‘Absolute Essentials of Ethereum’ by Paul Dylan-Ennis: An Excerpt

Blockchain
governance
refers
to
the
coordination
mechanisms
that
allow
blockchain
stakeholders
to
make
legitimate
decisions.
It
is
traditionally
split
up
into
two
broad
areas:
on-chain
governance
and
off-chain
governance.
In
the
context
of
Ethereum,
on-chain
governance
relates
to
the
Ethereum
protocol.
The
protocol
roughly
encompasses
the
original
white
paper
by
Vitalik
Buterin,
the
more
technical
yellow
paper
by
Gavin
Wood,
and
the
more
recent
execution
layer
and
the
consensus
layer
specs.

“Absolute
Essentials
of
Ethereum”

by
Paul
Dylan-Ennis
was
published
by
Routledge.
Dylan-Ennis
is
an
assistant
professor
at
the
College
of
Business
at
University
College
Dublin.

There
are
currently
efforts
to
update
and
standardize
everything,
such
as
the
Ethereum
Execution
Layer
Specification
(EELS)
update
of
the
yellow
paper,
and
likely
in
a
few
years
we’ll
see
a
more
formal
structure.
off-chain
governance
consists
of
open
source
procedures
–
developer
and
researcher
meetings,
GitHub
repositories,
Ethereum
Improvement
Proposals
(EIPs)
–
where
users
can
propose
changes
to
the
Ethereum
protocol
and
potentially
implement
them.

See
also:


What
Kind
of
Culture
Are
We
Building
in
Web3?

|
Opinion

Blockchain
culture
is
the
social,
cultural
or
political
values
shared
by
a
blockchain
community.
Ethereum’s
culture
is
multifaceted
and
dynamic
but
builds
on
a
core
set
of
values.
The
first
value
is
especially
important
in
Ethereum
and
almost
every
other
blockchain
community:
decentralization.

Decentralization
means
authority
is
spread
among
all
participating
members,
rather
than
concentrated.
Just
slightly
below
decentralization
we
find
more
values
important
to
Ethereans:
permissionlessness
(no
permission
required
to
use
Ethereum);
censorship
resistance
(nobody
can
censor
you
on
Ethereum)
and
credible
neutrality
(Ethereum’s
operations
should
be
fair
to
everyone).

Governance
and
culture
are
tightly
interrelated
because
governance
is
supposed
to
reflect
the
values
of
the
culture.

Satoshi
Nakamoto,
the
inventor
of
Bitcoin,
released
Bitcoin
as
open
source
software.
Open
source
development
means
volunteers
work
collaboratively
to
make
non-proprietary
software
where
the
code
is
freely
available
for
users
to
inspect
and
even
to
copy
and
build
upon.
Ethereum
adopts
this
model
of
open
source
development
wholesale.
This
model
applies
to
many
projects
built
on
Ethereum
as
well.

See
also:


The
Memecoin
Grift
and
How
It
Threatens
Ethereum
Culture

|
Opinion

Ethereum’s
main
codebases
are
hosted
on
the
open
source
development
platform
GitHub.
The
Ethereum
GitHub
contains
various
code
repositories
the
community
recognises
as
essential
to
Ethereum.
These
are:

The
open
source
process
for
GitHub

in
general
is
as
follows.
This
process
is
broadly
used
in
all
the
above
cases,
but
expect
nuance
once
you
get
involved:

What
about
when
someone
proposes
a
change
to
the
Ethereum
protocol
rather
than
a
specific
software
client
or
the
website?
This
kind
of
suggestion
has
its
own
special
process:
Ethereum
Improvement
Proposals
(EIPs).
EIPs
have
their
own
repository
on
the
Ethereum
GitHub.
EIPs
follow
a
template
where
the
proposer,
known
as
the
champion,
will
provide
the
rationale
and
the
proposed
technical
specification.

These
changes
can
relate
to
various
parts
of
Ethereum.
The
most
well-known
are
Core
EIPs
that
are
upgrades
or
improvements
that
require
a
fork.
EIPs
are
extensively
discussed.
A
subset
of
EIPs,
called
Ethereum
Request
for
Comments
(ERC),
relate
to
standards
for
smart
contracts
and
dApps,
and
at
the
time
of
writing
there
is
discussion
to
separate
ERCs
from
EIPs,
rendering
ERCs
their
own
category.

