MegaETH in 2026 & Ethereum's L2 End Game | Brett DiNovi & Lei Yang

We are trying to have a self-contained ecosystem where we have composability maximally because we have so much that can be done within our sphere of composability that we do not care if people can go out. Those things will happen, but we want to bring people inside of our ecosystem.

We want to have the best execution environment. We want to be able to do very complex stuff like a flash loan that is novel amongst a thriving DeFi ecosystem. So I'm not pegging my value prop on playing nicely with a bunch of other chains. Our idea is to grow the biggest, the fastest, the most performant.

Nothing said on Empire is a recommendation to buy or sell any investments or products. This podcast is for informational purposes only, and the views expressed by anyone on the show are solely their opinions, not financial advice or necessarily the views of Blockworks. Our hosts, guests, and the Block Works team may hold positions in the company's funds or projects discussed.

All right, welcome back everyone. I am Rob and Yanov decided to leave me out here. There's going to be an intellectual battle. We have Lelay and Brad from Mega ETH. I'm very excited to have you guys on.

There's a lot to talk about. For anyone that's been living under a rock, why don't you guys introduce yourselves? And then we'll set the stage.

I'll go first. My name is Lei and I'm a co-founder and CTO of Mega ETH. Mega is a layer 2 blockchain that is aiming to be the fastest blockchain ever possible by strategically centralizing the components and delegating the security to Ethereum layer 1.

And I'm Brad. I'm here to defend Lei. So I don't even say centralizing. I hate saying that word because it's such a trigger word for people, but I'm on the Yeah, go ahead.

He's here to chaperone the conversation. There's some pretty inflammatory stuff. So full disclosure, guys, I'm going to invest for Mega Youth, but this conversation is, as I told the backstage, it gloves off.

I mean, there's a lot happening in crypto. Prices are terribly down. People are leaving. And Vitalic came out with a pretty saying the quiet parts out loud.

He said look the value proposition of L2s is broken unless you do certain things but most L2s just you know the rollup centric road map is broken in my opinion uh why because L2s capture most of the value doesn't flow back to the L1 and so we've sort of talked about that people generally understand that but seeing Vitalic come out and say hey kind of acknowledging that publicly I think is uh will probably be a very important um I think it is is very revealing.

Curious to get your guys' thoughts on that. As someone that is building an L2 on top of Ethereum L1.

Yeah, I have some very strong opinions on this and actually so like background again for the intro. Brett, you might know me on the timeline. I'm the dude that has traditionally actually flooded L2 specifically blob space. I did that for probably a year and a half before joining meth, which is November of last year.

So, I'm very aligned, frankly, with where or what Vitalic was signaling towards there. And I made a post on that where I think that post specifically kills alignment games that were being played, right? I was so critical for so like like bro is Ethereum, arbitrum is Ethereum. Like, guys, no, they're separate blockchains.

I think we've acknowledged over the last few years that the value is going to be driven towards execution, right? That's largely what Salana was pivoting itself on. There obviously is a monetary component to all of this stuff, but you can't you can't determine that stuff.

And as this entire industry gets more and more let's say traditionalized, right? Like we're starting to bring in more parties from the traditional world, which means they're going to lean on metrics that they know and trust and are comfortable with. And most of that stuff is as Santi has pointed out in recent weeks too much chagrin is like DCF models, right?

You want to see how value is captured by the underlying token if there's a token associated to a network right and that frankly has been going to yeah frankly the L2s I think the execution that's where all the money is right and everyone was hoping that Ethereum with its monetary exporting would appreciate based on just like being used as a denominator in these ecosystems and that frankly was not materializing as much as people were hoping and I think it's just because they lean too far into one direction and I'm have been pushing I'm thankful that they're starting to get back to scaling Ethereum mainet because I think you do have to capture some degree of execution fees right priority fees whatever on your actual chain then when you can start like banking on the monetary premium that you can command.

And I do agree that if you're only going to do execution premium right if you do these DCFs even today you look at a Salana Salana with all the value that's captured even though the the block building pipeline gets eaten up by geos and you know everyone else even if you do that you're Salon's pretty pretty expensive. It's pretty expensive even today, right?

And I called out maybe a year and a half ago. I said all-time top for all smart contract platforms was Ethereum's top. It was like the $4,000. Then it touched it, kissed it. I kind of had to give in on that, but then I I still think maybe it's going to happen if we're going to continue to go down that path.

