Bankless - Can Ethereum Compete with Bitcoin, Solana & Celestia? | Mike Ippolito & Jon Charbonneau

Episode Date: December 9, 2024

What is Ethereum’s North Star, and does it even need one? There has been angst in the Ethereum community, growing over the last year, as Ethereum has become squeezed by its competition. Bitcoin’s story as money is growing in mainstream society. Solana has captured the hot ball of money in crypto. And Celestia’s data availability continues to progress at a faster rate than what is found at home in Ethereum. This is Ethereum’s Three-Front War, a topic we covered in a recent episode with Justin Drake. And today we‘re joined by Jon Charbonneau and Mike Ippolito to contextualize and diagnose what Ethereum needs in order to thrive in this competitive landscape. ------ 📣SPOTIFY PREMIUM RSS FEED | USE CODE: SPOTIFY24  https://bankless.cc/spotify-premium ------ BANKLESS SPONSOR TOOLS: 🐙KRAKEN | MOST-TRUSTED CRYPTO EXCHANGE https://k.xyz/bankless-pod-q2    ⁠ 🦄UNISWAP | BUG BOUNTY PROGRAM https://bankless.cc/Uniswap-Bug-Bounty 🐧 CARTESI | LINUX-POWERED ROLLUPS https://bankless.cc/CartesiSimple 🛞MANTLE | MODULAR LAYER 2 NETWORK https://bankless.cc/Mantle     ⁠  📈 iYield: YOUR FINANCIAL PICTURE, SIMPLIFIED https://bankless.cc/iYield 🔒  SAFE | INTRODUCING SAFENET https://bankless.cc/SAFE  ------ ✨ Mint the episode on Zora ✨ https://zora.co/collect/zora:0x0c294913a7596b427add7dcbd6d7bbfc7338d53f/109?referrer=0x077Fe9e96Aa9b20Bd36F1C6290f54F8717C5674E ------ TIMESTAMPS 0:00 Intro 6:00 Jon’s Article 16:48 How did we get here? 23:16 Ethereum’s Three Front War 43:14 Ethereum Wins by its Synergies 52:52 Ethereum’s Focus 1:01:58 Ethereum Tactical Advice 1:18:18 Ultra Sound Money vs World Computer 1:30:26 Closing & Disclaimers ------ RESOURCES Mike Ippolito https://x.com/mikeippolito   Jon Charbonneau https://x.com/jon_charb   Jon’s Article https://dba.xyz/ethereums-north-star/   ------ Not financial or tax advice. See our investment disclosures here: https://www.bankless.com/disclosures ⁠    

There's just this massive hump that people are not going to be able to get over, that they like things that cash flow, they can model, etc. Growth. They like growth. Growth. So the description of the world computer of Ethereum and this network, this economy of different applications that look like businesses, you got a lot of people there very quickly. And I think maybe this would be a controversial thing to say,

but I think Ethereum has a better shot at money on a long-term time horizon than something like Bitcoin does. Welcome to Bankless, where we explore the future of Ethereum and ask the question, what is Ethereum's North Star? And does it even need one? There has been some angst in the Ethereum community growing over the last year, as Ethereum has become squeezed by its competition. Bitcoin's story as money is growing in mainstream society, while ETH story as a financial asset has not experienced that same level of success. Meanwhile, deeper in the crypto trenches, Solana has captured the hotball of money of crypto, attracting the marginal new user and new capital into its ecosystem. system. And over in the distance, Celeste's data availability continues to progress at a faster rate than what is found on the Ethereum layer one. This is Ethereum's three-front war. And we covered this in a topic on a recent episode with Justin Drake. But this three-front war is a technical war. And armies are led by generals. Projects have leaders who make both strategic and tactical decisions in pursuit of a goal. What is Ethereum's goal? What is Ethereum designed to do? What are

the core devs building? Ethereum has been at peacetime for its entire life and has had the luxuries of building in a peacetime world. Today, more people are thinking that this era of Ethereum's life has come to an end and a phase change is needed for Ethereum to enter into a more aggressive stance towards this competition that some in Ethereum claim that it's not competing with. On the episode today, we have John Charbonneau, who recently released one of his best articles to date, which thoroughly contextualizes and diagnoses the issue at hand with Ethereum. And I highly recommend reading this article, even if you find yourself averse to the ideas. In fact, especially if you feel a negative reaction to the article, I'd even more encourage reading it. Joining us on this podcast is Mike Abolito, who has always been immensely valuable in these conversations

given his breadth of knowledge to all the relevant ecosystems and his general pragmatism. John and Mike and I were on a panel together discussing this very topic at DevCon, which was the ground zero for the light bulb that triggered John to write the article in question and also for the podcast that you are about to hear today. So, Bankless Nation, I hope you enjoyed this podcast with Mike and Polito and John Charbonne. But first, before we get into that conversation, a moment to talk about some of these fantastic sponsors that make this show possible. Want to know the exchange we at Bankless used to buy, sell, and trade crypto? It's Cracken, one of the longest standing and most secure crypto platforms in the world, with tools for

every type of trader to get started. Over 13 million users trust Cracken with their funds because they lead with transparency and privacy through top-notch security measures. Plus, they'll have access to professional 24-7-365 client support from real humans because your financial goals deserve real attention. Cracken also has a trading platform for advanced traders called Cracken Pro. Professionals and D-Gens love Cracken Pro because it's one of the most customizable, high-performance and intuitive trading platforms in the industry. Design your ultimate trading interface by choosing from over 25 widgets for market data, analysis, execution, and other order management tools.

Save multiple layouts and switch between them effortlessly on any trading scenario across 300 different assets. Manage your trades on the go with Cracken Pro's highly rated mobile app or use the all-new desktop app to unlock ladder trading in a native rust application. With Cracken Pro, you can truly trade like a pro. Ready to take control over your crypto journey? Visit crackin.com slash banklist to get started today. Not investment advice. Crypto trading involves risk of loss and is offered to U.S. customers through Payward Interactive Inc. View legal disclosures. Are you ready to take control over your entire financial life? Crypto, defy, and fiat all in one place? Me, I yield, the free financial planning tool built for crypto natives.

Unlike traditional portfolio trackers that just show you the value of your assets, eye yield goes deeper. It consolidates everything, assets, debts, income, and expenses, offering you a complete financial picture across 16,000 tokens, 40 defy-fi protocols, and all fiat currencies. With real-time defyield tracking for platforms like Ave, Athena, Eigenlare, and Uniswap, iYield ensures that you're always on top of your staking rewards, investments, and cash flow. And the best part?

It's 100% free with no ads and it's secure. No personal data, no ID, requirements. requirements, no compromises. So head over to iYield.com. So sign up today and get the guestwork out of financial planning. Imagine if the world's GDP moved on chain. Well, say hello to SafeNet, built by Safe. The project set on actually making that happen. It's not a blockchain. It's not a layer two. It's a transaction processor network built to send money anywhere and swap anything on thousands of layer twos, all from a single universal balance. With sub 500 second execution guarantees and zero cross-chain latency, SafeNet delivers a Solana-like user experience for Ethereum and

this layer two's making transactions lightning fast and seamless. SafeNet connects safe smart accounts across multiple chains, allowing users to access any chain with a unified balance, all with supercharged security, scalability, and speed. So get involved today. Join the waitlist and follow Safe on X and check out the SafeNet docks. There is a link in the show notes. Bank listening to I got John Charbono and Mike Abilito with me. John Charbonneau, professional lowercase R researcher, host of a podcast that doesn't exist. Writer of the longest articles that crypto can somehow still mustered the attention to read and co-founder of DBA. John, welcome to Bankless. How's it going? And Mike, Tribless Iplito, professional podcaster, host of lowercase art

researchers, closeted Sol Maxi, a man who can only turn left and co-founder of Blockworks. Mike, also welcome to Bankless. Well, only turn left is a deep cut. I don't think the audience is going to get that one. No, that's just for you, David. Yeah, that will be lodged in people's heads. It's great to have you guys. This podcast is coming on the back of a release of a very long blog post from John Charbonneau. Very readable. blog posts. I think the length is actually kind of deceiving. And it was a conversation that we also had on a panel at an event at DevCon. I think this content, this post, and hopefully the conversation that we're having

today is like a long time coming. I think the crypto world was very ready to read your post drawn. I think it kind of distilled a lot of the angst that we have felt in Ethereum, about Ethereum, about the ETH price. Maybe I'll open up the conversation with this. I think some people might be ready to say, oh, it was just price action. Like, Eith price has returned. now the sentiment is fixed. But I kind of want to actually decline that idea because the angst, the issue is still there, even if price number does go up. So John, maybe you can kind of just give us a speed run of the article and your kind of like diagnosis and your motivations for writing the article for people that haven't read it. What are just like the big elements that you focused on

while you were writing it? Yeah. Well, thanks for prompting it too. The panel at DevCon was actually when I had been like kind of jotting down notes on what I thought I was going to do of like a sort of related post. And then after we did that panel, I was like, this is great. I need to, like, write this. I literally went home to my hotel after. That was like, this is what I'm doing. Skipped events. That's what I ended up. Yes. No, I ended up like skipping events throughout the week. And that was like a lot of what I did throughout the week. And then the week after and then the I published it. Yeah, I mean, the TLDR of it for people who haven't ready yet is basically like, we've kind of had this kind of clear overarching problem in Ethereum for a while now that's like,

it's not a specific technical thing or like a problem at a very low level. Like it's a pretty high level vision thing that like I think has generally been lacking of when you look at Ethereum as now quite a number of like very credible competitors on really all of the different dimensions that Ethereum is competing on. And in each of those dimensions, it's a very clear competitor that is like focused on those things. And you know, you know they're like they're quote unquote like North Star their goal really is. So I mean like very specifically like Bitcoin like everyone knows what Bitcoin does. The whole point of this thing is like it's digital gold, it's money, and, you know, it's very easy to tell the story because, like, everyone knows what that is. And then you have these kind of like financial rail, smart contract platforms. I mean, Solana is the very clear example there of, you know, everyone knows Slana's story.

