I've often found myself grappling with the challenge of articulating what "Ethereum alignment" really means, especially when put on the spot. It's one of those elusive concepts that feels intrinsically significant—almost second nature, if you will. Yet, when it comes to putting it into words, the clarity I thought I had vanishes. This realization compelled me to sit down and methodically organize my thoughts on the subject. My aim is to articulate what "Ethereum alignment" means to me, particularly when I'm advocating for its importance. Moreover, I'm curious to explore the diverse perspectives that others in the blockchain space might have on this topic. I suspect that the term carries a multitude of interpretations, making a one-size-fits-all definition unlikely, if not impossible.
I view "Ethereum alignment" much like I do the concept of decentralization. Both serve as means to an end and exist on a continuum rather than as binary states.
In this exploration, I aim to delve into the various shades of this spectrum and scrutinize the trade-offs involved.
To make this complex idea more digestible, I suggest breaking down "Ethereum alignment" into more specific components. The key facets I've identified are as follows:
Cultural Alignment: This encompasses everything tied to Ethereum's overarching vision, including its social layer. This aspect is crucial for achieving the highest degree of decentralization.
Technical Alignment: This pertains to the ongoing development of the Ethereum protocol itself—future updates, contributions, and how entities can align themselves with these technical aspects.
Economic Alignment: This focuses on supporting the ETH asset and the inherent value of the protocol.
By dissecting "Ethereum alignment" in this manner, I hope to offer a more nuanced understanding of what it means to be aligned with Ethereum's multifaceted mission.
Before diving deeper into the nuances of Ethereum alignment, it's crucial to first address the 'why'—why should anyone, be it an individual, a company, or any other entity, strive to be aligned with Ethereum? Neglecting this foundational question could make the concept of Ethereum alignment appear exclusionary or even cultish to some.
I'm aware that the crypto space is rife with tribalism, a phenomenon that carries both some "merits" and drawbacks. On one hand, this tribalism serves as a sort of immune system, defending the ecosystem against harmful influences. Yet, much like an immune system can reject a life-saving organ transplant, this protective mechanism has its limitations and shouldn't be viewed as universally beneficial.
I find a certain appeal in this "maximalism," especially when interacting with newcomers to the crypto world. It's vital for those entering the space to grasp the foundational principles that drive us—why maximal decentralization isn't just an option but an absolute necessity. Failing to emphasize these core values risks a slippery slope of compromises that could lead us back to the very systems we initially sought to disrupt.
I won't pretend to be thrilled when someone's first foray into the crypto space involves gambling on the latest memecoin. While I'm not in a position to judge, and it's entirely acceptable if people knowingly treat it like a casino game, the issue arises when individuals are lured by false narratives and empty promises. For those genuinely interested in understanding the significance of decentralization, I'd recommend starting with the Bitcoin whitepaper. There, they can learn about the importance of trustlessness, sovereignty, and censorship resistance. Only then can they fully appreciate how Ethereum aims to extend Bitcoin's capabilities, offering a platform for general-purpose applications without compromising (too much!) on decentralization or security.
For years, I grappled with how to succinctly define my place within the crypto landscape. The human mind has an innate tendency to categorize, to neatly place things and people into predefined buckets. While this instinct can sometimes lead us astray, for the sake of this discussion on Ethereum alignment, I'll indulge in a bit of self-categorization. I've come to identify myself as a Bitcoin & Ethereum Minimalist.
My journey to this point has been marked by several distinct phases, each shaping my evolving perspective on blockchain technology.
Intriguingly, most of the transition between these stages coincided with a significant shift in my professional trajectory. I like to believe that my evolving understanding and sharpened perspective on the blockchain landscape have served as a compass, guiding me through the waters of my career. This is why I've chosen to share some of my background—to shed light on how these ideological shifts have had a tangible impact on my professional journey.
Chronoligically this is the order of the stages I went through:
Bitcoin curious (2010-2012): My introduction to Bitcoin came during my engineering school days in 2010, when a classmate presented on the topic. My initial reaction was, "Hmm, this looks cool!" I then delved into the Bitcoin whitepaper and spent a couple of years tinkering with the technology. At this stage, my interest was primarily technological, and I admittedly overlooked its more profound implications.
