Dialogue with Blockworks Research Director: Pump.fun raised 1 billion yuan to issue tokens. Is this for business expansion or running away with the money?

Compiled & edited by: Xiaobai Navigation Coderworld

Guest: Ryan Connor, Head of Research at Blockworks

Moderator: Mert Mumtaz; Jack Kubinec

Podcast source: Lightspeed

How Will Pump Fun's Token Impact Solana? | Weekly Roundup

Air Date: June 6, 2025

Summary of key points

This week we have a new weekly summary show, and we have specially invited Ryan Connor to join the discussion. We will analyze in depth the token release plan of Pump.fun, why Pump plans to raise $1 billion, the Alpenglow project, how to expand the Solana network and many other hot topics.

Summary of highlights

• Project tokens must have some kind of value accumulation mechanism, and those without value accumulation mechanisms often end up going to zero. As it stands, if this token is just a meme, I find it hard to imagine a $1 billion market demand.

• Some people think that they will "run away" and live a luxurious life after getting the money, but the reality is that they can do this without any financing, so this speculation is not valid.

• Pump.fun has not yet fully mastered the user discovery function, nor has it fully controlled the front-end distribution channels. This makes their service somewhat commoditized and at risk of being disintermediated.

• I speculate that they may use the funds raised this time to develop new products. For example, they may launch a tool to compete with Axiom, further improve the Pump Swap platform, or develop a dedicated wallet to control the front-end distribution channel.

• Pump.fun provides services that users really need. Whether these services are morally correct or not is not important, what matters is that users are willing to pay for them.

• Although the service provided by Pump is very competitive in asset launch, it is still a "commoditized" service in essence. In the crypto industry, first-mover advantage is not enough to guarantee long-term success. Controlling the front end is the key to Pump's long-term development.

• When you raise money, you are reducing risk for the next step. There are two general ways to do this: one is to expand the existing business, and the other is to try new areas. Funding is the foundation for achieving any business goal, especially in the business field. With sufficient cash reserves, they can withstand possible bear markets.

• While cash reserves can be a curse, it can also help you build a very strong network effect business.

• In the crypto industry, exchanges are one of the most profitable and influential businesses.

• People in the crypto industry sometimes focus too much on L1 and L2 and ignore what really matters - the business itself.

• What Pump obviously wants is market growth, not just optimizing yield.

• Performance optimization is indeed important, but you can't be too obsessed with it. Today's crypto market is more mature, and performance optimization and historical performance have become basic expectations of the industry.

Pump Fun Token Distribution

Jack Kubinec:

The main topic we’re going to discuss today is ICOs (Initial Coin Offerings). There’s been some major token news happening on Solana lately, probably the most notable event since Trump coin, and this week we got an exclusive report that Pump.fun plans to raise $1 billion through a token sale, which values the company at $4 billion.

This news has sparked a lot of discussion in the crypto Twitter community. I'm sure this will lead to some heated debate. But I think this news is really interesting, especially the ICO part. The amount they plan to raise is also amazing.

What was your first reaction to the news? How do you feel now?

Mert Mumtaz:

My first reaction was to want more details. We know they will issue a token and it may be divided into two phases: private sale and public sale. But beyond that, I noticed that many people's comments on this news are more based on their emotional projection of the market, and the current market environment is not optimistic. Almost every comment is saying something like "Solana is finished" and "Are they going to develop their ownBlockchain? ” or “Is this a scam?” There was even some discussion about the founders’ backgrounds.

I think there are many things worth discussing. For example,There is little dispute that there will be airdrops.If you’ve been paying attention in recent months, there have been a lot of signs pointing to a massive airdrop.

Another key question is: Why do they need to raise this money?A lot of people are confused by this. In fact, they have generated about $700 million to $800 million in revenue in the past year or since the company was founded. So why do they still need to raise money? This actually reflects the public's limited understanding of how business works, startups, and the decisions made by founders.

From a business perspective, why not raise more funds to expand the business while the market opportunities are good now?Pump.fun's core business relies on the meme market. While they were not the first team to enter this market, they did scale it to unprecedented heights. They are also trying to promote the market in other ways, such as entering the field of streaming. They are said to plan to compete with platforms such as Twitch, which is an extremely costly business that requires paying huge fees to celebrities to cooperate with live broadcasts.

So looking at it from another perspective, if I were them, I would think that my business depends on the meme market, and the current financing allows me to not have to worry about funding issues for a long time, so that I can boldly try greater risks and further expand the market size or optimize the existing market.Some people think they will just run away and live a luxurious life after getting the money, but the reality is that they can do this without any financing.Therefore, this speculation is not valid.

