Opinion by: Grigore Roșu, founder and chief executive officer of Pi Squared
The future of Web3 doesn’t necessarily hinge on blockchain technology. While blockchain solved the double-spending problem, its inherent limitations in scalability are prompting a search for alternatives. Fast, verifiable payment and settlement systems are key to Web3’s evolution, and blockchains are just one pathway, not the only one.
The Limitations of Blockchain
Blockchain’s reliance on total ordering – where every transaction must be processed in a global queue – introduces architectural burdens. This mechanism, while secure, can throttle throughput and limit design flexibility. In Web3, where complex applications require speed and scale, this becomes a significant constraint.
FastPay: A Blockchain Alternative
Mobile remittance app FastPay demonstrated that double-spending can be avoided without total ordering. This inspired systems like Linera, which use independent local orderings while maintaining global verifiability. Such systems prove a more scalable future is possible. If FastPay had been invented before Bitcoin, blockchain might never have captured the cultural or technical imagination in the way that it did.
Verifiability vs. Total Ordering
Concerns that total ordering is essential for financial integrity or that decentralization unravels without blockchains are misplaced. Decentralized systems are underpinned by transaction verifiability, not the order in which transactions occur. This distinction is critical for scalability.
Blockchain’s Growing Pains
Even with upgrades like Ethereum’s Dencun, which aims to improve throughput, the architecture remains tied to total ordering. Solutions like Solana’s Lattice system still suffer from outages and excessive load. Layer-2 solutions (L2s) serve as workarounds, offloading transactions from mainnets only to reintroduce them later, creating congestion management issues.
The Rise of Flexible Protocols
Investors and builders anchored to traditional blockchain architectures must adapt. Protocols prioritizing flexible, verifiable payment systems and settlement over rigid total ordering will unlock greater throughput and user experiences. As decentralized applications and AI-driven autonomous agents evolve, the cost of sequencing everything in order will become a competitive disadvantage.
Modular Blockchain Frameworks
The growing adoption of modular blockchain frameworks like Celestia highlights the recognition that classical blockchains are inflexible. Data availability layers, execution shards, and off-chain verification mechanisms decouple blockchain’s validation from its sequencing model, pointing toward more adaptable infrastructure.
A New Role for Blockchain
Blockchain isn’t disappearing but evolving. Its enduring role may be as a universal verifier, a decentralized notary within a broader, more agile stack. However, this shift won’t be smooth, as significant capital, ideology, and career risk are tied to the legacy narrative.
The Future Landscape
Many venture funds, DeFi protocols, and “Ethereum killers” have vested interests in maintaining blockchain’s centrality. However, history favors those who adapt to technological advancements. Web3 is poised to move beyond block-based sequencing, and the next wave of infrastructure will reward those who understand and capitalize on this inflection point.
Key Takeaways:
- Scalability Challenges: Traditional blockchains face scalability issues due to total ordering requirements.
- Alternative Solutions: FastPay and modular frameworks offer scalable alternatives without sacrificing decentralization.
- Verifiability Matters: Transaction verifiability is more crucial than strict sequencing for decentralized systems.
- Evolving Infrastructure: Flexible payment systems and settlement protocols are gaining prominence.
- Blockchain’s New Role: Blockchain may evolve into a universal verifier within a broader infrastructure.
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.
