The post Web3 scaling demands P2P clearing, not bigger blockchains appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Disclosure: The views and opinions expressed here belong solely to the author and do not represent the views and opinions of crypto.news’ editorial. There is a common misconception in the current narrative on web3 scaling that mass adoption requires faster, bigger, and more powerful blockchains. Every cycle, a new generation of chains emerges, promising millions of transactions per second and near-zero fees.  Summary Chasing massive TPS mirrors the failed 1980s single-core “faster clock” mindset; blockchains were built for final settlement, not high-frequency clearing, making monolithic L1/L2 designs fundamentally misaligned with real-world usage. Gas fees create psychological and economic friction; liquidity is fragmented across chains, fueling $2B+ in 2025 bridge exploits; and developers are forced to handle cross-chain complexity that degrades UX and slows innovation. Off-chain, trustless L3 clearing layers — akin to banking’s TrustFi model — enable gasless user interactions, unified liquidity without risky bridges, and parallelized scaling through specialization rather than brute-force blockspace. In the history of computing, one million instructions per second (1 MIPS) was achieved by supercomputers in 1964, minicomputers in 1977, and by 1984, the average Intel home processor had caught up, pushing around 1-3 MIPS. Today, modern computing operates in Teraflops (trillions of operations), and with supercomputers, we are experiencing Peta or Exaflops (quadrillions and quintilions of operations), all while blockchains still continue to discuss millions in TPS, from a bygone era. This emphasis on throughput is a technological dead end, eerily similar to a fundamental mistake made in the early days of computing — the 1984 Processor Problem. L1 blockchains bring back the 1984 problem In the 1980s, computer engineers were obsessed with increasing the clock speed of single-core processors. The belief was that a faster clock led to a faster computer. They pushed the physical limits of silicon until they hit a technological… The post Web3 scaling demands P2P clearing, not bigger blockchains appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Disclosure: The views and opinions expressed here belong solely to the author and do not represent the views and opinions of crypto.news’ editorial. There is a common misconception in the current narrative on web3 scaling that mass adoption requires faster, bigger, and more powerful blockchains. Every cycle, a new generation of chains emerges, promising millions of transactions per second and near-zero fees.  Summary Chasing massive TPS mirrors the failed 1980s single-core “faster clock” mindset; blockchains were built for final settlement, not high-frequency clearing, making monolithic L1/L2 designs fundamentally misaligned with real-world usage. Gas fees create psychological and economic friction; liquidity is fragmented across chains, fueling $2B+ in 2025 bridge exploits; and developers are forced to handle cross-chain complexity that degrades UX and slows innovation. Off-chain, trustless L3 clearing layers — akin to banking’s TrustFi model — enable gasless user interactions, unified liquidity without risky bridges, and parallelized scaling through specialization rather than brute-force blockspace. In the history of computing, one million instructions per second (1 MIPS) was achieved by supercomputers in 1964, minicomputers in 1977, and by 1984, the average Intel home processor had caught up, pushing around 1-3 MIPS. Today, modern computing operates in Teraflops (trillions of operations), and with supercomputers, we are experiencing Peta or Exaflops (quadrillions and quintilions of operations), all while blockchains still continue to discuss millions in TPS, from a bygone era. This emphasis on throughput is a technological dead end, eerily similar to a fundamental mistake made in the early days of computing — the 1984 Processor Problem. L1 blockchains bring back the 1984 problem In the 1980s, computer engineers were obsessed with increasing the clock speed of single-core processors. The belief was that a faster clock led to a faster computer. They pushed the physical limits of silicon until they hit a technological…

Web3 scaling demands P2P clearing, not bigger blockchains

Disclosure: The views and opinions expressed here belong solely to the author and do not represent the views and opinions of crypto.news’ editorial.

There is a common misconception in the current narrative on web3 scaling that mass adoption requires faster, bigger, and more powerful blockchains. Every cycle, a new generation of chains emerges, promising millions of transactions per second and near-zero fees. 

Summary

  • Chasing massive TPS mirrors the failed 1980s single-core “faster clock” mindset; blockchains were built for final settlement, not high-frequency clearing, making monolithic L1/L2 designs fundamentally misaligned with real-world usage.
  • Gas fees create psychological and economic friction; liquidity is fragmented across chains, fueling $2B+ in 2025 bridge exploits; and developers are forced to handle cross-chain complexity that degrades UX and slows innovation.
  • Off-chain, trustless L3 clearing layers — akin to banking’s TrustFi model — enable gasless user interactions, unified liquidity without risky bridges, and parallelized scaling through specialization rather than brute-force blockspace.

