比特币缩放的当前景观

在开发Botanix的过程中，我们一直在问自己一个问题：在比特币顶部建立的系统是否真的称为Sidechain或第2层（L2）？

Author: Botanix Labs

作者：Botanix Labs

Original link: https://botanixlabs.xyz/en/blog/the-current-occurrence-landscape-of-bitcoin-scaling

原始链接：https：//botanixlabs.xyz/en/blog/the-current-occurrence-currence-landscape-of-bitcoin-scaling

In the process of developing Botanix, we kept asking ourselves a question: Can a system built on top of Bitcoin really be called a sidechain or layer 2 (L2)? This is a complex question because from a technical point of view, based on current capabilities, Bitcoin cannot act as a true L1 to host L2 like other ecosystems. Typically, L2 relies on smart contracts deployed at the bottom layer to verify proofs. For example, in the Ethereum ecosystem, L2 verification is performed by a deterministic function in a smart contract, which is executed by all Ethereum nodes when processing transactions.

在开发Botanix的过程中，我们一直在问自己一个问题：在比特币顶部建立的系统是否真的称为Sidechain或第2层（L2）？这是一个复杂的问题，因为从技术的角度来看，基于当前功能，比特币不能像其他生态系统一样充当真正的L1。通常，L2依靠在底层部署的智能合约来验证证明。例如，在以太坊生态系统中，L2验证是由智能合约中的确定性函数执行的，在处理交易时，所有以太坊节点都执行。

The situation with Bitcoin is both simpler and more complex. Discussions about L2 on Bitcoin are often confusing. Unlike Ethereum, which natively supports Turing completeness and expressiveness, Bitcoin's current capabilities are extremely limited, and there are subtle differences in what is technically possible and what is not. Because of this, systems built on Bitcoin do not actually have strict L2 or sidechain capabilities. So why do we prefer to call them "Bitcoin Chains" instead of extensions or L2? The reason is that these chains built on Bitcoin usually have independent operating logic and build their own ecosystems around it.

比特币的情况既简单又复杂。关于比特币的L2的讨论通常令人困惑。与以太坊（以太坊）本地支持Turing完整性和表现力不同，比特币的当前功能极为有限，并且在技术上可能和没有的问题上存在细微的差异。因此，基于比特币的系统实际上没有严格的L2或Sidechain功能。那么，为什么我们宁愿称它们为“比特币链”，而不是扩展或L2呢？原因是这些基于比特币的连锁店通常具有独立的操作逻辑，并围绕其建立自己的生态系统。

Bitcoin does not support smart contracts like Ethereum does. Any complex logic must be implemented through structures built on top of it. Therefore, Bitcoin itself cannot directly verify proofs or maintain the state of smart contracts. Most types of proofs are too large to be put on the chain - Bitcoin transactions are only allowed to carry 80 bytes of arbitrary data. Solutions like Starkware's m31 are highly specialized and closed. Even if you manage to publish some kind of proof or state update to Bitcoin, the process is more like optimistic rollups. But waiting a whole week for fraud proofs to be resolved is neither realistic nor acceptable, and relying on third-party bridges introduces delays and trust assumptions, both of which are not ideal in the Bitcoin native environment.

比特币不像以太坊那样支持智能合约。任何复杂的逻辑都必须通过在其顶部构建的结构来实现。因此，比特币本身无法直接验证证据或维护智能合约的状态。大多数类型的证明太大而无法放在链条上 - 仅允许比特币交易携带80个任意数据。诸如Starkware的M31之类的解决方案是高度专业化和关闭的。即使您设法将某种证明或状态更新发布给比特币，该过程也更像是乐观的汇总。但是，等待整整一周的欺诈证据既不是现实也不可以接受，并且依靠第三方桥梁引入了延迟和信任假设，这两者在比特币本地环境中都不是理想的。

Interactions with Bitcoin are limited to unspent transaction outputs (UTXO) with ScriptPubKey and BTC transfer transactions. The OP_RETURN instruction can only carry 80 bytes of data and cannot support interactions with complex data structures at all. Because of these limitations, it is difficult for Bitcoin to have complete L1 support for L2 functionality unless there are major changes to the protocol (such as a hard fork). Such modifications not only require extremely high community consensus, but may also undermine the uniqueness and value positioning of Bitcoin as an asset. For example, proposals to introduce new instructions such as OP_CAT (such as CatVM) have not yet reached a broad consensus. Even if there is a consensus, it often takes several years for a BIP (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal) to be proposed and activated.

