It is meant to be a confusing alternative to bitcoin used to keep the masses of doing what is otherwise obvious: save their productivity in bitcoin.
I have recently finished Ways and Means, a book on how (mostly) the North financed the Civil War. The Treasury had a similar fight against gold investors. There are all sorts of tactics they used to convince the public to buy government bonds instead of gold.
History doesn’t repeat but it often rhymes.
Ethereum is the ultimate attack on Bitcoin.
If you were the state motivated to keep your monopoly on Monopoly money, this would be an obvious attack vector.
Seeing that Ripple fucktard fund Greenpeace to attack PoW has been hilarious, they clearly don’t have any hooks into power given how completely useless that campaign has been.
PoS is destroying itself in reality anyway, when people wake up to what PoW can deliver in terms of benefits then ETH will ultimately die.
Contrarian view here--for me, ETH has different use cases (e.g. smart contracts) and can compliment BTC. Same with SOL - solid use cases due to transaction speed.
BTC doesn't need to do everthing (and in fact there are significant risks in modifying the protocol in order to add features).
A Ferrari and an F-150 both have valid use cases. Trying to make one do both jobs compromises their core strengths.
Companies will do everything that bitcoin doesn’t do. And anything that Bitcoin NEEDS to do, eventually it will do, too.
We don’t need multiple cryptocurrencies. We need an unmanipulated, free market price signal for money. Everything else will derive off of that function performed by Bitcoin.
ETH is an unregistered security and if - for some reason - the SEC doesn’t regulate it as such then you will know that it is a government subsidized alternative to Bitcoin meant to slow Bitcoin adoption.
