Author:CM
EF has proposed a new structure, taking this opportunity to reinterpret the Ethereum worldview. Crypto is in the midst of a massive wave; where is Ethereum headed?
EF has laid off 20% of its staff and announced a new structure—5 Work Layers. Compared to the previously loose foundation structure, EF will clearly define what it should do in the coming years. These 5 work layers are:
-
Protocol Layer
-
Access Layer
-
User Layer
-
Community Layer
-
Institutional Layer
We can understand this as the division of work responsibilities within EF.
1/5 · Protocol Layer
Maintain Ethereum's core properties, which is what Vitalik has been emphasizing as CROPS:
-
Censorship-resistant(Censorship-resistant)
-
Robust(Robust)
-
Open(Open)
-
Private(Private)
-
Secure(Secure)
The specific work is more focused on underlying technology, such as safely advancing hard forks, reducing trusted dependencies, resisting quantum threats, resisting toxic MEV, etc. This part is EF's bottom-line task and the core value of Ethereum. It has always advocated not sacrificing Ethereum's self-sovereign attributes for short-term financialization, institutionalization, or market narratives.
Of course, this appears very difficult in the current environment because, from a user's perspective, embracing institutions and the market is always hard to fault. In reality, I believe decentralization is not an excuse for laziness and evasion in marketing. If we view Ethereum as a brand-new world and CROPS as the bottom line of world order, then actively meeting the needs of various roles in this new world without leaving this bottom line is the only way to give this world existential value and quickly move beyond the utopia of the geek world. This is an extremely correct thing. Of course, EF doesn't necessarily have to do this. EF has also repeatedly expressed its position and role. I hope more organizations will do this in the future.
2/5 · Access Layer
The Access Layer focuses on whether users can actually use Ethereum's self-sovereign capabilities in practice. EF mentions several key actions: Read chain, transact, prove, authorize, exit. Users, and agents representing users in the future, should be able to complete these operations without relying on unverifiable intermediaries.
There is a very important principle here called zero option. It means that for every mediated path, there must be a trustworthy, intermediary-free alternative path, and this path must remain continuously available.
I think this is crucial. The most direct example is that if a front-end goes down one day, or a certain server fails, you should still be able to operate your funds by interacting directly with the contract. If you've ever been trapped once, you can deeply appreciate its significance.
3/5 · User Layer
The User Layer's task is to base EF's work on the needs of real users and real organizations. It will focus on user segmentation, user personas. Its significance is to connect the Protocol Layer and the Access Layer, enabling development to truly reach users and ensuring that these decisions are effective rather than imagined in isolation.
This is something EF was relatively lacking in the past. Many discussions tended to be overly research-oriented or infrastructure-oriented. We can clearly see that Ethereum's past prosperity, from DeFi summer to NFT summer, largely stemmed from community innovation. There was little intersection between the application side and the technical side, let alone feedback from the application side to the technical side. Ethereum thus entered an unexpected boom period in a fragmented manner.
Some attribute it to luck, others say it's the inevitable result of Ethereum's technical accumulation. In fact, the Ethereum ecosystem did lead to the explosion of on-chain applications. Crypto entered a new era, but back then, developers and users didn't have many choices, so smart people and smart money gathered on Ethereum.
Today's situation is very different. L1s and L2s are everywhere, and the cost of launching a chain has rapidly decreased. Although Ethereum still holds security and stability as its biggest moat, when other competitors haven't exposed problems, this value isn't easily recognized by users and developers. (I personally agree that security is the biggest moat for a public chain.)
Therefore, the User Layer is the work EF should pay the most attention to. A new world needs to understand what its residents want.
4/5 · Community Layer
Its significance is to maintain and disseminate the consensus on Ethereum's values.
-
Within the ecosystem: Help the community understand why Ethereum exists, what should be upheld, and what narratives should not lead it astray.
-
Outside the ecosystem: Help EF establish connections with adjacent fields such as open source, privacy, civil liberties, and public interest technology.
So what consensus does it aim to establish? According to the EF article and my understanding of Ethereum, it can be summarized as follows:
-
Not being hijacked by centralized interests
-
Adhering to technological neutrality, not being swayed or influenced by any cultural, political, or other factors
-
Upholding the CROPS-based values, not sacrificing any of them for short-term commercial benefits
The consensus erosion in this cycle is, I think, the most severe in history. Before, crypto hadn't entered the mainstream spotlight, the user base was small, there were few applications, and prices were sluggish. None of these problems made users lose faith that decentralization is the future. In this cycle, with the launch of BTC and ETH spot ETFs, the emergence of DAT companies, the U.S. stablecoin bill, and institutions starting to develop L1s, more people have been exposed to crypto. From this perspective, it's a huge success. But the impact it brings is slowly becoming apparent. This impact is subtle but gradually changing the underlying logic of this market.
For example, the massive inflow of stablecoins onto the chain brought TVL but also replaced the monetary properties of BTC and ETH. How long has it been since we heard the term "coin-based standard"? Before the birth of USDT, exchanges mainly used coin-to-coin trading modes, mostly with BTC as the trading pair. During DeFi summer, on-chain LPs mostly used ETH as the trading pair. During NFT summer, prices were quoted in ETH. Looking at today, these things are gradually disappearing. The hand of dollar hegemony has extended onto the blockchain. DAT companies have even packaged crypto into what they once hated the most.
Regarding decentralization, people's perspective has shifted from fighting against the opacity, corruption, and inefficiency of traditional finance to questioning whether institutions need decentralization. Actually, this question doesn't require much thought. The demand for decentralization by institutions is definitely limited or exists in certain special scenarios. The term "decentralization" is being discussed less and less, even with a hint of mockery.
Of course, I believe crypto has no reason to reject institutional demand. It is permissionless. Both institutions and individual users should be accepted. However, if we change the underlying consensus of the public chain, the consensus based on decentralization, just to welcome institutional entry, we cannot define it as wrong. But the ultimate outcome of this move isn't much different from a second internet—a few authoritative institutions controlling network nodes. If this situation continues to develop, these chains will quickly become some country's chain or some institution's chain. Then, cutting off Iran's business on a U.S. chain would be easy. Many people compare a neutral and decentralized public chain to the high seas, which seems somewhat reasonable.
5/5 · Institutional Layer
Responsible for EF's interactions with institutions, but premised on self-sovereignty. EF's statement regarding institutions is not "making it easier for institutions to control users" but emphasizes using Ethereum and cryptographic technology to create better integration cases.
This statement is very clear, as discussed above. Those truly universal, ongoing businesses serving global users are still most suitable to be placed on the Ethereum public chain because they will never be subject to interference from certain coercive means or factors. In contrast, ecosystems with centralized control power find it increasingly difficult to achieve this over time.
To conclude, we are in the midst of a massive wave and cannot change it. But Bitcoin and Ethereum have experienced countless market changes. Regardless of whether it's dawn or darkness outside, the next block is produced as usual.