Whether you love it or hate it, everyone knows what it is. Everyone knows how it works. Everyone knows the vision. Like, it is, you know, totally I want to build decentralized NASDAQ, you know, permissionless markets for everyone in the world, equal access to information. Make sense. And then the other kind of third leg of it is generally, I would say, like Celestia. which is this kind of like big kind of roll up vision, which is much more of just like a broader, you know, we want to make it easy for anyone to launch any kind of application, you know,

make these unstoppable applications that are censorship resistant, you know, everyone can verify these things. You know, you have a light note on your phone. And so all three of those are like very clear, coherent visions of like this is the thing that we're focused on. And Ethereum has like kind of been sitting in the middle for a while. And it's actually been like pretty unclear, like, what of those dimensions that Ethereum wants to compete on and like, why?

is kind of like the more fundamental underlying question of, you know, if you ask someone, like, what is Ethereum's purpose? You get like 100 different answers if you ask 100 different people. And so I think that people have ignored that for a long time because that sounds like, I don't know, a semantic thing or like, ah, it's decentralized, you know, different people see different things. And so I think that kind of like, we kind of just like let that fly for a long time. But then I think the people have started to realize over the course of the past year, no, this isn't just a like, oh, it makes it, you know, hard to talk about it or just like, it's this complicated thing that, like, makes it hard to explain to my mom. It, like, actually ends up

creating, like, real coordination problems. In particular, I'm, like, the one half of it that I describe as, like, basically kind of, like, building coordination is that basically, if we don't all agree on, like, why we're building this thing, that ends up flowing down into, okay, well, then we don't agree on, like, what properties we need to build. Like, do we need to build a, like, fast and cheap chain that's doing execution and all these things? You can't answer that if you don't know what's the use case that we're building for. So that's half of it. And that ends up slowing down and making a really confusing conversation whenever we try to actually improve the chain.

It kind of slows everything down there. And you end up with potentially conflicting goals as well, too. And then the other half of it is that kind of like marketing part, I would say, is like downstream of like having a clear North Star, like knowing what your product is. And that does matter a lot, whether you're trying to, you know, communicate to new developers, new investors in the ecosystem like, hey, this is the reason that we're exciting. like come build on my chain, you need to have a clear story to kind of inspire people. And especially if Ethereum does actually want to compete on money, I mean, money is just a story. So if we don't even agree internally in Ethereum on, you know, what is the overarching vision, what is the story, well, then you're never going to be able to like sell the thing. So it's this kind of just like high level kind of perspective and realization that we've seen playing out over the past year of increasingly one half as Ethereum has a lot of like very credible competitors on different dimensions.

and then the other half is more internal to Ethereum of, okay, it's really unclear which of these things that we actually want to compete on, and so we need to really clarify that and then kind of everything falls downstream. When I was reading your article, I was getting two kind of parallel punchlines that really work well together. The first is that Ethereum has a coordination problem, and this is showing up in like the all-core devs calls, and discussing what EIPs Ethereum is going to work on to prioritize.

And like some of the anecdotes that are out there is that there's some technical debates about, you know, what should we do next about, like, you know, should it be fossil or multiple concurrent proposers? And these are just both technical upgrades. And a lot of these are being debated technically. But if you zoom out, they're actually more just like directional differences. Like, what do we want Ethereum to be? And so, like, while it might appear to be a technical debate, it's actually more of just a, what are we building here debate. And without that debate being answered, a lot of progress in Ethereum is being slowed. So that's like one half of, I think, the punchline of your articles. Ethereum has a coordination problem, has a North Star

problem. And separately, in addition to that, Ethereum has credible competition. And these two points really land extra hard when combined is because, you know, Solana, Celestia, more aggressively moving, more aggressive teams that can, like, move fast and break things. And then, you know, Bitcoin, which is kind of already very far along, like a narrow path for itself. It doesn't want to do too much. It just wants to be money. Money is very big, but still nonetheless, like pretty clear in its, like, path for what wants for itself. And so these two things together kind of create the current, like, angst that we've seen in Ethereum. Mike, you were part of the genesis of this conversation on the panel over in DevCon. Just give me your thoughts about what you had when you were reading

the article. Yeah, I think it's been difficult to have this conversation publicly for a couple of different reasons. One is a psychological element of do we want to admit that there's a problem here? The second is there are multiple conversations that are getting jumbled up into one. And that's why you have some people describing this as a product problem and others describing this as a marketing problem. I would like to introduce two new dimensions to that as well and just say, when you're looking at an organization, whether that's something that's extremely decentralized like Ethereum or a country like the United States or a small startup or a corporation, I think these are all roughly the same challenges and you could bucket into that coordination

problem that you mentioned, David, and there's a leadership component, a strategy component, a product component, and a marketing component. And I think I want to return. to that, but the first problem, do we have a problem here? It honestly reminds me a little bit of the MAGA movement, not to bring the politics angle into this. I had a really negative interpretation originally of that because it was like, I don't want to admit that there was a problem in America. I love America. I grew up in America. My parents told me as the greatest country in the world. Now, I don't know, I look at it a little bit differently because the first step to solving a problem comes from admitting that there's a problem or a challenge. And I think that basically, just judging by my

Twitter and anecdotal conversations, I think half of people are on the page that, hey, maybe there's an issue here that we need to address. And there's still another half that says, we don't want to admit that there's a problem. Everything is okay. But to break down, I think the different conversations that are happening, there's a leadership, strategy, product, marketing. And I think actually from a marketing perspective, I'm going to maybe take a contrarian opinion that I think Ethereum has phenomenal marketing. I don't think there's a marketing problem at all. I don't think that centralized top-down marketing works in the context of L-1s. What you really want in L-1s is grassroots, communities, community-driven bottom-up marketing. You want a bunch of people to basically yap. The problem is,

and Elin The U.M has that in spades, more so than anyone other than Bitcoin or maybe now Cardano or XRB. But the problem is that they're not getting a coherent input about what to yap about. It sounds very discordant, and you have all these arguments that are going on. Lots of yappers, not much message. Lots of yappers, not much message. On the leadership side of things, I think that there is a debate to be had around leadership. It ends up getting stymied because people say, we don't want some centralized top-down thing like Solana. But I think there are numerous different ways that you can be an effective leader. And one of those is setting a vision, right, or a North Star or a goal or mission, or where we're ultimately going, and then empowering and

entrusting other people to act on the mission. So I am a believer that someone needs to come up with the why, someone that has moral authority, and then you empower other people to come up with the how of actually executing that vision, which I think is the right vision for Ethereum. The strategy side of things, you can basically think of strategy as saying no to things. And I'm not of the opinion that Ethereum can't compete on everything that it's trying to compete on. I would disagree that it should compete on every single one of those verticals right now at the same time. I think it has to say no to some verticals, even on a short-term time horizon, get a wedge and become the best at one of the things that it's trying to compete on. And then in a number of years, it can ultimately

compete, I think, on everything that it ultimately wants. And I mean, we'll get to this with John's world computer vision, but I would be in the camp that that's probably the best way. The world computer leads to the money angle, I think. And then there's the product stuff. And I think, yeah, that's everything John mentioned in the article about actually creating a product that people want, making it measurable and setting, you know, just quantifiable ways of, is this actually what the market wants? Can we take some time in try and diagnose how we got here in Ethereum land? Ethereum has some very interesting properties. It started off in 2014, 2015 with a pretty centralized

team, but it very quickly moved to this decentralized EIP process. Vitalik started off with this process being pretty hands off pretty quickly into Ethereum's lifespan. And really, Ethereum has, to its credit, pioneered this decentralized coordination model in a way that, like, the world has never seen before. Like the level of decentralized coordination Ethereum is like pretty astounding. And to me, it's kind of a breakthrough of like what humans can do with like the assistance of internet protocols. And that works, like, really want. well for a while, especially as we had John mentions in his post, some very clear North Stars and temporary North Stars, like the Merge. Like the merge rallied everyone in Ethereum to get

the merge done. And again, to Ethereum's credit, got a lot of very big things shipped into it. And I think a lot of the low-hanging fruit has been picked off. And now we're starting to like ask, all right, what's next for Ethereum? And some of these problems of being a decentralized coordinated community are starting to like rear its head. And also, So, like, things age, right? These systems age. As people kind of know the game, like, different pockets of influence emerge. Ethereum, I think, really liked in John's Post, political interests have kind of been pushed to the margins. It, like, push away from the center. The EF doesn't want to be top down. And so it's pushed political power away. And then those political

epicenters, the layer two's, like the MEV supply chain started, like, you know, things like flashbots, things like optimism, started to become, like politically powerful. And that influences started to, like, work its way back in. And now we are. dealing with the consequences of that. And so, like, that's just an age thing. That's a timeline thing. We're now in the year 2024, 2025. And so what decentralized coordination looks like is different now than it did five years ago. Maybe this is my kind of, like, setting up the context for this question. But, like, John, help us, like diagnose how and why we got here. What are the properties that got us at this place? So I'd say half of it is definitely a natural age thing. Like, this is kind of the natural progression

of things. The other half and probably the bigger component, of it, I would say, is that I think it was quite intentional, and that's a product of kind of what Ethereum's roots were, which were very Bitcoin-y, which is not the case for all of these new, you know, Celestia-salana-type chains that you're seeing pop up now. These are not people who were like, I really wanted to build this thing on Bitcoin, but, you know, I guess we just need to go make her own thing. It was just like, they are just building a new tech platform versus Ethereum, you know, had very Bitcoin or roots. Like, those are the people who started the project. Like, that was around at the time. And so that is the kind of cultural inclination of most people in there. And so there

is a much earlier and more aggressive push to like very intentionally try to decentralize all the decision making, you know, the whole emphasis on a very multi-client architecture, try not to have like a very strong single leader and try to like decentralize the decision making processes, all of these things. And a lot of the culture of kind of manifested in the technical roadmap of we're going to push out a lot of the technical complexity. and what that ends up doing is that in pushing out technical complexity, you're also in practice pushing out kind of the political power as well. Because if you're not building those things that everyone is using now, well, now the layer twos are building those things. You know, they're buying client teams.

