I think this is an unfair characterization of the ETH network, given that it has yet to transition safely to PoS. Maybe "will be" is a better qualifier.
I welcome the reduction in energy consumption, but do not understand how a Proof of Stake approach does not effectively make Etheureum extremly uninteresting for non-whales.
While I agree with the final point, I would have hoped for better arguments. It's not because one validator node consumes 1% of the energy consumed by an Antminer that PoS consumes 1% of what PoW consumes ... You need to weigh in the relative weight of an Antminer over the total Hash Rate of the bitcoin network, and the same for the validator node.
Avalanche's AVAX <i>is</i> green and has been since the beginning - you can even bridge your ETH to it, and BTC "real soon now".<p>I think if there wasn't so much value locked into BTC that there'd be strong interest in many of the actual proof-of-stake systems, but it instead, understandably, is in an entrenched and defensive position.
>>While it was originally planned for 2023, we're working very hard to try and make it happen by the end of the year.<p>I hope Ethereum doesn't rush the transition to PoS. Better that it take a bit longer, with a long period of testing, and ensure that a robust PoS protocol, that can stand the test of time, is implemented.
everyone that matters is working towards making these statements more true than yesterday<p>everyone that doesn’t matter is looking at the current state and complaining about it, never considering they could improve the technology because it never was about that for them, its just the latest goal post in wishing it would go away<p>consensus from the state-apparatus leans towards the builders and not towards the ban-ners