2025-12-31 10:21:52

Ethereum co-founder recently published an article titled "The Balance of Power," which appears to discuss philosophical issues but actually exposes the industry's Achilles' heel.

He made a poignant observation: many crypto projects spend all their time worrying about three things—how to raise funds, how to survive, and how to grow bigger. But a more dangerous question is overlooked—will power become concentrated in the hands of a few?

Put simply: business models solve the question of where the money comes from, while decentralization determines where the power goes. Most projects only want to attract resources but haven't considered that once power is imbalanced, risks will also concentrate.

Interestingly, he provided a compelling comparison. Open protocols like English, TCP/IP, and HTTP are inherently easy to decentralize because no one truly owns them. But in certain application scenarios—the efficiency, user experience, and decision-making speed—you're forced to reclaim power, making decentralization a difficult problem.

The key point here is: decentralization is not just a slogan; in many scenarios, it must be consciously designed and actively delegated. Otherwise, it will likely evolve into a surface-level Web3 appearance, but fundamentally remain a centralized monster.

From a market perspective, such reflections are actually a good sign. They indicate that the industry is maturing and beginning to think about deeper issues. Projects that truly value decentralization will last longer, and Ethereum's core value proposition will be strengthened as a result.

But risks are also looming. Some high-valued projects may be re-evaluated, especially those relying on strong control and narrative packaging, which will face pressure moving forward. Ultimately, the market will differentiate: who is genuinely practicing decentralization, and who is just storytelling.

From another angle, the next wave of bull and bear markets may no longer be distinguished solely by technology and price, but by the differentiation in power structures themselves. Projects that can balance efficiency and decentralization well are the ones worth holding long-term.

Now, look at the crypto industry—how many projects are actively delegating power? This might be the main dividing line in the coming years.

ETH0,29%

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.

15 Likes

Reward
15
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ChainPoet

· 16h ago

In simple terms, it's just peeling the skin. Most projects are indeed the same old story, claiming decentralization in words but tightly holding onto power in practice. I've rarely seen projects truly willing to delegate authority; most are just playing word games. The idea of balancing power sounds simple, but in reality, it's a nightmare. Efficiency and ideals are always at odds. This article hits the point, but whether the market will actually respond is another matter. High-valuation projects still raise funds and continue to rise. Let's wait and see if any projects will genuinely take the initiative to implement such reforms. I bet five dollars that most will remain stagnant.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-a180694b

· 17h ago

In simple terms, most projects are lying and have never truly considered decentralization. --- This is the real issue holding back Web3. It's easy to talk about decentralization, but in practice, not a single project can actually implement it. --- Power balance? Haha, the current crypto scene is even more centralized now. --- So in the end, it's all about money; no one cares about the power structure. --- Finally, someone dares to expose this issue. Watching some projects raise crazy amounts of funding is really disgusting. --- Will decentralized projects survive this cycle? I'm a bit pessimistic. --- It's easier at the protocol layer, but at the application layer, true decentralization is impossible—it's a false proposition. --- The next round of differentiation will depend on whose power structure is cleaner. It seems few will pass the test. --- It sounds right, but the market simply won't buy into it. --- Projects that genuinely decentralize might even get crushed; how can risks be managed?

View OriginalReply0

airdrop_whisperer

· 17h ago

To be honest, most projects are fake decentralization; their behavior is too ugly to watch. The truly decentralized projects? I can count them on one hand. That's why I'm still holding onto Ethereum; everything else is just stories. The concentration of power has been obvious for a long time. Reflecting on it now? It's a bit late. I feel the next round will be very brutal; the projects that are rug-pulling will be exposed. Decentralization has been shouted about for so long, but it still can't escape the curse of gaining size and centralizing power—it's laughable. Thinking about those projects that raised hundreds of millions and then ran away, this is the result of playing with power.

View OriginalReply0

ApeDegen

· 17h ago

Another article about "decentralization" and big principles, but I just want to ask—how many projects are really willing to relinquish power? --- Honestly, it's still a matter of interests; no one wants to be a transparent puppet. --- So in the end, the winners are those projects that can both fool for funding and put on a show? --- This wave of polarization indeed reveals who is acting, but only if the market teaches a harsh lesson. --- The idea of power balance sounds very appealing, but in practice, it's all compromises. --- To be honest, most projects are just centralized companies wearing a Web3 disguise, and they will be exposed sooner or later. --- Releasing power truly requires a lot of resolve, and I can't see anyone capable of doing it. --- It's a bit ironic that those who can finish reading this article probably already know the truth, but they will still be exploited.

View OriginalReply0

SignatureDenied

· 17h ago

It's too heartbreaking; most projects just wear a Web3 disguise to do centralized things. I agree with the point about power structure differentiation; the next round will be the real litmus test. Let's wait and see who will be exposed and revert to their original form. There are really few projects that truly decentralize power; most are just guessing. How long can storytelling last? It’s time to deliver on promises. This article is a cold shower for the industry; it's time to wake up. Instead of raising funds to grow bigger, think about how to decentralize power—it's a misplacement of priorities. The contradiction between efficiency and decentralization is indeed difficult, but that’s no excuse. I am optimistic about projects that are genuinely reducing authority; everything else is just playing tricks.

View OriginalReply0