Layer 1 代币面临审查：它们能否满足硬通货的愿望？

加密货币分析师 Willy Woo 质疑第 1 层 (L1) 网络成为硬通货的潜力，并将其与随时间演变的计算环境进行比较。 Woo 指出，比特币的脚本语言更像是一种协议，而像以太坊和 Solana 这样的 L1 网络更像是计算环境，随着应用程序需求的变化，可能会失宠。

Layer 1 Tokens: The Enigma of Hard Money Aspirations

Layer 1 代币：硬通货愿望之谜

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.

在最近一项发人深省的分析中，著名加密货币分析师 Willy Woo 对以太坊、Solana 和 Radix 等第 1 层 (L1) 网络履行令人垂涎的“硬通货”角色的潜力表示怀疑。他的怀疑源于历史先例，这些先例表明随着技术的发展，计算环境具有瞬态性。

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.

吴是加密领域受人尊敬的人物，他在社交媒体上表达了他的担忧。他将 L1 网络比作不断变化的计算环境，其中编程语言和范例的主导地位随着技术进步而变化。

"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.

“以太坊非常适合每隔一周发送 Tether，但我也可以使用其他链来实现这一点。另一方面，比特币有一种脚本语言，但它更像是一种协议，”Woo 观察到。

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，这是一种在 20 世纪 50 年代和 1960 年代占据统治地位的高级编程语言。然而，随着 Web2 技术的出现，它的受欢迎程度逐渐下降，这有利于 JavaScript 对互联网环境的适用性。

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

“当今大多数大型应用程序都使用多种语言，每种语言都针对特定子系统量身定制。还记得 Fortran 吗？现在谁在使用它？”吴问道。

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.

吴的怀疑延伸到了持有比特币的性质。他把这种经历比作75%的时间是在忍受艰辛，而剩下的25%的时间是令人兴奋的回报。他认为，这种不稳定的模式破坏了通常与硬通货相关的稳定性。

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.

这位分析师的评论引发了加密社区内的激烈争论。一些人回应了吴的担忧，引用了技术范式的历史变迁。然而，其他人仍然对 L1 代币发展和适应不断变化的市场条件的潜力持乐观态度。

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 代币是否能真正成为硬通货的问题仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。最终，答案可能在于技术创新、市场动态和区块链生态系统不断变化的需求之间的相互作用。

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.

随着加密货币领域继续以前所未有的速度发展，必须批判性地评估不同技术的潜力，以满足硬通货的苛刻要求。只有时间才能证明 L1 代币是否能够应对挑战，或者它们是否注定会成为过去技术时代的遗物。