Stephen周

When I first heard about Linea's data availability committee, I was apprehensive: could this be another design that sacrifices security to save costs? It wasn't until I personally participated in testing that I understood the subtlety of this hybrid solution.
Our team recently deployed a financial application on Linea. According to traditional solutions, all transaction data must be stored on the Ethereum mainnet, which costs hundreds of thousands of dollars just for data each year. However, after using Linea's hybrid DA solution, we can choose the storage location based on the importance of the data—core transaction data is placed on the mainnet, while regular operation logs use external DA that is less costly. This simple choice has helped us save 70% on data costs.

Last year, my hometown was hit by a typhoon, and the claims process took a full three months. This year, I bought a smart insurance policy on Linea, and when my flight was delayed by two hours, the compensation was automatically credited—this experience showed me what insurance should look like.
This flight delay insurance is a simple smart contract. It connects to the airline's public data interface, and when the flight delay exceeds the agreed time, compensation will be triggered automatically. The entire process has no claims adjuster and no paper documents, just like having an insurance representative who is always on duty.
What surprised me the most was the pricing mechanism. The pricing of traditional insurance products is like a black box, but on Linea, the premiums are completely transparent. The insurance I purchased has a premium that dynamically adjusts based on real-time delay rates. Last week, as the weather improved, the premium was automatically reduced by 15%. This kind of flexibility is simply not achievable in traditional insurance.

When I was analyzing the latest on-chain data late at night, a discovery suddenly woke me up: Morpho's daily lending transaction volume has quietly surpassed that of several established protocols, while its token market value is only a fraction of these protocols. This stark contrast made me start to reevaluate this long-underestimated protocol, and it made me realize that the DeFi lending landscape is undergoing a silent but profound transformation.
I have been involved in DeFi data analysis for three years, witnessing countless protocols rise and fall. But Morpho's development trajectory is different—there is no noisy marketing, no exaggerated yield promises, but rather it operates like a steady craftsman, quietly refining every detail of the lending engine. A research report I was responsible for last year showed that Morpho's capital efficiency is 40% higher than the industry average, and this data continues to improve to this day.

I still clearly remember the shocked expressions of a student team when I deployed their first DeFi project last year, as they saw the gas fees—$50 for a single deposit operation. This scene made me deeply realize that in the blockchain world, gas efficiency is at the core of user experience. And it was this experience that led me to delve into Morpho's unique approach to gas optimization.
My work on optimizing the Morpho protocol began with a simple discovery: In traditional lending protocols, users need to interact with a massive liquidity pool contract for every operation, which is like having to search through an entire bookshelf every time you go to the library to find a book. Morpho's peer-to-peer matching engine, on the other hand, is like having a smart librarian who can help you find the exact book you want.

When I first saw someone build a completely unexpected application on Morpho — a training fund lending market designed for eSports athletes — I suddenly understood what true "protocol potential" is. This innovation, seemingly unrelated to finance, perfectly exemplifies the infinite possibilities of Morpho as an open protocol.
Three years ago, when I participated in the governance of the Morpho community, we discussed a vision: to make Morpho the TCP/IP protocol of the lending space. At that time, it sounded like an unattainable dream, but today, as I see the application ecosystem built on Morpho, that dream is becoming a reality. From simple yield optimizers to complex structured products, each new application adds value to this network.

When I first deeply understood the architectural design of Plasma, I was struck by a philosophical shock. This is not just a technological innovation but an elegant answer to the core contradictions of blockchain—how to achieve the efficiency required by the real world while maintaining the essence of decentralization. As a participant who has explored the blockchain field for many years, I believe that the balance point found by Plasma precisely reveals the direction of future development of this technology.
I remember witnessing the limitations of traditional blockchain architecture when I participated in a cross-border payment project in 2019. At that time, we tried to build a payment system on Ethereum, but whenever the transaction volume surged, the network would become congested, and fees would rise to staggering levels. Just as the team was about to give up on the blockchain solution and turn to traditional centralized systems, Plasma showed us a third way.

