Currently, there are three popular expansion solutions in the Ethereum community: Optimistic Arbitrum and Matic. From the dimensions of legitimacy/community ecology/compatibility, Arbitrum is a relatively balanced solution.

In terms of orthodoxy, Optimistic is Uniswap’s imperial expansion plan. After all, it has the support of Paradigm and A16Z, two funders. Fertile water does not flow into the fields of outsiders, so of course we must use our own plans for our own projects. Matic, on the other hand, takes the route of encircling the countryside. From a technical point of view, Matic is not a real Layer 2, it can only be called the previous side chain. The excellent performance of the high-level market is to create a strong ecology. Arbitrum is a balance between the two. It was originally an academic project of Princeton University. After considering that the project has entered the mature stage of the community, it resolutely chose to give up the patent.

In terms of community ecology, Matic's strong community attributes are well-deserved. Whether it is a first-tier or second-tier or third-tier project, Matic will basically cooperate with it and migrate it to the Matic second-tier network. If Matic's ecological cooperation projects are made into a map, it is quite bluffing at first glance, because the number of cooperation projects is too large, like an ecological empire. But after a closer look, AAVE is nothing more than AAVE, and AAVE contributed most of the second-tier lockup to Matic. In contrast, Optimistic has high requirements for cooperative projects. Top projects and legitimacy are two characteristics, specifically Uniswap and Synthetic.

Arbitrum, on the other hand, does both. For orthodoxy, Arbitrum's requirements are not as strict as Optimistic, so it can accept more projects. Arbitrum is supported by surrounding infrastructure such as Metamask Chainlink Truffle, and its ecological cooperation projects include Bancor MCDEX Hop Protocol/Connext (second-layer fast withdrawal), and the latest Uniswap.

It is worth mentioning two projects, Chainlink and MCDEX.

As the first officially recognized project to migrate to Arbitrum, MCDEX has been supporting Arbitrum since Q3 last year. Choose them as partners, put forward business needs to them, help them connect with resources, and actively introduce Arbitrum to the project party. MCDEX and DODO, as the two leading DeFi projects in China, will take the lead in supporting Arbitrum.

The relationship between Chainlink and Arbitrum is also very good. Foreign LINK big Vs such as Chainlinkgod are pushing Arbitrum. First, Chainlink and Arbitrum have reached a cooperation. Arbitrum will use Chainlink’s language machine. Second, Arbitrum’s Logo is very similar to LINK. Became a meme point.

In terms of compatibility, Arbitrum is fully compatible with EVM. Regarding the technology, I directly follow the point of view of Teacher Mindao:

"It is a major strategic misjudgment that Optimistic is not 100% compatible with EVM, not to mention the delay in market launch. These people don't understand that 99.9% compatibility and 100% incompatibility are actually the same thing. From this point of view, BSC, Polygon Arbitrum and Arbitrum think very clearly. Those who engage in public chains must go deep into the front line, and a strategic mistake will lose everything.”

And the opinion of a friend in the MCDEX community:

"Arbitrum's architecture is more reliable than Optimistic, especially in the current situation where EVM itself is fighting the five scumbags. Optimistic has no advantage in the Container architecture. It is better to separate a layer directly in the middle of Arbitrum and build a virtual machine to simulate EVM."

From the above point of view, we can see one thing or two, that is, EVM compatibility plays a very critical role in whether the second-layer solution can be widely adopted and then form an ecology.

Nowadays we often mention the word Legitemacy. Vitalik also wrote an article not long ago, saying that the most scarce resource in the blockchain industry is Legitemacy, which is the so-called legitimacy and legitimacy. But my little myth is that having legitimacy and legitimacy is really invincible, can it be done once and for all? Are projects with strong orthodoxy sure to win? Obviously, in the emerging early-stage industry of blockchain, having orthodoxy does not mean having everything. Projects with less orthodoxy can still become a dark horse by virtue of their strong community power.

But we have to admit that with the development and maturity of the blockchain industry, there is indeed a blood competition between projects. Players who have acquired original capital accumulation will gradually change from aggressive risk-taking styles to slowly seeking investment opportunities for orthodox projects. Legitimacy will give people a sense of security and reliability. Endorsement by large institutions, strong technical team, and strong financial support mean that there is a greater probability of obtaining a good return on investment.

This article is not to praise Arbitrum and derogate Optimistic. It is also the most promising expansion solution for the Ethereum ecosystem, and it is naturally the best to let a hundred flowers bloom. Maybe there is no best solution at all, the key is to see if the ecology can be done. Let Uniswap run on the second layer first.

In short, I am very optimistic and looking forward to Optimistic and Arbitrum.