How Ethereum 2.0 Can Transform DeFi

The SEC’s decision in June to drop charges against Ethereum was a milestone in the platform’s journey toward maturity and greater acceptance in the financial world.

For those who didn’t follow the case, the SEC believed ether (ETH) was sold as an unregistered stock, with concerns that it was being sold without following certain rules and protocols. However, Ethereum’s proponents argued that, since the network is decentralized, it does not meet the criteria of an investment contract or security.

While the SEC may have decided against direct legal action, it did open the door for further discussions around centralization. Some technological aspects of Ethereum’s architecture have stimulated an important dialogue around contracting power among influential entities. While these discourses are mainly internal, addressing these concerns can enhance the network’s upgrade goals and support true decentralization.

This is especially true as the network tries to embody the ideals of “Ethereum 2.0,” the stronger, more accessible, and more practical version of its token and infrastructure. Some say it’s already here, while others point out gaps that still need to be filled to definitively claim its arrival.

Yes, Ethereum 2.0 holds significant potential for transforming DeFi and the broader ecosystem, but we can’t just have a foot halfway through the door. To reach its full potential, key developments still have to be reached.

Validator centralization

By transitioning to a proof-of-stake (PoS) mechanism in September 2022, Ethereum now allows validators to stake ETH, with large stakes increasing validation chances and rewards. This upgrade clearly underscores Ethereum’s key role in DeFi by sparking countless innovative financial tools being created on the network for lending and trading, among other use cases.

However, emphasizing token ownership over the number of validators could potentially concentrate power among smaller groups, going against crypto’s ethos of decentralization. Moreover, staking requires an input of 32 ETH, meaning that validators with significant ETH staked can wield disproportionate influence over network governance and decision-making processes. This creates a feedback loop that favors certain participants, and can lead to power and wealth accumulating in the hands of a few individuals.

In March, Vitalik Buterin even expressed his concerns about “lazy stakers,” or those who engage solely in staking pools rather than solo staking — clearly indicating the relevance of the centralization issue.

At its core, Ethereum represents a shift in the way financial services are designed, accessed, and utilized. However, relying on a few entities continues to introduce risks and questions about how decentralized Ethereum 2.0 really is.

Shifting gears to DeFi

Ethereum’s path towards centralization sets the stage for more severe complications down the line — namely with regulators and reduced network resilience. Ultimately, Ethereum’s future within DeFi and the blockchain ecosystem as a whole hinges on balancing technical advancements while limiting centralization wherever possible. And there are ways to make it achievable.

For example, liquid staking protocols like Lido or Rocket could offer heavy service staking, while existing stakers can opt to run light service operators. Rainbow staking will eventually result in a more efficient and competitive network while granting more liquid staking provider diversity. However, executing it won’t be easy and could add confusion to the overall staking structure.

Beyond rainbow staking, Ethereum could leverage network-wide advancements already introduced in its initial 2.0 updates, like sharding. While sharding has been scrutinized for its security issues, justifying the shift to Layer 2 and zero-knowledge developments, that doesn’t mean the technology should be outright abandoned.

We have seen evolutions here thanks to developments like “danksharding” specifically for Layer 2s. Danksharding involves proposer-builder separation (PBS), a deviation from how Ethereum validators function now — proposing and broadcasting blocks entirely on their own. Instead, PBS shares the love and splits up these tasks among multiple validators.

Ultimately, danksharding helps implement data availability, allowing validators to verify blob data quickly and efficiently, while simultaneously identifying missing data.

The aim here is to make transactions on Layer 2 as cheap as possible for users and scale Ethereum to validate over 100,000 transactions per second. This would allow dApps such as Uniswap to process transactions at a significantly lower cost with quicker transaction approval times.

However, danksharding’s highly technical infrastructure and implementation leave out smaller rollups and potentially encourage centralization. So, while the technology has fallen out of favor as is, its benefits in reducing hardware and helping scalability show that the technology itself could be improved upon to benefit the next generation of Ethereum. Perhaps an Ethereum 3.0.

Ethereum 2.0’s significant strides in the regulatory and decentralization arenas shouldn’t be ignored. Reducing the network’s reliance on small groups of actors for network operations and legal wins are all positive steps forward. However, the next phase of Ethereum as a network must include adapting to evolving legal requirements to firmly establish itself as a transformative force in DeFi and mainstream blockchain usage alike.

Despite these hurdles, Ethereum 2.0’s current achievements have set the ecosystem on the right path. By focusing on the future and reaffirming a commitment to decentralization, Ethereum has the force behind it to maintain a dominant role as an innovator in the blockchain landscape.

Getting its affairs in order is just a small part of cementing its legacy.

Note: The views expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of CoinDesk, Inc. or its owners and affiliates.