SCDO, as a new generation public chain positioned as 'Blockchain 4.0', has indeed achieved a good balance in security, scalability, and fairness with its innovations such as ZPoW consensus mechanism, sharding architecture, Stem sidechain protocol, and EVM compatibility. However, any technical system in rapid development inevitably encounters some bottlenecks and challenges. Today, we calmly analyze the potential problems SCDO may face and the directions for future improvement from a technical perspective.
1️⃣ Complexity of sharding architecture: Expansion vs. consistency
SCDO's current mainnet has implemented a multi-sharding architecture, and will expand to more shards in the future. This parallel processing design significantly improves network throughput, but also brings typical technical challenges:
Cross-shard communication delay: Each shard processes transactions independently. When transactions occur between different shards, 'light chains + proof verification' interactions are needed, which may cause confirmation delays under high concurrency.
State consistency pressure: As the number of shards increases, maintaining high performance while ensuring distributed state consistency is a key focus for continuous optimization.
🧠 Solution direction: Optimize cross-shard protocols and design more efficient cross-shard messaging mechanisms (such as lightweight synchronization technology based on Merkle proofs).
2️⃣ Coordination of sidechain governance and security
SCDO's Stem sidechain protocol supports the deployment of customized sidechains, making it a highly imaginative Layer 2 solution. However, it also has the following risks:
Sidechain autonomy vs main chain security: If sidechains adopt autonomous consensus mechanisms (PoS, PBFT, etc.), poor governance or attacks may affect the main chain's credibility.
Execution efficiency of challenge mechanisms: The main chain introduces a 'challenge mechanism' to supervise the status of sidechains, but the challenge process relies on the main chain validators' quick response. If nodes are inactive, it may lead to delayed penalties.
🧠 Solution direction: Strengthen main chain challenge mechanism response, introduce an 'arbitrator network' for cross-chain auditing, and encourage sidechains to adopt community voting governance models.
3️⃣ Adaptability issues of ZPoW algorithm
ZPoW, as an innovative upgrade to traditional PoW, performs well in fairness and energy consumption aspects, but there are still technical bottlenecks that need attention:
Algorithm complexity threshold: ZPoW introduces non-parallel computing tasks such as matrices and scientific functions, which have a high understanding threshold for ordinary developers. This may limit developer participation during the initial stage of ecosystem building.
Cost of maintaining algorithm diversity: ZPoW adopts a multi-task parallel 'mining track', requiring dynamic adjustment of the difficulty of each algorithm. Maintaining a balanced mechanism is a continuous effort.
🧠 Solution direction: Gradually open ZPoW algorithm interface documentation, introduce AI automatic algorithm difficulty adjustment modules to reduce human intervention costs.
4️⃣ Long-term dependency issues related to EVM compatibility
SCDO is fully compatible with Ethereum EVM, greatly lowering the development threshold, but it may also limit future innovation space:
Compatibility constraints on upgrade paths: If there are significant changes to the Ethereum Virtual Machine architecture in the future, SCDO may face increased synchronous development pressure if it closely follows the upgrades; if it retains the old version of EVM, it might miss out on the future VM ecosystem.
Performance cannot break through EVM bottlenecks: The EVM itself has foreseeable performance bottlenecks, such as execution efficiency and rigidity of the Gas model. If SCDO fully relies on EVM, it may limit the development of high-performance DApps in the ecosystem.
🧠 Solution direction: Maintain EVM compatibility while exploring autonomous VM architectures (such as SVM, etc.), gradually building a runtime environment more suitable for SCDO's performance model.
5️⃣ Depth of community developer participation
Although SCDO has open-sourced all its code and provided SDK interfaces,
The developer ecosystem is still in its early stages, and compared to Ethereum, Polkadot, etc., its GitHub contribution level, third-party tool support, and documentation depth still have gaps.
The multi-language SDK is not yet perfect, currently mainly focused on Solidity, with low support for other development languages, limiting access for more developers.
🧠 Solution direction: Accelerate the development of multi-language SDK, hold community hackathon events to encourage DApp innovation, and establish a developer fund to support the construction of open-source tools.
✅ Summary: Technological leadership also requires continuous iteration
SCDO indeed has many technical advantages: ZPoW stands out in computational fairness, while sharding and sidechain mechanisms provide superior performance and strong scalability. However, in the long term, it still needs to address:
Network synchronization efficiency under high sharding
Coordination of sidechain governance and security boundaries
Long-term update adaptation mechanism of ZPoW algorithm
Deep expansion of the developer ecosystem
No excellent public chain is built overnight. SCDO is continuously refining itself on the path to becoming a 'large-scale application hosting platform'. If it can continue to optimize its architecture and expand its ecosystem, it will truly have the opportunity to break through technical bottlenecks and move towards a broader future.