TL;DR
- Cyber Capital’s Justin Bons criticizes the impact of Layer 2 (L2) solutions on Ethereum following the implementation of EIP-4844.
- He claims that ETH is losing relevance as L2s are fragmenting the ecosystem and centralizing control.
- Bons expresses little hope for the future of ETH, accusing its leadership of sacrificing decentralization in favor of capital interests.
In a recent critical analysis, Justin Bons, founder and Chief Investment Officer of Cyber Capital, launched harsh criticism towards the current state of Ethereum.
According to Bons, Ethereum is experiencing a significant decrease in its fee revenue due to the implementation of EIP-4844, also known as Proto-Danksharding.
1/9) Ethereum is dying while L2's dance on its grave
ETH cannot sustain high fee revenue because it lacks the capacity
At the same time, L2s are seeing record highs in usage & fees while they lobby to keep ETH's capacity down!
That is what makes it a parasitic relationship: 🧵
— Justin Bons (@Justin_Bons) August 26, 2024
This decline, he argues, is due to Layer 2 (L2) solutions capturing a large portion of the fees that previously sustained the Ethereum network, leading to increased inflation within the ecosystem.
Bons argues that this dynamic has fragmented the Ethereum ecosystem, weakening the liquidity and composability that are essential to the smooth functioning of the network.
He further questions the true decentralization of L2s, pointing out that many of the major L2 solutions are highly centralized, with the potential to censor or even appropriate users’ funds.
For Bons, this contradicts the decentralization principles that were originally used to justify Ethereum’s scaling roadmap.
Bons analysis also criticizes the lack of on-chain governance within the Ethereum community, which he says has led to a centralized capture of control over the development of the network.
From their perspective, this lack of effective governance has allowed L2 entities to disproportionately influence the direction of Ethereum, creating a conflict of interest where these layer 2 solutions have incentives to keep the mainnet limited to protect their own market.
An uncertain future for Ethereum
Bons’ view on the future of Ethereum is pessimistic.
He claims that L2 dominance has made a return to network scaling at Layer 1 (L1) impossible, and suggests that any technological advancement in L1 could render L2s obsolete, sending their token and share prices plummeting.
However, he believes this scenario is unlikely due to the vested interests that now dominate the ecosystem.
Bons argues that L2s are essentially “stealing” users and fees from Ethereum, operating under the pretense of being an extension of the mainnet when in reality they act more as competitors or, at worst, parasites that are draining the life out of Ethereum.
According to their analysis, L2s could eventually migrate to their own independence or become new Layer 1s, leaving Ethereum in a state of decline.
In his conclusions, Bons expresses deep disappointment with Ethereum’s leadership, which he accuses of having “sold” the network to L2s , sacrificing the decentralization and integrity of the original project in favor of capitalist interests.
This critical view calls into question Ethereum’s future as the leading platform in the cryptocurrency space, suggesting that it has lost its way in the process of adapting to an ecosystem increasingly dominated by private interests.
