When done carefully, the transition can be a step in the right direction. Even with the best online casino platforms that thrive on all-time classics and traditional game types, change can do a lot in creating new opportunities.
Ethereum is one of cryptocurrency’s most popular coins and soon enough, it will be taking on a new direction in the area of becoming more energy efficient when it comes to how transactions get processed.
But with prominent crypto personalities doing all they can to keep the coin’s proof-of-work version alive, there are certainly many questions surfacing on why that’s the case.
Ethereum’s New Venture
Ethereum’s decision to embark on its transition to proof-of-stake is long-awaited. Set to take place sometime in September 2022, a lot of speculation is going around on what will happen to the disapproval proof-of-work network post-Merge.
But despite the reality that comes with having the “Ice Age” freeze out PoW miners, the movement continues to grow in keeping Ethereum’s previous consensus mechanism going.
2016 saw the Ethereum community undergoing a lot of crisis after an exploiter took off with roughly 5% of all the ether in circulation. A lot of controversies sparked on what steps Ethereum should take to correct this and after careful consideration, the result came down to a “hard fork.” Here, token balances would be adjusted in such a way that it would seem like the infamous exploit never took place.
Initially, not everyone was in agreement on this step; therefore, it came down to anti-fork purists and select detractors, and chief trolls continuing to run the old chain under the name, Ethereum Classic.
Despite the spin-off chain being officially removed from its community, it still managed to count as a worthy competitor to its sister network in being the true heir to Ethereum’s throne.
After a considerable amount of time, the chain seemed to be coming close to reaching its goal of flipping the value of ETH, but its bid for blockchain dominance ultimately failed despite it setting the stage for years of debate, confusion, and grifts. Now, traders and investors are seeing a repeat of history.
Why Proof-Of Work?
The virtues of Ethereum’s previous PoS over its current PoW consensus mechanism remain a matter of heated debate. Essentially, a consensus mechanism is meant to be the set of rules that nodes follow when processing transactions.
By having these computers meet certain requirements, they can compete to give out blocks of transactions on Ethereum’s blockchain. In return, they will get a payout that will typically be a mix of newly issued crypto and transaction fees.
PoS and PoW will differ in how they go about selecting who they would like to issue blocks. With PoW, the system can accomplish the task by making use of “miners.” On the other hand, PoS does without mining and rather chooses to pass the assignment of block issuance to what they call validators.
Those advocating for PoS say that PoW lacks in the area of being energy efficient and sways the network’s control to companies that are in a position of being able to afford the running of expensive computers that are mining optimized. These are called ASICs. Those who then adhere to PoW say that PoS holds its own security risks and centralization while remaining less proven.
Despite the pros and cons behind each system, should Ethereum go according to plan, it will switch to PoS systems by the time September arrives. But questions still remain on what will happen to the PoW miners that have spent a lot of money investing in fancy mining hardware. Also, what happens to those who believe that PoW offers more security than PoS despite its flaws?
It goes without saying that not everyone in the Ethereum community will have a vested interest in the plans that PoW Ethereum has to ultimately give up on the previous mechanism.
And because both systems have considerable advantages and disadvantages, why should they?
Since this is a cryptocurrency that we’re talking about here, it’s obvious that some will see a fork while others will see dollar signs.