When I first participated in Walmart's food traceability project, I had no idea that Plasma technology would profoundly reshape the future of supply chain management. It was a steamy summer afternoon, and we were working on a batch of mango traceability data coming from Southeast Asia. The traditional systems struggled to handle tens of thousands of transaction records, while the introduction of Plasma brought about a revolutionary change in the entire situation.
In the early stages of the project, I was responsible for evaluating various blockchain solutions. Walmart's needs were very clear: they required tracking every item from production to shelf, ensuring the data was tamper-proof, and capable of handling millions of transaction data daily. When I proposed the Plasma solution, the team's initial reaction was one of skepticism—until I demonstrated how Plasma could handle massive transactions through subchains while anchoring critical hashes to the main chain to ensure security.

I remember the first time I made a transaction on the Plasma sidechain, feeling both excited and anxious. As a newcomer just transitioning from traditional internet to blockchain, I never expected the entire process to be so smooth and natural. Today, I want to share this exploratory journey with you, hoping to help you avoid the confusion I experienced and directly enjoy the convenience and magic of Plasma transactions.
It was a Tuesday afternoon when I decided to complete my first transfer on the OMG Network's Plasma sidechain. First, I needed to prepare a wallet compatible with Plasma, and I chose the officially recommended web wallet. The process of creating the wallet was surprisingly simple, filling out basic information just like registering for an ordinary website account. However, the difference was that this time I truly had a digital identity entirely under my control. When that string of mnemonic words appeared on the screen, I realized that this was my digital passport in the blockchain world, and I had to safeguard it as if it were my life.

As a developer who has deployed dApps on three different public chains, I have to admit that the development experience on Injective has rekindled my joy for programming. It feels like someone who has been driving on mountain roads suddenly gets on a highway.
What made me decide to put the new project on Injective was that Tuesday afternoon. At that time, I was optimizing gas fees for a derivatives protocol on Ethereum and had been working for 36 consecutive hours. By chance, I opened the Injective documentation and saw their on-chain order book module—this single discovery saved me at least two months of development work.

I remember the first time I heard about Injective; it was still referred to as 'that derivative project incubated by Binance.' Three years have passed, and no one defines it that way anymore. As an early user who participated from the testnet, I have witnessed how a small path has grown into a thoroughfare.
The commemorative NFT from the testnet phase still lies in my wallet. At that time, to obtain it, I needed to complete trading tasks on a buggy early version. Back then, Injective was like a child just learning to walk, stumbling yet full of energy. What I remember most is that the order book often lacked synchronization, making each trade feel like an adventure. But even so, we early participants remained enthusiastic because we could feel its progress every day.

The first time I completed a transaction on Injective, I instinctively waited for confirmation—but the confirmation was almost instantaneous. In that moment, I suddenly realized that this could be the other answer I had been searching for regarding the blockchain trilemma.
As an experienced user who has gone through Ethereum congestion, I once placed all my hopes on Layer 2. But after using several mainstream Layer 2 solutions, I discovered new problems: the security risks of cross-chain bridges, the risks of centralized sequencers, and that persistent feeling of being 'at the mercy of others'. It wasn't until I encountered Injective's application chain solution that I saw a different possibility.

Three years ago during that bear market, when I first started dollar-cost averaging into $YGG , my friends around me said I was crazy. Looking back now, it was the wisest decision I ever made in the cryptocurrency space.
The logic behind my choice to dollar-cost average into $YGG is actually quite simple. At that time, I observed that no matter how the market fluctuated, the YGG guild had thousands of scholars generating real profits every day. This fundamental base made me believe that the value of $YGG comes not just from market speculation, but is also built on tangible economic activities.
My dollar-cost averaging strategy is very systematic: I invest $500 on the 15th of every month, regardless of the price. I remember the toughest times when $YGG dropped 80% from its peak, but I continued to dollar-cost average. Because what I saw in the community was a different scene: the number of scholars continued to grow, gaming assets kept increasing, and community engagement was not only maintained but rising. This divergence between fundamentals and price, in my view, is the opportunity.