Like you have all these other different parties that, like, they end up having a lot of political influence and kind of like what is Ethereum itself doing. So I'd say it's a mix of those two things. Like there is some level of natural decentralization. I mean, you see that even in Solana now where, you know, they're going to have multiple client teams. you know, it's not just labs doing everything. It's, you know, Gito has a lot of input in the process. FireDancer has a lot of the input in the process. Like that is going to slow things down, but they don't have all of these other points of

we're going to intentionally, you know, like our founder and core team are going to be less opinionated about things. Like, they're not going to do that. Like, they're going to keep being opinionated. They're not going to have all these L2s that are putting a lot of political influence into the process and all of those things. So it's a mix of those kind of two things outside. Might you want to add anything?

No, I agree with all. of that. I think part of this is just natural growing pains. Let's just remember that there were literally lock-sized wars that got fought in Bitcoin over this. It's really short. You can look it up, but Naval Robicon has this quote about groups don't disagree. They schism. And you can kind of understand why that is having lived through crypto if you consider yourself as being part of a tribe. There's a natural cycle to it where you're part of one tribe. This happened to me with Bitcoin, where that's what gets you into the space in the first place. You buy into a lot of the arguments. And then once you get a little deeper, you start to see some of the issues.

You're like, oh, well, maybe there's some challenges here. We should talk about that. But for whatever reason it is, bag bias or people tying their entire identity to their coin, people are less willing to hear that. It turns a certain amount of people off. There's this kind of debate and conflict, and then a whole bunch of people end up leaving. And so you can see why this pressure to schism exists. And so I think, like John said, part of this is just really natural growing pains for a protocol

that's been as successful and will be as successful as Ethereum going forward into the future. And then I think my opinion would be that we're not rewiring human nature here. Even large decentralized organizations like the U.S. government, which is actually a very decentralized organization, has to have some sort of figurehead because people are just wired a certain way after hundreds of thousands of years. And just having someone to set a kind of high-level vision, I think, is important. And there are numerous examples, by the way, of DOWs, of the leaders of protocols attempting to decentralize, hand over control of the community. And then either of those protocols aren't as successful anymore without naming any names or their leaders have come back.

And so I think we just need to recognize that whether or not the leaders of Ethereum want to take on the mantle of that power, that power exists. And if they don't take it on, someone else will ultimately end up taking it on. I want to bring up the illustration of the three-way Venn diagram because I think that also does a really good job of grounding the conversation. So we have three circles all overlapping in the center. You have Bitcoin, Celestia, and Solana, execution, data availability, consensus. It's like how I think Justin Drake will frame it.

I don't know if you agree with that, like the relationship between the three ecosystems, but I thought it was a pretty useful metaphor here. And, of course, John, your article is about Bitcoin, Solana, Celestia, as the three credible competitions to Ethereum. I mean, Bitcoin is actually winning versus Ethereum and the money, but all three are competing with Ethereum. And then you have where it overlaps altogether is Ethereum. Ethereum is at the center trying to do all three, doing all three with some decent measure

of success. And then also you have Celestia with more data availability than Ethereum. You have Solana with more execution than the Ethereum layer one. And then Bitcoin with just straight up more moneyness than Ethereum. And so these are like the three players here that are trying to like unbundle. Ethereum, like the idea of like Ethereum being drawn and quartered comes to mind or drawn in thirded by these like three ecosystems. And so like I just have this like picture of like this Ethereum body with three ropes tied to it. And it's flexing as hard as it can trying to pull data

availability and money and execution to it. And then Salonis Celana, Celestia Bitcoin are all pulling those same resources away to their respective ecosystems. So that's kind of like the grounding, I think that helps illustrate this conversation. So on the Salinas Celana, Celestia Bitcoin three way spectrum, John, where do you think Ethereum lies in its like prioritization? And so where do you think it is? And then where do you think it ought to lie with where it ought to prioritize things? Yeah. I would say broadly it is kind of in one, two, three order. Well, I'll tweak it to show kind of the evolution of it. I would say initially it was, I would say, Solana, Bitcoin, then Celestia, like in the early on, where it really had that kind of world.

computer vision. When it was like only beginning with Bitcoin. When it was like just starting and it was like very clearly like I would say like more differentiated from Bitcoin, like particularly the genesis of Ethereum, you know, you weren't trying to copy Bitcoin. There was less focus on the moniness. There was more focus on the world computer, which is like the kind of vision that like I am trying to bring back. So I would say it almost like looked more like Solana at the beginning, which is interesting. And then I think over time, especially with the Alt Del Ones and all these other things popped up, it started to move more towards like Bitcoin as a prioritization of like, we're going to be the money thing with like the minimum viable execution.

And then it becomes, you know, there's quotes of like Bitcoin was the vision or whatever, like Ethereum is the execution of that. I'm like, we're just doing Bitcoin with like just enough functionality that you need for all these different things. And then I would say where that's like started to progress to is still primarily Bitcoinie, but with like a pretty strong emphasis on the celestial leg of it of, you know, we're really bought into this kind of L2 vision. But with a kind of like different L2 vision from.

Celestia, where Celestia's kind of L2 vision is, you know, it's very embodied in their like sovereign roll-up ideology of like, it is much more of a, you know, we are just making this verifiable, unstoppable, unstoppable internet. It is a much more kind of like app and user-centric. Like, we are a platform to, like, change the internet for you guys versus Ethereum is a more Ethereum-centric and then like everything kind of comes out from there of like eth is money. And therefore, this makes sense as the center of the internet. all of the other things will build on top of us because of that kind of route.

So where I think it is now concretely is like it's kind of shifted towards, I'd say like largely Bitcoiny, and that's manifested in a lot of the stuff we were talking about earlier. We end up with this like multi-client architecture, decentralized leadership. People are talking about the issuance and all these things all the time. And then on the technical focus, like what most people are trying to do is like stuff like blobs and peer deaths, which is concretely looking, you know, kind of more like Celestia. And where people have been largely ignoring that kind of, you know, should Ethereum execution, like does this really matter has largely been ignored for a while.

I don't say that's part of the push of what I think it makes sense to kind of re-emphasize again, is to kind of bring more of that back into it and start that shift over of be a little less Bitcoiny, at least for now, a little more of, you know, focus on the execution, the world computer, you know, this like neutral layer again. And then I think that ends up evolving into like more money is at the end, but the path dependence of those things matters. Yeah. Okay.

So the way that you would say is like Ethereum is most like Bitcoin with roll up. the Bitcoin plus Celestia, and it's competing with those two things the most, and it's kind of disregarded its own Solana end of the spectrum. It's disregarded its own execution, which kind of makes sense because which alternative ecosystem has grown the most over the last two years, which ecosystem has taken advantage of that fact that Ethereum has disregarded its own layer one execution. Oh, it's the ecosystem that has optimized for layer one execution. Mike, any commentary here? Yeah, I think a lot of this comes down to path dependence. And I have this memory of the challenge that Ethereum has, right? I think ultrasound money confused a lot of people, me included. And I remember describing to my dad early on, I had a lot of trouble getting him around the hump of Bitcoin. He was like, but there's no yield. It doesn't do anything productive. And you can go and look at guys like Jack Bogle describe people's natural. why they don't like commodities as an investment in general. There's just this massive hump that people are not going to be able to get over, that they like things that cash flow, they can model, etc. Growth. They like growth.

Growth. So the description of the world computer of Ethereum and this network, this economy of different applications that look like businesses, you got a lot of people there very quickly. And I think maybe this would be a controversial thing to say, but even the monitor, I think Ethereum has a better shot at money on a long-term time horizon. than something like Bitcoin does. Bitcoin has sort of gone the meme approach to money,

and I view it as a counter reaction to the issues that Fiat money is having. We print too much Fiat money, so we get a total fixed supply. That's great as a meme. That's a really strong meme. On a really long-term time horizon, that doesn't work as a monetary property, you need some amount of flexibility. And I kind of look at Ethereum's monetary scheme and think it's a better long-term scheme. The issue is you're confusing people by trying to ride two horses with one ass. And I also think there's been a misunderstanding as well of where the leverage for L1's really lies because of these brain damage words like settlement. And I'm not of the opinion that most people choose the L1 because of these settlement properties. I think there's a minimum viable amount of decentralization

you need with a settlement part. Then it becomes a cost thing. But really what it is is it's the liquidity of the L1. And why did so many people choose Ethereum last cycle? There was this massively liquid asset. You could build anything you wanted. You could speculate quite a bit. And that was super valuable for the network. And I think there was this misunderstanding among some people in Ethereum circles that said, oh, we're being chosen because we're the most decentralized. And the market was not choosing Ethereum for that reason. And so that's why I'm in the camp of world computer, focus on execution, whatever you want to do. And we can talk about how this, think dovetails really nicely with the roll-up-centric roadmap. It's all about having leverage and

users and liquidity more so than these vague concepts of, or one very myopic way to measure decentralization, I think. Yeah, I think that does extend into the role of centric roadmap very well, because in 2021-2020, when crypto got, you know, a hundred times more users, they went to Ethereum, because that's where the liquidity was. If you wanted to mint and launch an NFT project, you did it where the money was. So everything went to Ethereum. That's because it's where the money and users were. And just to make concrete examples there as well, look at the early defy apps that got product market fit. Uniswap, Maker, Avey. What were those protocols allowing people to do? Use Ethereum in some way. Right. Take loans out. Lever up. Get yield. Trade things. M.EV. All of those initial use cases were based around having a deep and liquid, a one token,

that people wanted to speculate around. Right. And Ethereum, I will say, is getting its layer two energy, is what's powering layer two's. It's just the same phenomenon. Yeah. Not to discredit the fact that Ethereum is decentralized and layer twos want some level of, like, property rights and censorship resistance, totally valid. And also, layer twos will go to where the money is. The incentives go to where the money is and where the users are.

And so I think this also kind of brings into a point that I think John said is like, well, layer twos will follow the liquidity just like users. And so you can like kind of imagine an alternative version of Ethereum and an alternative timeline where Ethereum prioritize the layer one first before prioritizing layer two's, which is what Slana is doing. Solana is prioritizing layer one execution. And then you keep everyone on the boat. You keep all the users. You keep all the liquidity. And then you kind of let layer two spawn more emergently from that.

