List of questions about [Blockchain]

As someone working in the tech industry in the U.S., I’m worried about the ongoing wave of IT layoffs and tech layoffs that seem to hit every few months. I’ve seen reports of big tech layoffs at companies like Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta, and it’s making me anxious about job security.

Are layoffs in tech still happening in 2025, or is there an end in sight? I want to know what’s driving these layoffs, if tech companies are still laying off, and when we might see some stability.

I’m also curious about how this affects opportunities in emerging fields like cryptocurrency or blockchain.The news about big tech layoffs is everywhere, and it feels like even profitable companies are cutting jobs.

For years, the crypto world has been dominated by the "blockchain trilemma"—the challenge of achieving scalability, security, and decentralization simultaneously. Traditional blockchains, like Bitcoin, are incredibly secure and decentralized but struggle with speed, processing transactions in a slow, linear chain.

This limitation has sparked a race to innovate, and one of the most promising solutions to emerge is BlockDAG. This guide will explain what BlockDAG is, how it works, and why it's a technology that every serious crypto trader should understand.

The Problem: Blockchains as a Single-Lane Road

Imagine a traditional blockchain as a single-lane road. Each block (a group of transactions) must follow the one before it in a strict, sequential order. This creates a bottleneck; if traffic is heavy, the entire network slows down, and fees can skyrocket. This is the core scalability problem.

The Solution: BlockDAG as a Multi-Lane Highway

A BlockDAG (Block Directed Acyclic Graph) redesigns this structure into a multi-lane highway. Instead of a single chain, a BlockDAG allows multiple blocks to be created and confirmed at the same time. These parallel blocks are then woven together into a complex, interconnected graph structure.

This parallel processing capability means a BlockDAG can handle a much higher volume of transactions per second (TPS) without compromising the core principles of security and decentralization that make blockchain technology so powerful.

BlockDAG vs. Blockchain vs. Pure DAG: A Quick Comparison

It's important to distinguish BlockDAG from its predecessors.

Kaspa (KAS): The Premier Example of BlockDAG

Ethereum quantum readiness has moved from a theoretical debate to an urgent priority in 2026. As the network matures into the backbone of the global financial system it faces existential threats that have nothing to do with price.

Vitalik Buterin recently highlighted two concepts that define the future of the chain. These are the "Walkaway Test" and the threat of quantum computing. Understanding these concepts is essential for anyone holding ETH for the long term.

Key Takeaways:

• The "Walkaway Test" determines if a blockchain can survive if its founders and core developers suddenly disappear.
• Ethereum quantum readiness is the next major hurdle as quantum computers threaten standard encryption methods.
• Vitalik Buterin's roadmap is shifting focus toward "The Scourge" phase to secure the network against future threats.

What Is the Walkaway Test?

The Walkaway Test is a thought experiment proposed to measure true decentralization. It asks a simple question. If Vitalik Buterin and the entire core development team moved to a remote island and cut off all communication would the chain survive?

For most crypto projects the answer is no. They rely on their leaders to fix bugs and push updates. But for Ethereum the goal is to become a self-sustaining organism.

The protocol must be "finished" enough that it runs on autopilot. This ensures that no government or entity can pressure the leaders to change the rules because the leaders are no longer necessary.

How Does It Compare to Bitcoin and Solana?

When analyzing the "Walkaway Test" Ethereum sits in a unique middle ground compared to its rivals. Bitcoin passed this test over a decade ago when Satoshi Nakamoto vanished. Bitcoin is fully "ossified" meaning its code rarely changes and it requires no central leadership to survive.

On the other end of the spectrum are high-performance chains like Solana or BSC. These networks still rely heavily on their foundations and founders to drive innovation and fix outages. If their leaders walked away today the projects would struggle to coordinate upgrades.

Ethereum is the only major chain actively transitioning from a founder-led startup to an ossified public good. While it tackles Ethereum quantum readiness it is also deliberately decentralizing its own governance structure to catch up to Bitcoin's level of resilience.

Why Is Quantum Readiness So Critical?

The second pillar of survival is Ethereum quantum readiness. Current blockchain security relies on elliptic curve cryptography. This math is impossible for a normal computer to break but easy for a sufficiently powerful quantum computer.

