2025-12-18 06:23:13

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin recently shared in-depth thoughts on decentralization. He pointed out that the concept of trustlessness is far more than just "rules automatically executed by code." The key is to enable as many people as possible to understand the entire protocol from start to finish.

Here's a practical issue: how complex can a protocol be? Only a few technical experts can truly understand and maintain it. What’s the result? Systems that appear decentralized are actually evolving into trust dependencies on this small group. In other words, you are still trusting people, not just trusting the code.

Vitalik’s perspective touches on the essence of protocol design—decentralization is not just a technical issue, but also a matter of participation and transparency. The easier a protocol is to understand, the more people can participate in review and maintenance, making the overall ecosystem’s trust foundation more genuine.

ETH2,03%

View Original

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.

19 Likes

Reward
19
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

QuietlyStaking

· 2025-12-21 06:07

At the end of the day, it's still that saying: after talking about decentralization for so many years, are we still trusting a few people? Laughable. No matter how complex the code is, if ordinary people can't understand it, it's completely a black box, which is no different from the trust blacklist of Web2. Vitalik is right on this point; the lower the threshold, the higher the participation, and the ecosystem truly thrives. A simple protocol is a virtue, brother. Real decentralization should allow small players like me to understand, otherwise, it's just a game for the pros.

View OriginalReply0

TommyTeacher1

· 2025-12-20 20:05

That's right, complexity itself is the biggest risk of centralization. We often overlook this. Fewer people understand the protocol, and power automatically consolidates. No matter how decentralized the design is, it's all in vain. This is the real trap.

View OriginalReply0

HashRateHermit

· 2025-12-18 06:55

In the end, decentralization is still a trust game. No matter how awesome the code is, someone has to understand it. The complexity ceiling of the protocol is fixed, and ultimately, it still depends on a few experts to make decisions. Isn't that just old wine in new bottles? True decentralization should be understandable even by my grandma—that's what I call a real trick.

View OriginalReply0

fren.eth

· 2025-12-18 06:54

Well said, this is exactly the issue I've been complaining about. It looks decentralized, but in reality, it's just replacing the master. In the end, I still trust those big V's code, lol. Protocol simplification is the real way to go, but how many projects will actually do that? Complexity = appearing sophisticated? I think it's just self-deception. Vitalik finally said something reasonable, but unfortunately, too few people are listening. By the way, true decentralization is still far from us. It's the same old pancake theory; the crypto circle is still the same, and it can't be changed.

View OriginalReply0

DegenApeSurfer

· 2025-12-18 06:54

Damn, that's why I've always said that the core developers in the Ethereum community are actually the new centralized power. Sounds right, but who really understands EIP-4844 now? Still have to trust those few people. V God is right, complexity is an invisible centralized trap. It's another case where the ideal is grand, but reality is harsh—developer monopoly on understanding is the end. The higher the protocol complexity, the longer the trust chain, and in the end, it's still a gamble on people's integrity. So, true decentralization has never really been achieved? Relying solely on code isn't enough. This argument is a bit harsh... It means most crypto users don't really understand what they're buying.

View OriginalReply0

NewPumpamentals

· 2025-12-18 06:52

You're right, to put it plainly, many so-called decentralized chains are still controlled by a few developers. After hearing Vitalik say this, I finally understand why I can't grasp those complex protocols—it's because the projects themselves lack transparency. Oh my god, is this what they call "decentralization"? It's just a different flavor of the same old story. Complex protocols = trusting a black box, and that's really unsustainable. This point hits hard; it feels like all L2s are caught in the crossfire. Simplifying protocols is more important than anything else, and that's where the difficulty lies.

View OriginalReply0

LightningHarvester

· 2025-12-18 06:32

Well said, this is exactly the point I've been complaining about. It seems decentralized but is actually trust oligarchy, just a different name. --- What is the ceiling of protocol complexity? In the end, isn't it still a few big VCs? --- It's so heartbreaking; the vast majority of people can't understand the code at all, so why trust or not trust? --- No wonder many chains ultimately become small circle games; the high understanding cost makes it meaningless. --- Vitalik's words can be seen as a subtle indication of Ethereum's own problems. --- Can simple protocols really bring innovation? Or will they inevitably become complex? It's a dilemma. --- Participation is a pseudo-proposition; 99% of people have no interest in reading. --- Thinking of those projects promoting decentralization, but in the end, it's still a bunch of insiders making decisions.

View OriginalReply0