Maybe John, you can kind of like run us through that simulation of a roadmap, maybe like Salinas, where you actually are on the roll up centric. roadmap. You were totally going to do roll-ups. We love roll-ups. We love the Celessia. We love the Cosmos Vision. We're just going to scale the layer one as meaningfully as possible. What could have been in this world? So, yeah, like all of it, I would say, like, make sense in hindsight of I think the key term that we will end up saying here a lot and that, like, people are realizing more is like, this is all just a path dependence thing of like, I think that most of us agree, like, as Vitalik has written as well, like the end game of most of these blockchains looks the same. and I think that Ethereum has at a very strong inclination over time to ignore the like,

what is the practical thing today and the path dependence of these things? And that is probably unsurprising when you have a very, you know, this like optimistic research-driven community, which is, you know, talking about one-shot signatures and these things that are like 50 years away. And you are planning for this, like, yes, this theoretically makes sense in the end game, but ignoring that point of like, okay, but like, yeah, in practice, why did the L2s launch on Ethereum in the beginning? beginning, like, it wasn't because we had this, like, perfect roadmap that had everything figured out or all these amazing decentralization properties. It was all the users are on Ethereum. That is where the most assets are. ETH is worth a lot of money. We can go onboard those people

into our chain. And, like, now we have product market fit. We can just, like, take those users and those assets. And that particularly makes sense when you realize that kind of, like, frame of, I mean, like, and this is what, like, totally pokes out actually all the time. It's, like, you make salon in L2. Like, what fundamentally is an L2 at the end of the day when you think of it is, It's a good bridge to another chain. So where are L2s necessarily going to go is just, they're just bridges. They're obviously going to bridge to where the assets are. And so it's not a surprise that for the first time over the past year and in a pretty

consistent line with the sole price, pretty much, and the activity on Seoul is like, people are talking about Solana L2s for the first time. And why is that? It's because Solana now has a lot of users and a high asset value on their chain. So, of course, it makes sense to build like a good bridge, effectively to Solana and get their users, get their assets. It didn't make sense when Solana wasn't worth a lot and they didn't have any users. It's not that Solana got, you know, more decentralized and had these like properties of a settlement layer from a technical level

from, you know, a year ago versus today. Like nothing changed. They're building the exact same thing. They don't even care about these altos. It's just that they have assets and users now. And so people make like, oh yeah, makes sensible on top of them. And so I think that Ethereum kind of in some sense, like probably like lucked into that benefit from the beginning of obviously when Ethereum started, it did not have the roll-up centric road map. It was just like, we're building an execution layer. This is the thing that we know to do. But that ended up being the right move. And like, the example that I was used is like, I would say the cosmos was generally the first ecosystem that very clearly understood. What is the end game that mostly matters for this?

It's like, we're probably going to have a bunch of chains. We need to figure out, you know, how do you make it easy to launch a chain? How did you make it easy to be interoperable between them? They had the generally correct idea. They just didn't have the right path-dependent solution to that. Like you've said this before, like they kind of went right to the end game right at the beginning. And it just like, it just doesn't make sense. You just ended up with a bunch of fragmented chains. And like, none of them were actually worth a lot. So there wasn't like actually much to do on any of them. And they were just like sort of fragmented. And it was like, there was no like kind of rallying point for the ecosystem versus Ethereum was just like, we have one chain. Like, let's be real.

This is enough to do like 99% of the stuff that you could do in crypto today, which was very concretely. And I think that Ethereum kind of, it hasn't gone all the way. But there has been a trend of its like sort of cosmos hubbing itself over the past couple years. And this is the reason why concretely, like the first time that we got very excited about and invested in Solana was it was like, I don't know, it was fall of 23 or whatever, like right before the bull market picked up because one, I mean, part of it was just the market view. I think the market's going to come back. But it was, I also had a very clear view that like this whole roll up thing again, like makes sense in the endgame. But it is very clearly just not the present situation of crypto that we need 100 trains with all these interoperability standards and all this stuff figured out. It's like, what do 99% of people in crypto want to do today? They want to trade some meme coins, play around with some new, like, deep-pin projects and whatever.

You can kind of just fit that on one chain. And so that is still directionally where we are today. It's like most of the interesting things that people want to do. You can fit on a chain like Ethereum, particularly if you just scaled it a bit. And so I think this is a much more realization now of, yes, obviously Ethereum L1 is not going to fit like the entire future of the world, but that doesn't mean that we should just ignore it completely. like it actually is valuable still as the center of this kind of L2 roadmap. Right.

So I want to also make a point. Let's say you're listening to this conversation and you're in the ETH is money camp. I want to try to connect the dots in between getting everyone on one single environment and how that actually leads to ETH being a better money. There's this reflexive property in between ETH, the L1 token versus actual usage of the network. And it comes from this fact that the total addressable market for apps is highly dependent on the market cap of the L1 token. Highfalutin concept, two concrete examples. The early, like Avey and Maker, their market size was limited by the amount of people that wanted

to borrow against their ETH. So the more that ETH went up, the more the demand or the market size for those applications was. Same thing for L2s. Why are L2s all very excited about launching an Ethereum? Partially it's because there was a prioritization from the L1 on making it easier to launch L2s, but also mostly because this mass of users and liquidity on the L1. And so that's why it's very important, actually.

There's this very reflexive property in between the price of the token and the actual adoption of the network. The other thing, too, that I think is going to be a bit of a challenge, just speaking about Cosmos and anticipating the end game, is if you look at Cosmos, they were really early to this trend of allowing users to pay in USDC as opposed to Adam the token. And I think that's roughly going to play out on L2s as well. This is one of those areas where L2s and Ethereum L1 have very different incentives. And so the broad discussion around this has been, we're trading off execution fees for liquidity network effects of ETH on L2s. But I don't see the incentive for, really, for L2s to make their customers adopt ETH. If customers want to pay for things in USDC, the L2s are going to make it very easy to pay for things in USDC. And so one of the other benefits from a monetary standpoint of maintaining more activity on your network is you have control over what happens on your network.

You can much more easily collect taxes that will translate into yield that will make your asset larger and the market size of all of your apps larger. There was an interesting discussion around EIP 1559 where they were deciding between a burn and these other mechanisms that would have made it desoc. And they ultimately, if you go back and you can listen to these great episodes that Haseau did on Common Core when that was still a podcast. And he's talking with Suu about this concept of economic abstraction. And part of the reason the burn was selected was because they didn't want off-chain payments happening. And so they wanted to control the fact that people needed to pay for block space in Ethereum. That's an example of something that you can concretely do that would affect the demand for Ethereum if you have everyone operating on your layer versus if you move all these users. users, the L2s that are not incentivized to do that.

I agree with that. The economic attraction can now return into the Ethereum ecosystem via the layer two's. Dollars are more easy to reason about. There's just better U.S. And as we expand crypto, people are just going to want to demand dollars to transact in dollars more than they are going to want to transact in ether. I generally agree with that trend. And I will also say, I kind of want to start to put on my Ethereum hat a little bit more strongly

here. And so I'll also say that, like, okay, that's great that people are going to spend. their dollars, but really that's like the commodity side, the payment side of money is a very small fraction of it as opposed to the store of value side. I will gladly spend dollars and store my ETH. And sure, we can economically abstract ether on its layer twos and people can spend dollars, but like if people are still electing to use and store their value in ether and use eth as money on these layer two's, that's actually like 80, 90% of what makes a money. And so if users elect to use ETH as money on layer 2s, that's way more powerful. And this starts to get into

some of the stuff I think Ethereum really has strengths on, which is even though ETH is not as great of money as compared to Bitcoin, a judge by its market cap, even though ETH is not great as execution and Solana, and even though Ethereum has less data availability, it still has a monopoly on the synergies between each of these overlapping Venn diagrams. So what do you get when you have a money mixed with layer twos, well, you can fuel those layer twos with money and you can have more demand for ether because Arbitrum's got super fast block times and it's got a very strong defy ecosystem. What's primarily the money in that ecosystem? ETH.

And sure, you can maybe even dollars do supplant like ETH in these ecosystems, but nonetheless, we are still in a fiat currency crisis. Nonetheless, societies are moving away from fiat currencies. And so ETH, to take a leaf out of Mike Norder's book, is the permissionless money. of these like layer two ecosystems. And that's just like one synergy. Like what do you get when you cross the synergy of money and execution, Bitcoin and Solana? You get layer one defy. And Ethereum's layer one defy ecosystem still has like 80, 85% market share of defy, like a very strong dominance of where is the ether? Actually still on the layer one inside of MakerDA inside of Avey. And a quote from

Eric Wall recently who was like, well, I go gambling on Solana. But like, I put my winnings in Ave on Ethereum. And so L2s or Ethereum? On the layer one. On the layer one. Yeah. Yeah. And so like, nonetheless, I think there's a lot of path dependency things that we can

bring up. And like John, I'll say, like, some of the pushback that I've heard from some Ethereum people is not that anything in your article is technically wrong, but the vibe wasn't accurate as in Ethereum is this decaying Roman empire. These smaller like city states, Solana, Celestia, are going to rise and take over. but like the fundamentals, the stats, like, are still very strongly in Ethereum favor. And so I'll kind of just present that to you. Like, talk about the synergies that Ethereum has and like how should we like weigh these things in these conversations. So I'll get to that in one second. The one quick part that I would disagree on is that on the stats that it's way ahead. I actually disagree with that now.

On some stats, some stats. Yeah. Solana has like a lot of economic energy in it for sure. Which is, I think, what it's been behind in practice, like it's rise over the past years that. I think in practice, like, SLO has actually surpassed Ethereum, even including all of its layer twos on a lot of key metrics, stuff like REV, just like the total amount of like, what are users paying between MV and fees to use the chain? What is the amount of revenue that the apps on the chain are making, you know, the applications like Radium, Jupiter, Pumphon, Gito, like all these things. They're printing money to a degree that, like, even more than Ethereum applications.

They're getting institutional, like a lot of the deployments that Ethereum is getting, that are pulling the same things on Slana, like all those different things. So I think on a metric space, I think that the discrepancy in their market caps is much higher than the discrepancy in actual, I would say, like what the metrics would tell you. If you were just looking at those with no understanding of kind of history. But what about DFI, though? I think Ethereum still has a very large dominance of market share of DFI specifically, like TVL, maybe not fees, but TVL, yes.