与比特币的相互作用仅限于ScriptPubkey和BTC转移交易的未解决事务输出（UTXO）。 OP_RETURN指令只能携带80个字节的数据，并且根本不能支持与复杂数据结构的交互。由于这些局限性，除非协议发生重大更改（例如硬叉），否则比特币很难对L2功能具有完全的L1支持。这种修改不仅需要极高的社区共识，而且还可能破坏比特币作为资产的独特性和价值定位。例如，介绍诸如OP_CAT（例如CATVM）之类的新指令的建议尚未达成广泛的共识。即使达成共识，提出和激活的BIP（比特币改进建议）通常需要几年的时间。

Because of this, Botanix aims to build on “current Bitcoin” rather than trying to force it to L1 or push radical protocol changes. This path is possible because we use Spiderchain technology and a network of coordinators. So, how far has the ecosystem being built on top of Bitcoin developed?

因此，Botanix的目的是建立在“当前的比特币”上，而不是试图将其强加于L1或推动激进协议更改。这条路径是可能的，因为我们使用蜘蛛网技术和协调员网络。那么，在比特币之上建立了多远的生态系统？

Background: The emerging landscape of Bitcoin Chain (L2)

背景：比特币链（L2）的新兴景观

Despite the above limitations, most projects still prefer to call themselves "L2" and use this term as a general label. One of the earliest projects to claim to be Bitcoin L2 is Stacks. Although Stacks anchors data to Bitcoin and interacts with BTC, it is essentially an independent blockchain with its own consensus mechanism. Another example is BounceBit, which is classified as Bitcoin L2 because it uses BTC in its consensus mechanism (along with the native token). But this is actually not accurate. From an architectural point of view, it is closer to a restaking model, running on its own chain, and Bitcoin's role is limited to indirect participation.

尽管有上述局限性，但大多数项目仍然更喜欢将自己称为“ L2”，并将此术语用作一般标签。声称是比特币L2的最早项目之一是堆栈。尽管堆栈将数据锚定为比特币并与BTC相互作用，但它本质上是具有其自身共识机制的独立区块链。另一个示例是BounceBit，该示例被归类为比特币L2，因为它在其共识机理中使用BTC（与天然令牌一起使用）。但这实际上不准确。从建筑的角度来看，它更接近重新制作的模型，在自己的链条上运行，比特币的角色仅限于间接参与。

However, the vision of making Bitcoin "alive" - making it not just a value storage tool, but an asset that can "do more" - has long attracted the attention of many developers. With the new super cycle starting in 2022, this vision has become increasingly important. While Ethereum has risen about 4 times from bottom to top in this cycle, Bitcoin has risen 6 times despite being slower and more "clunky". This dynamic is very interesting, isn't it? It further strengthens Bitcoin's position as the dominant asset in the Web3 world.

但是，使比特币“ Alive”的愿景不仅使其成为价值存储工具，而且可以“做更多”的资产 - 长期以来吸引了许多开发人员的注意。随着新的超级周期从2022年开始，这种愿景变得越来越重要。尽管以太坊在这个周期中从底部到顶部升高了大约4倍，但尽管比特币较慢，更笨拙，但比特币却增加了6次。这种动态非常有趣，不是吗？它进一步增强了比特币在Web3世界中的主要资产地位。

From the perspective of value utilization indicators such as TVL (total value locked) - which indirectly reflects the degree of use of the underlying assets in the ecosystem - Bitcoin's comparison with other networks is even more significant. TVL represents the value carrying capacity of an ecosystem, including both the applications built on its upper layer and the utilization of the underlying assets in the L2 running on the base chain.

从价值利用率指标（例如TVL（总价值锁定））的角度来看，这间接反映了生态系统中基础资产的使用程度 - 比特币与其他网络的比较更加重要。 TVL代表生态系统的价值承载能力，包括在其上层建立的应用以及在基本链上运行的L2中基础资产的利用。

Currently, Bitcoin’s TVL in decentralized applications is only $5.5 billion, while its FDV (fully

目前，分散应用程序中比特币的TVL仅为55亿美元，而其FDV（完全