2026-01-10 22:20:25

As DeFi continues to grow year after year, platforms are increasing in number and competition is becoming fiercer. However, to be honest, most platforms are following the same old path—repetitive features, similar gameplay, unstable returns, with little to distinguish one from another. In contrast, some emerging decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) are quite interesting; they are transforming the DeFi ecosystem in completely different ways.

**The First Change: Decision-Making Power Truly Returns to the Community**

How do traditional DeFi platforms operate? Simply and crudely— the core team makes all the decisions. Developers can change whatever they want, and users are passive recipients. Have opinions? Sorry, that’s not your concern. The drawbacks of this approach are obvious: decision-making is prone to bias, and there are even concerns about fund misappropriation or market manipulation risks.

Decentralized governance is different. Participants holding governance tokens have voting rights, and major platform decisions are made through community votes. It sounds like democracy— and it is— everyone’s voice counts. What are the benefits of this approach? First, transparency is greatly improved, with no black-box operations. Second, gathering collective wisdom reduces the likelihood of errors. Third, project directions are more aligned with actual user needs because users themselves are the decision-makers.

**The Second Change: Ecosystem Services Are More Complete**

In the past, DeFi platforms were like a "melting pot"—a platform might only handle lending, requiring users to swap elsewhere, or stake, then jump again. It was a hassle.

Now, some projects are building one-stop ecosystems where lending, trading, staking, and even derivatives trading can all be handled on a single platform. User experience has improved by more than one level, and operational processes are simplified. This is a blessing for those who want to participate in DeFi but dislike switching platforms frequently.

Different functional modules within the ecosystem can also empower each other. For example, yield data from lending pools can feed back into trading modules, helping traders make better decisions. This kind of synergy is something traditional single-function platforms cannot achieve.

While these changes may not directly save the DeFi industry, they are at least exploring the right direction. The market needs such innovation—breaking homogenization and truly creating value for users.

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.

17 Likes

Reward
17
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ser_we_are_early

· 01-11 23:11

Listening to this, I can't help but think of those projects that cut leeks. Even with more democratic governance token voting rights, they can't compete with whales dumping. DAO governance sounds great, but in reality, it's still those people calling the shots. The difference isn't as big as you might think. One-stop ecosystems are indeed convenient, but the risks are also concentrated. If one module crashes, it's all over. It seems that most of these so-called "transformations" end up just being new ways to cut leeks. Transparency improvement? I watched the approval process of those proposals, and it's still a mess.

View OriginalReply0

BlockchainWorker

· 01-11 16:44

Decentralized governance sounds great, but when you actually invest... big players still have a louder voice than us. That's right, but the problem is, who really hands over decision-making power now? Isn't that just an empty promise? A one-stop ecosystem sounds beautiful, but in practice, most of them are full of bugs, and the experience is even worse than single-platform ones. Talking about democratic decision-making every day, but in the end, it's still those big V players voting, and the voices of small retail investors are like they never existed. Homogenization is too real; browsing the platform reveals just a few types, and the profits are all just hype. Can this fully decentralized governance really work, or will it ultimately rely on the core team to clean up the mess? Thumbs up, finally someone dares to expose the window paper of DeFi. The chicken blood speeches end here.

View OriginalReply0

LightningHarvester

· 01-10 22:46

Community voting sounds good, but I'm worried that too many opinions will turn it into a mess, and it might just become another form of tug-of-war. Can governance tokens truly guarantee transparency? I doubt it, as big players still have the loudest voice. An all-in-one platform is convenient, but it also packs in the risks. Are you willing to gamble on this single entry point? I like this idea, but the implementation needs more observation—don't let it turn into just another slogan like "Revolutionary Wave." Decentralized governance sounds simple in theory, but in practice, everyone wants more say, and in the end, it's just a game of capital. Module interconnection can indeed improve efficiency, but the key is whether the code can hold up—one vulnerability and the whole system could fail.

View OriginalReply0

SighingCashier

· 01-10 22:45

Governance token voting sounds great, but the real decision-making power still lies with the big players. Small investors voting again is just a waste. Can DAO truly avoid the black box? I just want to ask how many projects ultimately end up being led by the founding team. A one-stop ecosystem sounds appealing, but all the risks are concentrated in one basket. If the platform crashes, everything is gone. DeFi is hot every year, with new projects popping up annually. Basically, it's just moving liquidity around; fundamentally, it's the same old thing. Homogenization has long been an issue, but I haven't seen a real breakthrough yet. True decentralization? Uh... I remain skeptical. Right now, it's more human governance than legal governance.

View OriginalReply0

NFTArtisanHQ

· 01-10 22:40

ngl the whole "decentralization as democratic process" frame is kinda reductive... like yeah tokenomics gives us voting rights but doesn't that just replicate capital-weighted power dynamics? feels more like proof of stake than proof of agency

Reply0

HodlKumamon

· 01-10 22:26

**Comment 1:** Honestly, after looking at so many DAO projects, truly transparent decision-making is rare... data speaks for itself. **Comment 2:** A one-stop ecosystem sounds appealing, but I'm more concerned whether the Sharpe ratio can outperform single-chain lending protocols. Bears need to see the data. **Comment 3:** Another DAO governance and one-stop solution... Please, everyone, stop repeating the same mistakes. We've seen this pattern at least 17 times in history. **Comment 4:** Homogenization is indeed outrageous, but has anyone solved the cold start problem in decentralized governance? Let's focus on stabilizing the basics first. **Comment 5:** Huh? Revenue data fed into the trading module? I heard this concept back in 2021. It's only now being implemented? (´；ω；`)

View OriginalReply0