Exactly. And this is where I do think it has a serious advantage. And this gets into that kind of world computer type vision that, like, which is why I do think it makes sense to compete on this is because what Eric described is like directionally what I do too and what I think directionally most people do too is like, yeah, I do most of my meme coin trading on Solana and then I have more like my U.S.DC is on Ethereum, you know, stuff like that. I think that actually is a real product market fit. It's kind of similar to when like Bitcoiners will say, oh yeah, I'll go shit coining,

but then I'll sell it into Bitcoin at the end of the day. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I wonder how many successfully do that. So yeah, that still is the kind of like directional bias right now, which is why I think it makes sense for Ethereum to lean into that and not just like give that up. Because otherwise, I think that is the concrete problem is I think that the current trend is, as long as clearly gaining on all of these different things. You know, it has more dex volume.

There's more users who are using this, like paying more fees, more interesting applications, all these things. But the last holdout really is that there's still a lot of the big money on Ethereum. This is still the place that like I generally trust a little bit more with like big dollar amounts. But if you just, like, continue to ignore this execution layer and for the next year or two, have this mixed messaging where a lot of people are actively telling, like, applications, like, there's no future for the L1, like, get off the L1. And then Solana keeps picking up activity and Black Brock and PayPal and all these other institutions are deploying on Solana.

You're eventually going to build up their, like, actual serious TVL and savings there, too. And then, like, the discrepancy is like, it's all gone. And so I think that strategically Ethereum should not let that happen. It should understand that, yeah, a lot of the users will go there. A lot of them will do the meme coins, blah, blah, blah. But we want to try to keep a lot of the serious value stuff here, because I do think that is like a real competitive advantage. And then as far as kind of the synergies and getting into like the economic

abstraction point that you're talking about as well. So I think that in practice, this was correct, that Ethereum was able to kind of say L2s will like definitely increase the moneyness of ETH because like these are just more places that use EF. Exactly. And so early on, I think that was correct because economic abstraction, there's just like technically complex. Like, no one did that.

You just wanted to use ETH. Like, all right, we're just going to use ETH on all these chains. The direction now is obviously, you know, base announcing like, oh, like we'll use the USC for payments. Like, more chains are going to do that. And so I would say that I think the more correct framing, particularly as we played this out over time, is that L2s expand kind of the opportunity space for ETH to be used as money. But once economic abstraction becomes easier and easier, it's just creating the opportunity

for it to be used that way. If users don't want it, then they're not going to use it. Versus today it's direction more, even if you don't want it, you're using ETH, if you want to go use an L2. So it's kind of like forced on people. So that will generally be a net negative, I would say, on like, eats some money and this over the longer term. And so part of that is what you were saying of, and I agree with this, like, most of the value of this kind of currency thing is not actually from the fact that people are using it for gas payments. I agree with that. You know, you do the MV equals PQ type calculations on this. Like, it's not a lot.

It gets high velocity on this stuff. But I think in practice that is very likely, very heavily tied to it being used as this store value and all of that, like, core of defy on this chain, when the onboarding for everyone who goes on this chain is, like, you're going to own ETH and you're going to use this, and that is the thing that you need to own. It is very likely in practice that is kind of going to be the core of the ecosystem. It's probably going to be the main asset that ends up in all these, like, defy applications versus if that is just never a step that you need, like, I never need to get ETH to go on to this change.

Like, I just go on there with USDC. Then I don't see a compelling reason why Ethereum is going to, like, just naturally become that asset. People are just going to naturally grab it towards the assets they want, which is probably you're actually going to be BTC and USDC. So that is the thing that I think that Bitcoin has gotten like very right and like luckily from the start of like you kind of need to start with the money because ultimately when the users have the choice, they're going to pick what they actually wanted the money, not just like this is the tech platform that I'm built on top of. That is part of the why I think it makes sense. And this kind of gets to the world computer and Heath's money

visions of like a lot of this is really just a timescale thing of like, I I think that, yes, the end game for these things is you want them to play out into money, but I don't think that in practice, the way that you can get this thing to be money is just saying, like, our ultrasound money, we're deflationary, we're better money than Bitcoin. Like, empirically, most people don't buy it. Most people prefer Bitcoin unlike the just sound monetary aspects of it. So I think that in general, probably the way to actually just increase the value of youth in the short to medium term and just like kind of start with that base of how do we

increase the moneyness or asset value of it is to probably refoble. on more of the focus on the L1, have a lot of the great execution there, this more world computer vision with that kind of as the heart of it, because that is still where in practice, like most of this high value defy is all happening. That is still where most users are. So if you can really just increase that a lot, and that becomes the home of it again, in practice, like, either it's probably going to go up in price, it becomes a better collateral asset, all these other things. And then that's probably the more path-dependently correct way to kind of build yourself into being money over time. It's like really focused on the core and build out from there.

Uniswop Labs is making history with the largest bug bounty ever. 15 and a half million dollars for critical bugs found in Uniswop v4. This isn't just any update. Uniswop V4V4 is built with hundreds of contributions from community developers and has already undergone nine independent audits, making it one of the most rigorously reviewed codebases to be deployed on chain. And with 2.4 trillion in cumulative volume process across Uniswap V2 and V3 without a single hack, the commitment to security and transparency is rock solid. Now Uniswap Labs is taking an extra step to make V4 as secure as possible with a 15.5 million dollar bug bounty. Head to the link in the show notes to dive in and participate

in the Uniswap V4 bug bounty. All the details from eligibility and scope to the rewards are there. New projects are coming online to the Mantle layer two every single week. Why is this happening? Maybe it's because Mantle has been on the frontier of layer two design architecture since it first started building Mantle DA powered by technology from Eigen Dei. Maybe it's because users are coming onto the Mantle Layer 2 to capture some of the highest yields available in Defi and to automatically receive the points and tokens being accrued by the $3 billion mantle treasury in the Mantle reward station. Maybe it's because the Mantle team is one of the most helpful teams to build with giving you grants, liquidity support, and venture partners to help bootstrap your mantle application. Maybe it's all of these reasons all put together.

So if you're a dev and you want to build on one of the best foundations in crypto, or your user looking to claim some ownership on Mantle's Defi apps, Click the link in the show notes, so getting started with Mantle. Have you ever felt that the tools for developing decentralized applications are too restrictive and fail to leverage advancements from traditional software programming? There's a wide range of expressive building blocks beyond conventional smart contracts and solidity development. Don't waste your time building the basics from scratch and don't limit the potential of your vision. Cartese provides powerful and scalable solutions for developers that supercharge app development. With a Cartese virtual machine, you can run a full Linux OS and access decades of rich code libraries

and open source tooling for building in Web3. And with Cartese's unique roll-up framework, you'll get real-world scaling and computation, no more competing for Blockspace. So, if you're a developer looking to push the boundaries of what's possible in Web 3, Cartesey is now offering up to $50,000 in grants. Head over to Cartesie's grant application page to apply today.

And if you're not a developer, those with staked CTSI can take part in the governance process and vote on whether or not a proposal should be funded. Make sure you're vote-ready by staking your CTSI before the votes open. I want to bring up the North Star conversation again. Celessia, Salina, Bitcoin, I'll have very clear North Stars. Celestia, one gigabyte blocks, build whatever. Solana, increased speed, reduced latency. centralized NASDAQ. Yeah, decentralized NASDAQ. You know, Bitcoin, 21 million units.

And then, you know, the conversation is, Ethereum just has this kind of confounded, like, North Star idea. But I want to present the idea that couldn't it be the case that it's simply because these other three ecosystems are just going after a smaller vision than what Ethereum is going for? Ethereum's roadmap is parallel. its complexity is immense. It's hard to explain. Maybe that's because it's going for a super set of what all of these things are going for. It is the thing in the middle of the Venn diagrams, right? That's why it's got a marketing problem. That's why it's got coordination difficulties. That's why it's difficult to understand. And it's kind of like imagine trying to explain a third vertical dimension to a flatlander. Like that's just going to be a hard thing to explain. And Ethereum's governance, its EIP progress, its arc, its roadmap is kind of like this random walk in the towards this vibe of a direction that is like loosely articulated by Vitalik. Maybe that's why Ethereum has like this North Star vision. It's the tweet that I tweeted out that was in this direction was what is Ethereum's like

North Star? What is Ethereum's roadmap? Better money than Bitcoin. More data availability than Celestia, better execution than Solana. And that was a hit tweet. And I think that's because that actually resonated with a lot of people. It's like, oh, this is putting a lot of pieces to the puzzle together for me. Would you guys like this vibe?

Yeah. So I think that this comes back to the. the comment that I made at the top of this episode about strategy. I do not think that it is a bad thing for Ethereum's vision to compete on all of those dimensions eventually. I think it's a mistake to go out and say they're competing on all of those dimensions right now. Here's another analogy that I'll give you. If Amazon had come out on day one and said, we're going to be the everything store, it would have fallen completely flat. Jeff Bezos started with books. Right. And did Jeff Bezos only ever want to sell books? I don't think so. But he picked a wedge that was easy to

understand. He did it better than everyone else. And then he expanded from there. So again, I want to just also just to zoom out here for a second. I think that Ethereum has the best shot at winning the largest market, which I've always viewed as a commodity like money that has some amount of yield attached to it. The reasons, again, getting back to the MAGA comment here is I'd be firmly in the camp that there is a problem. You don't solve the problem unless you say it. There's not much incentive actually for me to come on a podcast like this and talk about this, right? It's like, I know there's going to be unpopular for people. The reason is I care about it and I want to see the problem solved in the first step of that. It's admitting that there's a problem. And I think that I would disagree, David,

with that tweet that Ethereum is more complex than any of these other networks or it's just got a bigger vision. I think all these networks have a very similar vision. And I think there's a very similar amount of complexity across all these networks. I think Ethereum has to improve on its strategy here and decide, again, on the path dependence point, on the timescale point, when do I want to win each of these wedges and which wedge is going to give me the most leverage to win the next tranche up from that? And I think describing it as competing for everything at once, it's not hitting with people. And I don't think it's the right strategy. So I would split it into two. I think half of the answer is what Mike just described, which is, I would say, like, very succinctly

epitomized by Kobe's reply to your tweet, which is, you know, man who chases two rabbits, catches neither. But I don't think is a fair argument. It is very possible that it is the wrong move strategically to go full force on all three of these right now, and this is just a matter of prioritization. At the end of my post, that is generally the view that I end taking is that, you know, I think on some time horizon you are competing on all these things, but like we probably need to reprioritize and focus a little bit more on certain aspects of this. Like in particular, like, I think you should probably focus more directionally on the kind of like execution front today and a little bit less on the money.

