To be honest, I wasn't very interested in Layer2 before: cumbersome, fragmented, and bridges were not reassuring. It wasn't until I took a small contract that had been running on the mainnet for two years and tossed it onto Linea unchanged—that moment I realized: if you truly understand Ethereum, you would know where the value of Ethereum-equivalent zkEVM lies.
First, the migration cost is nearly zero. I'm still using the familiar Hardhat/Foundry process, without needing to change opcodes or write strange adapters; once I switch the wallet network, the contract comes alive. In the past, my biggest fear was 'compatible but not fully compatible,' but now on Linea, the calling behaviors, event logs, and toolchains are as smooth as on L1.
Second, performance and security are no longer a choice between two. Linea moves execution to L2, but final settlement and proof fall on the Ethereum mainnet. For someone like me with 'security OCD', this is more solid than the 'fast but not stable' approach: user interaction experience is on a second-level, while the underlying consensus still relies on Ethereum. Even better, zero-knowledge proofs turn 'I say I calculated correctly' into 'mathematical proof that I calculated correctly', which gives me confidence.
Third, real pain points are being addressed effectively. High gas fees? The cost of a single contract interaction on Linea has shifted from 'painful' to 'I can click a few more times'. Liquidity fragmentation? Linea naturally integrates with the Ethereum ecosystem, allowing assets and tools to be reused seamlessly; creating a cross-chain whitelist and setting up routing means users hardly notice they've 'switched chains'. Developers wanting to try new approaches also don’t risk isolating their funds.
Fourth, forward-looking economic design. One point I most appreciate is that it binds value recirculation with Ethereum: on-chain activities are not 'draining Ethereum's resources', but rather making the flow faster and more efficient. For the ecosystem, this is not a zero-sum game, but a positive-sum game—my product's cash flow, the user's transaction experience, and the underlying network's security can all be balanced simultaneously.
Of course, I'm not blinded by my enthusiasm. Linea is still pushing for decentralization, and the operation of the sequencer and bridges needs time to refine; I've also implemented risk control: layered vaults, cross-bridge limits, and multi-signature for key contracts. However, these engineering 'flaws' do not hinder me from making business judgments—it's the truly 'equivalent' zkEVM on Ethereum that offers a lasting solution.
Looking back over the past six months, I went from skepticism and trial to heavily investing my efforts: migrating the mainnet user entry to Linea, A/B testing new features on Linea first, and then deciding whether to deploy them on L1. The data and feedback are very honest: retention is better, failures are fewer, and the saved costs are reinvested into products and incentives, making the team more agile.
If you truly understand Ethereum, you will care about three things: security boundaries, developer experience, and the value coupling with L1. Linea has given me actionable answers on these three points. It is neither the loudest chain nor the flashiest narrative, but it has turned the four words 'the future of Ethereum' into a product path that users can click on, use, and stay engaged with.
I don't believe in new buzzwords; I only trust technologies that can retain users. For me, the next phase of Ethereum is neither in the congestion of L1 nor in the isolation of starting from scratch, but in projects like Linea that integrate performance, compatibility, and value flow together. Choosing it is not betting on the popularity of a trend but on the certainty of Ethereum continuing down the right path.
