吴说获悉，Vitalik Buterin 指出，协议简洁性是去信任化、自我主权与长期安全的核心。即便高度去中 心化，若代码臃肿、依赖复杂，仍会迫使用户信任少数专家并削弱可持续性。他呼吁以太坊引入明确 的"简化/垃圾回收"机制，减少不必要功能与复杂依赖、强化不变量，并将少用但复杂的特性下放到合 约层，以避免协议持续膨胀，支撑长期稳定发展。 （来源：吴说） ...

Core Insights - The cryptocurrency industry has deviated from its original mission, as highlighted by Gavin Wood, co-founder of Ethereum and Polkadot, during a podcast discussion [2] - The conversation critiques the increasing regulation and centralization of stablecoins like USDT and USDC, which are becoming akin to traditional banks [8][11] - There is a call for a return to the foundational ideals of the crypto space, emphasizing self-sovereignty and transparency over reliance on opaque institutions [12][15] Group 1: Regulation and Centralization - Stablecoins are described as highly regulated centralized banks, which raises concerns about their alignment with the original decentralized ethos of cryptocurrencies [8][11] - The more compliant these projects become, the more they resemble traditional banking systems, potentially undermining the core principles of decentralization [11][12] - The discussion suggests that increased regulation may lead to a loss of the original vision of the crypto industry, as it becomes absorbed into the existing financial order [11][12] Group 2: Self-Sovereignty and Responsibility - The concept of self-sovereignty is emphasized as a means to escape arbitrary power, advocating for individuals to understand and navigate the rules that govern their lives [19][23] - Democracy is contingent upon citizens having a sense of responsibility and awareness, which is currently lacking in many individuals [16][19] - The ideal world envisioned is one where individuals are empowered to make informed choices without relying on opaque authorities [15][19] Group 3: The Future of Crypto and Network States - The potential for cryptocurrencies and blockchain protocols like Solana, Ethereum, and Polkadot to function as "network states" is explored, suggesting a new form of governance that transcends traditional nation-states [24][26] - The discussion raises questions about the need for physical territory to establish true sovereignty, indicating that while digital networks can create communities, a tangible space may still be necessary for legitimacy [25][26] - The evolution of social contracts in the context of modern technology is highlighted, advocating for a rethinking of governance structures to better fit contemporary society [25][26]