Jack Shared: I’m not anti ETH. I’m anti-centralized, VC-owned, single point of failure, and corporate controlled lies. If your goal is anti-establishment, I promise you it isn’t Ethereum. Don’t believe or trust me. Just look at the fundamentals.
Community Response: I mean my goal is to build stuff and make money and have fun I’m used to the corporate establishment and don’t really see any meaningful break away from it. Bitcoin just gives power to new rich people.
That’s why I’m pro Doge.
I’m confused. What is Jack pointing out here? Is he saying ETH is VC controlled and centralized and has a single point of failure? How is ETH any of those?
I’ve been looking at the fundamentals since 2015 and they just keep getting more impressive – criticism on ETH welcomed, but let’s be more substantive please, a discussion with Vitalik Buterin and ETH core devs perhaps going through your issues point by point?
It takes 32 eth, ~125k to even qualify to be a full validator in eth2, ignoring hardware requirements. Those validators will likely be the same ones that Vitalik admits will centralize L2, the scaling solution necessary for eth to survive. People with less than 32 ETH get diluted.
The net result is a protocol that is susceptible to centralization amongst the top stakers- because governance is determined by stake, i.e., wealth. Amount of bitcoin held has no bearing on weight of vote. That’s decentralization.
I don’t think that regular peasants can mine BTC. Only big boys with big hash power can. This is in regards to your comment that only big boys can stake.
A regular guy cannot buy miners and expert to make BTC as a reward. Ok they can join a pool, but so can stakers. I think both BTC and ETH will be fine. They each solve two different things. I don’t get the animosity from maxis though.
A staking pool is custodial & requires handing over your coins, a mining pool is completely virtual & distributed. Reward is paid out intermittently, but if a pool was being dishonest, you just join another If your staking pool ends up being dishonest, you’re SOL
Your misunderstanding of Ethereum is your Achilles’ Heel meanwhile, you will try to create something “decentralized” on top of Bitcoin, and you will fail because the base layer is not expressive enough, and no one will care.
I’m not disagreeing with you, but someone like Jack has access to some of the smartest people and developers in the world. He’s going to have a reason behind the anti-ETH sentiment. Hearing him say this is making me re-evaluate my Ethereum bull case hypothesis. Just curious.
Ethereum didn’t have VCs, is not centralized, have a centralized point of failure, or push corporate controlled lies? If you look at the fundamentals, you’ll see $154B in Eth DeFi, $31M in daily user fees, and thousands of Dapps with many that distribute tokens to their users.
The whole launch of Ethereum was extremely sketchy, you got to know that. Huge pre-mine, founders getting serious allocations. EF is still there, as a corporation, owning a lot of it. Infura runs the important nodes. Vitalik’s word is law.
That’s not the big part, the question about fair distribution is. There were sketchy stuff going on. Since you brought it up, Ethereum is now considered deflationary (right?), so the issue with pre-mine concentration is really important.
Decentralization is a means to an end, not the goal in and of itself. The goal is permissionless access and credible neutrality. Ethereum may not be as decentralized as Bitcoin but it’s decentralized enough to achieve those goals.
I don’t understand the maxi-mindset. Imagine being able to see the value of blockchain and crypto, and then just stopping right there at the gate and saying, “no more.”
70% of Ethereum was pre-mined. Ethereum is slow and gas fees are over $100. Two months ago, month the GETH client accidentally hard forked the blockchain. Last month the Ethereum Foundation changed the monetary policy. The “difficulty bomb” can destroy Eth based on human error.
Get the latest Crypto & Blockchain News in your inbox.