I kind of deviated a little bit there, but my general position is I think he made the right call. I think this like you need to scale down one. you need to capture execution fees and then you can try to hit upper echelons.

To strip off some technicality there, the way I think about it is imagine if you have a company and that company then has divisions within that company and divisions within that company have their own specific stock and that stock is you know Google for instance a good example like these conglomerates.

So I like private equity. So back in the 80s there's all these conglomerates and they have different divisions. Some might be wildly profitable because they sell cigarettes and others might be not as profitable because they're, you know, an R&D department that is not very profitable. It's a dying industry.

And that's how I think about Ethereum. It's it's very fragmented. People think about Ethereum as this one ecosystem, but it's very fragmented and value is being captured by these individual subsidiaries called L2s.

Vitalic being one of the founders says at some point and I was like why did it take you so long to kind of come out publicly and I think just for context lei this is where I want to get your perspective which is this all started because Ethereum couldn't scale and I remember looking at my addresses interacting in Ethereum and it was I paid for a house in fees and it's and it's disgusting you don't see a a path towards you know back in the NFT craze mania and DeFi yield farming mania you were paying thousands of dollars per transaction but you know there's been a lot of innovation in the underlying L1 I think fees are down like 90%.

I think part of the argument that Vitalic now makes is like the L1 is and has scaled. Without getting too technical, Leia, I'd be curious, you started this journey, saying, "Okay, I believe in that. I think scalability, I think applications are going to be built. I'm going to create this environment that is more performant."

And there's some trade-offs. And you talk about this taboo word of centralization. And when I first met you guys, I'm like, well, finally, someone's building in that direction. And people can go reference that initial podcast that we had with you guys around like why why do you kind of decided to build in that direction but in some ways like maybe ask the the question a do we need L2s when the L1 has scaled to Vital's point and if we do need L2s what is what is the purpose of an L2?

Yeah, of course. So I think first I think according according to Vak's post I think I don't really think that his his kind of realization or his his new vision on layer 2 is purely driven by by by by productivity by sorry by uh by kind of aggregating value back to the to the ETH token.

I think it's purely driven by a technical reality which is it's much harder to verify correctness of software because I think in the original vision so I think maybe just take one step back to how the the layer 2 centric the rollup centric road map came into being right it's because Ethereum was trying to build shards sharding and I think back then they thought that okay so build 128 shards for the Ethereum blockchain so that is scaled by 128x but then I think they realized that okay so if it's not very interesting if we build other shards why not delegate the work of building individual shards like the individual departments you were mentioning to other companies to other entities such that they can do some exploration I think the the main highlight because they could have just done the sharding roadmap themselves right but the reason that they switched to the rollup ccentric roadmap is really because they want exploration so I think exploration is the key word that kind of centers is the value of layer 2's even today after his post.

I think actually his post even just highlights the the the kind the significance of exploration of like a diverse set of trade-off points being explored concurrently by layer 2s while all anchoring their security in some sense by to the Ethereum layer 1 blockchain.

So I would actually say it's something that is I think it's kind of an evolution of the original rollup ccentric road map. It's not like the death of it. It's not like we're doing they're doing a complete pivot or anything. And why do we need layer 2 today?

So I think that's center back to the to the word exploration. I think the thing is with any physical system you have to face trade-offs and I think that's the most interesting part you can play in a system designer. You want to strike the best trade-off you think that is good for you and your users by filling a gap in the market by doing something that you think makes more sense to the general public so that you can serve a better so you can address a better market a larger market right and I think Ethereum as a layer one or any individual layer ones Solana other layer ones included they can only strike one particular trade-off point on this curve between centralization and performance.

And the trade-off is fundamental because if you have a few servers around the world co-producing blocks, then if you want to communicate between the servers, it takes some certain amount of time because there because information travels in fibers at one/ird of the speed of light, right? It takes time and that latency fundamentally limits your performance of the blockchain. the more nodes you add, the more decentralized you get to and the slower you become.

So you we kind of see that kind of a difference between Ethereum layer one and the Solana and other layer ones. So I think what layer 2s can serve in this trade-off curve is the far end of the curve which is maximizing performance.

So this has always been the north star for me. We just we don't think that we are a a scaling company for Ethereum. Scaling as in 10x at 100x Ethereum performance. We want to address a market that is fundamentally impossible for any layer one to address. And by doing that you kind of capture a part of market that you will never be captured by by any layer one however much scaling they are pushing.

