Layer 1 代幣面臨審查：它們能否滿足硬通貨的願望？

加密貨幣分析師 Willy Woo 質疑第 1 層 (L1) 網路成為硬通貨的潛力，並將其與隨時間演變的運算環境進行比較。 Woo 指出，比特幣的腳本語言更像是一種協議，而像以太坊和 Solana 這樣的 L1 網路更像是運算環境，隨著應用程式需求的變化，可能會失寵。

Layer 1 Tokens: The Enigma of Hard Money Aspirations

Layer 1 代幣：硬通貨願望之謎

In a recent thought-provoking analysis, prominent crypto analyst Willy Woo has cast doubt on the potential of Layer 1 (L1) networks, such as Ethereum, Solana, and Radix, to fulfill the coveted role of "hard money." His skepticism stems from historical precedents that suggest the transient nature of computing environments as technology evolves.

在最近一項發人深省的分析中，著名加密貨幣分析師 Willy Woo 對以太坊、Solana 和 Radix 等第 1 層 (L1) 網路履行令人垂涎的「硬通貨」角色的潛力表示懷疑。他的懷疑源自於歷史先例，這些先例顯示隨著科技的發展，計算環境具有瞬態性。

Woo, a respected figure in the cryptosphere, took to social media to express his concerns. He likened L1 networks to ever-changing computing environments, where the dominance of programming languages and paradigms waxes and wanes in response to technological advancements.

吳是加密領域受人尊敬的人物，他在社群媒體上表達了他的擔憂。他將 L1 網路比作不斷變化的運算環境，其中程式語言和範例的主導地位隨著技術進步而變化。

"Ethereum is great for sending Tether every other week, but I can also use other chains for that. Bitcoin, on the other hand, has a scripting language, but it's more of a protocol," Woo observed.

「以太坊非常適合每隔一周發送 Tether，但我也可以使用其他鏈來實現這一點。另一方面，比特幣有一種腳本語言，但它更像是一種協議，」Woo 觀察到。

He cited the example of Fortran, a high-level programming language that reigned supreme in the 1950s and 1960s. Yet, its popularity dwindled with the advent of Web2 technologies, which favored JavaScript's suitability for the internet environment.

他引用了 Fortran 的例子，這是一種在 20 世紀 50 年代和 1960 年代佔據主導地位的高階程式語言。然而，隨著 Web2 技術的出現，它的受歡迎程度逐漸下降，這有利於 JavaScript 對網路環境的適用性。

"Most big apps today use multiple languages, each tailored to specific subsystems. Remember Fortran? Who uses it now?" Woo queried.

“當今大多數大型應用程式都使用多種語言，每種語言都針對特定子系統量身定制。還記得 Fortran 嗎？現在誰在使用它？”吳問。

Woo's skepticism extends to the nature of holding Bitcoin. He likened the experience to enduring hardships 75% of the time, followed by exhilarating rewards for the remaining 25%. This volatile pattern, he argues, undermines the stability typically associated with hard money.

吳的懷疑延伸到了持有比特幣的性質。他把這種經驗比喻成75%的時間是在忍受艱辛，而剩下的25%的時間是令人興奮的回報。他認為，這種不穩定的模式破壞了通常與硬通貨相關的穩定性。

The analyst's commentary has sparked a lively debate within the crypto community. Some have echoed Woo's concerns, citing the historical transience of technological paradigms. Others, however, remain optimistic about the potential of L1 tokens to evolve and adapt to changing market conditions.

這位分析師的評論引發了加密社群內的激烈爭論。有些人回應了吳的擔憂，並引用了技術範式的歷史變遷。然而，其他人仍然對 L1 代幣發展和適應不斷變化的市場條件的潛力持樂觀態度。

The question of whether L1 tokens can truly become hard money remains an open one. Ultimately, the answer may lie in the interplay between technological innovation, market dynamics, and the ever-evolving needs of the blockchain ecosystem.

L1 代幣是否能真正成為硬通貨的問題仍然是一個懸而未決的問題。最終，答案可能在於技術創新、市場動態和區塊鏈生態系統不斷變化的需求之間的相互作用。

As the crypto landscape continues to evolve at an unprecedented pace, it is essential to critically assess the potential of different technologies to meet the demanding requirements of hard money. Only time will tell whether L1 tokens can rise to the challenge or if they are destined to become mere relics of a bygone technological era.

隨著加密貨幣領域繼續以前所未有的速度發展，必須批判性地評估不同技術的潛力，以滿足硬通貨的嚴格要求。只有時間才能證明 L1 代幣是否能夠應對挑戰，或者它們是否注定會成為過去科技時代的遺物。