In the history of computing, one million instructions per second (1 MIPS) was achieved by supercomputers in 1964, minicomputers in 1977, and by 1984, the average Intel home processor had caught up, pushing around 1-3 MIPS. Today, modern computing operates in Teraflops (trillions of operations), and with supercomputers, we are experiencing Peta or Exaflops (quadrillions and quintilions of operations), all while blockchains still continue to discuss millions in TPS, from a bygone era. This emphasis on throughput is a technological dead end, eerily similar to a fundamental mistake made in the early days of computing — the 1984 Processor Problem.

L1 blockchains bring back the 1984 problem

In the 1980s, computer engineers were obsessed with increasing the clock speed of single-core processors. The belief was that a faster clock led to a faster computer. They pushed the physical limits of silicon until they hit a technological dead end themselves. The heat and power consumption became unmanageable, creating a hard physical limit to this approach. The solution that unlocked the next era of computing was then not a faster single core, but the shift to multi-core processing and, more importantly, specialization and parallelization.

Today, L1 and L2 blockchains are making the exact same mistake. They are attempting to be the single, monolithic engine for every type of transaction, from high-value transfers to micro-payments in personal banking. It does not work.

Think of it like a trip to the grocery store. When you buy apples, oranges, and bananas, you don’t settle the payment individually for every single fruit you pick up. You aggregate the items, receive one invoice, and settle the total at the end. Current blockchains are inefficiently trying to settle every apple and orange individually. Blockchain was designed for final settlement, not for high-frequency, low-value clearing. These are the structural failures that must be addressed before mass adoption can be achieved.

Structural barriers to web3 adoption

Largely, the Gas Fee Barrier is the most encountered challenge in scaling. Even low-cost chains require users to pay a fee for every interaction, building psychological and economic barriers to adoption. In reality, web3 requires zero-gas settlement for the vast majority of daily interactions. 

The next challenge to immediately solve is Liquidity Fragmentation. Assets are siloed across hundreds of chains, creating isolated pools of liquidity. Today, cross-chain bridges are a security nightmare, responsible for billions in hacks. In the first half of 2025 alone, hackers stole over $2.17 billion, with cross-chain bridges and access control exploits being primary attack vectors. This fragmentation is the antithesis of a healthy, unified financial market that web3 can create. 

We must acknowledge that building a truly cross-chain dApp is a complex, multi-protocol engineering feat. Developers are forced to spend their time managing the plumbing of multiple chains rather than focusing on the application layer. This complexity slows innovation and directly translates into the clunky user experiences that plague web3 applications today.

The shift to P2P clearing?

A true solution to the 1984 Processor Problem is to embrace specialization and move the bulk of transactional activity off the main chain. We need a solution for peer-to-peer trustlessness where we don’t have 30,000 computers supervising the trade, but we still settle on-chain in the end.

The recommended approach goes against the grain of creating another Layer-2 rollup, which still relies on the L1 for execution and finality. It encourages establishing a Layer-3 network that specializes in high-frequency, peer-to-peer clearing and settlement. This L3 can use simple and updated, capital-efficient TrustFi technology to make real-time, non-custodial, cross-chain trading occur off-chain. In TrustFi, millions of transactions are cleared daily between banks, and only the net balances are settled through the central bank. In web3, the L1 is the central bank for final settlement, and the L3 becomes the trustless, decentralized clearing house. 

The vast majority of user interactions could thus become gasless, removing the primary psychological barrier to entry. The L3 can also act as a ‘network of networks,’ unifying fragmented liquidity pools without relying on risky bridges. Finally, developers can build complex, cross-chain applications that hide the underlying complexity of multiple blockchains.

The history of computing teaches us that scaling is achieved more quickly through architectural innovation, not brute force. We must stop trying to build a single, faster processor and instead build the specialized, parallelized infrastructure that the global economy demands. The future of web3 is not in bigger blocks, but in trustless, P2P clearing layers that finally bring the principles of decentralization in sync with the speed and cost suited to modern life.