And that kind of comes later. That is like my directional bias. I think it probably makes sense to do that. I would say the much larger actual other half of it, though, is what was a lot of the focus of the piece is I don't think most of the issue today is that we are trying to compete on all of those things. I think that most of the issue today is that none of us agree about whether we are competing on any of those dimensions.

I do not think that there is internal agreement that we are competing on money. I think that, like, most people want this in, like, some loose notion, but a lot of people very actively dislike it and do not care about it, do not want to see Ethereum do it. Like, they want to be this, like, decentralized economy, tech, all these things. Like, it's not a money. Yeah. And, I mean, like, the perfect epitome of this, like, I described as, like, at the Bankless Summit, like, one of the talks was like Anziger and Caspar talking, like, they've been doing a lot of work around issuance and all these things. And the title of the talk is, if we choose it to be. Right.

That, like, highlights it. Like, we just don't know. Like, we haven't decided internally, like, if we're even competing on this thing. DA, I would say it's the same thing, of like, we have this loose notion of like, yeah, like, we're going to scale this thing. Like, we're going to do 4844. We're going to do PIROS. We're going to do dang shirting, blah, blah, blah, blah, like all these different things. And like, oh, we're going to do that. But I would say that there's a reasonable amount of disagreement of like, how much do we actually have to prioritize that, like, how valuable actually is that. You know, if we're just doing the whole money thing anyway, I mean, like, Bitcoin's never going to have enough DA for the world. Like, we're not going to have enough DA for the world. Like, we're not going to have enough DA for the world. So, like, it's fine. If, like, most of these L2s go use Celestia and I can DA and whatever for D.

DA, if it's not really a priority. Like, we can have this, but, like, it's not really a huge deal. We don't need to compete with Celestia directly. I mean, like, Justin even says that directly. Like, I quoted him in there basically a couple times of he was saying, like, yeah, like, if DA gets a little expensive in the next couple months as we go into price discoveries, like, I think it should be totally social acceptable for Ethereum L2s to basically just, like, leave Ethereum DA, go use Celestia until it becomes, like, cheap again, like, if it does,

like, like, that should be totally fine because, like, most of the value is not from the cashload, it's like the moneyness. Just let him go do that. So I would say this complete disagreement there. and then I would say there's complete disagreement on the are we competing with Solana either. I would say that that is like a complete 50-50 split again of I do not think that there's any coherent message at all. I think that there's a mix of, I mean, one of the points that I highlighted in there was like Justin and Vitolic have said at various points that, you know, the L1 is competing with Bitcoin. The L2s are competing with Solana.

And also very explicitly saying at times there is no future for the L1, like when he was debating totally on your podcast. Like if you're an application developer, go to the L2. There was no future for the L1. While at the same time, his roadmap was also, like, juicing the execution on the L1 and doing precoms for faster than Solana transactions. And, like, most of these design, like, execution changes end up looking like Salana. And I would say a very large amount of people in Ethereum, like, do I would say direction agree with some of the stuff that I've been pushing up?

Like, we should focus more on the L1. Like, we do want to compete on this front? And I put, like, Don Crot and a number of other people kind of in that camp. So short-tale, do you already a question back to the beginning kind of summing up is like, I think that half of the question is like, it is a faireradier. point of like which of these dimensions should we compete on. I think there's like a fair conversation and we probably are trying to compete a little too hard and too many of them. I think we should rebalance them. But I think the much bigger issue is that I don't think that we

agree on any of them right now, which is one of the things that I called out at the end of like, I think that like I directionally prefer this like we should focus more on execution. Don't worry about the money right now. Like that'll kind of come naturally as a byproduct of what we're doing. Like that is my preferred vision. But I also think it would be better for Ethereum today if they just took like a hard right turn and went the other way. And I'm and you're like, fuck it, like, kick everyone off the L1. It's fine. We don't need that anymore. Like, we are competing with Bitcoin is money.

And, like, we make that a very clear story. And, you know, we have better economics, you know, for reasons, X, Y, and Z. Bitcoin's block reward is going to be unstable as inflation goes away. Like, all these different things are economic. But it doesn't make sense. Like, we're going to be better. We're going to be programmable enough. Obcat is never going to happen.

Like, you can tell a very coherent story there. Right. Even if it's not my preferred path. I think that is, like, actually a much better path than where we are today, which is, like, an unclear mix of none of us. on any of the three dimensions of what we're competing on. And that brings it back to that, like, you know, what does a lack of North Star concretely end up with? You can't tell your story is money if we don't agree whether the thing is money. So you're obviously going to lose there.

And you also aren't building the tech platform to compete with Salana because we don't even agree if we're competing with Salon or Celestia. And so that also becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of like, I don't even know if we're competing with them. We're like, we're kind of telling people not to just leave. And so then that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. you're going to lose to them too. So more importantly than honestly, which direction that we like really decide to lean into, I think the problem is just people just don't agree, which dimensions are we competing on. I'd like to get into just practical, actionable items that we can bring to the table for the Ethereum project, because I think we all agree,

this is not a technical issue. This is a social and political issue. So like, what are the actionable things that we would like to see out of Ethereum governance to really, like, write the ship? my attitude, if I can put my like name in the hat here, is I think we should kill the five swim lanes, the urges, kill the urges. I want the urge is gone. Let's replace them with three swim lanes, data availability, execution, and consensus because that's correlated to like the three big economic resources that a blockchain has. And only Ethereum has really identified first and is in the lead to the idea that like we're all building the same system here. So let's go build that. But I think it's also let's reframe and consolidate. three routes of progress to optimize for Ether to be the best money possible, for Ethereum to provide the most amount of DA possible, and for the Ethereum layer one to have the strongest amount of execution possible. And then the layer two ecosystem will just naturally emerge. Rather than being forced, it will just naturally emerge out of that. And then the cross-interoperability of the layer two is will have the benefits of a very strong layer one execution to be able to do

that interoperability. That's kind of what I would see is to reframe the roadmap. But John, Mike, like what would you bring to the table? What advice do you have for the Ethereum team, the Ethereum core devs, the all-core devs call? How would you suggest to them, like, where should they go? So the two things I had in the posts more concretely were one section was a, it's called it, like, talk to your customers. I think there's like a very clear trend in Ethereum of there is a pretty large disconnect disproportionately to other networks of like what are the core developers doing and looking at and working on and like what are the use cases and applications of this chain. and like a couple of tweets like I'd thrown in there very clearly

whereas I think it was like Potos who is basically saying like you know none of us core devs you know we don't spend time looking at applications like that's fine we don't need to we're low level and then Max was pointing out like you're designing EPBS like every application's transactions

are now going to go through this thing like shouldn't you probably understand like at a little bit better level like what do the applications like what are they doing what do they care about I think that's fair and Donkrod had also like argued that in a similar vein of like there's a big disconnect between like what is happening on all core devs versus you know like actually having a conversation

with a lot more the applications and a lot more focus on like what are we doing in service of like our big customers and i remember kyle had mentioned that on one of the podcasts i remember for it was the one that he had done with you or gwart or one of the others but i threw the quote in there of he was kind of like making this distinction of he was like you know he was like mark zeller had done a podcast recently who's like the main guy at ovae who's like the largest application on ethereum and he was talking about he's like i've never spoken to anyone at the eF before and like that just like seemed Like, that probably shouldn't be the case. Like, that is the biggest application on your chain with, like, $30 billion or whatever in it,

versus the strong contrast of that is, like, look at the Solana Foundation is, you know, who's, like, pointing out, like, they have a defy team, a D-PIN team, a stablecoin team, all these different things that is interfacing with all the specific use cases that are important. And they have had, like, literal technical changes come out as a byproduct of kind of that interaction and conversations of, like, the one that he points out is, like, token extensions on Solana, which is, like, a feature that they have ended up implementing as a direct result. of like, these are conversations that we had with, you know, payment providers and institution providers and, like, different applications of, like, they want more control over, like,

programmability of the token. Like, this is a useful feature that they want, so we're going to implement this. Those conversations, like largely aren't happening on Ethereum. And so kind of, like, the thought process that I end up, like, calling out in the post is, like, I think the way that you generally should be designing any of these things from first principles is you ask yourself, like, the first question is, like, what are we building for? Like, what is the end use case?

And then after that you can ask yourself, like, okay, this is the use case. What properties do we need for that use case? And then you could have an educated conversation about like, oh, this is the right EIP. This is the right upgrade to get those properties to like fulfill that use case. And right now, directly in Ethereum, there is a lot of just like skipping that first step, which makes that second step of like what properties are you optimizing for, like not super clear. Like we don't really know. And so that third step of like what EIP should we put in Pectra becomes this kind of like jumbled conversation of like it's super unclear because the properties and the prioritization of use cases. just kind of not there. So that is kind of just like a more like cultural fundamental thing. I think that would be quite useful. And then the other aspect of it is a more just like organizational and kind of like leadership style change. And the section that I like that called that was like wartime CEO, which was from a book, which I know Kyle has like used this analogy the same thing over the past few months of like it's hard thing about hard things. Yeah. It's a book by Ben Horowitz, who's like one of the founders of A16C has a startup background had run businesses before. And he has this chapter called Peace Time CEO, War Time CEO, where he's talking about kind of like the different

personalities of, you know, what are the types of leadership styles and skills that you need in kind of different scenarios? And where I would say Ethereum has like had more of a history of like being kind of in peacetime earlier on where just like you just focus on like build up the market, everything is good, you know, we're the leader and that's all you have to worry about. Versus now when you have credible competition, you really need to like align people a lot more and kind of get this message straight. And because like we actually like do. have real competition that we need to worry about right now. We can't just be, like, worried about 20-year research. It's like someone might overtake us in the next few years. And the challenge

that Ethereum has right now is that, like, we have very aggressively decentralized leadership in a bit of, like, an odd way that I would say. And like one of the quotes that I had in there, which I think was kind of indicative of it. It was a press switch who was talking on the Gwark podcast was kind of describing how, like, what we end up having in practice in Ethereum today is, like, Vitolik is putting these posts out on like the roadmap of your describing like these kind of five segments. But what I was calling out in there is like if you look at his posts on like possible futures of the Ethereum protocol, all of them are very clearly here are all of the technical options for you guys to look at. Like here are the tradeoffs for each of those things. Like asks the big questions