So we feel actually very happy seeing Vitalics post this kind of like a validation to our road map actually that we have. I mean in fairness I think you guys started with like hey we're going to create a super high performant focus on scaling like that was I think that was the value out of you guys initially and say we're going to focus on that because if we do that there's certain applications that can never be built on the L1.

If Ethereum gas limit kind of keeps 10xing, like what's your mode?

Yeah, good point. I'll talk a bit first and I think Brad can of course should address the the marketing the the app side. So, I think the mode here, two acts. I think there's two fault. One is fundamentally it's cheaper for a layer 2 to process transactions and there's no I personally I think there's no question around that because fundamentally layer 2 use fewer servers with layer ones you have to get many validators you have to communicate between the validators which costs quite a bit of money if if one actually runs runs applications in a distributed cloud.

So these costs ultimately they have to pay they have to be passed down to the users. So the cost basis I guess the the I think the bottom line is the cost basis for layer ones is just fundamentally higher than co than layer 2. So there's some certain threshold that the layer ones cannot pass in terms of scaling in terms of getting cheaper and cheaper gases and I think the second and more importantly is the latency which I kind of touched on with layer ones you have to communicate between block producers.

So one simple example is if I send Santi say $10 on on the blockchain on a blockchain and currently it's the New York block producer certifying that transaction and the next transaction will be the next block will be certified by a producer in Tokyo. Then just the fact that I sent Santi the transaction has to be communicated to the Tokyo block producer in order for it to continue. Right?

So this latency fundamentally limits many applications for example online gaming like high frequency trading and anything that is interactive right because it takes almost 300 sec 300 milliseconds at the least to circle around the world which is something that layer ones cannot bypass if they want to stay the like the globally dis the globally decentralized nature.

Yeah an old-timer Brett I want to go to you I know yeah go for it. As an old-timer would say, hey, we've had this problem before in Trafy. I remember people were getting closer and closer to Wall Street because you could get the information faster. There's always latency when you propagate information.

Naturally, the skeptic person would say, well, what's a trade-off? It seems too good to be true, right? If you're saying you're fixing latency like and you're faster, do I really want to be moving mill billions and billions of dollars when there's a centralized basically like what is the tradeoff when you when you really go like low latency? And and and are people prepared will they be prepared to accept that trade-off?

I think the answer is yeah I think the answer is I think people already voted with their feet. I think with the success of I think I would actually say that so far the layer 2 centric road map has been a success. you have prominent layer 2's capturing I would say values and TVLs from the layer one which I think actually prompted your initial question right what about the fragmentation but actually it's I first I don't think it's fragmentation and second I think it's actually the fact that people are moving money to other layer 2s that kind of testifies the fact that people are fine with centralized block producers and yeah back to the point of back to the question of what's the what's the trade-off?

The trade-off here is block production. If you want low latency, you have to collocate the facilities for block production into one data center or into into a few data centers that are close to each other. So this I would say is the quote unquote trade-off you're taking.

But how does that translate into like actual properties that impact users? I think that's actually the beauty of layer 2s. I would say layer 2 preserve most of the security guarantees from Ethereum. So let's just take Mega as an example. in say a year of time mega will give users the escape hatch so that they can take their money withdraw from the layer 2 back to the layer one whenever they want because users can force their transactions into the layer 2 chain even if the centralized I think with centralization the most you can censor the transaction but you still get your phone yeah exactly exactly with centralization the the major risk is central is censorship right but With proper design, you can actually let users post transactions to the layer one and the layer two will have no choice to but to pick up those transactions. So this kind of circumvents the the censorship problem. Yes.

So so like Vitalic is pushing this native role of pre-ompile for like trusted TBM verification. And so but like so are you guys building like towards that or like does your architecture make it impossible because I think like concretely like yeah maybe address that and then I have a follow-up to that.

Yeah. It's not a I don't think it's a black and white question. So I think the so okay so the problem they are trying they're trying to solve which I kind of touched on is making sure the layer 2 software is correct because the layer 2 security mostly relies on correctness of a piece of smart contract that tracks whatever state route or whatever layer 2 state the layer 2 chain wants to snapshot and commit back to the layer one because this is What allows people to move money between layer 1 and layer two without any trust assumption, right?