If a bad actor develops a quantum computer before Ethereum upgrades its defenses they could theoretically steal user funds. They could reverse engineer private keys from public addresses.

This is why the Ethereum roadmap includes a phase known as "The Scourge." This phase is dedicated to implementing post-quantum cryptography. It ensures that the network remains secure even in a world where quantum computing becomes a reality.

How Does This Affect Your Investment?

For institutional investors Ethereum quantum readiness is a major due diligence checklist item. Trillions of dollars in tokenized assets cannot sit on a ledger that might be cracked in five years.

The push for these upgrades signals that Ethereum is transitioning from a "move fast and break things" startup to a "security first" global settlement layer. It prioritizes stability over new features.

This shift might make development feel slower but it makes the asset significantly more valuable as a store of trust. It builds a moat around the ecosystem that newer faster chains cannot match.

Is the Network Truly Decentralized Yet?

Not fully but it is getting there. The implementation of automated upgrades and client diversity helps.

We are seeing a move toward "ossification." This means the core rules of the protocol become set in stone much like the TCP/IP protocols of the internet. Once this happens the Walkaway Test will finally be passed.

Conclusion

The focus on Ethereum quantum readiness and the Walkaway Test proves that the developers are thinking decades ahead. They are building a system designed to outlive its creators and withstand the technological threats of the future.

Navigating the Wild World of Crypto with a Certified Crypto Advisor

So far, we've explored the exciting potential of Layer 3 blockchains. We've talked about a future with thousands of hyper-specialized chains powering everything from games to private finance. It's an inspiring vision for a hyper-scalable future. But in the world of crypto, every innovation comes with trade-offs, and it's crucial to look at the other side of the coin.

Not everyone is convinced that Layer 3s are the right path forward. In fact, some of the brightest minds in the space have raised serious concerns. You've heard the bull case; now let's have an honest conversation about the potential problems.

The Centralization Concern: Sacrificing Security for Speed?

The most significant criticism of many Layer 3 designs revolves around the issue of security. A Layer 3 often gains its speed and low cost by using a "sequencer"—a single entity responsible for ordering transactions. While the L3's transactions are ultimately secured by the main Ethereum network, the live, real-time operation can depend heavily on this centralized sequencer.

If that single sequencer goes offline or decides to censor transactions, the Layer 3 could halt or become unreliable. Critics argue that this is a dangerous step backwards. They believe that we should be focused on scaling Layer 1s and Layer 2s in a way that doesn't reintroduce centralized points of failure, which is the very problem blockchains were created to solve.

The Liquidity Fragmentation Problem

Imagine a vibrant city where all the shops and markets are in a central square (the Layer 2). It's easy to move between them and trade. Now, imagine that every single shop moves into its own private building on a separate street (a Layer 3). The city has expanded, but now it's much harder to get from the bakery to the butcher.

This is the problem of "liquidity fragmentation." Right now, a huge amount of trading volume and capital is concentrated on major Layer 2s. If thousands of Layer 3s launch, each with its own separate applications and pools of assets, that capital could be spread incredibly thin. This would make it harder to trade, as there would be less liquidity in any single place, and it would require users to constantly bridge their assets between a dizzying number of tiny, isolated ecosystems.

The Complexity Overload

At what point does the "layer" model just become too complex for the average user and even for developers? Adding a third layer creates new challenges.

Users have to navigate bridging between L1, L2, and now multiple L3s, each with its own nuances. Developers have to build and maintain these complex connections. Critics argue that this adds more potential points of failure and creates a user experience that is far too complicated for mainstream adoption. They believe a simpler architecture—perhaps by making Layer 2s themselves more powerful and customizable—is a better path forward.

A Future Still Being Written

It's important to remember that the Layer 3 debate is happening in real-time. The technology is still new, and the teams building these solutions are actively working to solve these very problems.

The future probably isn't a simple "L2s vs. L3s" choice. It's more likely to be a mix, where different applications choose the solution that best fits their needs for security, performance, and decentralization. As an investor, your job isn't to have the perfect answer, but to understand the trade-offs being made.