Eli Ben-Sasson calls for merit over alignment in Ethereum debate
Eli Ben-Sasson, cofounder of StarkWare and a founding scientist of Zcash, has shared his view on the recent debate around the Ethereum Foundation.
- Eli Ben-Sasson said Ethereum should weigh merit and technology more heavily than ecosystem alignment debates.
- His comments followed Foundation exits and warnings about core development funding pressure within coming months.
- StarkWare’s past choices on STARKs, Cairo and zkVM were once viewed as misaligned by critics.
His comments came as Ethereum faces questions over leadership changes, funding pressure and the role of layer-2 teams in the wider ecosystem.
Ben-Sasson said he was not joining criticism of the foundation and was not claiming that Ethereum is near its end. He also said he was not trying to defend the foundation by saying everything was fine. “Ethereum has many strengths, and it also has its politics,” he wrote.
StarkWare history frames his point
Ben-Sasson said StarkWare’s first paid project in 2019 and 2020 focused on a post-quantum secure, scalable ZK-STARK system for Ethereum. He said the work aimed to help Ethereum scale and become more ready for future quantum security risks.
He also pointed to StarkWare’s later choices, including STARKs, Cairo, zkVM work, native account abstraction and Bitcoin scaling. He said those choices were not always popular and were sometimes viewed as “misaligned.” Ben-Sasson said he was glad the team made them because he sees them as the right technical decisions.
Exits and funding worries add pressure
His comments came during a tense period for the Ethereum Foundation. As previously reported by crypto.news, Hsiao-Wei Wang stepped down as co-executive director and board member after returning from a sabbatical. Her exit followed other staff changes and came after Tomasz Stańczak also left a co-executive director role.
The debate also includes funding concerns. Former Ethereum Foundation contributor Trent Van Epps warned that Ethereum core development could face a funding gap within three to nine months. He linked that risk to spending cuts and the end of the Client Incentive Program. Tom Lee later rejected that warning, saying there was “zero chance” of such a crisis.
Merit versus alignment becomes the issue
Ben-Sasson’s main point centered on how Ethereum should judge teams and ideas. He said the ecosystem placed too much weight on whether teams appeared aligned or misaligned. He argued that technical merit should matter more than social labels or political positioning.
“As part of the ecosystem and supporter of all things crypto, I hope the new system that will arise will give a lot of weight to merit and technology, and less for alignment,” Ben-Sasson wrote.
He added that he would want to work more closely with that system if it moved in that direction.
That framing also answers past complaints that StarkWare moved outside Ethereum’s preferred path. In his view, useful engineering can start outside consensus and still become part of the broader stack later. The post did not propose a formal governance plan for the wider ecosystem.
His comments place StarkWare’s experience inside a wider Ethereum governance debate. Layer-2 teams depend on Ethereum, but they also make independent technical choices. That can create tension when foundation priorities, roadmap work and community expectations do not move at the same pace.
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
The AI boom may follow the path of the 19th-century railway bubble, and builders may not be the ultimate winners
Goldman Sachs analyst Bobby Molavi compared the current situation to the 19th-century British railway mania: 500 companies spent more than the nation's annual income building 8,000 miles of railway, with most early investors losing out, while the real beneficiaries were the later "passengers." He pointed out that the current AI craze is driven by both debt and momentum, and that the S&P 500’s forward P/E ratio of 18x is only "a bit cheaper." Whether the builders can retain value is uncertain, and history does not offer an optimistic answer.
If Anthropic's IPO goes smoothly and the stock price rises next week, then everything remains the same for AI. Otherwise, some companies will go bankrupt.
The shrinking valuations of two major giants have triggered a chain reaction—investors are adopting more conservative revenue multiples for AI startups and are directly halting high-valuation financing for companies with zero revenue. Multiple venture capital firms have advised their portfolio companies to lower valuation expectations and to quickly build up cash reserves. Market participants warn that the outcome of Anthropic’s IPO will be a barometer for the industry: if successful, the boom will continue; if it fails, some companies may face elimination.
After the Brazilian election, political discount deepens; Morgan Stanley remains bullish on Petrobras (PBR.US), focusing on fuel pricing and dividends
Morgan Stanley still maintains its most optimistic "Overweight" rating, but has lowered its year-end 2027 target price from $31 to $25.
Corning (GLW.US) receives initial "Buy" rating from Jefferies! AI factories driving a fiber optic rush, with a potential global supply gap of up to 30%
For Corning, the recent profit growth mainly comes from the expansion of AI clusters. As the number of optical links crossing cabinets and campuses increases, customers need to deploy more optical fibers within limited conduit and cabinet space, thus driving demand for high-density optical cables and connection systems.
Crypto prices
More