Bitcoin convinced (2012-2015): As I dug deeper, the philosophical underpinnings of Bitcoin began to resonate with me. I started questioning societal norms, the dynamics of power among states and banks, and the role of influential entities globally. Ironically, during this period, I was deeply involved in the fintech sector, developing cloud-based payment solutions for—of all clients—banks! I now quip, "I used to work for banks before fighting them!"
Ethereum pilled - The revelation (2015): This year marked a watershed moment in my life. I first heard about Ethereum during a remote conference talk by Stephan Tual, who discussed its potential use cases. Reading the Ethereum whitepaper was a game-changer for me; it captivated my full attention. I felt an overwhelming sense that I would dedicate a significant portion of my life to this intriguing thing called Ethereum. From that moment on, I had one driving ambition: "Join the movement!" At the time, I was still employed at this fintech startup.
Finding My Way into the Ethereum Space (2015-2018): During this phase, I harbored hopes of persuading the fintech startup I was part of to explore the untapped potential of Ethereum—especially given our existing credibility within the banking sector. We dabbled in a few experimental projects, but it became evident that the founders weren't sold on this emerging technology. Eventually, the allure of the blockchain space became too compelling to ignore. I knew I had to fully immerate myself in this transformative movement. As I continued to deepen my understanding of the Ethereum protocol, I began to engage more actively in development. Alongside like-minded colleagues who were also "Ethereum pilled," I worked on various side projects. But after a while, these endeavors felt insufficient. They didn't satiate my desire to make a meaningful contribution to what I saw as a revolutionary shift in technology and society. So, I made the pivotal decision to leave the startup and take the plunge—I joined ConsenSys. It was a move that aligned not just with my professional aspirations, but also with my deeply-held belief in the transformative power of Ethereum. This step marked a new chapter in my journey, one where I could actively contribute to the Ethereum ecosystem and be part of the change I wanted to see.
Ethereum Core Dev (2018-2021): I've had the privilege of collaborating with an array of brilliant minds, delving into the intricacies and marvels of the decentralized protocol known as Ethereum. My expertise grew particularly in the areas of the execution client and the low-level workings of the EVM. But if I had to pinpoint a watershed moment in both my career and my blockchain journey, it would be encapsulated by four digits: 1-5-5-9. I'll never forget the day Tim Beiko posed a question that would alter the course of my professional life: "Would you feel comfortable championing EIP-1559 on the technical front?" My response, a casual "Yeah, sure, why not," belied the profound impact this would have on me. At that moment, I was simply eager to deepen my understanding and make a meaningful contribution to the protocol and the broader revolution I was so passionately advocating for. At the time, EIP-1559 was languishing in a state of near-abandonment. It was a sweeping proposal with far-reaching implications—not just for the protocol, but for the entire Ethereum ecosystem, from wallets and block explorers to SDKs. Moreover, altering Ethereum's monetary policy was no trivial matter; it demanded rigorous economic analysis among other considerations. And there were lingering questions about the network's capacity to handle the block elasticity the proposal would introduce. But I digress—I could easily dedicate an entire post to the fascinating journey that was EIP-1559. What it did illuminate for me, however, was the intricate complexity of governing a decentralized protocol with so much at stake and so many disparate actors, each with their own vested interests (cue the various dramas involving mining pools, among others). It was during this period that I came to fully appreciate the critical role of Ethereum's social layer—as the ultimate safeguard for upholding the platform's vision and mission.
