The recent surge in popularity of the Robin Hood Chain has stirred up considerable waves within the Ethereum Layer 2 scaling ecosystem. BASE, which has consistently ranked first in TVL metrics, is now feeling uneasy. Coinbase co-founder Jesse Pollak recently published a lengthy article online (see reference link at the end), reflecting on his experiences and lessons learned in building the BASE ecosystem over the past few years. Two points particularly struck me after reading this article: First, the social applications (including content tokens and the creator economy) that Jesse heavily supported have largely failed to achieve the results he anticipated. Second, applications that Jesse neglected—prediction markets, perpetual contracts, and asset tokenization—have seen a surge in popularity. Regarding the social applications that Jesse strongly supports, there was a first surge in popularity during the 2017 ICO boom, followed by a brief surge in 2021. During those booms, I observed related applications, but I remained uncertain about their potential to create new ecosystems and models within the Web 3 ecosystem, so my interest gradually waned. As for the later surge in popularity of prediction markets, perpetual contracts, and asset tokenization, as mentioned by Jesse, it seems somewhat surprising to me. This is because these applications existed for a considerable period before the current surge in popularity. Polymarket launched as early as 2020; the perpetual contract market (dYdX) launched even earlier, in 2019; and asset tokenization was already present when BM created Steemit. These applications aren't new; they've existed for a long time, but never really took off. This situation is strikingly similar to the early stages of the dot-com bubble in the late 1990s. At that time, a large number of internet applications (including e-commerce and pet services) emerged. But soon after the bubble burst, most of those projects went to zero. In this respect, they fared worse than the Web 3 projects mentioned above. But then, after 2000, especially after the rise of Amazon and Alibaba, those internet projects that had been tried and failed were revived. This time, they proved viable, had business models, and could make money. This is the price of being born at the wrong time. Perhaps such a story will repeat itself in the crypto ecosystem. Jesse's reflection further reinforces my understanding of this point: The formation and successful innovation of a business ecosystem are almost impossible to design or plan artificially. Even an ecosystem (social applications) heavily promoted by a company like Coinbase ultimately failed miserably due to a lack of market acceptance; the situation is even more dire for others. Therefore, for the development of a platform, the best approach is to treat every project in the ecosystem fairly, as if each project were a guest, and to create a uniform and positive ecosystem for all guests. This is the most suitable method for platform development. The lack of fairness in this regard is precisely what Jesse and the Base ecosystem have done most criticized in the past two years—applications that bring huge traffic and users to the BASE ecosystem receive almost no attention. It was only when these projects went to Robin Hood and received a warm welcome there that Base felt immense pressure. However, despite the Base team's varying attitudes towards ecosystem projects over the past two years, there's one thing I haven't quite figured out: Base is arguably the most dynamic among many Layer 2 extensions. But it seems indifferent to many popular projects; where does its vitality come from? Especially since many hackers and makers enjoy innovating on BASE, and some well-known hackers have even compared BASE to a new Ethereum, believing it possesses strong geek characteristics and appeal. If BASE were the only ecosystem in Layer 2 scaling, many issues would be difficult to understand. Now, with a strong competitor, it's entirely beneficial to the development of the Ethereum ecosystem.