In a recent post on X, Vitalik Buterin argued that protocol simplicity is one of the most overlooked pillars of trustlessness and self-sovereignty.
Buterin’s argument cuts against a common assumption in crypto: that more features and more advanced cryptography automatically make a protocol stronger. He warns that once a system grows into hundreds of thousands of lines of code and relies on multiple forms of highly specialized cryptography, it creates a new kind of centralization.
At that point, users are no longer trusting the protocol itself – they are trusting a small circle of specialists to explain what the protocol does and why it is safe. That undermines the idea of trustlessness. It also weakens the “walkaway test”: if current client teams disappear, rebuilding the software from scratch becomes unrealistic for newcomers.
From Buterin’s perspective, true self-sovereignty means that even highly technical users should be able to inspect the system and convince themselves how it works. If that becomes impossible, ownership of the protocol becomes abstract rather than real.
Feature Creep as a Long-Term Risk
Buterin also expressed concern about Ethereum’s tendency to accumulate features over time. Backwards compatibility makes it easier to add new components than to remove old ones, which slowly bloats the protocol. Each added component increases the surface area for bugs and unintended interactions, raising security risks rather than reducing them.
He frames this as a trade-off between short-term functionality and long-term resilience. Features that solve narrow problems today can become permanent liabilities if they complicate the system for decades. For a blockchain that aims to last a century, that trade-off matters.
Why Simplification Needs to Be Explicit
To counter this dynamic, Buterin argues that Ethereum needs a formal “simplification” or “garbage collection” mindset built into its development process. That means actively reducing complexity, not just managing it.
In his view, simpler protocols are safer protocols. Fewer lines of code, fewer deep dependencies, and clearer invariants make it easier for multiple independent teams to implement clients correctly. He points to past upgrades, such as changes that placed clearer limits on storage behavior or transaction costs, as examples of how well-defined rules can significantly simplify client development.
Big Resets and Quiet Demotions
Buterin also highlighted that simplification does not always have to be incremental. Some of Ethereum’s most important cleanups were large-scale, such as the transition away from proof-of-work. Future efforts, including work on leaner consensus designs, could open the door to fixing multiple structural issues at once.
Another idea he emphasized is moving rarely used or overly complex features out of the core protocol and into smart contracts. This approach allows advanced functionality to remain available without forcing every new client implementation to support it at the base layer. Over time, even major components like the virtual machine itself could be abstracted away from the core.
Ethereum’s Adolescence Is Ending
Buterin framed Ethereum’s first 15 years as an experimental phase, a period of rapid change and exploration. Looking ahead, he believes the pace of change should slow, not because innovation is finished, but because stability becomes more valuable as the system matures.
The broader message is clear: if Ethereum is meant to outlast political cycles, companies, and even ideologies, it cannot afford to carry unnecessary complexity forever. Simplicity, in Buterin’s view, is not a limitation – it is the foundation of long-term decentralization.