Since the launch of Blur last week layer2 Online Blast has attracted the market to join first, but its technology and marketing mechanism are full of controversy. Paradigm, a venture capital institution that invested in Blast, said yesterday that "Blast has crossed the line, but in the end it still respects the team's decision."
What's controversial about Blast?
What is Blast
NFT DecentralizationExchange Blast, a new Layer2 network launched by Blur founder Pacman last week, features “on-chain native income” and provides interest rates that ensure the security of on-chain user assets.
When a user deposits ETH or a large amount of stable currency into Blast, the Blast team will send the user toEthereumDeposit the assets on Lido or MakerDAO, which represents the user operating Blast DAPP At the same time, the assets also enjoy basic interest rates, which improves the efficiency of capital utilization.
Extended reading:A detailed look at Blur’s yield-based L2 network Blast: native interest rates on the chain, NFT perpetual contracts, and more
Due to its unique original interest rate mechanism and the use of Blur's points system to speculate on the market in the past, Blast's TVL has exceeded 5 million as of earlier美元In terms of the current Layer2 ecosystem, Blast has delivered an excellent report card. Just one week after its launch, it has already firmly established itself as one of the top five existing Layer2 projects.
Blast technology controversy
Blast received a lot of criticism.Several obvious problems can be found in the above mechanism. The Blast team has multi-signature control to move funds to Lido, but there are relative security concerns. In addition, Blast has not yet completed the Rollup mechanism but is only a smart contract for deposits.
Polygon Labs engineer Jarrod Watts tweeted that Blast is just a contract controlled by a 3/5 multi-signature wallet. Although other L2s currently have the same problem, Blast currently has no testnet, no transactions, no cross-chain bridges, no rollups, and noEthereumSend transaction information,There is not even a withdrawal contract that allows users.Jarrod Watts believes that Blast cannot be called L2 at present.
SlowMist founder Yu Xian also believes that the security behind Blast is very problematic. The contract can be upgraded to change the logic, but the multi-signature holders behind it have not been made public.
Extended reading:I was greedy for Blur airdrop, but the results of Blast L2 are all fake?Developer reveals risk of running away
The technical architecture of Blast has been criticized by the community as being too simple, and most of the designs are inconsistent withDecentralizationContrary to the concept, it successfully attracted the market and once again aroused many concerns aboutDecentralization, discussion on the necessity of safety.
Steven Goldfeder, founder of OffChain Labs, commented that Blast is a monster and believes that it has abused the L2 vocabulary definition.
Layer2 projects have been developed for several years, and even many Rollup projects based on zero-knowledge proofs have not been officially launched yet. Compared with Blast, they are sneaky and violateDecentralizationThe technical architecture of the concept has quickly attracted market funds and attention. It is not difficult to think about why most developers cannot understand the project.
Blast marketing controversy
Blast can successfully attract funds in a short period of time. In addition to its unique interest rate mechanism, it also relies on a points mechanism similar to Blur. Users who deposit assets into Blast can also earn points and receive future airdrop reward opportunities, successfully impressing market sentiment. .
However, this type of points system has long been criticized for being unable to attract real users. At this stage, most of Blur's transaction volume is still filled with many buy and sell orders for the purpose of earning points.
In addition, the Blast invitation code mechanism also makes the business model more like a pyramid model. In order to answer various questions from the community, founder Pacman also issued an explanation to try to alleviate concerns.
Extended reading:The founder of Blast clarifies: it is not dominated by Paradigm, the income is sustainable, and explains the invitation system
Paradigm view
Disagree with many of Blast's practices
In the face of so many controversial projects, the professionalism and philosophy of investor Paradigm have also been questioned.Therefore, yesterday Paradigm team member Dan Robinson issued an article saying that the Blast team has indeed crossed the line in information transmission and execution.
It seems that Paradigm has many philosophical conflicts with the Blast team.For example, Paradigm does not agree with the launch of mainnetBridge before the Layer 2 network to invest funds in other protocols, and does not agree with why the user withdrawal function has not been enabled.
Paradigm believes that Blast will set a bad precedent for other projects, and that most current marketing activities will reduce the team's work efficiency.
Pacman is still supported Try to explore
However, even if there are many conflicts of ideas, Paradigm will still choose to support Pacman and his team. Paradigm said that this is not the first time to invest in these people. From past projects such as Namebase, Blur to Blend, it has seen the ability and talent of the Pacman team.
When Pacman expressed that he had a vision for L2 to expand Blur and wanted to strengthen the product on the existing basis, Paradigm chose to invest in him again, saying that they are world-class developers who can bring value to the industry.
Paradigm has been discussing the above issues with the Blast team. Paradigm does not endorse such strategies, but takes its responsibilities in the ecosystem seriously and expresses its opinions.
The importance of independent thinking
After Blast's first successful entry into the market, there are still many tests on how to grow and operate sustainably amid controversy. The team's next step is indeed attracting attention.
The author believes that opinions from the project team, professional venture capital, community comments, market sentiment and other aspects should be taken into consideration correctly and objectively.
In addition to seeing things on the surface, you should also think about the motivations behind the speeches of all parties. Only then can you think more clearly and see the full picture of the incident, and finally make your own judgment and take responsibility for your own actions.The ability to think independently is Web3 Ecology is more important.