It's supposed to be like code is the law, right? If a withdraw from the layer two to layer 1 is green lit by this by this piece of smart contract, then it is green lit. Then the kind of the risk is what if there is a there's a bypass? What if there's a backd dooror in this piece of code such that people can withdraw money that they do not own right from the layer two to the layer one.

So I think Vitalik's proposal is to is to delegate that work to the layer one more and more in the sense that currently it's a piece of smart contract and next it can be a piece of code that those validators run and compare against each other. Then it's not one single implementation of smart contract. It's a spec that different validators can implement themselves individually and compare the notes against each other. So it's less so it's less less risky. It's less it's more it's more different implementations you can kind of compare the results against against each other right so we can we are definitely compatible with this vision but I think the core here the core question is what kind of spec are you going to push to those layer 1 validators so my guess is they're going to push a spec that is equivalent to Ethereum layer 1 which means only those layer 2s that behave almost equival equivalently to the Ethereum layer 1 can benefit from it.

And in our case, because we did a bunch of optimizations which I think is purely worthwhile. We're not compatible with we're not 100% equivalent to the Ethereum layer one spec although it's code is by code level compatible but this kind of the sorry for the elaborated long I don't know answer but yeah I I want to ground it to reality and Brad I want to go to you but before I think there's so like why does this all matter because I think in in a lot of these podcasts we get lost in the technicality of TPS and and and technical stuff that the end of the day is like what does it actually matter for bringing more users on chain and is it actually going to it meaningfully influence the possibility to create applications and bring more users that stick around and do coolit on chain whether they believe whether they appreciate that they're doing it on chain doesn't matter right if you can build stuff there's sort of the cynical argument here which is like I remember in the peak of D5 mania pancake swap eventually had more activity than unis swap and you're sitting there you're saying well you clearly understand that binance like BMBB that chain is way more centralized and then And you say, well, wait a minute. Like clearly users are voting with their feet. They're going to a place where they can do activity. Why? Because Binance has all these customers. They create a chain. They can do more stuff. They can make more money. They're going to naturally flow.

And I think a lot of times the Ethereum community has sort of been academic in their approach and it hasn't been you need to be savage in the best sense of the word to win in this industry and in any industry. Otherwise, you know, go back to academia and don't make any money. But it's very cutthroat.

Before we move over to like actually why does this matter and why do you guys win in in the next 5 10 years like I want to talk about composability because it is an important thing there's two components there's interoperability in the system of chains and then there's composability and composability was one of those things where I remember back in defcon and Osaka it was you were starting to see the first L2s come out and people were very worried about that because DeFi is pretty awesome the money go analogy is pretty powerful that you can have all of these applications. A core property crypto is you have all these different applications that are composable.

So your money in a you can do flash loans you can you know just do not like skumorphic things which is copying what exists in traditional finance but really do just entirely new things because money is real time connected composable. Now when you go to an L2 framework where there's multiple chains and the question really becomes so so say for instance you deploy D5 protocol on and it's a really cool D5 protocol options trading or per um can it atomically compose with unis swap in the L1 today or will it ever be able to do that or you maybe the position is it doesn't matter our users are never going to I that's they're never going to leave like like so what you're starting to touch on is kind of what base rollups were trying to do right where you're talking about oh you have a validator that also can perform transactions on meth that can also do transactions on Ethereum because it has awareness of both you can do atomic stuff but frankly what you're pointing at is why I have been or what metallic has kind of crushed with his recent post right the way described it to people just to take it all the way back of of simplifying just the road map is like there's Ethereum there was Ethereum and then all of the current roll-ups were being Ethereum plus where they're like it's Ethereum but it's like kind of cheaper right so like because of that because they're still not super scalable they still require a little bit composability because you can't do too much on any individual one so you need them to play nice together you needed to try to like get stuff from Ethereum mainet and the value props were all still very intrinsically tied to each other because like they needed all of that stuff to grow.

And again taking it a little further, you talk about even with Ethereum scaling like where is mega mode? I still think people do not fully grasp the the level of difference in in scale between a mega and an Ethereum and or base and you know even some of the other like more performant chains out there right now because you even just said like oh what if Ethereum scales 10x then what? Well, I'll give you some numbers and then you could I'll let you do the math in your head on how long this will take.

If you take Ethereum's current throughput, you 10x it, and then you 10x it, and then you 10x it, right? From that starting point, you're still about 50% of what Megith can do today, right? And then you think of the time scale it takes for them to get to that point. Like, bro, we're talking 5 to 10 years, right? It's just like it's just how the systems work. Whenever there's this much capital at play, it's just going to take a long time. So, it's effectively never going to happen in in this environment.