A
famous
Core
EIP
is
EIP-1559
which
proposed
gas
fees
be
burnt
rather
than
sent
to
validators.
This
is
a
change
to
the
Ethereum
protocol
itself.
It
therefore
needed
to
garner
support
from
all
quarters.
This
meant
as
close
to
all
the
stakeholders
possible
in
the
Ethereum
ecosystem
had
to
back
it
before
it
went
live
in
2021.
Remember,
Ethereum
is
politically
decentralized
to
a
strong
degree
so
there
is
no
centralized
entity
that
can
decide
on
behalf
of
everyone
else.

Decision-making
is
spread
among
many
blockchain
stakeholders.
Blockchain
stakeholders
are
groups
with
a
stake
or
interest,
whether
financial
or
culture,
in
a
blockchain
implementation.
Ethereum’s
stakeholders
in
no
particular
order
are:

An
EIP
proposal
might
not
garner
any
interest,
but
every
so
often
some
will.
When
this
happens,
the
EIP
will
most
likely
be
picked
up
by
the
Ethereum
developers
and
researchers.

The
developers
congregate
in
the
Ethereum’s
Magician
forum
and
the
Ethereum
R&D
Discord
(Research
and
Development).
In
these
hubs,
developers
and
researchers
meet
to
coordinate
and
discuss
issues,
including
representatives
from
the
various
client
software
teams.
Every
week
there
is
a
meeting
called
AllCoreDevs
where
the
most
important
issues
around
the
Ethereum
protocol
are
discussed.
There
are
several
smaller,
more
niche
discussion
meetings
as
well.

Ethereum’s
logistics
is
generally
handled
by
the
Ethereum
Foundation
(EF),
the
non-profit
created
at
the
launch
of
Ethereum.
It
has
other
roles
too,
such
as
organizing
and
hosting
Ethereum
conferences
(e.g.
Devcon)
and
providing
grants
for
Ethereum
research
(e.g.
the
Ecosystem
Support
Program).
However,
its
everyday
role
is
providing
several
dedicated
full-time
staff
who
work
on
Ethereum,
which
includes
developers
and
researchers,
but
also
protocol
support
members.

For
example,
the
Ethereum
Cat
Herders
is
a
collective
that
helps
with
logistics,
but
also
cleans
up
EIPs.
The
Cat
Herders
include
EF
and
non-EF
staff,
but
the
staff
members
really
keep
the
engine
running.
The
Protocol
Guild,
with
EF
and
non-EF
members,
manages
a
smart
contract
that
rewards
open
source
developers
of
Ethereum,
but
again
the
EF
members
are
the
main
drivers.
Somewhat
amusingly,
the
logistical
role
of
the
Ethereum
Foundation
is
often
conflated
with
centralised
control
of
Ethereum,
but
I’ve
yet
to
encounter
a
single
instance
of
the
EF
dictating
to
anyone.

There
is
no
exact
science
to
how
an
EIP
garners
support.
Over
time
it
gains
support
from
developers
and
researchers
and
quite
often
it
will
be
raked
over
the
coals
for
any
potential
issues
it
might
cause.
EIPs
will
then
attract
people
to
contribute
toward
any
further
research,
testing
or
coding
required.
News
about
this
EIP
will
begin
to
filter
out
to
the
other
stakeholders.
Ethereum
validators
or
project
teams
might
express
their
own
support
or
concerns.
Ethereum
media
and
users
might
start
to
discuss
it
among
themselves.

An
EIP
that
manages
to
gain
a
positive
response
from
the
various
Ethereum
stakeholders
–
but
especially
the
developers
and
researchers
in
the
AllCoreDevs
call
–
reaches
a
rough
consensus
that
the
EIP
should
be
implemented.
In
open
source
development
culture,
there
is
rarely
complete
consensus,
but
instead
a
rough
consensus
is
reached
across
the
many
distributed
parties.
Again,
there’s
no
perfect
science
here,
but
usually
you
can
recognise
rough
consensus
by
the
disappearance
of
concerns,
critiques
or
controversies.
Once
accepted,
the
EIP
will
usually
be
included
in
the
next
Ethereum
upgrade
and
become
part
of
the
general
developer
and
researcher
discussion
about
how
to
coordinate
and
integrate
the
EIP
in
the
various
software
clients
in
preparation
for
the
upgrade.
EIPs
are
often
bundled
together
these
days.

Governing
a
blockchain
like
Ethereum
is
the
responsibility
of
the
community
collectively
and
each
stakeholder
in
the
wider
community
has

some
influence,
albeit
sometimes
small.
The
optimal
governance
state,
central
to
the
belief
systems
behind
almost
all
blockchain
communities,
is
decentralization.
The
rationale,
at
least
at
this
abstract
level,
is
to
replace
centralised
governance
with
decentralized
governance.