Appchains ? Interop ? Cosmos intrigued and quick desilusions (2021): After dedicating over a year to EIP-1559, I found myself mentally fatigued, laboring under the (misguided) notion that I had somehow exhausted all there was to explore within Ethereum. Around the same time, I became intrigued by the Appchain vision of the Cosmos ecosystem and decided to delve deeper. I left ConsenSys and embarked on a new journey with a Cosmos project. Initially, I was impressed by the technical aspects of Cosmos—Tendermint, the Cosmos SDK, and IBC. The developer experience, particularly with CosmWasm for smart contracts, was excellent. However, reality soon set in as I observed the power dynamics at play within the Cosmos ecosystem. The delegated Proof of Stake model was deeply flawed in practice; users often randomly selected a validator from the top 10, and the incentives skewed more towards marketing prowess than building a robust and resilient validator infrastructure. Additionally, I noticed that very few Appchain teams were contributing back to the core Cosmos technology. Coming from the Ethereum space, the contrast was stark, particularly concerning the social layer and the culture. While I still believe Appchains offer intriguing possibilities, their current form leaves much to be desired. There are undoubtedly brilliant minds at work within the Cosmos ecosystem, and the technology is commendable. However, when it comes to the social layer—an indispensable component in any decentralized system—I found Cosmos lacking in comparison to Ethereum. I observed a dearth of robust mechanisms to defend core values, as well as a lack of initiative from Appchains to educate users about the critical importance of decentralization. While it's challenging to encapsulate these observations succinctly, I hope my comments don't come across as overly reductive or caricatured. My aim is to highlight some of the issues I encountered within the Cosmos ecosystem—issues that reaffirmed my belief that, aside from Bitcoin, Ethereum is the only Layer 1 platform with the credibility and resilience to fulfill the ambitious goal of creating systems capable of withstanding attacks from nation-states.
Back to root - The desire of Ethereum (2022): The pull to return to Ethereum proved irresistible. Faced with the choice of diving back into Layer 1 protocol development—perhaps focusing on the consensus layer this time—or contributing to Ethereum's scalability through Layer 2 solutions, I ultimately opted for the latter. The decision reflects not just my technical interests but also my ongoing commitment to advancing Ethereum's ambitious mission in the most impactful way I can.
Scaling Ethereum - Starknet pilled (2022-present): In my quest to contribute to Ethereum's scalability, I embarked on a journey of analyzing and benchmarking various existing solutions. This led me to the fascinating realm of Zero-Knowledge Proofs. It didn't take long for me to develop a strong preference for ZK (Validity) Rollups over Optimistic Rollups (seduced by the Math >>> economic incentives! motto and by the intriguing and magic scaling properties of STARK proofs). Faced with the choice among different ZK Rollup options, I found myself particularly drawn to Starknet's approach. The reasons for this preference are numerous and nuanced, and I plan to delve into them in a future post.
As my understanding of the blockchain landscape matured, and my resolve to dedicate my life to what I see as a fight against a system that has reached its limits intensified, I fell into the trap of maximalism. The stronger my conviction to change the world through decentralized systems became, the more I found myself dismissing anything that didn't align with this lofty goal. I became a Bitcoin & Ethereum maximalist, dismissing all else as irrelevant or inferior.
It took about a year for me to recalibrate my perspective in a healthier direction. While I remain steadfast in my belief that only Bitcoin and Ethereum have the potential to withstand attacks from nation-states, I've come to appreciate that not all blockchain projects need to meet these stringent criteria. First, not every use case demands the same level of security and decentralization. Second, some alt-L1s are doing commendable work in terms of innovation and engineering. For instance, I respect Solana's approach, even if it doesn't meet my personal standards for decentralization and security. I've also observed resilience in Solana's social layer and appreciate some of their innovative features, like the local fee market mechanism.
So, what do I mean by being a "minimalist"? Essentially, it signifies my intent to concentrate my time, attention, and energy on the L1s —Bitcoin and Ethereum— that I believe have the best chance of succeeding in this critical battle against centralized forces. Both are works in progress and remain vulnerable to capture, which is why I see a risk of failure if we don't intensify our efforts to bolster their resilience now, while threats against them are still manageable.
Moreover, the manner in which a L1 is launched can be a significant drawback, regardless of its technical merits. Economic incentives can easily lead to its capture. Bitcoin's launch was the purest, while Ethereum's ICO-based launch, though not as pure, was still acceptable in my eyes—especially given the years of PoW distribution before transitioning to PoS.
