Tech
It will take people, not technology, for modularity to succeed.
Disclosure: The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author and do not represent the views and opinions of the crypto.news editorial team.
The modular blockchain movement is gaining traction. Countless new entrants are introducing innovative solutions designed to help us reach the ultimate state of decentralization, security, and scalability. The technology is powerful, original, and most importantly, compatible. Soon, developers will have the power to create complex, scalable dApps without the limitations of conventional blockchain infrastructure.
As we continue to build bridges between layers through technical integrations, it is also critical to foster off-chain collaboration to support this growth. As architects of the modular movement, we must ask ourselves: How can we optimize our systems to facilitate not only our individual advancement, but also our collective progress?
Facilitating a culture of continuous and constructive discourse is essential if we are to succeed. Decentralized governance will need to evolve within the modular paradigm to support this collaborative and sustainable growth.
Decentralized governance in a modular paradigm
The rise of blockchain modularity raises a new set of questions and considerations about what constitutes optimal blockchain governance. While on- and off-chain mechanisms similar to those of monolithic blockchains can be used at the protocol level, the results can create a ripple effect throughout a modular ecosystem.
In this new paradigm, decentralized governance has the potential to look radically different and will certainly be more complex. For the modular thesis to succeed, a mechanism must be established that helps maintain a level of congruence between the different layers of the stack.
We are dealing with nascent technologies that will go through many iterations as the systems are refined and the software becomes more sophisticated. As the technology progresses, we need to pay more attention to how this constellation of different players come together to build something truly powerful.
We are at such an early stage that we have yet to really see what such a scenario might look like, but it is one we need to anticipate. Creating a sustainable alignment between those systems will determine how viable blockchain modularity can actually be.
How should a protocol’s decentralized governance frameworks evolve to strike a balance between its community and the collective interests of the modular ecosystem? One place to look for inspiration is open source software governance, which has evolved over decades.
Drawing lessons from web2
When a monolithic blockchain updates, the entire stack moves as one. While monolithic chains may tout this as an advantage, they are arguably closer to the “closed source” paradigms of web2 than many would like to admit. Developers must conform to the new infrastructure, regardless of whether it is optimal for their dApp (yes, they could choose to fork, but that comes with risks and limitations).
Within a modular paradigm, developers have a greater degree of choice in how their dApp is composed at each level, which gives them greater autonomy over what they create. Developing open and collaborative infrastructure fosters greater resilience and trust among developers who choose to build on it. In this regard, modularity shares strong parallels with the open source approach to software development.
Linux is a great example. An open source framework with decades of tools, libraries, and resources, Linux is indeed one of the greatest demonstrations of decentralized software we have seen in our time. It is maintained by a global community, free from the risk of being shut down, and versatile in creating a variety of applications.
Just as the open source movement has played an essential role in today’s global technology infrastructure, the modular approach is a natural and essential part of the evolving web3 landscape. And the drawbacks are similar: when a modular protocol is updated, the stack risks fragmentation if not planned and governed effectively. However, the ubiquity and success of open source software demonstrates that effective governance is possible. It’s simply a matter of collaboration in its design.
More governance, not less
At the macro level, we must remember that modular layers are inherently interdependent; they cannot stand alone. This means that communication and cooperation are essential to the progress of this movement. That said, modularity will presumably require more governance, not less.
Stability comes from culture. Off-chain governance must perpetually create a culture that rewards rational and reasonable discourse, both technical and public. It must center on a shared purpose and vision of what the technology is ultimately built to do. All decisions must revolve around that purpose.
Imagine a decentralized off-chain governance system that also exists between multiple modular protocols, a soft-power social framework that helps establish a level of consensus around shared goals and objectives. A system to determine mutual benefit and ongoing compatibility without sacrificing innovation or decentralization.
There needs to be strong ecosystem-level systems for each protocol. Environments where levels of debate, consensus, and action can be achieved within a decentralized community. It could help foster greater alignment both within and between protocols as these technologies evolve.
On-chain governance has a distinct role here as well, as developers need a system that is reliable and enforceable at the dApp level, as well as the protocol level. We are actively experimenting with developing on-chain governance mechanisms that can help dApp developers make these upgradeability decisions. While in the very early iterations, the intent is to address the complexities of the upgrade process within a modular framework. It is an experiment in what developers need to consider when the underlying foundation changes.
Blockchain modularity is rapidly gaining momentum as an alternative to the monolithic framework as an industry standard. More and more protocols are being developed at every layer of the stack, promising more efficient and scalable solutions that can power the most sophisticated dApps.
The modular paradigm is necessarily supported by a more collaborative approach to decentralized technology, where it was previously considered more competitive. To succeed, we must begin to ask ourselves critical questions about how we collaborate effectively and optimally to achieve our shared goals.
Philip Silver
Philip Silver it’s a Cartesi co-founder and consultant at the Cartesi Foundationa non-profit organization dedicated to supporting Cartesi technology and decentralizing the Cartesi ecosystem. Since Felipe joined Cartesi in 2018, Felipe has focused on L2 research and application. Initially, Felipe led the blockchain engineering team, making significant contributions to the architecture and design of Cartesi Rollups while also leading the on-chain implementation team. Prior to Cartesi, Felipe was a co-founder and advisor at GoBlock, which provides consulting services and develops applications for blockchain technology, and was a software engineer focused on blockchain applications for clean energy, carbon credits, and energy futures in a partnership with Brazilian energy companies.