Opinion by Grigore Roșu, founder and CEO of Pi Squared Challenging the dominance of blockchain in Web3 might seem almost heretical, especially to those deeply invested in Bitcoin, Ethereum, and related technologies. However, given blockchain's well-known scaling limitations, it is arguable that Web3’s success does not depend solely on blockchains but rather on super-fast payment and verifiable settlement systems. Blockchain is one approach to these systems, not the only one. While blockchain solved the double-spending problem, it introduced a rigid architectural constraint: total ordering, where every transaction waits its turn in a global queue via a monolithic consensus process. This made sense initially for secure payments but has become a bottleneck for Web3 applications that require speed, flexibility, and scalability. This serialized design restricts throughput and limits developers’ options. The success of mobile remittance app FastPay demonstrated that double-spending can be prevented without enforcing total ordering. This innovation inspired projects like Linera, which use independent local orderings while maintaining global verifiability, showing a more scalable model is feasible. FastPay also influenced protocols such as POD and Sui’s single-owner objects. Had FastPay predated Bitcoin, blockchain might not have achieved its current cultural or technical prominence. Some argue that total ordering is essential for financial integrity and decentralization, but this conflates a specific trustless implementation with the concept itself. True decentralization rests on verifiable transactions rather than ordering every transaction globally. Blockchain’s challenges persist: Ethereum’s Dencun upgrade attempts to boost throughput with “blobs, ” yet the fundamental total ordering remains; Solana’s Lattice system still struggles with outages caused by bugs and high loads. The proliferation of Layer 2 solutions mostly masks congestion by shifting transactions off-chain only to batch them later, creating cyclical delays. The imperative to "evolve or die" applies to blockchain investors and builders anchored in traditional architectures.

Future protocols emphasizing flexible, verifiable payment and settlement systems over rigid total orderings promise significantly higher throughput and improved user experiences. As decentralized applications and AI-driven autonomous agents increasingly interact with blockchains, the cost of strict sequencing will become a competitive disadvantage. Emerging modular blockchain frameworks like Celestia highlight the growing realization that classical blockchains are inflexible. Innovations including data availability layers, execution shards, and off-chain verification aim to separate trust validation from limiting sequencing models. Although not a full break from the past, these efforts signal a trend toward more adaptable infrastructure. Blockchain will not disappear but must evolve. Its future role may be as a universal verifier — a decentralized notary within a larger, more agile tech stack rather than a rigid master ledger. This shift, however, may be difficult given the significant capital, ideology, and career stakes tied to the current blockchain narrative. Many venture funds, DeFi protocols, and so-called “Ethereum killers” remain heavily invested in blockchain’s centrality. Yet history shows technology incumbents resisting change often falter. Just as the internet transcended its early closed systems, Web3 is set to move beyond block-based sequencing. The greatest opportunities will belong to those who recognize and leverage this pivotal transition. This article is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered legal or investment advice. The opinions expressed are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cointelegraph.