Lately I keep seeing the word “modularization.” It sounds pretty grand, but put simply, for us end users, the most direct change is this: before, switching chains was like moving house; now it’s more like swapping a shell. Wallets, bridges, Gas, and all kinds of pop-up prompts for authorization—these things end up making people doubt their sanity. Once modularization separates execution, data, and settlement, the experience more often gives you that sense of “the same set of applications is everywhere.” You get more choices, but it also becomes more fragmented. Since I have so many touchpoints, I can only keep splitting my funds, tracking costs, and reconciling records—otherwise, after a week I won’t even be able to match my books to the right accounts.

But it’s not all good, either. As soon as things become fragmented, the security boundaries place even more demands on you: bridges, signatures, permissions, privacy tools… Recently, I’ve also watched the community argue endlessly about the compliance issues around privacy coins/mixing. On the one hand, they say privacy is a right; on the other, they’re afraid that with one click they could end up on a risk-control blacklist. In any case, my current “shell” strategy is that if I can get away with giving fewer permissions, I’ll authorize less; if I can avoid mixing coins, I’ll avoid it first. If I truly have to use it, I’ll try small amounts first—don’t get carried away. Bottom line: modularization hasn’t made the headaches disappear; it has just split the headaches apart.