Questioning the primacy of blockchain technology in the realm of Web3 may seem heretical to some. For those who have dedicated their careers to Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other blockchain innovations, the proposition that progress and decentralization can exist without blockchains appears absurd. However, given the well-documented scaling limitations of blockchain, there exists a compelling argument that Web3 may not necessarily require blockchains for its advancement. Instead, what it fundamentally needs are payment systems and verifiable settlement mechanisms that can operate rapidly and efficiently.
While blockchain has effectively addressed the double-spending problem, it has also introduced significant architectural constraints, particularly a rigid adherence to total ordering. This means that every transaction must wait for its turn in a global queue, subject to a monolithic consensus process. This approach made sense primarily within payment ecosystems where security and straightforwardness took precedence. However, in the expanded context of Web3—where complex applications demand speed, flexibility, and scalability—this inflexible system has become a limiting factor, imposing a serialized mechanism that throttles throughput and confines developers to a narrow array of design options.
The Undeniable Influence of FastPay
Take, for instance, the mobile remittance application FastPay. It demonstrated that double-spending could be managed without a strict total order, which has encouraged the development of systems like Linera, utilizing independent local orderings while ensuring global verifiability. FastPay has inspired innovations such as POD and Sui’s single-owner objects protocol, suggesting that had FastPay been introduced before Bitcoin, the landscape of decentralized technologies might look entirely different today.
Critics may argue that total ordering is crucial for maintaining financial integrity or that without blockchains, the very essence of decentralization diminishes. Such concerns often conflate a specific implementation of trustlessness with the overarching principle of trustlessness itself. The bedrock of decentralized systems lies in the verifiability of transactions, not in their exact temporal sequence within a global ledger.
Blockchain’s Growing Pains Are Still on Display
Despite efforts by Ethereum through the Dencun upgrade to enhance transaction throughput with what are termed “blobs,” the core architectural issue remains: a dependence on total ordering. Meanwhile, Solana’s introduction of the Lattice system has yet to eliminate outages caused by bugs and excessive network demand. The emergence of Layer 2 solutions appears more like a temporary fix—a method of offloading transactions from main networks only to reintroduce them later, effectively managing congestion rather than resolving it.
The Rise of Flexible Payment and Settlement Protocols
As in traditional tech ecosystems, the mantra of “evolve or die” holds for investors and builders tethered to outdated blockchain paradigms. Future success will favor protocols that prioritize flexible and verifiable payment systems over strictly enforced total ordering, thereby unlocking greater throughput and enhancing user experiences. As decentralized applications continue to mature and autonomous agents powered by AI start interacting with blockchain technology, adhering to sequential transaction models may become a competitive disadvantage.
Signs of this transformative shift are already emerging, with increased adoption of modular blockchain frameworks like Celestia, which emphasize a broader recognition of the limitations inherent in classical blockchains. The development of data availability layers, execution shards, and off-chain verification mechanisms presents new avenues to decouple the trusted validation from the restrictive sequencing model. While these initiatives might not entirely sever ties with previous systems, they undeniably signal a movement toward more adaptable infrastructural solutions.
A New Role for Blockchain
This evolution does not imply that blockchain technology will vanish; rather, it must undergo a transformation. In the future, its most effective role may be serving as a universal verifier—functioning more like a decentralized notary rather than a dominating ledger embedded in a more agile technology stack. This essential evolution poses challenges, as a significant amount of capital, ideology, and professional risk is tied to existing narratives.
A multitude of venture funds, DeFi protocols, and so-called “Ethereum killers” are financially and reputationally aligned with maintaining blockchain’s central position within the ecosystem. Nevertheless, history has shown little mercy to technological incumbents that cling to outdated models. Just as the internet evolved beyond its initial walled gardens, Web3 is also set to transcend the constraints of block-based sequencing. The rewards from the next wave of innovation will favor those who are astute enough to recognize and leverage this pivotal moment in the industry.
Opinion by: Grigore Roșu, founder and chief executive officer of Pi Squared.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