As for some people questioning whether they will leave the Solana network, I personally think that this view is unreasonable. After all, they have achieved significant success on Solana, and it is in their best interest to continue to stay in this ecosystem. Of course, the specific details of this financing have yet to be disclosed, but I think some of the negative reactions in the market are unfounded. We can delve into these issues later.

What is Pump Fun’s core strategy?

Jack Kubinec:

As Mert said, people are confused about Pump.fun's strategy, mainly because its structure seems a bit complicated. I personally think that Pump.fun is likely to launch a large-scale airdrop plan. After all, they have made a lot of money and also need to create a good market image through airdrops.

From the information revealed so far, it seems that Pump.fun’s plan is to combine airdrops with ICOs (initial coin offerings), while reserving a portion of tokens for founders and early investors.In addition, this ICO may also be targeted at some institutional investors, while most of the tokens will be sold publicly. This innovative issuance method may be one of their core strategies.Ryan, what do you think about this?

Ryan Connor:

I think this is a really interesting project, and it’s actually been a long time in the making.The market has long known that Pump.fun would eventually launch a token, but has been speculating on the exact timing.Although their profitability is very strong and their operating costs are almost negligible, the founding team obviously has greater ambitions. They not only set a grand vision, but also plan to further expand their market influence through live broadcasting and other means.

From a business perspective, Pump.fun’s strategy may be to leverage existing market network effects and gradually build social network effects to attract more users.This dual effect will make their product more attractive. However, their current model is not perfect. The biggest challenge is thatThey have not yet fully mastered the user discovery function, nor have they fully controlled the front-end distribution channels. This makes their services somewhat commoditized and at risk of being disintermediated.

因此，我推测他们可能会利用这次筹集的资金开发新产品。例如，他们可能会推出一个与 Axiom 竞争的工具，进一步完善 Pump Swap 平台，或者开发一个专属钱包，以掌控前端分发渠道。如果他们能够掌控分发渠道，那么未来的潜力将更加巨大。不过，若无法解决分发问题，他们的长期愿景可能会受到限制。至于他们是否计划开发自己的区块链，目前还没有明确的迹象，但这确实是一个值得关注的方向。

Why is Pump planning to raise $1 billion?

Jack Kubinec:

Aside from the eye-catching content, Pump.fun’s token fundraising plan was controversial when you talked to investors. Some people questioned whether there was really a demand for $1 billion. Do you think they can successfully raise this amount of money?

Ryan Connor:

This is a very worthy question to discuss. I personally think this ICO is very exciting. The Blockworks research team has been analyzing market dynamics, and we found that many cryptocurrency investors are skeptical about this project, believing that it is not profitable enough. However, judging from the fact that Pump.fun has raised more than $100 million in venture capital, this skepticism may not be true.

Of course, raising $700 million to $800 million is not an easy task for such a controversial project. But I believe that rational market judgment will prevail in the end. The team of Pump.fun is very good and their profitability has been verified. For example, when Libra was launched, the market was also full of doubts about its prospects, but in the end it became one of the most profitable projects on the chain. I think Pump.fun has similar potential. If I were to predict, I think they have a high chance of raising $700 million to $800 million.

Jack Kubinec:

This is just speculation on my part, I have no definitive information. But it seems to me that Pump's plan to conduct a $1 billion token sale seems to be a challenge to their critics, especially those who think that Pump is purely speculative and has no long-term value. It's like saying, "You don't think our product has real use. Let me prove how we can raise $1 billion through an ICO, and this hasn't happened in the crypto industry for 8 years." So this looks like a deliberate move to show their strength.

I suspect that Pump will find a way to make this token an attractive investment option. For example, they may design a buyback mechanism, or make the token have value accumulation function, or even use it as the native token of the Twitch-like streaming platform they are developing. I don't think Pump.fun will easily launch a token and then ignore its value drop. After all, they are now a large company with a lot of reputation and interests to maintain. Therefore, I believe they will take the value management of the token seriously and use some strategies to stimulate market demand.

However, at this point in time, if this token is just a meme, it is hard for me to imagine a $1 billion market demand. But maybe this is not necessarily a bad thing. Because I think the airdrop phenomenon in 2024 is not friendly to participants in the crypto industry. For example, many people hope to get free funds through airdrops, but if they don’t get enough rewards, they will be dissatisfied and even cause the market to collapse. In addition, some project parties may pay opaque fees to market manipulators to artificially maintain token prices. So, from this perspective, ICO may be a healthier solution. However, this is just my guess.

