Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has raised fresh concerns about growing complexity within the Ethereum protocol, warning that years of feature additions combined with strict backward compatibility are leading to dangerous bloat. In a recent post, Buterin argued that true trustlessness, decentralization, and self-sovereignty depend not just on node counts or cryptographic strength, but on how simple and understandable a protocol remains over time.
According to Buterin, even a highly decentralized blockchain can fail its core mission if it becomes too complex to audit, explain, or rebuild. When protocols grow into massive codebases filled with advanced cryptography and layered rules, users are forced to rely on a small group of experts to interpret how the system works. This reliance undermines Ethereum’s original goal of empowering individuals to independently verify and understand the network.
Why Ethereum’s Growing Complexity Is a Risk
Buterin outlined three major risks caused by unchecked protocol expansion. First, trustlessness erodes when average users and developers can no longer reason about Ethereum without guidance from “high priests” of the ecosystem. Second, Ethereum risks failing the so-called “walkaway test,” meaning the network would struggle to survive if current core developers disappeared, as rebuilding full-featured clients would be extremely difficult. Third, self-sovereignty weakens when even highly technical participants cannot confidently inspect or validate the system themselves.
He traced the root of the problem to how upgrades are evaluated. Because backward compatibility is often treated as the highest priority, protocol changes tend to favor adding new features rather than removing outdated or rarely used ones. Over time, this creates a one-way path toward greater complexity, heavier clients, and more fragile infrastructure.
To counter this trend, Buterin proposed introducing an explicit “simplification” or “garbage collection” function into Ethereum’s development process. This would involve actively reducing total lines of code, minimizing dependence on complex cryptographic primitives, and introducing stronger invariants that make client behavior more predictable. In his view, simplifying a blockchain should be treated with the same seriousness as adding new capabilities.
Ethereum vs. Solana: Two Different Philosophies
Buterin pointed to past Ethereum upgrades as examples of successful cleanup. The transition from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake represented a major reset, while newer gas cost reforms aim to replace arbitrary rules with clearer, resource-based logic. He also suggested that rarely used features could be moved out of the core protocol and into smart contracts, reducing the maintenance burden on client developers.
This philosophy contrasts sharply with the approach taken by Solana Labs CEO Anatoly Yakovenko. Yakovenko has argued that constant evolution is essential for a blockchain’s survival, warning that networks which slow down or stop innovating risk becoming irrelevant. From his perspective, continuous iteration — even without a single guiding authority — is necessary to meet changing developer and user demands.
Buterin, however, envisions a future where Ethereum eventually reaches long-term stability. In that ideal state, the protocol would be simple, robust, and predictable enough to operate securely for decades with minimal ongoing intervention. His call for “garbage collection” highlights a growing debate in the blockchain world: whether long-term success comes from constant change or from disciplined simplicity.