I choose to focus solely on Bitcoin and Ethereum because, at this moment, they represent our best hope for achieving the ultimate goal of resisting globally coordinated nation-states attacks. This is the "north star" metric we should aim for, the one that will determine whether we stand a chance of bringing truly unstoppable protocols to the world. I view other projects as potential distractions from this primary objective.
The divergence in paths between Bitcoin and Ethereum—one remaining on PoW and the other moving to PoS—offers different attack vectors, making it more challenging for Governments to simultaneously shutdown them both. I see this as a strength, a complementary resilience that enhances our chances of achieving our overarching mission.
While I continue (and will always do) to be a strong advocate for Bitcoin, I've chosen to dedicate my personal time and efforts to Ethereum. The reality is that making meaningful contributions to both platforms simultaneously is a tall order, and one has to prioritize. Additionally, I find Ethereum particularly invigorating and challenging, and I have a soft spot for its social layer—even though there are aspects of Bitcoin's social layer that I admire and envy. So, there you have it: a rather lengthy explanation, but one that I felt was necessary to articulate why I'm channeling my energy exclusively towards Ethereum.
Having laid out my rationale for why I consider Ethereum to be the best general purpose L1 according to my standards -the only one standing a chance against globally coordinated nation-states attacks- I can now delve into what it means to be "Ethereum aligned." At its most basic, the term can be defined as follows:
"To be Ethereum aligned means to support Ethereum in achieving its mission."
Admittedly, this is a broad definition, but it's crucial to articulate it explicitly. It serves as a foundational statement that can be further refined and explored.
Let's begin by examining a critical facet: cultural alignment. As previously discussed, the social layer is an essential component of any decentralized protocol. It serves as the guardian of the system's core principles, ensuring that they are upheld and respected. Being culturally aligned with Ethereum is a vital way to support its mission.
Cultural alignment encompasses several dimensions:
Education: This involves promoting Ethereum's core values and providing educational materials to help people understand their importance. The aim is to cultivate a well-informed community that can advocate for Ethereum's principles effectively.
Safeguarding: As a community, it's crucial to remain vigilant in safeguarding our values. This includes monitoring for any actions or developments that could compromise them and alerting the community to take collective action when necessary.
Empowering Individuals: Providing opportunities for those who are passionate about Ethereum and wish to contribute to its growth and success. This could mean anything from offering educational resources and mentorship to facilitating involvement in governance or development projects.
In essence, cultural alignment is about more than just individual belief in Ethereum's mission; it's about active participation in a community that collectively upholds and advances these core principles.
Education stands as a cornerstone in Ethereum's cultural framework. It serves as the medium through which the essence and mission of Ethereum are disseminated, ensuring that people have access to the information they need to understand its core principles.
Variety of Content: Educational resources should cater to a range of expertise levels. It's crucial that no one is left behind, whether they're newcomers or seasoned veterans in the space.
Accessibility: To foster geographical diversity, educational content should be available in multiple languages. This ensures that the message of Ethereum reaches a global audience.
Inclusivity: The content must be designed to be inclusive, accommodating different learning styles and entry levels. This ensures that everyone, regardless of their background or prior knowledge, has an opportunity to engage with Ethereum's mission.
Advocacy: Well-educated individuals often become Ethereum's most potent advocates. They not only understand the system's intricacies but can also articulate its values compellingly, further amplifying its reach and impact.
Being Ethereum-aligned can manifest in various ways within the educational sphere. This could involve creating new educational content, updating or maintaining existing resources, or participating in events aimed at knowledge dissemination. In essence, education is not just a passive receipt of information but an active commitment to broadening and deepening the community's understanding of what Ethereum stands for.
Remaining vigilant and actively monitoring the real-world status of the Ethereum network is crucial for ensuring that we don't compromise on our core values. Theory alone is insufficient; what truly matters is the practical application and observable outcomes. Not only must we stay true to our principles, but we also need to develop the tools to measure whether we're succeeding in doing so. The Ethereum community has made significant strides in this regard, as evidenced by several key initiatives:
Client Diversity: Continuously monitoring client distribution is essential for the network's health. Tools like this dashboard help us track and promote diversity among Ethereum clients.
