Optimism price

base distributes $3m in op grants based on thrive protocol's volume leaderboard. not tvl, not users, pure volume. projects rising on thrive before major announcements show where capital actually flows vs where it's promised. mercenary money leaves breadcrumbs when chasing

L2 rotation underway, sequencers grabbing capital $ARB $0.435, 24h +6.20% $OP $0.689, 24h +3.86% $BASE 6h +7.69% Liquidity and volume are rotating into rollups, volatility building, expect winners to be sequencers and infra plays as airdrop upside pulls attention

We've been trapped on this deserted island for too long. To be honest, the first thought that came to my mind when I first saw Malda's proposal was: Someone should have done this a long time ago! Having been in DeFi for so many years, I know all too well how painful the term "fragmentation" is: You deposited USDC on Ethereum and want to borrow on Arbitrum? Sorry, you have to cross-chain first. You have collateral on Base and want to borrow on Optimism? Sorry, cross the chain again. Every time you cross the chain, you have to go through those nerve-wracking third-party bridges. We are like being trapped on individual islands, clearly in the same ocean, yet unable to flow freely. This is the current state of DeFi: fragmented, inefficient, and complex. And Malda says: I want to connect these islands. Cross-chain bridges: a perpetual pain. Why is fragmentation so deadly? Security black holes: Ronin bridge was hacked (600 million dollars evaporated), Wormhole was attacked (320 million dollars disappeared), Nomad bridge vulnerabilities (200 million dollars stolen)... each time is a bloody lesson. Cross-chain bridges have become the weakest link in DeFi because they rely on centralized trust mechanisms (multi-signatures, validators), which goes against the very essence of DeFi. User experience disaster: Approve → wait for confirmation → Claim → takes over ten minutes... how is this DeFi? It's simply torture. Malda's breakthrough: unified liquidity pools. Malda didn't optimize cross-chain bridges—rather, it bypassed them entirely. Core proposal: unified liquidity pools. Your liquidity on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism converges into a single pool. Deposit USDC on Ethereum → directly borrow on Arbitrum (no cross-chain needed); Have collateral on Base → directly borrow on Optimism (no bridge needed). All chains operate seamlessly like a single chain. ZK proofs: making trust redundant. Key question: how to synchronize multi-chain states? Malda's answer: The host chain records global lending activities. Extension chains periodically send ZK proofs to the host chain (mathematical verification of on-chain activity authenticity). The host chain updates the state after verifying the ZK proofs. Result: Fully trustless (no need to trust third parties); Security guaranteed by mathematics (ZK proofs cannot be forged). Insights from the evolution of Rollups. Malda's design reminds me of the technological evolution of Rollups: Plasma → data availability issues ❌ Optimistic Rollup → 7-day challenge period delay ❌ ZK Rollup → instant withdrawals ✅ ZK proofs once again prove their power: Malda applies ZK to cross-chain lending, hitting the essence—"state synchronization" is more important than "asset cross-chain". What does this mean for users? Significant security improvement. Assets do not need to be held at risk bridges, collateral can be safely stored in L1, and lending operations are universally applicable across chains. Experience greatly simplified. Deposits, loans, repayments—smooth as operating on a single chain. Maximized capital efficiency. Idle collateral on chain A → instantly used for borrowing on chain B, bidding farewell to resource mismatches. Unified interest rates. Eliminate inter-chain interest rate arbitrage opportunities, significantly enhancing consistency of experience. Unresolved mysteries. Despite the bright prospects, there are still three major questions: ZK proof costs. Will high computational resource consumption affect the protocol's sustainability? Host chain performance bottlenecks. Will the proof surge from extension chains overwhelm the host chain? Cross-chain liquidation mechanisms. A chain borrowing + B chain collateral → how to execute liquidation efficiently? Implications for the DeFi industry. Malda forces the industry to rethink the essence of "multi-chain": True multi-chain ≠ fragmented experience. Users should not perceive the existence of chains (just as internet users ignore routing paths). Ultimate goal: Use ZK to unify liquidity, making multi-chain as transparent as single-chain. Final thoughts. Looking back at 2025 five years from now, how will Malda's attempt be evaluated? Possibility 1: Unified liquidity becomes the industry standard, and Malda is hailed as a pioneer; Possibility 2: Fragmentation proves insurmountable, and ideals become mere bubbles. But regardless: In a fragmented industry, those who dare to pursue unity deserve the highest respect. Because only such ambition can drive DeFi across islands to reach new continents. Written on October 1, 2025. Salute to those builders who solve real problems with technology.