Alexis Sirkia

Alexis Sirkia is the Chairman of Yellow Network, where he oversees the strategic direction of the entire ecosystem. A recognized pioneer in blockchain, he previously co-founded GSR, a leading cryptocurrency market-making firm that played an essential role in Ripple’s early growth. Alexis holds degrees in mathematics and computer science from Université Paul Sabatier Toulouse III. He seamlessly blends work and adventure, circumnavigating the world as the captain on his sailing catamaran, all while staying connected 24/7 via Starlink

Source: https://crypto.news/web3-scaling-demand-p2p-clearing-not-bigger-blockchain/

Market Opportunity
Notcoin Logo
Notcoin Price(NOT)
$0.0003954
$0.0003954$0.0003954
-1.78%
USD
Notcoin (NOT) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

CEO Sandeep Nailwal Shared Highlights About RWA on Polygon

CEO Sandeep Nailwal Shared Highlights About RWA on Polygon

The post CEO Sandeep Nailwal Shared Highlights About RWA on Polygon appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Polygon CEO Sandeep Nailwal highlighted Polygon’s lead in global bonds, Spiko US T-Bill, and Spiko Euro T-Bill. Polygon published an X post to share that its roadmap to GigaGas was still scaling. Sentiments around POL price were last seen to be bearish. Polygon CEO Sandeep Nailwal shared key pointers from the Dune and RWA.xyz report. These pertain to highlights about RWA on Polygon. Simultaneously, Polygon underlined its roadmap towards GigaGas. Sentiments around POL price were last seen fumbling under bearish emotions. Polygon CEO Sandeep Nailwal on Polygon RWA CEO Sandeep Nailwal highlighted three key points from the Dune and RWA.xyz report. The Chief Executive of Polygon maintained that Polygon PoS was hosting RWA TVL worth $1.13 billion across 269 assets plus 2,900 holders. Nailwal confirmed from the report that RWA was happening on Polygon. The Dune and https://t.co/W6WSFlHoQF report on RWA is out and it shows that RWA is happening on Polygon. Here are a few highlights: – Leading in Global Bonds: Polygon holds 62% share of tokenized global bonds (driven by Spiko’s euro MMF and Cashlink euro issues) – Spiko U.S.… — Sandeep | CEO, Polygon Foundation (※,※) (@sandeepnailwal) September 17, 2025 The X post published by Polygon CEO Sandeep Nailwal underlined that the ecosystem was leading in global bonds by holding a 62% share of tokenized global bonds. He further highlighted that Polygon was leading with Spiko US T-Bill at approximately 29% share of TVL along with Ethereum, adding that the ecosystem had more than 50% share in the number of holders. Finally, Sandeep highlighted from the report that there was a strong adoption for Spiko Euro T-Bill with 38% share of TVL. He added that 68% of returns were on Polygon across all the chains. Polygon Roadmap to GigaGas In a different update from Polygon, the community…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 01:10
SHIB Price Analysis for February 8

SHIB Price Analysis for February 8

The post SHIB Price Analysis for February 8 appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Original U.Today article Can traders expect SHIB to test the $0.0000070 range soon
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/09 00:26
UK Looks to US to Adopt More Crypto-Friendly Approach

UK Looks to US to Adopt More Crypto-Friendly Approach

The post UK Looks to US to Adopt More Crypto-Friendly Approach appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The UK and US are reportedly preparing to deepen cooperation on digital assets, with Britain looking to copy the Trump administration’s crypto-friendly stance in a bid to boost innovation.  UK Chancellor Rachel Reeves and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent discussed on Tuesday how the two nations could strengthen their coordination on crypto, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday, citing people familiar with the matter.  The discussions also involved representatives from crypto companies, including Coinbase, Circle Internet Group and Ripple, with executives from the Bank of America, Barclays and Citi also attending, according to the report. The agreement was made “last-minute” after crypto advocacy groups urged the UK government on Thursday to adopt a more open stance toward the industry, claiming its cautious approach to the sector has left the country lagging in innovation and policy.  Source: Rachel Reeves Deal to include stablecoins, look to unlock adoption Any deal between the countries is likely to include stablecoins, the Financial Times reported, an area of crypto that US President Donald Trump made a policy priority and in which his family has significant business interests. The Financial Times reported on Monday that UK crypto advocacy groups also slammed the Bank of England’s proposal to limit individual stablecoin holdings to between 10,000 British pounds ($13,650) and 20,000 pounds ($27,300), claiming it would be difficult and expensive to implement. UK banks appear to have slowed adoption too, with around 40% of 2,000 recently surveyed crypto investors saying that their banks had either blocked or delayed a payment to a crypto provider.  Many of these actions have been linked to concerns over volatility, fraud and scams. The UK has made some progress on crypto regulation recently, proposing a framework in May that would see crypto exchanges, dealers, and agents treated similarly to traditional finance firms, with…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:21