ETH Reddit Mentions | ChartExchange

1) “Hard cap doesn’t equal Bitcoin scarcity / social consensus matters”
Correct — and that cuts both ways. Bitcoin’s “immutability” is social too.
The real question is: what’s the credible commitment of each system now and what are the governance levers to change it?
ETH has changed monetary policy multiple times (issuance + burn mechanics fundamentally changed after EIP-1559 and the Merge).
So “code can change” isn’t an Algorand dunk — it’s a universal property. The relevant comparison is how hard it is to coordinate a change and what interests dominate that coordination.
2) “Algorand changed its supply schedule / accelerated vesting”
Yes — early distribution policy changed. That’s not “revisionism,” it’s history.
But you’re acting like that automatically invalidates everything else. It doesn’t. Two separate axes:
Token distribution / emissions (economics)
Consensus / settlement guarantees (protocol)
You can criticize early emissions while still acknowledging: Algorand’s L1 gives deterministic finality with fast settlement and no reorg game.
3) “ETH ‘middleman’ argument is overstated; PBS/relays mitigate MEV”
This is the biggest sleight of hand.
Saying “PBS isn’t centralization, it’s mitigation” is like saying “adding a middle layer isn’t a middle layer.” PBS/relays/builders create structural specialization, which creates concentration pressure.
“Validators can build their own blocks” is technically true, but economically irrational at scale — so it centralizes in practice.
That’s the whole point: decentralization isn’t what’s possible, it’s what’s incentive-compatible.
4) “Centralization risk is researched and mitigated, unlike hand-waving here”
Researching a risk doesn’t delete it — it admits it exists.
The critique is that ETH scaled by moving complexity and trust boundaries up the stack (L2s, sequencing assumptions, cross-domain messaging, etc.).
That’s a tradeoff. Pretending it’s “not centralization” because it’s being studied is marketing.
5) “HBAR comparison is a strawman”
Not really. Nobody claims Hedera is permissionless today — that’s exactly why it’s relevant in a ‘decentralization vs tradeoffs’ discussion.
If a network has a council/permissioned governance model, that’s a different trust model. Mentioning it isn’t a strawman — it’s classification.
6) “Bitcoin energy per transaction is a bad metric / security budget not tied to tx count”
Agree. Per-tx energy is a sloppy metric. Better framing:
PoW’s security budget is tied to block reward + fees, not tx throughput.
But that doesn’t magically make PoW critique “activism.” The real critique is:
PoW converts external resources into Sybil resistance. Some people value that, others don’t. Call it a tradeoff — not a moral victory.
7) “Virtually zero e-waste for PoS is marketing; hardware still obsoletes”
Also agree partially. PoS still uses hardware.
But it’s disingenuous to pretend PoW and PoS are comparable here:
PoW’s competitive dynamic explicitly incentivizes constant capex/opex arms races.
PoS doesn’t require burning energy to stay competitive in the same way.
So yes, “zero” is marketing — but orders of magnitude lower is not.
8) “Stake concentration introduces centralization risks PoW does not”
PoW has concentration too — it just hides inside mining pools + cheap energy geography + ASIC supply chains.
PoS concentration is visible (stake). PoW concentration is visible (hash). Neither is immune.
9) “Cardano chose hard languages for formal verification; accessibility isn’t rigor”
Fine — but “Haskell = safety” is not automatic.
What matters is:
whether the platform’s design + tooling reduces exploit surface in practice, and
whether composability + execution semantics encourage safer patterns.
Accessibility and rigor aren’t opposites; they’re orthogonal.
10) “Overall reads like an Algorand pitch deck; tradeoffs exist”
Sure. Tradeoffs exist. That’s the whole conversation.
But dismissing protocol arguments as “pitch deck” is a dodge. The core claims being made are protocol-level:
deterministic finality
fast L1 settlement
low fees
no reorg / no confirmation depth games
You can say “ecosystem smaller” without pretending those guarantees don’t matter.

.dark-mode .hpzggB{ color: white; background-color: #333333; border: 2px solid white; }.light-mode .hpzggB{ color: #333333; background-color: white; border: 2px solid #333333; }ETHEUREthereum / Eurocrypto Composite

ETHEUR
Ethereum / Euro
crypto Composite