Performance metrics are no longer moving, and everyone is starting to think about privacy. Recently, industry discussions have been heated: when the TPS and confirmation speeds of various public chains are similar, the real differentiator is privacy capabilities.
Chain-level locking, data sovereignty, intrinsic security mechanisms—these seemingly abstract concepts are now becoming the core competitiveness of cryptographic infrastructure. Simply put, the level of privacy protection you can provide to users directly affects ecosystem stickiness and long-term attractiveness.
From another perspective, the highest migration cost for users is not speed but trust. Once a public chain makes privacy its moat, it becomes harder for users and developers to leave. This could be the key point in the next round of infrastructure competition.
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.
17 Likes
Reward
17
8
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
SatoshiSherpa
· 01-12 03:22
Privacy moat is more ruthless than TPS competition. What truly retains people is never speed, but trust.
View OriginalReply0
NonFungibleDegen
· 01-11 19:54
ngl ser this is actually the move... privacy moats hit different than tps flexing. everybody and their grandma can do fast transactions now but actually keeping my data safe? thats the real alpha play fr fr
Reply0
BridgeJumper
· 01-09 09:46
Performance is not interesting; privacy is the real key. Truly, once a trust system is established, the migration cost skyrockets, and that's what we call a moat.
View OriginalReply0
NotAFinancialAdvice
· 01-09 09:45
I really agree with the concept of a privacy moat; it's much more reliable than a hundred times TPS. In the end, it's still a trust issue—who dares to truly protect my data is the real key.
View OriginalReply0
SchrodingerAirdrop
· 01-09 09:38
The concept of a privacy moat is okay, but how many can actually achieve it? Most are just talking about it.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainGriller
· 01-09 09:36
Privacy has indeed been underestimated. Performance has reached the ceiling; it's time to think more deeply.
View OriginalReply0
TokenDustCollector
· 01-09 09:35
The idea of a privacy moat sounds great, but how many projects are really willing to bet on it? Most just talk about it, and the real work hasn't kept up at all.
View OriginalReply0
MetaverseVagrant
· 01-09 09:32
Privacy is the real moat, there's no denying that. TPS has reached its limit, and it's indeed time to find new differentiators. However, when it comes to truly implementing privacy well, there are still only a few public chains that can do it... most are just theoretical discussions.
Performance metrics are no longer moving, and everyone is starting to think about privacy. Recently, industry discussions have been heated: when the TPS and confirmation speeds of various public chains are similar, the real differentiator is privacy capabilities.
Chain-level locking, data sovereignty, intrinsic security mechanisms—these seemingly abstract concepts are now becoming the core competitiveness of cryptographic infrastructure. Simply put, the level of privacy protection you can provide to users directly affects ecosystem stickiness and long-term attractiveness.
From another perspective, the highest migration cost for users is not speed but trust. Once a public chain makes privacy its moat, it becomes harder for users and developers to leave. This could be the key point in the next round of infrastructure competition.