The increasing complexity of the Ethereum protocol is becoming a long-term hidden risk that needs attention. As the founder of Ethereum, Vitalik Buterin recently pointed out, the continuously growing protocol complexity could pose a serious threat to ecosystem health.
This accumulation of complexity stems from multiple aspects: firstly, the ongoing expansion of functionality—each upgrade attempts to introduce new capabilities; secondly, the security model becomes increasingly difficult to verify; thirdly, developers face higher audit costs and risk management pressures.
Simple and straightforward protocol design should be the advantage of blockchain, but now this simplicity is gradually being sacrificed. While functional expansion can attract more applications, excessive complexity makes the system more vulnerable to bugs and also makes it harder for new participants to understand and contribute. This reminds the entire ecosystem that while pursuing innovation, it must also be vigilant about the accumulation of technical debt—sometimes, deleting code is more important than adding code.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
12 Likes
Reward
12
8
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
CascadingDipBuyer
· 12h ago
Vitalik finally spoke... We should have stopped blindly piling on features a long time ago
---
This wave is indeed a sign of exploding technical debt; deleting code is a hundred times harder than writing code
---
As complexity increases, security actually decreases—typical self-destructive innovation
---
Laughing to death—wanting both features and simplicity—how is that possible?
---
Audit costs are skyrocketing; small developers are basically out of the game—it's really quite ironic
---
Protocol bloat—Ethereum should learn from Bitcoin's restraint
---
Wait, doesn't that mean Ethereum will ultimately destroy itself? That's a bit scary
---
I just want to know if it's still possible to turn back now. It feels like it's already too late
---
Can features and security be traded off? Do we have to have everything?
---
Developers are exhausted... Every upgrade requires relearning everything—who can handle that?
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHarvester
· 01-20 23:54
Vitalik has explained it so clearly, why are people still rushing to pile on features?
---
In plain terms, it's greed—wanting everything, but ending up with everything falling apart in the end.
---
Technical debt, you’ll have to pay it off sooner or later.
---
With higher complexity, audit costs also skyrocket, and small developers are directly discouraged.
---
Really, sometimes doing subtraction is much harder than addition.
---
Isn't this a classic case of overengineering? Ethereum is now a bit hard to open the bottle cap.
---
Newcomers reading this protocol must be very confused; no wonder competing chains are rising.
---
Every upgrade tries to add new things, but it’s becoming more and more bloated, which is a bit funny.
---
Vitalik is subtly implying that there are issues with project management.
---
Simplicity is king; now everything is the opposite.
View OriginalReply0
PonziDetector
· 01-18 21:02
Vitalik is right. Ethereum is now digging its own grave, piling up features that result in a big mess.
Who suffers the most from complexity explosion? Isn't it us old guys who need to audit contracts? The costs are extremely high.
Deleting code is more important than adding code... This statement really hit me. Many projects just add features without reducing liabilities.
View OriginalReply0
PancakeFlippa
· 01-18 21:01
Vitalik is right. Ethereum is indeed a bit bloated now.
Deleting code is a hundred times harder than adding code, and no one wants to take the blame for it.
The higher the complexity, the more vulnerabilities there are. This truth is harsh but very realistic.
Speaking of which, isn't this the common problem of all major projects? In the end, they all have to pay off their debts.
It seems Ethereum needs to be ruthless and do some pruning; otherwise, the risks will only pile up higher.
View OriginalReply0
OldLeekConfession
· 01-18 21:00
Vitalik has already said it, we still have to listen. The complexity is indeed getting out of control.
Deleting code is much harder than adding code. No one wants to do this job, right?
These years of upgrades have become more and more fragile in the end, it's hilarious.
View OriginalReply0
FallingLeaf
· 01-18 20:59
Vitalik's points this time are really on point. Ethereum is indeed a bit bloated now.
The code cleanup ability is there, but no one cares about security risks, huh?
Deleting code is much harder than adding code, and that's the real problem.
View OriginalReply0
TopBuyerBottomSeller
· 01-18 20:45
Vitalik has started to reflect, and that's the right move. No matter how many features are added, it's useless if stability collapses.
View OriginalReply0
FOMOSapien
· 01-18 20:43
Vitalik has already said that complexity needs to be reduced, and we're still adding new features... Truly impressive
If ETH keeps piling up like this, it will eventually collapse
Deleting code is much harder than adding code, that's just the reality
The more complex the protocol, the more vulnerabilities it has—this logic makes sense
Once again, a warning before a wave of technical debt explodes; whether it will be heeded is hard to say
The increasing complexity of the Ethereum protocol is becoming a long-term hidden risk that needs attention. As the founder of Ethereum, Vitalik Buterin recently pointed out, the continuously growing protocol complexity could pose a serious threat to ecosystem health.
This accumulation of complexity stems from multiple aspects: firstly, the ongoing expansion of functionality—each upgrade attempts to introduce new capabilities; secondly, the security model becomes increasingly difficult to verify; thirdly, developers face higher audit costs and risk management pressures.
Simple and straightforward protocol design should be the advantage of blockchain, but now this simplicity is gradually being sacrificed. While functional expansion can attract more applications, excessive complexity makes the system more vulnerable to bugs and also makes it harder for new participants to understand and contribute. This reminds the entire ecosystem that while pursuing innovation, it must also be vigilant about the accumulation of technical debt—sometimes, deleting code is more important than adding code.