Ryan Connor:

It's really fascinating to hear that Pump is planning to raise $1 billion at a $4 billion valuation. If that's the case, you can almost put most of the money in it because it's a very brilliant business model, but the actual allocation may not be entirely that way. I think what you need to pay attention to, especially when venture investors see the terms, is that there may be some mechanism around token destruction or value accumulation. So what you really need to pay attention to is how value accrues to the token. Based on the valuations that we're seeing now, I think it's unlikely that all of the value will accrue to the token.If a project launches a token, it must have some kind of value accumulation mechanism, and those tokens that do not have a value accumulation mechanism tend to eventually go to zero. I think it is very likely that Pump's token will have some kind of value accumulation mechanism, which should attract investors who focus on long-term fundamentals. The ultimate question is what the degree of value accumulation will be and what the valuation will look like afterwards.

Mert Mumtaz:

So the question is why do they need to raise so much money.Maybe it can be understood like this:They want funds to grow their business.If we look at the venture capital industry as a whole, not just in crypto, we see a lot of examples of huge rounds of funding. Some might argue that those projects are more technical, but at the end of the day, if you are a business and want to build and create something, money is essential.

Take Pump as an example. If they really want to challenge Twitch, it will be a very difficult task. But judging from their past performance, I think they are capable of doing it. They have proven their execution ability. As for the fact that some people think that they just keep withdrawing funds and act like "greedy people", it is actually not fair. After all, no one forces anyone to use Pump. There are many other platforms in the market that can issue coins, but users still choose Pump, which speaks volumes in itself.

Why are users willing to pay more to use Pump? There are competitors in the market, but Pump is still dominant. Obviously, they provide a service that users really need. Whether these services are morally correct or not is not important. What matters is that users are willing to pay for them. There is no law requiring the use of Pump.fun, but users choose it anyway.

So, there is no doubt about Pump's ability to execute. A lot of people might think, "Oh, they just keep pumping money out." But it's actually very difficult to build a platform that can generate $700 million in revenue in its first year. So why does Pump need to raise more money?More money means they can take on riskier investments.For example, they could conduct mergers and acquisitions (M&A), such as acquiring a small social network, or invest in more infrastructure construction or even a DeFi team.In this way, they can enter new areas or get involved in business areas with higher regulatory requirements. Of course, these attempts are very expensive, but financial support can give them the opportunity to try.

Pump may want to use this money to increase the value of the token and make it a worthwhile investment. However, this is not an easy task. They need funds as a buffer to reduce future risks. In fact,When you raise money, you’re reducing risk for the next step. There are two general ways to do this: expand your existing business or try new areas.Simply put, why do they need to raise this money?Because money is the basis for achieving any business goal, especially in the business field. With sufficient cash reserves, they can withstand possibleBear Market.

I think people in the crypto industry may have forgotten what a real bear market looks like. But in fact, bear markets sometimes come suddenly, last for a long time, and have very serious impacts. The funds raised by Pump now can help them maintain stability in the bear market, and can also be used for strategic actions such as acquisitions and mergers. Of course, I doubt they will merge, but they can use the funds to challenge some existing large competitors.

It is important to emphasize that Pump's market, revenue, and future all depend on this meme market in the crypto space, so they have more motivation than anyone else to develop and improve this market. Some people think that raising funds will kill the meme market, but I find this view somewhat contradictory because the purpose of their fundraising is to improve this market.

Of course, it all comes down to their execution. If they really wanted to cash out, they could have done it with their existing funds without having to raise an additional billion dollars.They may start to focus on MEV infrastructure and core DeFi Investment in infrastructure.The supply chain value in these areas is very high, and deep investment requires a lot of capital support. Therefore, I think they can use this money for multiple purposes rather than simply meeting short-term needs. For those who think that Pump will mess up everything at once, I think this is very one-sided, because their goal is obviously to develop the market, not to destroy it.

Jack Kubinec:

I don’t think Pump.fun will live a carefree life with this billion dollars. But I have a question:Pump has $700 million in funding, why are theyMergers and AcquisitionsWhy isn’t there more aggressive action in the market? Why aren’t we seeing more app development?

