How can a public blockchain truly live for a hundred years? Recently, Vitalik Buterin proposed a bold idea: Ethereum needs to pass the "Forget Test"—even if the core team disappears entirely, the chain should still be able to operate and transfer as usual. This isn't about pursuing a better user experience; it's about turning it into a fundamental tool like a hammer: once you buy it, it belongs to you forever.

Achieving this goal requires a set of extremely hardcore technical solutions:

Quantum resistance is the first line of defense. It's not enough to just "make do"; we need to build a century-long fortress at the cryptographic level. Along with this, scalability requirements are also high—design the architecture to handle thousands of TPS in the future, using zero-knowledge proofs and PeerDAS data sampling to manage it. Future upgrades might only involve changing parameters, without hard forks.

The state architecture also needs a complete redesign. Introduce stateless nodes and state expiration mechanisms to ensure the chain remains stable under high load for decades, with consistent node synchronization. The account model must be thoroughly abstracted, shedding the constraints of traditional signature systems, making accounts more flexible. Finally, the PoS economic system must be able to sustain operation for decades, maintaining decentralization while making ETH a truly trustless collateral.

In simple terms, it's about turning Ethereum into a "forgettable protocol"—we can continue to upgrade it, or choose not to upgrade at all.

When a chain starts designing for its own "disappearance," is this ultimately a sign of robustness, or is it somewhat idealistic? In this hundred-year plan, which technical direction do you think is the most challenging? Or which feature, once implemented, will most change the landscape? #密码资产动态追踪 $ETH $SOL