2026-01-04 19:27:39

When digital assets cannot be transferred across chains, the value of ownership begins to disintegrate. Liquidity dries up, counterparties decrease, and the ecosystem becomes inward-looking and closed—this is the current state of the multi-chain landscape. The true solution relies on native cross-chain asset settlement, without sacrificing security as a cost. Only in this way can the ownership of digital assets not be diluted and the complete transfer of value be maintained across different chains. Many projects are currently exploring this direction, with the key being how to find a balance between decentralization and security.

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.

20 Likes

Reward
20
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

AlphaBrain

· 8h ago

Ultimately, it's a liquidity issue. Currently, there are all kinds of cross-chain solutions, but who can truly resolve the contradiction between security and efficiency?

View OriginalReply0

GreenCandleCollector

· 23h ago

Honestly, cross-chain is now a vicious cycle. When security is prioritized, liquidity dies out; when liquidity becomes active, the risk starts to escalate again.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainGriller

· 01-04 19:57

That's right, all the chains are like isolated islands now, with asset liquidity dead beyond dead. Just shouting about security isn't enough; we need real solutions. If cross-chain settlement isn't handled properly, asset values could evaporate directly, who the hell would want to play? These projects are still just talking on paper; when will they actually be implemented?

View OriginalReply0

NftBankruptcyClub

· 01-04 19:57

To be honest, cross-chain issues are indeed a sore point right now. Every day, people are tinkering with bridge protocols, and each one is more complicated than the last. Centralized cross-chain is poison; if security fails, everything else is pointless. This is the real problem Web3 should solve—stop focusing on those superficial things.

View OriginalReply0

BlockDetective

· 01-04 19:55

Basically, the current cross-chain situation is stuck, and asset liquidity has been halved. There are a bunch of security vulnerabilities in cross-chain bridges, how can we trust decentralized solutions? Each chain does its own thing, and user experience has completely collapsed. Native settlement is a good idea, but it's easier said than done, brother. I haven't seen any projects that can truly balance decentralization and security that are worth mentioning.

View OriginalReply0

GasBandit

· 01-04 19:46

That's right, cross-chain is indeed a pain point now, with liquidity fragmentation being outrageous. I believe native settlement is definitely the way out. There are a bunch of vulnerabilities in bridging solutions, and security must be prioritized. Each chain operates independently, which is really frustrating; the ecosystem's vitality is being eroded. How many projects can truly achieve a balance between decentralization and security? That's the real test. Without solving cross-chain issues, asset ownership remains just an illusion.

View OriginalReply0