As an early member of YGG, I was one of the project's most fervent evangelists. But today, I want to take off the fan filter and share some calm observations.
Three years ago, when I first introduced YGG to my friends, I portrayed it as a world-changing revolution. Looking back now, this enthusiasm made us overlook its limitations. The most obvious question is: Can the YGG model really scale? I have seen players in Southeast Asia who rely on YGG for their livelihood, but when the user base grows to millions, can the existing game economic system support it?

In these years in the YGG community, I have witnessed the panic of a cryptocurrency price plummeting by 80%, and I have also experienced the crisis of a gaming economy collapsing. However, what truly keeps me awake at night has never been these apparent risks.
Last year in Manila, I participated in a community meeting that changed my perspective. At that time, the market was sluggish, and everyone was discussing how to cope with the price decline. But a scholar from the countryside voiced what everyone was thinking: "We can endure price fluctuations, but what we fear most is waking up one day to find the game unplayable, and our livelihoods completely cut off."

As a participant immersed in the crypto space for many years, when I first heard Lorenzo propose the concept of 'on-chain investment banking,' I felt both excited and skeptical. Investment banking, which was once a realm with towering thresholds in the traditional financial world, can it really be moved to a blockchain where everyone can participate? It wasn't until I deeply understood the financial abstraction layer and its seven core modules that I realized – this is not just a technological upgrade, but a profound revolution in financial democratization.
In my view, Lorenzo's financial abstraction layer is like a sophisticated 'financial engine,' and the seven core modules are its indispensable cylinders. It is their coordinated operation that makes complex on-chain investment banking activities smooth as silk. I would like to share my understanding of how these seven modules allow ordinary users like me to enjoy investment bank-level strategy services.

When I watched Mary receive her design fees for work completed in Silicon Valley through Plasma payments under the scorching sun of Nairobi, it felt like witnessing a microcosm of a financial revolution. This leap from the American tech hub to the grassroots in Africa made me truly understand the global significance of Plasma technology - it is not just lines of code, but a financial bridge connecting the world.
Last year, I participated in a cross-border payment project aimed at delivering the income of Silicon Valley tech freelancers to their families in Africa in real-time and at the lowest cost. Traditional bank transfers take 3-5 business days and charge fees up to 10% of the transfer amount, but everything fundamentally changed once we connected to the Plasma network. I remember Mary's surprised expression the first time she used it: the moment she confirmed the transaction on her phone, her brother, far away in Kenya, received the full amount, with fees that were almost negligible.

When I first deeply understood the working mechanism of Plasma, what shocked me the most was not only the ingenuity of its technological innovation but also the unique approach it provides to solve the blockchain energy consumption problem. As someone who has long been concerned about the sustainable development of blockchain, I believe the potential of Plasma in promoting the industry's green transformation has been severely underestimated.
I remember last year when I participated in a blockchain environmental seminar, an expert raised a sharp question: "Bitcoin consumes more electricity annually than the entire country of Argentina, how can such technology be sustainable?" At that time, I was thinking that Plasma might be one of the answers to this question. By transferring most transaction processing to sidechains, Plasma effectively creates an "energy-saving and emission-reducing" blockchain architecture—much like the dedicated bus lanes in urban traffic systems, which enhance overall traffic efficiency while reducing the energy consumption of each individual trip.

When I first deployed my own Plasma sidechain, the experience of creating a standalone yet closely connected blockchain world on the Ethereum mainnet made me fully understand the true charm of layered scalability. Today, I want to share this exciting practical journey with you and guide you step by step into the world of building Plasma sidechains.
I remember when I first encountered the concept of Plasma, I thought building a sidechain was an unattainable task. But when I actually got my hands dirty, I found that with the existing development tools, the process was surprisingly elegant and intuitive. I chose to use the Truffle framework and the OMG Network's JavaScript SDK because they provide a quite mature toolchain for Plasma sidechain development.