem. Whether it is Arbitrum, Optimism or Base, these chains are dominated by ETH-related assets.

Vampire attack?

However, opponents of the Rollup-centric scaling route have made a major argument: L2 may not always rely on Ethereum. At present, L2 and Ethereum seem like a harmonious family. But what if L2s build their own ecosystems and get rid of Ethereum completely? They no longer rely on Ethereum's security, no longer use ETH as fuel, and no longer even need Ethereum's block space.

This fear of “L2s breaking away” is not unfounded. Technically, L2s can indeed build their own independent ecosystems with their own validator clusters, thus mastering the entire modular blockchain stack. So, does this mean that there will be a messy breakup between L2s and Ethereum in the future? Not necessarily.

Creating a new ecosystem or launching another L1 blockchain is a complex and resource-intensive task. Launching a validator cluster is a huge challenge, and building a new L1 will likely suffer from the same scalability issues as Ethereum. If L2s really intended to do this, they would probably have already started.

The danger of fragmentation?

In fact, L2 builders are pursuing different goals. Their main focus is to scale transactions, attract developers to build applications for various use cases, and introduce new users to the crypto space, while Ethereum deals with security and decentralization issues.

However, the rapid development of the L2 ecosystem has also brought some foreseeable problems. The popularity of L2 is a sign of the success of the Rollup-centric roadmap, but it also brings the risk of fragmentation.

We can agree that there may be too many L2s at the moment, and many projects lack differentiation. It's like a bunch of startups chasing the same market, all promising to provide the same features. This kind of competition is not healthy.

What we need are meaningful L2s that provide unique value and stand out from the crowd. Whether in terms of security, application diversity, or go-to-market strategies, L2s should demonstrate real innovation capabilities.

Collaboration and connection

As Ethereum scales through L2s, we need to ensure that it remains true to the core qualities of Ethereum. We need to avoid the risk of fragmenting the system by over-differentiating, and we don’t want every project to go in a different direction.

L2s need to connect seamlessly. Teams are launching technology stacks that allow chains to share resources, providing users with a faster and more seamless experience - projects like Superchain, AggLayer, Elastic Chain, and Orbit Chains are all moving in this direction.

However, we must also be wary of the “echo chamber effect”. L2s should not become isolated ecosystems that work independently. A healthy L2 ecosystem should be one where chains cooperate with each other, not isolate each other. We need to build bridges, not moats.

To achieve this goal, we need collaboration, communication, education, and incentives. Building shared infrastructure and standards to facilitate seamless connectivity between L2s is the only way to truly prosper together.

in conclusion:

Some may say that L2s is not Ethereum, or even an extension of Ethereum. But it is undeniable that L2s does enhance the practicality of Ethereum and ETH.

The “L2s vs. Ethereum” debate is a false proposition. This is not a zero-sum game. Ultimately, Ethereum and L2s are symbiotic. Together, we should build a future where Ethereum and L2s thrive together and drive the entire crypto ecosystem forward.