Ryan Connor:

Running a business requires capital, and assuming their profit margin is around 50%, they may not have $700 million in available capital, but around $400 million, and having too much capital can indeed cause problems. We see this in many crypto foundations.When an organization has huge cash reserves, it may lose the sense of urgency and become a "curse".Of course, there are some organizations that are able to make good use of large amounts of capital, such as Solana and Helium, but for many teams, this may become a burden.We need to pay attention to whether Pump.fun can manage their financial reserves effectively.

existMergers and AcquisitionsIn terms of this, I do think there is a lot of rationality, but the key is whether there is enough discipline.In the crypto industry, many M&A cases historically lack a clear strategic direction. Therefore, it will be important to observe whether Pump's acquisition develops synergistically with its business. If they want to globalize their business, I guess their market is currently mainly concentrated in the United States. But if you refer to the case of Uber, until 2020, they need to burn $1 billion to $4 billion a year to deal with local taxi regulations. Although this is not exactly the same, dealing with securities regulations in different regions on a global scale is also a very expensive challenge that requires funding in advance.

I think the more interesting things are the grassroots efforts, like targeting crypto-related users with targeted advertising, or working with content creators on Twitch. Building a network is very difficult, and a lot of people underestimate the complexity of this work. People might think that Instagram started a network effect overnight, but in fact, there is a lot of grassroots effort behind it, which requires employees to go door-to-door to sign up suppliers, such as Uber and Airbnb did, and Tinder promoted their app on college campuses. These are very challenging tasks, and to do them, you need to have sufficient funding support.

So while cash reserves can be a curse, it can also help you build a very strong network effect business. We’ll have to wait and see if they can successfully use this funding to achieve their bigger goals.

Will Pump launch its own blockchain or exchange?

Jack Kubinec:

Do you think Pump needs to have a front end to be successful in the long run?

Ryan Connor:

I think this is necessary. If Pump does not control the front end, their role will be limited to the middle link. In the cryptocurrency market, the base layer (Layer 1) can obtain a lot of value because it controls the writing of block content. In other Internet markets, it is often the front-end aggregators that occupy a greater value because they directly provide services or integrate resources for users.

Currently, we can see that the front-end of Uniswap, the profitability of digital wallets, and the performance of CEX all prove the importance of the front-end.The service provided by Pump, while competitive in terms of asset activation, is still essentially a “commoditized” service.Although they are pioneers in this field,In the crypto industry, first-mover advantage is not enough to guarantee long-term success.They may face the risk of being "disintermediated". So, I thinkControlling the front end is key to Pump's long-term success, and this may be one of their top priorities going forward.

Mert Mumtaz:

I agree with this, especially if they could raise $1 billion. However, I think it is unlikely that Pump will launch its own blockchain. Instead, they might consider launching an exchange.In the crypto industry, exchanges are one of the most profitable and influential businesses.For example, Binance, Coinbase and Hyperliquid are all successful examples.

At present, the competition among centralized exchanges is not as fierce as imagined. For example, Coinbase is mainly concentrated in the US market, while Binance has more advantages in the international market. Hyperliquid is an exchange with more crypto attributes, which is in between the two. Therefore, I think Pump is more likely to try to enter the exchange field, and may even achieve this goal by acquiring an existing exchange.

Will Pump launch its own blockchain or start an exchange in the next 12 months? From a practical point of view, I think it is more likely to launch an exchange. Because exchanges are closer to users and easier to obtain regulatory approval. Launching their own blockchain may make them further away from users. The characteristic of the crypto industry is that if you choose to vertically integrate and launch your own chain, you need to get all exchanges to support your chain, and you also need the cooperation of bridge service providers and wallets, which will be a very complicated process.

Ryan Connor:

Indeed, launching your own blockchain makes the user experience more complicated. For example, a user may only need 1 to 5 clicks to complete an operation, but if you move to a new chain, this may increase to 5 to 10 clicks, significantly increasing the risk of user churn. And history shows that many projects fail more than they succeed when trying to launch their own blockchain. I believe the Pump team is well aware of this.

As things stand, I think it is too early to launch their own blockchain. They may consider this direction in the future, but it is unlikely that Pump will launch a blockchain in the next 12 months at least.

Will Pump Fun continue to run on the Solana network?

Jack Kubinec:

We have agreed that it is unlikely that Pump will build an L1 network or anything like that.So what stops Pump from building a dedicated L1 or a more attractive L2?For example, Pump brings a lot of income to Solana's validators and stakers. In order to increase the yield of Pump, it is actually possible to transfer transaction execution to its own sorter, capture all transaction fees, and settle data on L1. In this way, you can still enjoy Solana's network effect.