So, okay, that's the paradigm. That's where we're operating in our mindset, my mindset and what I've communicated try to advocate for the ecosystem. We are purchasing a service from Ethereum, right? We are purchasing security. We are outsourcing our consensus. It allows us to achieve a high level of scalability that like today that they will never be able to achieve in the next 5 to 10 years, right?

Cool. We give Ethereum the asset a privilege position inside of our ecosystem. Right? Ethereum the asset gets some monetary value from that. Whatever that is, I don't know. We are going to be a self-contained ecosystem. And while other other ecosystems face may as well be salon at us. I'm being frank. It's an EVM change. Like yes, there's some things that can go back and forth, but we are trying to have a self-contained ecosystem where we have composability maximally because we have so much that can be done within our our sphere of composability that we do not care if like people can go out like those things will happen, but we want to bring people inside of our ecosystem.

We want to have the best execution environment. We want to be able to do very very complex stuff like a flash loan that is like novel net new amongst a thriving DeFi ecosystem. So I I'm not pegging my value prop on playing nicely with a bunch of other chains. Our idea is to grow the biggest, the fastest, like the most performant.

Well, I'm I'm glad I've always appreciated your your guys' transparency and the I'm always very skeptical when builders in the space just assume that there are not trade-offs with technology. There's always a trade-off. There is for sure. There's always a trade-off. Security, centralization, whether you believe that Trellm is real or not. kind of to ground it back to so your re your real-time thesis like requires apps to be natively deployed on Mega ETH.

That's a walled garden. You're effectively saying we want to create this walled garden. Sure, users can leave. Sure, you can commit back to the L1. You can't lose funds. But it's a walled garden. In the same way that you can switch social media network, Facebook, you know, you you use Facebook and Instagram, you can go to Tik Tok. Like nothing really stops you from doing that, user behaviors is really interesting because no one really cares about the infrastructure, you know, you don't really care. You don't you don't go to book a flight and say, "Does that airplane have a Rolls-Royce engine or something else?" Maybe now if it's a boing 77 max maybe you might not want to fly that.

How do you You say Wald Garden. I I say black hole. And this is this is cuz I'm this is going down the the same path that you're talking, right? I Mega ETH will be a performance and UX black hole because right now we're in the early stage of all this stuff and people are bicker bickering over consensus mechanisms. They're bickering over like this little stuff. And you know what happened? We observably this last year and a half, everyone went to Hyperlquid. Everyone. One of the most profitable applications in our entire ecosystem. You know what Hyperliquid is? It's 24 validators in Tokyo. No one cares. It's a good experience. Go there. It's got liquidity. It's got it's fast. It's snappy. And what like the reason that happened is because you care if you get liquidated and and they're auto deleveraging uh mechanism. That's a layer on top of that logic matters if you have if you're trading there.

For sure. For sure. And I even man I felt like I got hunted over there if I'm being totally honest which so like you know we can call into question some of that stuff but like let's like abstracted it's just it was a good user experience so you know we can like whatever and I think that is going to continue to happen right so in a world where we are progressing to where everyone is continuously giving less and less of a about what chain you're on what the consensus mechanism how many validators you have whatever whatever apps are naturally going to just gravitate towards the place that gives them the best execution environment because it gives them the best user user experience.

And if I can sit there and say I can take my app from a base, a Hyper EVM, an Ethereum mainet, an Avalanche, and I just port it over to a mega and it's instantly a better experience, like I'm probably going to do that assuming there's liquidity there, assuming there's like right, you need some of those like bones to make sure that the other stuff is there. But if the experience itself can continue to be better, it's they will just do that.

And I have already had calls over the last several weeks of apps that have come to me and they say, "Bro, I want you to be my AWS." It's like, I want blockchain. I want liquidity. I want composability and I just know that I want you're going to be there. I'm not going to have to worry about it. My costs as we showed in our our stress test can scale up to tens of thousands of TPS with a static base fee. Like it never changed. We were we had 50,000 transactions per second. We had people coming on and doing latency in test intensive apps on top of that same time costs were still fractions of a cent. So that's that's predictability for these builders, right? And they can come and they're like awesome. It's a relief. I don't have to worry anymore.

