How to Avoid Centralization in Blockchain Scalability: Vitalik's Layered Analysis

Blockchain scalability represents one of the major challenges in decentralized adoption. Vitalik Buterin recently proposed a structured approach to understand the dimensions of scalability and the risks of centralization that stem from it. This layered analysis provides a useful framework for evaluating how each expansion solution affects the decentralized integrity of the network.

The Three Dimensions of Scalability in the Face of Centralization Challenges

The blockchain architecture is divided into three fundamental elements: computation, data, and state. Vitalik classifies these dimensions in order of increasing complexity, each posing distinct challenges to maintaining decentralization. Computation is the most accessible dimension for expansion, while state presents the deepest challenge in preserving a robust decentralized structure.

Computation, Data, and State: Hierarchy of Difficulty and Architectural Risks

The computation layer, the most flexible, can be expanded through several approaches: parallelization of operations, use of optimized indices provided by block builders, or replacing intensive calculations with advanced cryptographic proofs such as zero-knowledge proofs. This flexibility makes centralization at the computation level difficult to achieve.

The data layer presents an intermediate level of complexity. Systems requiring guarantees of availability must balance expansion with control of centralization. Emerging solutions like data sharding, erasure coding (notably PeerDAS), and graceful degradation allow nodes with limited capacity to process proportional blocks without creating central bottlenecks.

The state layer embodies the existential challenge. Even to validate a single transaction, nodes theoretically need access to the entire state. Although a reduced state tree (storing only the root) offers apparent compression, each update intrinsically depends on the full state. State sharding strategies show promise, but they require major architectural re-engineering and are not universally applicable. This level remains the most vulnerable to centralization pressures.

Prioritizing Solutions Without Centralizing Architecture

Vitalik formulates a strategic conclusion: if data can effectively replace the state without introducing new centralization assumptions, this substitution should become the top priority. Similarly, if computation can substitute for data without increasing centralization, this approach warrants serious consideration. This hierarchy of substitution provides a framework for evaluating any scalability innovation based on its net impact on the decentralized balance.

This reflection reveals that the real question is not simply “how to speed up?”, but rather “how to accelerate without compromising structural decentralization?”. Architectural choices that favor delegation of complexity rather than its centralization will determine the long-term viability of blockchain ecosystems.