The cross-chain landscape has long relied on bridges and wrapped tokens—a solution that stacks complexity upon complexity. Each additional layer introduces new vulnerabilities and failure points that compound the risk.
There's a different approach emerging. Some protocols are moving away from this model entirely. Rather than routing assets through bridges or creating synthetic versions, they're keeping native assets truly native across chains.
The beauty here is in the incentive design. If a transaction fails to complete, the protocol's built-in incentive mechanisms automatically step in to finish what was started. It's a cleaner mechanism—fewer intermediaries, fewer assumptions, fewer things that can unexpectedly break down.
This shift from wrapped complexity to native simplicity could be the next evolution in how blockchains actually communicate with each other.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
7 Likes
Reward
7
8
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
EternalMiner
· 12h ago
To be honest, the wrapped token system indeed has many issues. Every time you cross chains, you have to pray that nothing goes wrong.
View OriginalReply0
SocialAnxietyStaker
· 22h ago
To be honest, the whole wrapped token system should have been discarded long ago; the risks are piled up like a building.
View OriginalReply0
RetiredMiner
· 01-13 15:51
The idea of native asset cross-chain is truly brilliant. Finally, someone has understood how outrageous the bridge system really is.
View OriginalReply0
LiquidationSurvivor
· 01-13 15:41
native assets跨链才是正解,wrapped token那套老掉牙了
Reply0
GasFeeLover
· 01-13 15:41
Honestly, the wrapped token solution for cross-chain has long been outdated. The more layers added, the more risk there is. Anyone who uses it knows.
View OriginalReply0
GameFiCritic
· 01-13 15:38
The cross-chain ecosystem's bridge + wrapped token solution should have been replaced long ago. The more layers added, the more risks there are, and it feels like stacking blocks becomes increasingly dangerous. Keeping native assets in their native state is indeed a clean approach, and automatic incentive mechanisms also help address many failure points. However, the key still depends on how effective the actual deployment is—ideals are lofty, but reality is often harsh...
View OriginalReply0
SmartContractWorker
· 01-13 15:21
Nah, this is definitely cleaner compared to those previous bridging solutions... Less layers mean less risk.
The cross-chain landscape has long relied on bridges and wrapped tokens—a solution that stacks complexity upon complexity. Each additional layer introduces new vulnerabilities and failure points that compound the risk.
There's a different approach emerging. Some protocols are moving away from this model entirely. Rather than routing assets through bridges or creating synthetic versions, they're keeping native assets truly native across chains.
The beauty here is in the incentive design. If a transaction fails to complete, the protocol's built-in incentive mechanisms automatically step in to finish what was started. It's a cleaner mechanism—fewer intermediaries, fewer assumptions, fewer things that can unexpectedly break down.
This shift from wrapped complexity to native simplicity could be the next evolution in how blockchains actually communicate with each other.