How should public chain protocols evolve? Solana founder Toly recently shared an interesting perspective. He believes that Solana cannot fall into the trap of relying on a single development team or individual and must maintain continuous iteration—once it stops, the ecosystem will decline.



This view directly responds to the "walkaway test" concept proposed by Ethereum founder Vitalik. Toly thinks that protocol upgrades should focus on real needs, such as solving actual bottlenecks faced by developers and improving user experience, rather than being driven by all voices. In other words, the direction should be clear but flexible enough.

This reflects two different approaches to ecosystem governance and technical routes among public chains. One emphasizes self-improvement and continuous innovation, while the other values protocol stability and decentralization more. Which is better remains to be seen over time.
SOL-1,47%
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.
  • Reward
  • 7
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
BearMarketSurvivorvip
· 10h ago
To be honest, Toly's theory sounds smooth, but how to balance "continuous iteration" and "not being hijacked"? It still seems to rely on human governance. Vitalik's side moves slowly, but at least the direction isn't confused. In the end, it's still about who lasts longer. Wait, didn't Solana also experience a freeze? Continuous iteration won't cause problems? That's a bit of nonsense. I want to see who wins in five years between the forever-changing public chain and the stable public chain. This is the ultimate showdown between ETH's conservative camp and SOL's aggressive camp, haha.
View OriginalReply0
GhostAddressHuntervip
· 13h ago
Solana's rhetoric sounds a lot like blaming Ethereum's "over-governance," but honestly isn't it just about prioritizing speed? Basically, the logic that stagnation equals death is only convincing to newcomers who haven't seen a bear market. Why has Vitalik's walkaway test become a negative example? It seems Toly is a bit rushed. It feels like ETH and Solana are just talking past each other—one wants to live for ten thousand years, the other wants to run the fastest. Real needs? Developer bottlenecks? That's a clever way to put it—translate it as "whatever I say is whatever." Wait, can continuous iteration really save the ecosystem, or is it just another way of covering up problems? Is this question well-phrased? Solana is trying to redefine what a "good protocol" means again—interesting.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-74b10196vip
· 13h ago
Basically, Toly is afraid of being rolled over if SOL stagnates. Vitalik's conservative approach is too cautious for him. You can only survive if you keep moving; that logic is indeed ruthless... But can it really be achieved? Solana has been through a lot in the past two years. It's funny that they still claim to continue iterating. Both approaches have their flaws. In the short term, SOL's aggressive strategy is fast, but in the long term? Who knows. It's really asking: should public chains run fast or stay steady? It's hard to say.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainRetirementHomevip
· 13h ago
Yes, yes, yes, Toly hit the nail on the head. Stopping iteration is just waiting to die. Solana's logic of "either sprint or sink" is indeed stimulating, but could Vitalik's approach of slow and steady be more stable? Another battle of technical philosophy, it all depends on who can survive longer. If we knew stagnation would lead to failure, why are there still so many projects slacking off every day? The competition between these two chains is actually a management issue—who can balance innovation and stability wins. Toly wants to beat Vitalik's pace—it's getting a bit interesting.
View OriginalReply0
BottomMisservip
· 13h ago
The public chain that stops is the good one, haha --- Toly, your words sound a bit anxious. Is the ecological decline really just because of stopping iterations? --- Basically, it's just fear of being surpassed, maintaining a sense of hunger --- Both approaches have their merits. The key is execution. Right now, it's unclear who will win --- Isn't this just the classic debate between rapid iteration and stability? --- Continuous innovation sounds good, but who decides which direction to innovate in? --- One wants to run fast, the other wants stability. Anyway, we're all betting on who can survive longer --- I just want to know how long Solana can hold on without crashing if this continues
View OriginalReply0
NFTArchaeologisvip
· 13h ago
Interesting, isn't this the debate in ancient engineering between "perpetual maintenance" and "self-completion"? Solana chose the former, Ethereum chose the latter, both betting that time will provide the answer.
View OriginalReply0
DegenRecoveryGroupvip
· 14h ago
Honestly, Toly's words are a bit of a slap in the face. Doesn't Solana also frequently experience outages? Haha Wait, stopping iteration means decline? Then how has Ethereum been thriving all these years... Solana is getting anxious, implying they still need to keep competing. Continuous innovation vs. stability, they're not really opposites, it's just that SOL is getting anxious. But he does have a point—lying flat definitely has no future.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)