2026-01-18 12:23:11

Solana's leadership recently raised a sharp question: if blockchain networks do not actively iterate and upgrade, will they be eliminated by history? This reflects two completely different evolutionary paths.

On one hand, Solana is promoting an AI-driven upgrade plan supported by fees. This model relies on revenue generated from network transactions to fund innovation. On the other hand, Ethereum adheres to a development philosophy of decentralization and self-sustainability—achieved through community governance and ecological incentives for continuous evolution.

$SOL and $ETH represent two fundamentally different development arguments in the crypto world: is rapid iteration driven by centralized decision-making and funding more efficient? Or is decentralized governance, although slower, more resilient and risk-resistant? This collision of technological routes is reshaping the future direction of the industry.

SOL-6,07%

ETH-3,41%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

9 Likes

Reward
9
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GasFeeCrier

· 54m ago

Ha, the AI-driven upgrade for SOL sounds quite aggressive, but is it relying on transaction fees to support it? What if the market conditions are poor? Although ETH is slower, it's definitely more solid. Decentralized governance is slow but stable. Personally, I think these two approaches will eventually learn from each other. Pure centralization or pure decentralization are not long-term solutions. Speed doesn't necessarily guarantee victory; it's about who can survive longer.

View OriginalReply0

AirDropMissed

· 22h ago

The whole idea of "sol" sounds sophisticated, but it's actually just centralized money-grabbing with a different name.

View OriginalReply0

ZenMiner

· 22h ago

Well... basically, Solana wants to make quick moves, while ETH aims for steady long-term growth. Both have their reasons.

View OriginalReply0

ser_we_are_ngmi

· 22h ago

The core issue is actually the trade-off between speed and stability. SOL's approach of "using transaction fees to fund innovation" sounds sexy, but it also carries significant risks.

View OriginalReply0

blocksnark

· 22h ago

I've seen through Solana's tricks early on. Centralized money injection is fast, but how long can it last... ETH may be slow, but at least I sleep soundly.

View OriginalReply0

OvertimeSquid

· 22h ago

The idea of SOL sounds like spending money to get fast, but the community-driven approach on ETH is really more risk-resistant. --- Centralized spending vs. decentralized slow and meticulous work—it's hard to say which route will last longer. --- Solana is starting to tell stories again; basically, it still depends on the ecosystem to speak for itself. --- Fee-driven upgrades? That logic just doesn't seem quite right... --- ETH is slow but stable in people's hearts; Solana always feels like racing, and sooner or later, it'll crash. --- Both paths are experimenting; whoever runs out first will be the winner. --- At the end of the day, it's still a trust issue—centralization is fast but not necessarily safe. --- I'm just curious to see what kind of tricks Solana's AI upgrade plan will come up with in the end. --- Community governance sounds great, but can the efficiency really keep up? That's the question. --- Risk resistance sounds good, but how can the project team sustain development if they aren't making money?

View OriginalReply0