Ethereum itself must pass "walkaway test（walkaway test)". Ethereum's goal is to become the home of trustless and trust-minimized applications, whether in finance, governance, or other fields. It must support applications that are more like tools. Like a hammer, once you buy it, it's yours; not a service-oriented application, whose functionality completely fails once the developers lose interest in maintaining it (or worse, it's hacked). Even if some applications do rely on specific developers, Ethereum should minimize this dependence as much as possible and protect users as much as possible in the event of a dependency failure. However, if the underlying protocol itself depends on a particular "supply provider" for continued availability, even if that "supply provider" is merely part of the overall core developer workflow, then a true application ecosystem cannot be established. The Ethereum blockchain itself must possess the qualities we seek in Ethereum applications. Therefore, Ethereum itself must pass the "walk-out test." This means that Ethereum must reach a state where, if we wish, we can choose a "fixed (ossify) protocol." We don't necessarily have to stop improving the protocol, but we must reach a point where Ethereum's value proposition no longer strictly relies on any features that don't yet exist in the current protocol. This includes at least the following aspects: Complete quantum resistance. We should avoid falling into the trap of postponing quantum resistance to the last minute in order to squeeze out a few more years of efficiency. Individual users can choose this, but the protocol layer should not. Being able to proudly say that the Ethereum protocol, in its current form, will be cryptographically secure for the next hundred years is a goal we should strive to achieve as soon as possible and uphold with pride.
Scalable to a sufficiently large architecture. The protocol must be capable of scaling to thousands of transactions per second over time, especially including ZK-EVM verification and data sampling implemented via PeerDAS.. Ideally, future expansion would primarily be achieved through parameter adjustments; even better, these adjustments would not be BPO-style hard forks, but rather, like gas limits, through validator voting mechanisms. This would create a stateful architecture capable of operating for decades. This means we need to decide on and implement some form of partial statelessness and state expiration so that even decades after Ethereum starts running at thousands of TPS, we don't have to worry about synchronization, disk, or I/O demands overwhelming us. It also means forward-looking design for tree structures and storage types for long-term environments.
General Account Model (i.e., "Complete Account Abstraction"): Eliminate the hard-coded dependency on ECDSA signature verification in the protocol. We are certain that there is no DoS vulnerability in the pricing system, which includes both the execution layer and the ZK proof layer.
A time-tested economic model PoS Based on our experience over the past five years in Ethereum's Proof-of-Stake (PoS) and even more than a decade earlier, we are confident that this model can remain decentralized for decades to come and support ETH as a trustless collateral asset (e.g., for governance-minimized ETH-collateralized stablecoins). This block-building model, resilient to centralized pressures, ensures censorship resistance even in an uncertain future environment. Ideally, we should complete these difficult but crucial tasks over the next few years, enabling virtually all subsequent innovations to be implemented through client-side optimizations and reflected in the protocol through parameter changes. Each year, we should check off at least one of these, ideally several. Doing things right the first time, based on a full understanding of what is truly right, rather than compromising half-baked fixes, maximizes Ethereum's long-term robustness at both the technical and social levels. Ethereum, all in. This is the way of Ethereum.
Coinlive 
