Emin Gün Sirer, the brains behind Ava Labs, recently sounded the alarm on the proliferation of subpar layer 2 solutions, aptly named “trash L2s,” aiming to swoop in and occupy the space left wide open by Sam Bankman-Fried. These new entrants are marked by their reliance on centralized sequencers devoid of fraud proofs, alongside founders engaging in the dubious practice of offloading their personal tokens before the projects even hit the market. These tactics bear a striking resemblance to the manipulative ploys utilized by SBF, raising red flags across the crypto community.
The Lure of L2
Layer 2 solutions, or L2s for short, have been touted as the next big leap in scaling blockchain technologies, offering a way to handle transactions off the main chain (layer 1) and supposedly bringing us closer to mass adoption. However, Sirer’s recent observations suggest that not all that glitters in the L2 realm is gold. The ease with which these platforms can be launched has opened the floodgates for entities with questionable motives. These players mimic the appearance of innovation and progress, echoing the strategies of networks that are known for their instability and frequent reorganizations.
The red flags highlighted by Sirer are not just mere potholes on the road to blockchain’s future but gaping chasms that threaten to derail the journey. Centralized sequencers in L2 solutions that lack the essential component of fraud proofs are fundamentally at odds with the ethos of decentralization that crypto stands for. This discrepancy between the narrative peddled by these projects and the actual technology underpinning them is a glaring issue that investors and enthusiasts should not overlook.
Moreover, the practice of founders liquidating their stake in the project before it even launches, under the guise of rewarding their staff, is reminiscent of SBF’s infamous tactics. These maneuvers, coupled with the manipulation of token valuations through the manipulation of supply (very low float tokens), spell trouble for the integrity of these projects and, by extension, the broader crypto ecosystem.
Cutting Through the Noise
In a place cluttered with buzzwords and technical jargon, discerning the viable from the vacuous can be daunting. Sirer proposes a straightforward litmus test: does the project in question address the current critical challenges facing the crypto world? The true innovators in the space, such as Avalanche and Solana in the past, have offered tangible solutions to pressing issues like scalability and performance.
Today’s challenges revolve around fostering interoperability among diverse use cases and facilitating seamless integration with traditional finance (TradFi). It’s essential to evaluate whether these new entrants bring anything of substance to the table. Would you be comfortable inviting the founders to a family dinner and listening to them explain their unique approach to solving these problems? If the answer is no, then there’s a good chance you’re looking at a project that’s more smoke and mirrors than substance.
The emergence of these “trash L2s” is a testament to the fact that the allure of quick gains and fame in the crypto sphere continues to attract individuals with less than noble intentions. Sirer’s warning serves as a timely reminder for the community to remain vigilant and critical, especially in the wake of the void left by SBF’s downfall.