of like a big question that we have to answer is, you know, what should happen on the L1? And then he doesn't actually give opinions on any of those things of like, what should we do on the L1? It's very like, he just defines the possible paths without choosing any of them. It's very intentional, and, like, I fully understand the rationale and the reason for doing that is, you know, trying not to exercise this kind of centralized decision making because, yeah, in practice, if Atalik says a thing, like, a lot of people are probably just going to follow with it and, like, ah, does that look centralized? The problem is, I think we are in, like, a very weird mix today where the practical reality is Adelik is putting out his roadmap, and in practice, 99% of people, like, this is just the Ethereum roadmap. We are still just listening to, like, effectively, like, this is the founder, like, this is the roadmap. This is what we're doing. And I was like I was calling out, like, I think in many ways, Vitolic actually holds a higher position in Ethereum than, like, Tolly does in Salana in many ways. I think that he exercises less direct control of, like, saying, like, this is what we're going to do. But just like, I mean, subjectively, if you, like, look at conversations in Solano, we're like, if Tolly says a thing and a bunch of the Salana people think it's a stupid idea, like, they'll tell them the stupid idea. I notice a lot less of that inclination in Ethereum, honestly. And so the deal of that is like a lot of that kind of dynamic is exacerbating what I was talking about of we have all these technical ideas. Like we have all these EIPs that we could look at, but we don't have a like strong starting vision of, okay, but what are we building for?

Like what's the use case? Like what is the thing that we all agree on? What's the purpose of this? What do we need to optimize for? And so we just end up like going in circles on all like the very specific technical implementations because we really need to be fighting about the thing that's like kind of a step earlier. And so I think the hard question is how do we in practice solve this kind of social coordination? of how do we agree on what the vision should be? And I think the easiest way to get that as the wartime CEO, you know, you have someone who's super opinionated, whether that's Votelic or Justin

or Donkrod or someone who's like, does take a much more active role. So at an individual level, and then also probably at like somewhat of an organizational level. Right. Of the EF, I would say, has a very similar vibe to what I described with the Vatolic of like. Right. The EF is downstream of Vite. Yeah. And like the whole culture at the EF is very similar in a way of, you know, we do not take views as an organization. You know, a lot of them try to- buy subtraction. A lot of them try not to be too opinionated on different matters.

And so we end up with generally a very decentralized leadership, and a lot of leadership that I would say is directionally much less inclined to give you their opinions versus if you look at Stallone. I mean, like, they're all telling you they're very opinionated, strong stances all the time. And then people fight it out and like,

whatever you come to a decision. And so I think that in practice, like that is the easiest way and probably the way that it needs to go is you need some people to step up into a little bit more of a leadership role, kind of in Ethereum. So you're like, all right, we're going to hurt the cats. Like, we're going to get people aligned kind of on this vision. And then you could still have this like super decentralized process. I mean, like, look, you got all these client teams that are actually going to go figure out the details of the how and all of this. But taking a little more agency on, okay, we need to align people on the vision.

Like, we need to agree on a vision to start with. And I think that, like, the community is ready for that, as evidenced by, I think, like, I have been very pleasant. surprised at the reception of like the piece that I put out. And I think a lot of people are more open to this in the last month of realizing, I think that we kind of need to align around a vision more. And so it's just really a matter of how does that vision kind of come about and how do we end up all coordinating to agree on this thing? Because then everything can happen downstream of there. And we could figure out, you know, what should we prioritize as a result of that? Right. And I want to bring up the thing that I said at the very beginning of this podcast,

which is I noticed there's like two halves of the article. It's one, Ethereum has a coordination problem, which is what you were just talking about. And two, Ethereum has credible competition. And I want to emphasize that the idea here is, like, Ethereum has a coordination problem, regardless of the existence of its competition. And I think there are some people in Ethereum who don't want to admit that it has a coordination problem because the conversation is being brought in the context of, and Ethereum is losing to Solana, and it's going to have less data availability than Celestia, and because it's not as great money of Bitcoin. And so framing it in contrast to these other ecosystem, I think sets off a knee-jerk reaction of like, I decline the

existence of that. And I'm an advocate of saying, if that triggers you find, but like, internally, we can identify Ethereum's coordination problem inside just discussing Ethereum. Like, Ethereum doesn't have a defined, what are we building Ethereum for? It has this very decentralized leadership, which has pros and cons. And so there is this trade-off space that Ethereum has made, and now we are starting to run up into a lot of the costs of, again, maybe, maybe even early, very big successes for having a decentralized leadership model, and now we need to learn how to contend with these things. And these are the two bits of advice that John is bringing to the table for the Ethereum community. Mike, what would you add to it?

I was just going to say, so I feel like I've been saying this for a long time, but there's steel sharpened steel. This is why I've always been a massive fan of there being multiple different ecosystems and communities that are focused on solving different parts of this very large, multifaceted problem of how do we create and scale? blockchains. And I think there's a certain reality of how humans work, which is, in order to admit that there's a problem, something actually has to break in a really fundamental way. Otherwise, inertia is a really powerful force, and it's too easy to just say, nope, this is mostly working. And something that you said at the top of this episode, David, is something when we did that panel at DevCon, we're both a little concerned about, which is ultimately everything that we're saying today, I don't think has a massive impact on the price of Ethereum on a three

or four-year time horizon. I think you're already probably starting to see it. Ethereum has an ETF. I think it's probably going to go up regardless of what comes out of this discussion. But what I worry about there is that it could paper over this larger problem, which is going to metastasize on a longer time horizon. And that would be a real shame because I keep saying this also. I think the market that Ethereum is pursuing here is one of the larger ones in all of crypto. And I agree with John's point about it feels, I don't I don't mean this to sound mean or targeted or, you know, what do I know really at the end of the day. But I do think leadership is a component here. I would be, this is just one man's opinion, but I would be in the camp that you need the why to come from a smaller group of people and then decentralize the how as much as you possibly can. And I think one of the reasons why people have been reticent to do this is because there's some healthy amount of turnover that has to happen, I think. This is something that really naturally happens. Again, I'm going to say in governments, in startups, in large companies, in different types of communities where if you have two people, two groups of people with

competing visions, both of which are viable, one of those visions has to win, and then some amount of those people ultimately need to leave, because people will opt for coherence over almost everything else, and that's, I think, what is lacking. And so I agree with John that I think there needs to be a firmer hand on the stick when it comes to leadership. And that's going to mean, most likely, some amount of turnover in terms of potentially users. There's also a concept in startups. You have to fire your users in the early days. And as you scale and you ultimately end up evolving your product. And so there is going to be some turnover. And that's not a bad thing. That's the sign of healthy growth, I would say. And I think that's why as a community,

we've been relatively reticent to do this. But I would say, yeah, it's firm leadership, the willingness to have some turnover or fire community members or users. or whoever that ultimately ends up being so that you can get a coherent vision of how to improve your product. And the one obvious thing that I point out to is it's not just companies and governments and whatever that happens in.

It's exactly what happened to Bitcoin. Yeah, it is. Which is why I used that example a few times in the post is like, there's a reason that Bitcoin has a clear vision today. It's because they had two sides that had very different opinions on what we should do and like what their vision was for Bitcoin. And they fought it out. And it was like, all right, we're going to go a separate way.

It's like, we're going to go build our thing. And they both focused on that thing and the better one, one out. And that's where Bitcoin is as a result today. Because they're in a much cleaner, straightforward place. We all agreed on what we're building. This is what we're building. And Ethereum has kind of sat in that middle ground for a while without kind of the, you know, if there's 20% of the community who disagrees with us completely and, you know, wants to go, like, wholehearted Ether's money and, like, kick everyone off the L1 and, like, some of these things that 80% disagree with, maybe the 20% should go built a different thing.

And I think that would be like a reasonable kind of split to kind of end up happening, at least on the margin of like we kind of need to start forcing these questions. And my mind start answering them as opposed to just kind of like letting them kind of simmer. Because the result ends up being we end up having two visions which are just like directly in conflict at the end of the day. Right. I personally don't think there will be a split in the Ethereum community in the same way that like the Bitcoin chain hard forked into Bitcoin. Yeah, I don't think that will. I don't think so either. I don't think so.

I do agree that we should force the issue. and like we you know numbers going up now and now we can feel a little bit better about ourselves but that's just the dopamine like the IV drip that will kind of like just kick the can down the road like you're not actually solving anything you're just papering over it as Mike said so I do kind of and I enjoy the idea of like hey let's make that we it has to hurt first before it feels better and again emitting a problem is the first step towards the end of the article john you actually gave out a couple ideas for north stars ultrasound money versus world computer maybe you can take us through this last leg of your article. Yeah. Yeah. So the last part of it was like I was trying to make this point of

I think you can very strongly argue for either of the extreme ends and like I kind of like make a case for both of them to kind of highlight that I think you can actually go either of these directions and I think that either of these directions is probably better than kind of sitting around in the middle. One of them I call kind of like the eth is money or ethosolmoney kind of vision where you take a very opinionated view of like we are primarily just like we are competing with Bitcoin like money is the thing. Like, it is a failure if you do not become money. And we just, like, we start from there and we work outward. So, you know, then you can be, you know, we are probably going to spend a lot of time about being super obsessive about figuring out, like, what is the perfect issuance policy? Like,

this is priority number one. We're going to get our story straight so that we can start fudding Bitcoin, like, even more effectively. Like, we're going to point out, like, why their security budget is, like, completely screwed and why their role if you're, like, definitely not going to work. And, like, we're going to have a clear, incredible story of, like, why this thing makes sense. And then, like, once you have a strong story of, like, okay, money is the center of this thing, then the rest of the architecture kind of falls out from that of, okay, eth is money. And if this is the thing that matters and that everyone wants, most of the technical stuff, we could actually get rid of L1 scaling, like, ah, it's not a big deal anymore. For the

same reason that everyone is, like, desperately trying to build L2s on Bitcoin right now, it's because if your asset is the best money, well, then everyone is kind of forced to build on you, because, like, you are the ledger of record for that asset. Effectively, ultimately, everything does fundamentally have to settle to you as the, like, quote unquote, settlement layer. I hate that word, but in practice, that's what it ends up being. And so you could take a very strong opinionated to know, like, all right, like, get rid of the execution stuff. Like, you know, tell all the apps to leave. We don't care.

