The Real Face of Decentralization: How Ethereum Avoided the Trap of Centralization
3-Point Summary
- Many blockchains claim decentralization but operate under centralized structures led by foundations, corporations, or core teams.
- The Ethereum Foundation (EF) takes a fundamentally different approach — it does not run validators, control the network, or use ETH holdings to exert influence.
- EF focuses on philosophy, protocol direction, and ecosystem support, while network operation is fully distributed across independent participants.
Even in “decentralized” blockchains, hidden forms of centralization persist — but the Ethereum Foundation chose a different path.
20-Second Shorts Video
The Hidden Shadow of Centralization in “Decentralized” Blockchains
What the Ethereum Foundation (EF) Does — and Does Not Do
This article builds on two previous DCT analyses: “Why Decentralized Systems Grow Stronger When Central Authority Fades” and “The Truth About PoS Security: Ethereum Is Secured by Capital, Solana by Performance” . Both articles emphasized that decentralization is not a slogan but a structural design choice, and each blockchain implements it differently.
Extending that discussion, this article examines how many blockchains claim “decentralization” as a core value while still operating under highly centralized structures dominated by foundations, corporations, or core development teams. However, the recent message released by the Ethereum Foundation (EF) moves in a completely different direction.
EF describes itself as “not the center of Ethereum, but a small node with a clear purpose.” Its internal document highlights several key points:
- The most valuable product Ethereum has created is ETH as an asset.
- Approximately $250 billion worth of ETH is secured by the network.
- The author personally holds 90% of their net worth in ETH.
- Yet, many tasks required to support ETH as an asset fall outside EF’s scope.
- Therefore, other organizations and contributors in the ecosystem must share responsibility.
This aligns with Vitalik Buterin’s recent statement that “EF is not the center of Ethereum, but merely one node in the ecosystem.” So what exactly does EF do — and what does it intentionally avoid doing? And how does this compare to other blockchain projects? Let’s break it down into four key questions.
1) Does the Ethereum Foundation directly or indirectly operate validators?
(Comparison with Solana, BNB, and Ripple)
① Ethereum (Ethereum Foundation): Absolutely no validator operation
EF does not operate validators — neither directly nor indirectly. This is a deliberate choice.
- To avoid centralization risks
- To maintain censorship resistance
- To preserve capture resistance
- To uphold the philosophy that “EF is not the center of Ethereum”
- To ensure validator operations are handled by individuals, companies, communities, and staking services
In short, EF stays completely out of network operations.
② Solana: A structure with strong foundation influence
Solana has many validators, but high hardware requirements create a steep entry barrier. Network stability depends heavily on a small number of high-performance nodes. Solana Foundation and Solana Labs play central roles in upgrades, client development, and token distribution.
Validators appear distributed, but decision-making remains highly centralized.
③ BNB Chain: A de facto corporate-style centralized chain
BNB Chain has only 21 active validators, many of which are directly or indirectly connected to Binance. The validator selection mechanism itself is centralized, making network control effectively concentrated in Binance.
④ Ripple (XRP Ledger): Distributed in structure, centralized in influence
Ripple’s validator model relies on the UNL (Unique Node List) provided by Ripple Labs. Most nodes follow this list, giving Ripple Labs substantial influence over network direction.
It appears distributed, but real influence is centralized.
⑤ Comparison Summary
In summary:
- Ethereum: Maintains a clear structure where the foundation does not operate validators
- Solana, BNB, Ripple: Foundations or corporations exert deep influence over operations and governance
From this perspective, Ethereum’s decentralization is structurally the strongest.
2) How much ETH does EF hold compared to validator count and total staked ETH?
To understand EF’s position within the network, we must look at validator count, total staked ETH, and EF’s ETH holdings together.
- Ethereum validators: Over 1,000,000
- Staked ETH: Approximately 33M ETH (about 32% of total supply)
- EF’s ETH holdings: Less than 0.3% of total supply
Thus, even though EF holds a meaningful amount of ETH, it is nowhere near enough to influence or control the staking structure. ETH is Ethereum’s most important financial output, but its control is distributed among many independent participants.
3) Why does EF avoid participating directly in network operations?
EF is not an operational body — it is a philosophical and directional steward. Vitalik Buterin highlights several core responsibilities:
● Preventing centralization risks
If EF operated validators or controlled network operations, people could claim “Ethereum is controlled by EF,” leading to power concentration, censorship risks, and erosion of Ethereum’s core values.
● Maintaining censorship and capture resistance
EF’s role is not to control the network but to ensure no one else can control it. This includes designing and monitoring governance and protocol structures.
● Upholding the philosophy that the ecosystem must run the network
Ethereum is not meant to be operated by a single institution. It must be run by individuals, companies, communities, and independent validators. EF intentionally steps back to preserve this structure.
4) What must EF do to maintain decentralization without operating the network?
Instead of running the network, EF focuses on protecting the foundations of the network. Its responsibilities fall into five categories:
1) Protocol research and development
- Consensus, security, privacy, and core protocol research
- Long-term roadmap and upgrade direction
2) Ensuring censorship and capture resistance
- Designing structures that prevent corporate or governmental takeover
- Monitoring centralization risks
3) Supporting the community and ecosystem
- Funding external teams, researchers, and developers
- Expanding the ecosystem through diverse contributors
4) Maintaining transparency and openness
- Keeping the system verifiable by anyone
- Continuing open-source development and transparent decision-making
5) Providing long-term direction
As Vitalik describes, EF aims to remain “a small but long-lasting organization” and “a node with a clear philosophy” to ensure Ethereum’s core values remain intact.
Conclusion: The Shadow of Centralization in “Decentralized” Blockchains — and the Path EF Chose
Even blockchains that champion decentralization carry their own forms of centralization beneath the surface. Solana relies heavily on high-performance hardware and foundation-led upgrades; BNB Chain operates with just 21 validators closely tied to a single corporation; Ripple’s UNL structure gives Ripple Labs substantial practical influence. They appear decentralized on paper, yet decision-making power often converges on a central entity.
Ethereum has taken a fundamentally different path. The Ethereum Foundation (EF) does not run the network, does not operate validators, and does not wield influence through massive ETH holdings. This is not a symbolic gesture — it is a deliberate structural choice to preserve decentralization.
EF’s role is not to “operate” Ethereum but to safeguard its philosophy and direction. It focuses on protocol research, censorship resistance, capture resistance, ecosystem support, and long-term roadmap design. Meanwhile, the actual operation of the network is distributed across thousands of independent validators, developers, companies, and community participants.
In other words, the community operates Ethereum, while EF protects its direction and values. This division of responsibility is the mechanism through which Ethereum maintains decentralization — and it stands in clear contrast to chains where foundations or corporations remain deeply embedded in network control.
EF is not the center of Ethereum. It is a “small but enduring node” whose purpose is to preserve the philosophical and technical foundations that make Ethereum meaningful. And that is precisely why Ethereum has been able — and will continue — to uphold decentralization as a living principle, not just a slogan.
Younchan Jung
Researcher exploring structural shifts in AI, blockchain, and the on‑chain economy.
If you would like to read this article in Korean, please click the button below.
댓글
댓글 쓰기