2025-12-17 20:24:58

Less is more—this philosophy has never gone out of style in engineering and product design. The optimal component is the one that is not needed. The most efficient process is the one that can be eliminated.

This minimalist approach is especially important in the cryptocurrency and blockchain space. When we look at successful protocol designs, it is often those projects that are willing to remove unnecessary features and streamline interaction paths that survive in the end. The simpler the code, the fewer vulnerabilities. The more direct the process, the better the user experience.

From Bitcoin's UTXO model to Ethereum's EVM optimization directions, this "art of deletion" runs throughout. Whether it’s Layer 2 scaling solutions or new blockchain architectures, those that dare to discard redundancy and focus on core functions tend to be more competitive.

The same applies to products like exchanges, wallets, and DEXs. Adding more features does not equal user value. True innovation lies in accomplishing the most core tasks with the least amount of code and the simplest interactions.

BTC-0.08%

ETH-0.05%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

10 Likes

Reward
10
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

DarkPoolWatcher

· 2025-12-20 18:53

Simplicity is true skill, but in reality, many exchanges are still piling on features... --- But speaking of which, deleting features is much harder than adding them; it requires great wisdom. --- That's why Bitcoin has remained so pure all these years; it's really about principles. --- I'm really fed up with all the flashy interactions on DEXs. Can we just simplify it? --- Simple code = improved security. This logic is especially popular on-chain. --- I believe in projects that are truly willing to cut back; they tend to last the longest. --- Having many features isn't necessarily an advantage; it can be a burden. Are people only now starting to realize this? --- The art of deletion sounds nice, but users often don't understand why something is missing. --- Comparing Bitcoin and Ethereum makes it clear—they're on completely different levels of simplicity. --- All those garbage features on exchanges really should be cut; instead, they make operations more complicated.

View OriginalReply0

WenAirdrop

· 2025-12-20 13:00

You hit the nail on the head. Many projects die from feature bloat, while BTC with its simplicity has lasted until now. The more features, the more bugs. How many blood and tears lessons does it take to understand that? The art of deletion sounds simple but is incredibly difficult to do. Most teams are still crazily stacking features. Those DEXs still messing around with a dozen menu items really need to reflect. Simplicity is not poverty; it is true wisdom. Unfortunately, many people have got it wrong.

View OriginalReply0

ProbablyNothing

· 2025-12-17 20:54

You are absolutely right, but the reality is that most projects are still crazily stacking features. Simplicity indeed makes money, while complexity only leads to faster death. Bitcoin has lasted until today because it didn't add anything; on the other hand, those flashy features have all failed. Deleting features is much harder than adding them, requiring true discipline. Many teams claim to innovate but are actually digging their own graves—don't buy into that. After experiencing setbacks, Solana is now moving towards simplicity. Aesthetics and code aesthetics are two different things.

View OriginalReply0

GrayscaleArbitrageur

· 2025-12-17 20:53

That's right, but I find that many teams are still frantically piling on features, afraid that users will think it's not worth it. Bitcoin's persistence over the past decade has truly been remarkable, sticking to its core principles. Most projects fail because they try to do everything, and as a result, end up doing nothing well.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoMom

· 2025-12-17 20:48

Exactly right. These days, exchanges with a bunch of piled-up features are really disappointing. Many projects just don't get it; they have to add so many flashy gimmicks. Bitcoin has been the same logic all these years—it's stable. Some wallet apps are so slow to open that I can't even use them. Simplicity is king, but unfortunately most teams don't understand that. Seeing through it all, it's over; too many features are actually just clutter. This really hit me—using overly complicated products makes me want to smash my phone. Design aesthetics should be about simplifying, right? Oh my God, finally someone said it. The more you cut back, the better it works. In today's world, reverse thinking is key.

View OriginalReply0

MEVHunterWang

· 2025-12-17 20:40

That's very true. A bunch of flashy features can actually backfire. Really, looking at those failed projects, they basically try to add everything and end up with messy code. The btc UTXO model has lasted longer than those complex designs. As I always say, simplicity is king. Some exchanges insist on adding a hundred derivative product features, but the user experience ends up worse than those focusing solely on spot trading. Deleting features is much harder than adding them—that's real skill. Likes are good, but security issues still need to be taken seriously. Simplicity doesn't mean lack of rigor. This logic also applies to product design. Nowadays, apps are too bloated; anyone who uses them gets annoyed.

View OriginalReply0

SchrodingerAirdrop

· 2025-12-17 20:28

Really, I've seen too many projects stack up into a mess, and nobody uses them. Simplicity is the key. --- Bitcoin's approach is correct. Why add so many flashy features? --- That's so true. Deleting code is much harder than writing code. Most people suffer from bloatedness. --- So, those exchanges with explosive features are ultimately not as good as simple and user-friendly ones. --- Exactly, the simpler, the safer. Many vulnerabilities are caused by redundant features. --- I agree, but the reality is that product managers always want to add features, fearing they won't look professional. --- DeFi now faces this problem: contracts are so complex that no one can fully understand them. A minimal version might be better. --- On the other hand, why can't everyone just change this bad habit? --- That's true. The protocols that last the longest are so simple they almost seem "cold." --- This philosophy is correct, but actually implementing it is another story.

View OriginalReply0