Bitcoins/Litecoins/Virtual Currencies

Volto! said:

Matic may be a decent choice. It would fall into the second group mentioned above.

Click to expand...

Matic was actually exactly what I was thinking of when I wrote 2. It's been on one hell of a run recently, and I don't personally chase runners, but I don't really see it slowing down in the near future, so...

Still some MATIC supply being released until the end of next year. I like MATIC a lot but I'm not sure I love it at this price. Eventually I see it going far past it once the supply is fully released so whatever I guess?

ETH has made some big gains on BTC in the last month. I bought the dip this week and I'm wondering if the rally for ETH is going to continue. I'm super pessimistic about their Proof of Stake change though. Does anyone have good insights on what ETH is doing relative to BTC? Can the rally continue?

Break said:

ETH has made some big gains on BTC in the last month. I bought the dip this week and I'm wondering if the rally for ETH is going to continue. I'm super pessimistic about their Proof of Stake change though. Does anyone have good insights on what ETH is doing relative to BTC? Can the rally continue?

Click to expand...

It's the foundation for Web3. Doesn't get much bigger than that.

Edit: Web3

Arden said:

It's the foundation for Web3. Doesn't get much bigger than that.

Edit: Web3

Click to expand...

Or is PoS a POS that tanks Ethereum in the long run?!

Break said:

Or is PoS a POS that tanks Ethereum in the long run?!

Click to expand...

Yes, I saw you don't like pos. Ok I'll bite: why don't you like pos?

I don't hate it, but I'm very leery, it's unproven at the scale that Ethereum is at.

Yeah, I mean most things about crypto are untested/unproven at scale, and the scale is increasing all the time. It's emergent tech, just saying something is unproven doesn't mean much. I haven't heard any logical explanation as to why it wouldn't function as well as PoW. I'm still remaining pretty open to hearing opinions, since I'm not nearly as tech-savvy as a lot of people, but most of the criticisms I've seen are kind of vague like yours (no offense).

wrong thread

Tmac said:

Saying something is unproven means a lot. It means it’s incredibly risky.

PoS didn’t do anything for gas fees.

Click to expand...

The entire crypto industry is unproven and risky when it comes to long-term viability.
Saying POS is unproven means very little when comparing it to the crypto industry as a whole.

Also, ETH hasn't fully transitioned to 2.0 yet (though it remains to be seen if it will do anything for gas fees or if it even matters).

PoS gives those with the most ETH control of the content of each block. They can censor transactions. It is no different than the current financial system. Most people are fine with that I guess

Flobee said:

PoS gives those with the most ETH control of the content of each block. They can censor transactions. It is no different than the current financial system. Most people are fine with that I guess

Click to expand...

Maybe? I've got questions and I'm not sure anyone will really know what it ends up looking like until it happens. I think your point is a valid concern though. I'll tell you why. The twitter thread I linked a few posts ago is a really good/clear explanation about the ideas behind Web3. That said, Chris Dixon (guy who wrote the thread), described the evolution of the web as follows:

Web1 (1990-2005) was characterized by decentralization and open protocols. Value was accrued by web user and builders.
Web2 (2005-2020) was characterized by centralized services and corporations (Amazon, FB, Google, Apple). Value was "siloed" into these few actors.
Web3 attempts to move back to a decentralized paradigm that restores value to the users and builders but keep the advanced functionality of Web2. Web3 does this by utilizing blockchain tech via ETH.

My concern is that POS at least provides the opportunity for a relative few actors who possess a majority share of ETH to consolidate and control Web3. If that happens, aren't we just back to "siloing" the value? At that point we are simply exchanging corporations for people who hold a lot of ETH. Put another way, we are trading corporations for DAOs...

Arden said:

My concern is that POS at least provides the opportunity for a relative few actors who possess a majority share of ETH to consolidate and control Web3. If that happens, aren't we just back to "siloing" the value? At that point we are simply exchanging corporations for people who hold a lot of ETH. Put another way, we are trading corporations for DAOs...

Click to expand...

You're getting it. There is only 1 truly decentralized crypto network and it can't be reproduced. Make your tendies on shitcoins, but don't forget that Bitcoin is king and its playing a different game than the rest. Bitcoin the asset and Bitcoin the network are different things. Most of the 'web3' feature set will, IMO, end up on layers below Bitcoin main chain.

Not because its the most efficient or easiest, but because its the only network that can't be controlled.

LachiusTZ PoS is quite literally those with the most ETH staked, control the most validators. Validators validate blocks. If validators collude to exclude certain transactions they don't make it on the chain. That is how the system works at the simplest level. That control can and will be used in all sorts of clever ways that we won't be able to predict. This is no different than a bank telling you where, when, and how you are allowed to send/spend your money.

Flobee said:

You're getting it. There is only 1 truly decentralized crypto network and it can't be reproduced. Make your tendies on shitcoins, but don't forget that Bitcoin is king and its playing a different game than the rest. Bitcoin the asset and Bitcoin the network are different things. Most of the 'web3' feature set will, IMO, end up on layers below Bitcoin main chain.

Not because its the most efficient or easiest, but because its the only network that can't be controlled.

LachiusTZ PoS is quite literally those with the most ETH staked, control the most validators. Validators validate blocks. If validators collude to exclude certain transactions they don't make it on the chain. That is how the system works at the simplest level. That control can and will be used in all sorts of clever ways that we won't be able to predict. This is no different than a bank telling you where, when, and how you are allowed to send/spend your money.

Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong. It's pretty clear to me Web3 WILL be built on ETH (it's already being built on ETH); I just think it's not going to be quite as egalitarian as Web3 proponents are suggesting. I just think we are moving to a situation where we replace tech corporations with DAOs.

Also, this doesn't change the value of ETH in my mind at all. If anything it makes it more valuable.

LachiusTZ said:

Define control
Explain how validators could collude to exclude certain transactions?

I think you have hyped into thinking there is a bogey man dude.

If 10% of ETH wanted to break off, and create a completely open, or whatever lingo, validation chain on PoS, there is nothing preventing it.

PoS is the only way to scale ETH.

You can't have pow hosting everything ETH is trying to power. It just eats up to much resources. PoS allows for those resources to be spent on processes in the foreground, instead of the mining.

I dunno man

Click to expand...

You don't scale L1 to do what ETH is doing and stay decentralized. Thats the whole point. They screwed up by shoving all of that data in L1 instead of waiting for L2 to develop to a place where they could do the calculations off chain. Even Vitalik is admitting that now. ETH is a bungled project and they're scrambling to try to bail it out. Maybe PoS will breath some life into it and prolong the abomination.

Vitalik created ETH because he was impation with BTC dev pacing. He wanted to move fast and break this, BTC devs wanted to keep the codebase rock solid and move slowly. In the long run I'd rather be using the platform that took its time testing before moving code into production. Fortunately we all get to invest into what we're comfortable with. IMO Ethereum will not fare well in the long run, and if it does, it will do so as a effectively centralized entity.

Do you know about the difficulty they built into ETH?

Just for fun, here is a 4 year old thread, updated every time ETH 2.0 gets delayed.