Published: February 4, 2026 | Tapbit Ethereum Research
On February 3, 2026 Vitalik Buterin published a lengthy reflection on X that has already reshaped much of the current Ethereum Layer 2 discourse. The core message is simple but profound:
“The original vision of L2s and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path.”
What follows is a detailed explanation of why the “rollup-centric roadmap” that dominated Ethereum planning since ~2020–2022 is being quietly retired, what has changed on Layer 1 to make this rethink necessary, and the new mental model Vitalik proposes for the future of L2s — one that treats them as a broad spectrum of chains rather than simply “branded shards” of Ethereum.
Original Rollup Vision (2020–2024)
The rollup-centric roadmap rested on three main assumptions:
- L1 scaling would remain difficult and expensive → most activity must live on L2 rollups
- Rollups inherit almost all of Ethereum’s security properties through fraud proofs or validity proofs
- After reaching Stage 2 (trustless proofs, no multisig or security council), L2s could legitimately be considered “Ethereum-branded” shards with the same social consensus guarantees as the base layer
This vision produced the mantra: “L2s are Ethereum scaling.” Optimistic and ZK rollups were expected to reach Stage 2 relatively quickly, after which the ecosystem would consist of a secure L1 plus a large number of fully trustless L2s — each with its own branding, apps and fee market, but sharing Ethereum’s consensus and data availability.
L1 Progress That Changed the Equation (2024–2026)
Two major L1 improvements arrived faster and delivered more capacity than most forecasters (including many inside the Ethereum Foundation) anticipated:
- Blobs + PeerDAS — proto-danksharding (Dencun, 2024) introduced blobs, reducing L2 data costs by ~90–95%. PeerDAS and further data-availability sampling upgrades in 2025–2026 pushed effective throughput even higher. L1 can now support significantly more activity at very low cost.
- Gas limit increases — targeted hikes (30M → 36M in late 2025, with 40–45M under discussion for 2026) combined with execution optimizations (EVM Object Format, EOF; Verkle trees in the pipeline) mean L1 execution capacity has grown substantially.
Vitalik’s blunt assessment:
“L1 scaling has progressed much further than most people expected, and L2 scaling has progressed much slower than most people expected.”
The original urgency for L2s purely as a scaling solution has therefore diminished. L1 is no longer “hopelessly congested”; it can already handle meaningful throughput at reasonable cost.
The L2 Spectrum Model – A New Mental Framework
Because L1 can scale more and many L2s will not (or cannot) reach full Stage 2 trustlessness, Vitalik proposes moving away from the binary “L1 vs L2” or “rollup vs sidechain” worldview toward a **spectrum** of chain designs:
| L2 Stage / Type | Key Traits | Examples | Scaling Fit in 2026+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stage 0–1 | Multisig / security council, limited or no proofs | Many enterprise L2s, some gaming chains | Partial Ethereum extension at best |
| Stage 2 | Full ZK / fraud proofs, no councils, trustless | Optimistic rollups with fraud proofs live, mature ZK rollups | True “branded shard” of Ethereum |
| Spectrum Chains | Custom privacy, ultra-low latency, non-EVM VMs, app-specific execution | Privacy-focused chains, AI execution environments, social protocols | Non-financial or extreme-performance use cases |
| L1 with bridge | Separate consensus, bridge to Ethereum | Some “L2s” that may never decentralize fully | Independent chain, not Ethereum extension |
Vitalik’s central recommendation: **L2 teams should stop defining their value primarily as “scaling Ethereum”** and instead identify a unique advantage that even a highly-scaled L1 cannot easily replicate (privacy by default, specialized VMs, extreme throughput, non-financial applications, etc.).
Future Tech Directions Mentioned by Vitalik
Several concrete technical paths were highlighted that could redefine L2–L1 relations:
- Native rollup precompiles — built-in EVM precompiles for ZK verification, allowing rollups to verify proofs directly on L1 without external verifier committees
- Native ZK-EVM support — making ZK proofs cheaper and faster to verify on L1
- Further gas limit increases — targeted hikes to 40–60M gas/block possible in 2026–2027
- PeerDAS & full danksharding — dramatically increasing data availability sampling capacity
These upgrades would make it easier for L2s to remain tightly coupled to L1 security while simultaneously reducing the pressure to move every transaction off-chain.
Market & Developer Implications in 2026
Early reactions from L2 teams and developers (Feb 3–4, 2026):
- Optimism, Arbitrum, Polygon, Base — emphasized ongoing progress toward Stage 2 and decentralized sequencers
- zkSync, Starknet — highlighted ZK proof maturity and roadmap toward trustless operation
- Some smaller / app-specific L2s — quietly agreed that pure scaling narrative is weakening
- DeFi & NFT communities — mixed: some worry about fragmentation, others excited about specialized execution environments
ETH price reaction remained muted (trading ~$2,200–$2,400 range), but the post has reignited long-term roadmap debate across Ethereum Magicians, Reddit, and developer Discords.
Conclusion & 2026 Ethereum Scaling Outlook
Vitalik Buterin’s February 3, 2026 reflection marks a quiet but important pivot in Ethereum’s scaling narrative. The combination of unexpectedly strong L1 progress (blobs, gas limit hikes, PeerDAS, native rollup precompiles) and slower-than-hoped L2 decentralization (many projects stuck at Stage 0–1) has rendered the simple “rollup-centric roadmap” obsolete.
The new mental model — L2s as a spectrum ranging from fully trustless Stage 2 rollups to application-specific chains with custom VMs — gives projects more room to innovate in privacy, latency, non-EVM execution, AI workloads, social protocols, and other domains where L1 may not be the optimal base layer.
Trade ETH & L2 ecosystem momentum on Tapbit:
Disclaimer: Cryptocurrency trading involves significant risk of loss. Prices are highly volatile and can change rapidly. Roadmap statements and technical proposals do not guarantee future implementation or price action. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Always conduct your own research (DYOR) and never invest more than you can afford to lose completely.