Mert Mumtaz:

I think startups can be divided into two types, or two stages of development.The first is the "growth model", like Uber mentioned by Ryan, where founder Travis will spend hundreds of millions of dollars to compete for market share and fully invest resources. The other is like Amazon or Walmart, which focuses more on profit margins.Reduce costs, there is no luxurious equipment even in the workplace.

So what is the motivation for Pump to launch its own chain? Everyone is saying that if they want to improve their yield, it basically means they want better profit margins. Profit margin is the ratio of net income to net expenses. Let's say Pump made $800 million on Solana, and although they didn't make that money because of Solana, it was done on Solana. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that Solana did not limit their growth, but instead helped them in some way, becoming one of the fastest growing companies in history in terms of revenue. So if they raise $1 billion just to improve their profit margin from 80% to 85%, I would think that's a boring thing. If I were their investor, I would ask, "What are you doing? I want to see a tenfold increase, not a few percentage points increase."

And launching your own chain isn’t free. You need to build your own distribution channels, potentially lose existing liquidity and integration support, and build a full-time team to handle Phantom and other exchange partnerships. So, improving profit margins is not a simple matter, it requires a lot of effort, and these efforts look more like early optimization strategies. If Pump really wants to grow, they seem to be focusing on bolder attempts, such as challenging Twitch. This makes more sense than building the 100th L2 network.

I mentioned before that using the raised funds to reduce the risk of bold attempts, such as entering the media and entertainment field, is much more interesting than building a mediocre L1 network. Because anyone can launch an L2 through existing services, and even launching an ordinary L1 network is not difficult. So, what is the actual motivation for Pump to create its own chain?

I thinkPeople in the crypto industry sometimes focus too much on L1 and L2 and ignore what really matters - the business itself.So far, no company or application has achieved 100x or even 1000x growth by launching a blockchain. The only analogy might be the so-called “L1 premium”, where launching a token on L1 makes the token more valuable, but it does not really drive market growth.Pump obviously wants to grow the market, not just optimizerate of return.

So in general, launching their own chain is not in line with Pump's current development direction. The goal of raising funds now is to achieve greater growth, not to make small improvements on the existing basis. If they really want to leave Solana or create their own chain, as a participant of Solana, we need to ask ourselves: "What makes them feel that Solana is not good enough to do this?" But from the current point of view, Pump and other projects like Axiom, Phantom, Magic, and Jito have achieved great success on Solana and earned hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue. Therefore, even if Solana has some problems, it is far from as bad as the outside world says.

If it weren't forrate of returnOptimization, that may be for user experience.For example, Solana may experience unstable transactions when the network is congested, which is indeed a reasonable concern. However, these problems are gradually being solved, so launching a new chain is not a viable option in the short term until these problems are solved.

Jack Kubinec:

Did you mention “application-specific ordering” before? Because every time I ask people “what if Pump launches its own chain?” they always mention that application-specific ordering is coming, which might make it less attractive for Pump to do so.

Mert Mumtaz:

Yes, “application-specific ordering” is a direction that is definitely moving in. There are other ways to do similar things. I think the crypto industry sometimes gets too focused on the minutiae, like “If Pump could control transaction ordering at the core of L1, that would be a huge boost to their business.” But in reality, it’s just a specific optimization that can already be done in other ways. Polymarket is a good example of a company that has little to no reliance on the blockchain in some ways.

Therefore, there are still many shorter-term and more direct optimizations that can be performed on Pump.If your entire business is on-chain, like Hyperliquid, then "application-specific sorting" or other complex technologies may make more sense. But for Pump, their business does not rely entirely on on-chain operations.

More importantly, we need to ask ourselves,Will this optimization actually help their business grow?Compared to launching an L1 network, redefining the landscape of the global media, social media, and entertainment markets, or even creating a whole new market category, is obviously a bigger driver of revenue growth. That’s why they need funding. If they can achieve this goal, their business could grow from a billion dollars to ten billion dollars, and this cannot be achieved by simply relying on “application-specific ordering” or launching a new chain.

Analysis of Alpenglow and Accelerate

Jack Kubinec:

Ryan, what do you think of Alpenglow and Accelerate?

Ryan Connor:

I think this speaks volumes about the Solana ecosystem’s ability to break convention and challenge conventional wisdom, which is one of the strengths of Solana that we often mention.