Staking Concentration: It's vital to raise alerts when staking becomes overly concentrated, as this poses a risk to the network's decentralization. Websites like Rated Network provide insights into staking pool diversity.
Censorship: Keeping tabs on the percentage of OFAC-compliant blocks and MEV boost relays that could potentially censor transactions is another important metric. This information can be tracked on platforms like MEV Watch.
Having these monitoring tools is a start, but they're only useful if we act on the information they provide. Fortunately, Ethereum's social layer is robust in this aspect as well. Many in the community are actively watching these metrics and sounding the alarm when necessary, often accompanied by concrete suggestions for action.
In summary, being Ethereum-aligned means not just espousing its values but also actively participating in safeguarding them. This involves both vigilance and a willingness to act when these values are threatened.
Ethereum's strength lies in the individuals who believe in it, actively contribute to it, and shape its essence—what we often refer to as the social layer. Maintaining the resilience of this social layer is an ongoing effort and should never be taken for granted. Over time, there's a real risk of value dilution and erosion, which could jeopardize the entire network.
Given the stakes, it's crucial to empower individuals who wish to play a role in this ambitious mission. They need the right tools and resources to engage effectively in what I view as a very real struggle. I deliberately use martial terminology here because the mission has clear objectives and faces significant opposition. The fight for privacy, a fundamental human right, has already led to real-world consequences, including government actions against contributors. As we progress and come closer to achieving our goals, the attacks against us are likely to intensify. While I hope I'm not overly dramatizing the situation, I'm somewhat pessimistic about the revolution unfolding without significant challenges.
When it comes to empowering individuals, several criteria should be respected:
Neutrality: We should aim to empower all individuals who wish to contribute to Ethereum's mission, without favoring specific groups or use-cases.
Fairness: Equal access to opportunities within the Ethereum ecosystem should be a priority. Everyone should have a fair shot at finding their place and making a meaningful contribution.
Diversity: True decentralization requires diversity—not just in terms of software implementations but also in the people who make up the community. This includes geographical diversity, as well as a variety of backgrounds and opinions, provided they align with Ethereum's core values and don't compromise its principles.
In summary, being Ethereum-aligned means not only believing in its mission but also actively working to empower those who can help make it a reality. This involves creating an inclusive, fair, and diverse environment where everyone has the opportunity to contribute meaningfully.
Having delved into the cultural aspects and the pivotal role of the social layer, let's now turn our attention to technical alignment. Achieving the mission we've outlined involves intricate technical challenges, and when it comes to Ethereum, there's still much work to be done. The term "ready" is nebulous, and opinions on what constitutes Ethereum's readiness can vary widely.
I want to stress the importance of viewing the technology we're building as a means to serve our philosophical goals. There's a risk I refer to as "technical excitement distraction." As builders, we're naturally drawn to complex technical challenges; they stimulate our minds and offer a sense of accomplishment. However, we mustn't lose sight of our overarching mission. Focusing on the mission is crucial, as it helps us prioritize effectively.
Moreover, it's essential to recognize that adding complexity comes with a steep price, particularly in the form of technical debt. In a protocol like Ethereum, the ramifications of technical debt are far-reaching and more challenging to resolve than in traditional software. Thankfully, the social layer serves as a safeguard, pushing back against unnecessary complexity. Ethereum's core developers have been exemplary in maintaining this balance.
As you can see, cultural and technical alignment are not isolated; they're interwoven and mutually reinforcing. Technical alignment serves the goals set forth by cultural alignment, while cultural alignment acts as the steward of technical alignment. In essence, one cannot exist in its fullest form without the other.
Breaking down technical alignment into more manageable categories can help us better understand the various ways one can contribute to Ethereum's mission. Here are some key areas where technical alignment can manifest:
Protocol Governance: This involves participating in the governance of the Ethereum protocol. Activities can range from reviewing Ethereum Improvement Proposals (EIPs) to attending protocol-related calls, such as All Core Devs meetings, Consensus Layer discussions, Breakout Sessions, and Interoperability Testing calls.
