2026-01-21 01:23:31

When mentioning Plasma, most people's minds jump to one phrase: "Oh, that's an early scaling solution; its performance metrics don't look great now."

But this understanding is actually a bit off.

Recently, as I reviewed the evolution of Plasma, I realized that the truly interesting point isn't whether its TPS can handle the load, but rather a straightforward question it initially posed—

Do all applications on the blockchain have to be stacked on the main chain?

Plasma's answer is: not necessarily.

Its approach is very clear: use side chains to allow applications to run independently. This means developers no longer have to suffer from high Gas fees, no need to compete in congestion on the main chain, and instead can design their own mechanisms, rules, and economic models—play however they want.

You see, high-frequency scenarios like blockchain games, payment settlements, and NFT trading have gone from just being concepts on PPT to real, operational systems.

More importantly, within this framework, the role of the main chain has been completely transformed.

It is no longer a universal layer that manages everything, but instead focuses on one thing: serving as a trust anchor. Ensuring security, maintaining consensus, and handling final settlements. Simply put, the main chain has upgraded from "the worker executing all instructions" to "the trust foundation of the entire system."

There's also a often-overlooked detail—the consideration of user asset security in Plasma.

What if the side chain encounters issues? Users are not passively suffering; they hold the initiative. Through exit mechanisms, assets can be safely withdrawn to the main chain at any time. Control always remains in the hands of users, not system hijacking.

This design philosophy has actually influenced many later Layer 2 solutions.

Therefore, I believe that the significance of Plasma goes far beyond being just a "fast but not the fastest" solution. It was among the first to present the possibility of multi-layer structures, paving a path for the entire industry. This is its true value.

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.

6 Likes

Reward
6
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DegenMcsleepless

· 9h ago

Plasma has long been overdue for a re-evaluation; it was indeed demonized. --- The idea of using the main chain as a trust anchor is brilliant; it's much better than stacking everything together. --- The exit mechanism is truly what protects users, unlike some schemes that trap people inside. --- Honestly, thinking back, the concept of sub-chains was ahead of its time, even now. --- Most of the Layer 2 solutions are actually grandchildren of Plasma; why are they being forgotten? --- Developers no longer need to be drained by gas fees, which is revolutionary enough. --- Wait, what would happen if Plasma were still alive today? --- Multi-layer structures should have long become the industry standard; Plasma was heading in the right direction.

View OriginalReply0

Liquidated_Larry

· 9h ago

I've long said that Plasma is underrated, and this article finally hits the point. The design of that exit mechanism still seems brilliant now.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidationOracle

· 9h ago

Oh, this perspective is quite fresh. I always thought Plasma was just an outdated old relic with poor performance. By the way, the exit mechanism is indeed a highlight. It seems that many L2 solutions nowadays don't pay as much attention to this. Gotta admit, I really underestimated its design philosophy back then.

View OriginalReply0

HodlKumamon

· 9h ago

Oh, now I understand. Plasma is actually asking a more fundamental question, rather than just comparing TPS numbers(◍•ᴗ•◍) The idea of running side chains independently does seem quite advanced now. Back then, those developers were numb from being overwhelmed by Gas fees. Suddenly, there was a solution saying "We don't need to pile everything on the main chain," which must have been very satisfying. The exit mechanism design is quite clever. Asset security is in the hands of users, not system-controlled. This concept was adopted by later L2 solutions. To put it simply, Plasma is telling everyone that the main chain isn't万能 (all-powerful). There needs to be division of labor. Looking back at that perspective, it was truly enlightening.

View OriginalReply0

PumpDoctrine

· 9h ago

The plan that was hacked the worst early on ended up asking the right questions, now that's true vision.

View OriginalReply0

ruggedNotShrugged

· 9h ago

Oh brother, this perspective is indeed excellent. I used to only focus on TPS, honestly, the exit mechanism of Plasma is truly a stroke of genius. Someone should have spoken about this properly a long time ago. Now, a bunch of L2s are benefiting from its dividends.

View OriginalReply0