Another interesting thing about Alpenglow is that if you look at historical validator performance, you will find that their performance has been lagging a bit. However, I noticed that they have made great efforts in this regard recently, such as making some important talent recruitments, but unfortunately, the entire ecosystem seems to have to spend a lot of energy to win such talents. Why such good people are forced to leave the team is indeed a question worth pondering. However, I don’t have inside information and don’t know the specific situation.

Jack Kubinec:

Ryan, I have another question for you. I think there is an interesting contrast between Alpenglow and the Ethereum merger. Although the two are not exactly the same, Alpenglow may be the most important upgrade in Solana's history, and the Ethereum merger was also a milestone for Ethereum at the time. I remember when Ethereum merged in 2022, I was reporting on it at Blockworks, and everyone was paying attention to the merger at that time. Every day I would interview investors to understand their views. Before the merger, the price of Ethereum rose sharply, but after the merger was successful, investors sold Ethereum and it has been underperforming.

Now facing the Alpenglow upgrade, Solana's efficiency has been further improved. As an investor, how do you view this situation?

Ryan Connor:

I think performance optimization is indeed important, but we should not be too obsessed with it. Today's crypto market is more mature, and performance optimization and historical performance have become basic expectations of the industry.For hedge fund managers, they may not delve into technical details, but rather focus on the overall direction of the market, especially distribution channels and customer acquisition strategies.

I think this is where we are in crypto. I know the technical details still matter, but Solana has a huge lead here, even ahead of its competitors.

From my perspective, the most striking thing about Solana is that I often hear some founders actively mention the efficient operation of the Solana Foundation. They are very satisfied with working with such an efficient organization. Hearing this feedback from the founders is more meaningful to me than pure technical upgrades. I know very well what Solana's technical goals are, and I have confidence that they can achieve these goals because they have been able to deliver on their promises in the past. This is particularly important to me personally.

Solana Network Scaling Strategy

Jack Kubinec:

What is Solana's long-term expansion strategy? The team seems to be focusing on optimizing the existing technology stack rather than expanding the architecture. In addition to optimizing existing technology, does Solana have other expansion strategies? Or is it to improve the existing code base?ThroughputIs this the only research direction? Mert, what do you think?

Mert Mumtaz:

The basic approach to performance engineering and system expansion is to first build a system, apply load in actual operation, then observe where the bottlenecks are and improve the system by optimizing these bottlenecks. Then, test the performance of the optimized system again. The complexity of a distributed system lies in the exponential growth of the interactions between its components. For example, if a system has eight components, each of which can communicate with each other, the potential complexity of the interactions is huge and cannot be fully predicted in theoretical design. Therefore,The only viable approach is to design a simple architecture that is scalable in principle and continuously tune and fix problems during actual operation.

This approach has proven to lead to great progress. The team is currently using this strategy, and they have discovered some very strange bugs in the process, such as low-level errors such as duplicate data structures in the code. By solving these problems, the team has gradually accumulated insights on how to further expand the system.

This process can be compared to racing car design. For example, in an F1 race, even if you design a racing car with a powerful engine and excellent tire grip, it may perform poorly when turning because the body is too light. The challenge at this time is how to solve this problem without affecting other performance. Similarly, when designing distributed systems, as long as you follow the laws of physics, other problems can be solved through optimization. This is one of the reasons why I was initially attracted to Solana - maximizing the use of physical resources by increasing bandwidth and reducing latency.

At present, the main bottleneck of the system is bandwidth, especially after the asynchronous execution function is launched, which provides a new direction for expansion. In contrast, multiple concurrent proposals are more for enhancing the fault tolerance of the system, while asynchronous execution focuses on improving scalability. To solve the bandwidth bottleneck, it is necessary to use a variety of technologies in combination, such as zero-knowledge proof, and design a new consensus mechanism to efficiently utilize bandwidth, and further optimize the efficiency of bandwidth use through asynchronous execution.

However, the traditional "paper-driven" approach, that is, solving problems through theoretical assumptions, does not work for distributed systems. This is because the nonlinear complexity of the system will expose many unexpected problems in actual operation, which cannot be fully predicted by theoretical design. Therefore, Solana's expansion strategy is to gradually generate insights about core architectural changes by continuously fixing bottlenecks and optimizing the system. A good example is the combination of Alpenglow optimization and asynchronous execution capabilities, which complement each other and jointly promote the system's expansion capabilities.

The article comes from the Internet:Dialogue with Blockworks Research Director: Pump.fun raised 1 billion yuan to issue tokens. Is this for business expansion or running away with the money?