I always thought that 'core assets' could only be high-priced tokens with strong consensus on L1. It wasn't until the last two years, with frequent interactions on Ethereum, deploying several small contracts, and being repeatedly educated by gas prices during peak periods, that I began to seriously look at Linea. As I watched, I realized the question had changed: core assets may not be a single token; they can be a 'pipeline' that reorganizes value. And that pipeline, in my eyes, is Linea.
First, let's talk about user experience. In the past, when I performed simple operations on L1, I had to time it perfectly to hit the low points; switching to Linea, with the same contracts and the same wallet, the costs suddenly flowed smoothly. It adheres to the 'Ethereum-equivalent' zkEVM route, allowing migration with almost no code changes, which is a game-changer for developers: no need to adapt to a bunch of strange opcodes, no need to rewrite the toolchain, and the team can refocus on the product itself. In short, Linea does not force you to change yourself to accommodate it, but rather makes itself as much like 'Ethereum's accelerator' as possible.
Then there is security and finality. I am not a ZK circuit expert, but I can understand a simple logic: having proof that can be verified on L1 makes me feel more secure. Linea's proof pipeline has been iterating over the past two years, with the speed and cost of issuing proof decreasing, and the user side reflects this as faster confirmations and a more stable experience. Some say 'L2s are all centralized'; I do not deny that early sorters indeed have single points, but I care more about the direction: gradual convergence of permissions and diversification of operators is the real path to decentralization. Linea has written this path on its roadmap and is gradually fulfilling it.
What moves me the most is its design for the flow of value. In the past, we often treated L2 as a 'money-saving channel', where paying fees is the end of it; Linea is more ambitious: it ties fees to the value return of Ethereum, allowing the ETH that bridges in to no longer just 'stay in the second layer', but to participate in a larger capital cycle. Coupled with its own token model (including mechanisms for burning and recycling), every interaction by users is not just a disposable cost, but is more like contributing to the health of the underlying network. This narrative is much healthier than 'subsidizing to activate'.
From an ecological perspective, I have observed two small things: first, developers come quickly, and second, applications stick around. The former comes from low migration costs, while the latter comes from stable settlement and predictable fees. In the past, as I navigated between multiple chains, I was often discouraged by various 'bridge risks' and 'compatibility pitfalls'; with Linea, I can converge risks into a few audited infrastructures, leave complexity to the underlying layer, and focus my energy on business. For the team, this is a real productivity boost; for users, it means 'it feels more like Ethereum, but cheaper and faster.'
So why do I say 'the core asset may not be ETH, but Linea'? This is not to belittle ETH—on the contrary, Linea is amplifying the value of ETH, transforming Ethereum from a mere settlement layer into a highly efficient financial computing network with an 'external cycle'. ETH remains the anchor, while Linea transmits the anchor's power further. As more real businesses and cash flows start to run through this pipeline, you will find that the so-called 'core asset' is not just the on-paper price, but whether it can bear and amplify the economic activities of the entire chain.
I don't blindly believe in slogans, nor do I deify any technology. As someone who has truly worked on-chain, I pay more attention to the tangible quality of implementation: with the same amount of money, can I buy more stable confirmation, lower friction, and clearer value loops? Linea is providing an answer that I am willing to bet on—it allows the future of Ethereum to no longer be limited by the ceiling of L1, but to grow a new 'core' in the second layer.