So you guys are you said something interesting there which is you are bringing value to the Ethereum ecosystem. You're kind of you're giving it monetary value because you're bringing all this activity. You're doing the hard work. You're renting security from Ethereum. Yeah. It's a service exchange in the same way that you can go buy infrastructure or decide where you want to live because it's more secure or not. Is that security that you're buying adequately priced?

Because my thesis is sec is security and the pricing of security and how you tax it effectively is grossly grossly miscalculated and it's one of the hardest things to figure out. There's all this analogies that you could say of like what is a proper tax? You live in the US. Well, there's federal tax and there's state tax. And the composition of GDP tax is a small sliver. And there's always that trade-off of how much you tax. You don't want to go the California route because if you tax people too much, Mark Zuckerberg goes buys a mansion in Miami and then the taxable revenue of California has dropped by a trillion. So, it went from two trillion to a trillion. So, how do you guys think about that? You're effectively buying security from the Ethereum L1. Maybe the lay this more abstract is a hard question to answer. I haven't found like I think about it a lot. I just don't know how to price it. The way I the observability of that is what is the effect of that? Are more people building on the Ethereum ecosystem? But at what point does that model break? Because because like if you're if you're in New York and you're building Wall Street and you're building, you know, these massive enterprises on top of that city, does it collapse? Does New York as a state make more money in the federal government? And then at that point, what's the whole point of the federal government? You might as well just be an independent country. And then, but maybe the perverse the perverse answer to that is don't ever be a federal government. Be a state and then just use federal resources and just keep your head low and be quiet about it.

I I I I tend to believe in free markets. So, I I really tend to believe in free markets. So eventually it'll be correctly priced and I I have absolutely no comment on whether it's you're saying it's not. No no no no no no. So I I I I have to be very honest. I have no idea whether this is it's I think it can be calculated but I cannot calculate it right now on the podcast.

But so this is how I would calculate it. Right. So if you take a look at the so I think okay so what are the transactions you want to guarantee security for it's the in-flight transactions right it's the ones for example you you withdraw to a centralized exchange and the centralized exchange is going to wire the it's going to wire you the money right it's the ones it's the transactions that it's the transactions for which the centralized exchange have wired you the money to the bank account which is not recallable but the onchain transactions but maybe the corresponding onchain transactions have not been settled. So it's these transactions that we really make sure that they get settled.

So on a layer two this latency of settling transactions from the layer two to layer one depending on the notion it's 30 minutes to 7 days depending on whether you want to make sure the the state is also settled. So if you just cap if you just calculate the volume of transactions on the layer 2 within such a time period right and by little's law the the result is the the number of transactions or the the amount of money you are sending or everyone is sending collectively on the layer 2 per second times the amount of time you have to wait for the transactions to settle. This is the so-called inflight volume right inflight capital that have not been settled that you really need security from Ethereum.

Okay. So take that and consider how much money you would pay for to guarantee its its security and that's I think the fair market price of security. Yeah so this is how I would calculate it. But I think what's quite interesting is it does not really cost too much for the layer one to to guarantee security of these kind of inflight transactions. because all these volume all the volume all the transactions they settle down to the layer one as a single Ethereum transaction.

So I guess like I think the conclusion here qualitatively is that the cost basis for layer 1 is actually pretty low to guaranteeing the security but yes I I tend to agree with you that is kind of a big amount of money that you are guaranteeing. So, yep.

Coinbase cryptobacked loans powered by Morpho empower users to borrow up to $5 million using Bitcoin or $1 million using ETH as collateral. Loans originate in seconds with no additional credit checks and competitive rates typically between 4 to 8%. Use USDC for down payments, debt refinancing, unexpected bills, and more. Repayment anytime with no fixed deadlines. Over $1 billion in loans have been opened through Coinbase to date. With the Coinbase app, you can manage cryptobacked loans with ease. To learn more, click the link in the show notes. As always, investments in blockchain technology involve risk terms and conditions apply.

The Blockworks Digital Asset Summit is back in New York March 24th through 26th. We'll have top speakers from leading asset managers, financial institutions, DeFi protocols, crypto companies, and policy makers all under one roof. Think Black Rockck, Coinbase, Robin Hood, and more. Follow the link in today's show notes to buy tickets, and make sure to use code Empire 200 for $200 off at checkout.

So, well, let let's kind of ground it a little bit more, which is how much revenue flows back to the Ethereum L