On 4th September, Vitalik Buterin, the Co-Founder of Ethereum said that Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchain “sucks”, in a reply to a Jameson Lopp, a Cypherpunk.
Jameson Lopp stated on Twitter:
@VitalikButerin agrees with @JeremyRubin that the value of ETH will trend toward 0 unless changes are made to the protocol.”
To which, the Co-Founder of Ethereum said:
“I think I’ve been pretty consistent about my view that (i) every present-day existing blockchain, including ETH and BTC, sucks, and (ii) PoS is necessary. Not sure why anyone surprised.”
This is the continuation of the series of the statement made by the core Developer Jeremy Rubin, a Bitcoin core contributor and the Co-Founder of the MIT Digital Currency Initiative on TechCrunch.
Jeremy remarked that “The collapse of ETH is inevitable”. He has predicted that the value of ETH will reach zero. This was followed by Vitalik speaking on the topic on Reddit. Vitalik claimed that the article had missed out on critical details on the economic and technical terms.
The author had stated that ‘sometimes’ the term ‘economic abstraction’ in the Ethereum community refers to paying for GAS with a non-ETH token for the transaction of a token based on the Ethereum platform, instead of paying for GAS in ETH.
To which, Vitalik said that in the current state of Ethereum, the statement is “absolutely true”. He further added that if there is no change in Ethereum, all the statements made by the author including, ETH collapsing to zero would become true. In addition, he said that the Ethereum community is considering two proposals which focuses on the importance of ‘pay ETH at a protocol level’.
However, he does not agree with the statement made by the author on the topic of Proof of Stake [PoS]. Jeremy stated:
“Without ETH, a modified version of Proof-of-Stake with a multitude of assets could still decide consensus if each node selects a weight vector for the voting power of all assets (let’s call it HD-PoS, or Heterogeneous Deposit Proof Of Stake).
He further added:
“While it is an open research question to show under which conditions HD-PoS would maintain consensus, consensus may be possible if the weight vectors are similar enough.“
“Except the part about proof of stake, which would not even apply to Ethereum as it is today”
Vitalik added that he looked into HD-PoS back in the year of 2014 and that it is very difficult, probably impossible to “get it right”.
JP Thor, a Twitterati said:
“There’s nothing wrong with Bitcoin. Changing it will make it wrong. For other blockchain that aren’t trying to be a SoV they should optimise and iterate”
To which Vitalik replied:
“I don’t really think the “pure SoV” vision is sustainable; I think good SoVness comes *as a consequence* of succeeding at other forms of utility.”
He further added:
“One way this could happen is that if a portion of txfees gets burned, then that cryptocurrency’s supply growth rate becomes *negative*, making it a more attractive SoV than the mere “zero issuance” cryptos.”
Subscribe to AMBCrypto’s Newsletter