Centralized
institutions,
companies,
organizations,
governments
are
seen
as
inherently
corrupted
or
corruptible.
However,
the
desire
to
implement
decentralized
alternatives
does
not
always
go
to
plan
and
centralization
tends
to
reassert
itself,
even
in
the
most
mindful
of
blockchain
communities.
The
reality
of
decentralization
is
more
like
a
dance,
where
centralised
power
is
disrupted
by
decentralization,
new
forms
of
centralisation
appear,
renewed
efforts
at
decentralization
occur,
in
acts
of
re-decentralization.

To
be
a
good
citizen
in
Ethereum
is
to
keep
an
eye
on
what
you
believe
might
be
centralized
points
of
influence
and
to
raise
concerns
and
disrupt
centralization
where
you
find
it.
Generally
speaking,
Ethereum
governance
is
highly
decentralized,
but
with
some
light
centralization
around
logistics.

Ethereum
has
no
dominant
culture
and
Ethereans
can
on
principle
be
drawn
from
any
culture,
in
the
spirit
of
an
open
permissionless
protocol.
Despite
this,
there
are
recognizably
popular
subcultures
within
Ethereum
and
we
can
learn
a
lot
about
the
protocol
by
looking
at
who
is
attracted
to
it.
Since
culture
is
dynamic,
some
of
these
subcultures
will
continue
to
flourish
on
Ethereum
and
others
might
dissipate.

Cypherpunk:
Many
of
Ethereum’s
influential
developers
and
researchers
are
influenced
by
cypherpunk
ideals.
Cypherpunk
was
one
of
the
foundational
subcultures
in
Bitcoin
and
it
carried
over
into
parts
of
the
Ethereum
world.
A
cypherpunk
is
committed
to
open
source
development
and
a
certain
DIY
or
punk
attitude.
Cypherpunks
believe
the
best
way
to
solve
problems
is
to
create
the
solution
yourself
and
then
disseminate
the
results
freely,
even
allowing
others
to
copy
and
build
upon
them.
Cypherpunks
usually
stress
an
apolitical
position
regarding
what
they
build
should
be
used
for.
In
Ethereum’s
case,
the
cypherpunks
build
the
infrastructure
and
tools,
but
are
hands
off
about
how
they
are
used,
taking
a
neutral
stance.
Historically,
cypherpunk
had
an
explicit
emphasis
on
privacy,
but
in
Ethereum
it
is
not
always
prioritised,
albeit
this
seems
to
be
changing.
A
neo-cypherpunk
movement
called
lunarpunk
has
also
emerged
to
advocate
for
placing
privacy
back
front
and
center.
You
can
find
cypherpunks
on
the
Ethereum’s
Magician
forum,
the
Ethereum
R&D
Discord
or
by
attending
events
like
ETHDenver.

See
also:


What
Are
Soulbound
Tokens?

Regens:
Many
influential
voices
within
Ethereum
are
committed
to
a
regen
or
regenerative
approach
to
building
technology.
Rooted
in
Vitalik
Buterin’s
interest
in
politics
and
social
science,
many
regens
engage
in
governance
experiments
designed
to
reinvigorate,
improve
or
even
replace
contemporary
institutions.
This
subculture
is
characterized
by
its
experimental
nature
and
interest
in
public
goods,
engaging
in
experiments
such
as
Quadratic
Funding,
Soulbound
Tokens
(SBT),
and
retroactive
public
goods
funding.
Regens
are
usually
less
focused
on
financial
applications
and
more
drawn
to
the
idea
of
building
a
new
decentralized
Web,
sometimes
called
Web3.
Regens
usually,
but
not
always,
tend
to
hold
more
progressive
forms
of
politics
and
are
associated
with
an
aesthetic
called
solarpunk.
You
can
find
regens
in
public
goods
communities
like
Gitcoin
or
Optimism.

Degens:
Within
Ethereum
there
exists
a
contingent
of
users
driven
purely
by
speculation
and
wealth
accumulation
at
all
costs,
the
degens
(degenerates).
Degens
are
financial
nihilists
who
focus
on
current
trends
and
hype
to
strike
it
lucky
and
escape
the
rat
race
of
contemporary
neoliberal
capitalism.
Degens
will
often
take
extraordinary
risks,
but
in
an
ironic,
almost
detached
way.
Degens
usually,
but
not
always,
tend
to
hold
more
provocative
political
views
and
are
associated
with
a
more
anime-type
aesthetic.
You
can
find
degens
in
and
around
newly
launched
Decentralized
Finance
(DeFi)
or
Non-Fungible
Token
(NFT)
launches.