Protocol Development: Direct contributions to the protocol can be made by working on either the execution layer or the consensus layer. This is the hands-on aspect of technical alignment, where you can actively shape the protocol's future.
Research: Many elements of Ethereum's roadmap still require extensive research. Contributing to this research not only advances the protocol but also provides valuable insights that can prevent us from overlooking crucial aspects. L2s are a prime example of how external entities can contribute valuable research to Ethereum. For instance, advancements in ZK could eventually benefit the L1 protocol.
Testing: The risks associated with introducing bugs into the protocol are immense, potentially leading to financial losses and even the protocol's collapse. Rigorous testing is therefore vital, and more contributors are needed for this effort. Given what's at stake, it's incumbent upon all who rely on Ethereum to contribute to this aspect.
Technical Education: Raising awareness about the technical implications of Ethereum's roadmap is another form of contribution. This can involve simplifying complex changes to make them more accessible to the broader community.
Technical Safeguarding: This involves challenging every proposed change to the protocol to ensure they align with core principles and don't compromise essential values. Additionally, developing tools that help the community monitor key metrics—like client diversity, staking distribution, and censorship—is also part of technical safeguarding. These tools require coding, maintenance, and deployment, all of which demand a significant technical effort.
In summary, technical alignment with Ethereum is multi-faceted and offers various avenues for contribution. Whether it's governance, development, research, testing, education, or safeguarding, each area plays a crucial role in advancing Ethereum's mission.
Addressing the economic dimension of Ethereum alignment is crucial, as it's the economic layer that ultimately underpins the system's functionality. The value of Ethereum's blockspace is essential for the protocol's resilience. Without adequate economic incentives, both the security and decentralization of the protocol would be compromised.
The transition from Proof of Work (PoW) to Proof of Stake (PoS) has also shifted the way blocks are produced and how incentives are structured. There's a delicate balance to maintain between making the protocol affordable, protecting against spam, and preserving essential decentralization features. Fee structures play a pivotal role in managing network congestion and implementing anti-spam measures.
As Ethereum moves towards a Rollup-centric roadmap, we can envision a future where the mainnet primarily serves as a settlement layer for various Layer 2 solutions. In this scenario, Layer 2s would be the primary consumers of Layer 1 blockspace and would thus contribute significantly to the protocol's security budget.
To better understand economic alignment, let's break it down into two main categories: protocol-level and external to the protocol.
Protocol-Level Economic Alignment:
Denominate Fees in ETH: For protocols that settle on Ethereum, allowing users to pay fees in ETH can strengthen the asset's utility and demand, thereby contributing to the overall economic health of the ecosystem.
Settle on Ethereum: By settling transactions on Ethereum's Layer 1, you're directly contributing to the protocol's security budget. The more activity and fees generated by Layer 2 solutions, the more blockspace they consume on Layer 1, which in turn helps to secure the network.
Staking: Operating validators is not just a way to earn rewards; it's a fundamental method for enhancing Ethereum's security. By staking ETH, you're economically aligning yourself with the network and playing a vital role in its stability and future.
External to Protocol Economic Alignment:
Funding of Protocol Development: Entities, individuals, or protocols that rely on Ethereum should consider financially supporting its development whenever possible. Initiatives like the Protocol Guild offer structured ways to contribute to the ongoing improvement of the Ethereum ecosystem.
Funding of Education and Events: As previously discussed, education is a cornerstone of Ethereum's cultural alignment. Financial support for educational content creation and event organization is crucial for raising awareness and understanding of Ethereum's core principles.
By actively participating in these funding initiatives, you're not just making a financial investment in Ethereum; you're investing in its intellectual and social capital. This kind of economic alignment goes beyond mere monetary considerations to include a commitment to the network's long-term viability and success. Whether you're an individual or part of a larger entity, these actions contribute meaningfully to Ethereum's mission.
In summary, economic alignment with Ethereum is not just about financial investment; it's a multi-pronged approach that involves both direct participation in the protocol and external activities that contribute to its economic robustness. Whether you're a staker, a developer, an investor, or an advocate, there are numerous ways to economically align with Ethereum's mission.