You know, we're not focused on increasing the gas limit. We're not focused on reducing the block times. Like, none of that matters. It's like, get the money story straight. Like coherent vision, which I think you like, you can pursue that and like it might work. I don't think it will work. Like my directional bias is like that probably won't because I think it's hard to out Bitcoin at its own game. But I think you, like, you can make a very clear story there.

And the other kind of argument, I would say, like, or direction North Star is like the world computer vision. And this is the one that I directly believe in more is, like, if you look at Ethereum today, like, the hard question that we need to ask ourselves is starting with one problem that I think a lot of people take is, I think a lot of people I've seen take this view of like, we should just ignore what the competition is doing and just like look at kind of Ethereum in a bubble, which I don't think makes sense. I think you need to like very much pay attention to like, what is Swanoo doing, what is Celina doing? What does Bitcoin doing? Like, how do we kind of fit in there? And so my general was like starting question is like, what is Ethereum's currently like it's like real unique and defensible value that is providing and moat that has. And right now that thing like very concretely is it is the most decentralized, credibly neutral, permissionless execution layer. Like that is the thing where those properties really matter the most. It's not on the DA side right now in practice. Most changes, like they don't care for the use Celeste or Ethereum DA. Like most of them like don't really care. I really do care if my money is an Ave on the L1. or if it's on some L2. Like, I quite frankly don't trust most of the L2s in large scale with my money. I'm keeping it on the L1.

Like, that is a very strong product market fit for Ethereum right now. Like that example of what Eric was talking about. I did the meme coins on Solana, but like for now, I'm keeping my serious money on Ethereum. And I think that like credible neutrality and kind of this like unstoppable world computer, I think is like a very coherent vision of in practice. Ethereum does have that advantage today. It is winning at this game. It has a moat there.

It has technical properties which makes sense for it. The multi-client architecture makes sense here. The liveliness properties of Gasper makes sense here. Salana goes down every once in a while. That is a problem for this. All that we, like, need to do is we don't need to get to a salon a level execution. The difference is, like, we preserve the credible neutrality, the, like, max of centralization, all of these things. On balance, though, we can shift the deed a little bit.

I mean, like, the example I basically gave is, like, we could change the node requirements to start from somewhere from, like, where a toaster in the Sahara Desert level to, like, maybe you should have to run, like, a laptop at home, like, a pretty good Lappnop on, you know, in, like, good home internet. Like, that seems like a reasonable requirement. And no, you're not going to get to Salon a level performance overnight. Like, it's fine. Like, I don't need Salon of level performance to just, like, have a large amount of money on Ave and just, like, use that normally. But, like, 2xing the gas limit to start now and just, like, getting that a few X over the next few years and, like, getting the blocks, you know, down from 12 seconds to 8 seconds. And then, you know, we work our way down to four and two over the next, like, five years.

and you get single slot finality in there. We make a very clear, credible commitment today. Like, we're improving the L1. Like, this is an important thing, and we lean into that. I think that is, like, a very strong product and, like, a real thing that you can offer. So I think it makes a lot of sense where if you're going to, like, lean into that as the kind of, like, center of the world computer. Because I think that we have sold ourselves a little bit too much of a story over the last couple of years of, like, don't worry. Like, the L2s are going to figure everything out.

Like, they're all going to be, like, these trustless, you know, burn the keys on, like, the governance, like, stage two, perfect rollups. in like a year from now, and like everything they'll be totally trustless. That's not the reality. It's not going to happen. I don't think it's ever going to happen. The majority of them are going to remain, like, they're going to have keys to upgrade these things. Like, companies are going to want to ship fast. They're going to want a competitive advantage. Like, people are not going to trust these at the same levels in L1.

They're great. Like, we should still have a very L2 friendly and L2 kind of like centric vision of, you know, we're promoting all these things. They're necessary. But those L2s are not the world computer. You know, the chain that has, you know, a few people on the multisig and is run by

public company is not the world's computer. That's like that's coinbase's computer, which is great. It's a great product. It's awesome. It's very different than, you know, a chain like Ethereum, which is, you know, a place that, you know, you can get large international financial players, like countries issuing CBDCs. I fucking hate CBDCs, but like they're the extreme example. Like that's the place where you'd probably issue them. If you just like needed like a contract where you're just putting them, that kind of thing. So I think that's a real thing for the theorem to lean into. And then from there, you know, you could tell that like that gives you a very coherent, like, okay, this gives us a good grounding for that conversation. Should we increase

the gas limits now? I absolutely think that you should. If you, like, if you agree with that argument that I made, then, you know, people like Donkrod who are tweeting right now, like, we should double the gas limit right now. That makes a lot of sense. It's obvious. We should do that and, like, make a credible commitment to keep scaling over time. And I think that doing those things now is a very good forcing function for making us commit to, like, this is the direction that we're going on this thing. And at the end of the day, this gets back to the, like, the path dependence of it. And you kind of end up competing on all these things. In practice, I think that gives you the highest probability of ETH winning as quote unquote money in the long term is actually just

focusing like a little bit less on like the economics and, you know, shouting money at people right now. It's let's just build the world computer. If you build that thing and that thing wins, like, ETH is going to be really valuable. Like, that's really not going to be an issue at the end of the day and kind of the rest of it falls out from that. So that's directly like the kind of the argument that I was laying out in there. Mike, what do you think about this direction for theorem or any new direction for Ethereum, any new North Star? I don't really have many notes on that. I think it's an interesting thought experiment to think about how the beamch... All right, there was Justin Drake unveiled the beam chain at DevCon,

listening to the great episode that you did with him. There were mixed reviews, I would say, on beam chain generally. As I actually, they're mostly negative. There was a good amount of pushback. I imagine if he at one point had a slide with the three different buckets of what Ethereum's roadmap was focused on. There was block production, cryptography, and I can't remember what the middle one was. But I do remember he had P0, P1, P2 in each of these three boxes. And at the bottom, in red, was a faster slot times.

So four second slot times. And it wasn't single slot finality, but it was a shorter time. Three slots. Yeah. And then like Fix the issuance was at the top. Fix the issuance was at the top. I wonder as a thought experiment if he had just reversed the prioritization on that, what the response from the community would have been.

Just sit and ask yourself that. I still don't think it would have been better. Maybe not. Maybe a little better. I think it would have been because all of these, like, I think I'm with you on this idea that focus on world computer. It's a single coherent thing that people can get to. But again, to me, these are all one thing. Like the mega trend, I think, you know, David, you mentioned we're in this world of crumbling fiat currency. The way that I have united these two viewpoints, at least in my

head of there's a tech component to this and a money component to this is the big driver of capital into this space is concern around fiat currency. And that's what's moving capital into L1s. And that's why I think on a long time horizon, this whole discussion that we're having doesn't really matter. I basically think these L1s are going to go up over a period of time. But then ultimately, people are going to start asking these questions and they're going to matter. And I think that Ethereum has chosen, again, the right viewpoint here. There is a meme discussion about is this a meme and does this really do anything or is there actual utility here? And I could give you a million analogs in TradFri that would tell you that ultimately on a long time horizon, the market size for,

assets that are productive and have some amount of utility is much larger than the meme assets. And so Theorem has done everything right. It's just this even subtle shift in reorientation in terms of leaning into that originally correct vision of providing more utility, generating fees, that type of thing. And I agree with John that the right way to get there is this world computer move some activity back to the L1 vision. As far as the talk, that's what I think was messing. I actually agree as a result of what we agree on as the vision that I would flip those priorities. The main thing that I think was lacking was just he didn't say what the vision was. It was the epitome of I agree with most of the things that were in that roadmap on some time scale.

And like that's cool. But like the example I gave in the paper was like the reason why something like the merge or the beam chain can't be your North Star is because, you know, you can't pitch Ethereum to someone. It's like, this is the chain that by 2030 is going to have a ZK consensus and single slot finance. and fix our issuance. Like, that's not a compelling vision. Right. The vision that, like, a user wants to hear is like, okay, but why? Like, what does it do for me?

Right. Saying it's like, we're doing all these things because we are building the world computer and this is going to be the place. Like, this can be the home of global finance and, like, you are going to use this thing and like this is going to be where you store all your money and like it's going to be great and, you know, computer in the sky. Like, that makes sense. So I think just like giving that vision is largely what we're missing.

And then the rest is kind of downstream. Yeah. And not to introduce this nuance at the end of this podcast, but there is a difference, I think, in between vision and goals. And a vision, honestly, one of the guys who comes up with the best visions in the world is Elon Musk, where if you look up what the vision of Tesla is, it isn't to create the best electronic car in the world. It is to accelerate the adoption of green energy. The vision for SpaceX is not to transport weight into space at half the cost that it takes, you know,

whoever to do it today, Boeing to do it today. And they can't do anything. It's to move humanity on Mars, right? you do need this long-term huge, like inspires people to get out of bed in the morning. Aligning vision. Aligning vision. Correct. But then what you ultimately need on a shorter-term time horizon is, okay, but I need to agree

that I'm working to on a two-year time horizon. Right, right. We still need to sell satellites and actually delivering satellites into space now and to make money now. Yeah. So we can colonize Mars later. Exactly. Because everyone needs to know how their work funnels up into that big vision. And, okay, Elon Musk getting on stage in stage.

saying, we're going to move everyone to Mars in 20 years. Everyone's like, let's go, Ivan. Okay. But then the SpaceX engineer that wakes up and thinks about their job on a two-year time rise needs to know, what am I doing to contribute to that? And so you need these two, you need the vision, and then you need the goals that roll up into the vision. Yeah. Guys, this has been great. John, thank you for writing the post. Thanks for coming on and helping unpack it. And then Mike, thank you for joining me and helping me out here. Yeah. This has been great. Thanks for having us on. Thank you. Cheers. Bank of the deal. Thanks. You guys know the deal. Crypto is risky. You can lose what you put in, but we are headed west into the

frontier with an unknown North Star that maybe we know by the end of this year, maybe next year. But we're glad you're with us on the bankless journey. Thanks a lot.