/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.51404587]

Purely for the sake of argument, assume the following conditions:

>The Ethereum Proof of Stake merge completes successfully and seamlessly
>Over the next 5 years, the Ethereum network never faces any significant issues as a result of the Proof of Stake consensus mechanism (no successful denials of service, double-spends, history rewriting, or any other sort of attack)

I am not saying any of that will be the case. Even if you find the assumptions unlikely, just assume them as hypotheticals for the time being.

Given those assumptions, how will politicization and culture war tribalism affect "Bitcoin vs. Ethereum"? The main complaint people on the left have is the energy use required by Proof of Work algorithms. If those assumptions hold, then Ethereum suddenly becomes a lot more palatable in their eyes, and Bitcoin becomes even less palatable than it already is. Especially since Bitcoin mining energy use will be ever-increasing while Ethereum consensus energy use will permanently remain a flat line, effectively.

Could this eventually cause it all to escalate into something more like an actual holy war? Bitcoin may become way, way more "right-coded" and Ethereum may become way, way more "left-coded". They already kind of are, but this might be the tipping point into something never before seen.

[Anonymous No.51404655]

>>51404587
idk, it seems like without a "right-coded" reason to dislike Ether in the way that there is a "left-coded" reason to dislike Bitcoin (energy-inefficient), it'll simply be more a matter of "old-and-busted-coded" vs "new-and-improved-coded."

[Anonymous No.51404798]

>>51404655
Based.

[Anonymous No.51404803]

>>51404655
>it seems like without a "right-coded" reason to dislike Ether in the way
Instinctive reactionary backlash + dislike that the "opposing side" (Ethereum) is mostly left-wing while you are right-wing may lead to right-wing Bitcoin proponents to lots of motivated reasoning that will lead them to hate Ethereum and Ethereum adopters. And then vice versa as a reaction to that, in its usual cycle.

This isn't really something you can apply a lot of concrete reasoning to. And actually, that may be one of the core accelerants here. You do have one objectively undeniable factor - Bitcoin network consensus will indisputably require way more energy use than Ethereum network consensus - and this will lead to counter-rationalization of why Ethereum is fatally flawed/unethical/fraudulent/not truly [whatever] and/or why this energy use differential isn't something anyone should care about or view negatively, which will lead to its own countering, etc.

The "Ethereum left" will fire the first shots by increasingly berating them and telling them the thing they care about most and deeply identify as and put all their hopes and dreams in is intrinsically unethical. "Cancellation" analogies are way overused, but there could be parallels here. Especially when combined with existing tropes on the left that most cryptocurrency proponents are Nazis or whatever. Right now that label mostly also applies to Ethereum proponents in their eyes, but with things like NFTs "supporting independent artists", Vitalik being mostly socially left-leaning, and now the removal of the energy use demon, it could start to shift.

(Or maybe not. They may just use plenty of motivated reasoning of their own to mostly continue to hate and distrust all cryptocurrency technologies, including Ethereum. In which case, yeah, it may just be a perputation of the existing Bitcoin vs. Ethereum war on less overtly political grounds. But even that alone may dramatically escalate.)

[Anonymous No.51404813]

>>51404655
>it seems like without a "right-coded" reason to dislike Ether in the way
Instinctive reactionary backlash + dislike that the "opposing side" (Ethereum) is mostly left-wing while you are right-wing may lead right-wing Bitcoin proponents to lots of motivated reasoning about why they should hate Ethereum and Ethereum adopters. And then vice versa as a reaction to that, in its usual cycle.

This isn't really something you can apply a lot of concrete reasoning to. And actually, that may be one of the core accelerants here. You do have one objectively undeniable factor - Bitcoin network consensus will indisputably require way more energy use than Ethereum network consensus - and this will lead to counter-rationalization of why Ethereum is fatally flawed/unethical/fraudulent/not truly [whatever] and/or why this energy use differential isn't something anyone should care about or view negatively, which will lead to its own countering, etc.

The "Ethereum left" will fire the first shots by increasingly berating them and telling them the thing they care about most and deeply identify as and put all their hopes and dreams in is intrinsically unethical. "Cancellation" analogies are way overused, but there could be parallels here. Especially when combined with existing tropes on the left that most cryptocurrency proponents are Nazis or whatever. Right now that label mostly also applies to Ethereum proponents in their eyes, but with things like NFTs "supporting independent artists", Vitalik being mostly socially left-leaning, and now the removal of the energy use demon, it could start to shift.

(Or maybe not. They may just use plenty of motivated reasoning of their own to mostly continue to hate and distrust all cryptocurrency technologies, including Ethereum. In which case, yeah, it may just be a perputation of the existing Bitcoin vs. Ethereum war on less overtly political grounds. But even that alone may dramatically escalate.)

[Anonymous No.51404865]

>>51404587
If they manage to "cancel" BTC for ETH, I'm never trusting my net worth into crypto again, because that means something else along the way can cancel ETH and become the new leader.

Crypto'll be nothing more than a shitcoin casino for me then.

[Anonymous No.51404912]

>>51404865
The problem with this mindset is that it assumes that anything that is currently "most expensive" must always be the "most expensive" forever, or else "buying thing" is just a scam. Yet historically, change in markets is not only inevitable, but beneficial. Standard Oil isn't the most valuable company by market capitalization of its outstanding shares, but that's because something better came along, and so on in a very long and competitive list. Roman coins were replaced by the British Pound and then the American Dollar as a "world reserve currency." Do you refuse to hold currencies and trade stocks?

[Anonymous No.51404928]

Normies will always flood in and ruin everything, so yes, it will inevitably become another retarded political front with Ethereum being centralized Fedcoin that leftists simp over because they so desperately crave direction and purpose.

That being said, Ethereum will be the Amazon of crypto.

[Anonymous No.51405906]

>>51404813
>The "Ethereum left" will fire the first shots by increasingly berating them and telling them the thing they care about most and deeply identify as and put all their hopes and dreams in is intrinsically unethical.
This is the big danger here IMO

[Anonymous No.51405959]

>>51404928
>Become another retarded political front
We've already seen this taking effect. Divide an conquer tactics as usual.

[Anonymous No.51405986]

>>51404587
ESG nuts will attack btc for the E
ESG nuts will attack eth for the S and G