Eth is moving to #proofOfStake.
Does it matter: not really.
Eth is already captured and controlled by the banks. The true chain is the one USDC say is the true chain.
In General though there is a difference between a system where the rich can create money to pay themselves, and one where all money-creation takes work.
What should the cost of money be?
Should money be free for the powerful to create at will?
Using bank-debt for money leads to an impossible situation: not enough money in the economy to pay off the debt.
Bitcoin is another way.
Are there others?
I'd like a way better than any of those.
Bitcoin-skeptic's: What is your plan on how to make a better money:?
I agree: Bitcoin is shitty. Dollars are shitty. Pounds are shitty.
So how *do* we fix the money then?
Are we're going to end up with a system where we simply admit that unbacked money is a social credit score and run society as a game?
The game of Capitalism++. Two hundred points for passing go every year.
Money can't just be what the rich say it is. It has to involve work, or else it's just points.
Who gets to create money?
Why do they get that right?
What limits should there be?
Can a government be trusted with it?
Why should my government trust your government's money?
Those are the Bitcoin questions.
The last bitcoin will take the combined computing power of all the nodes in the network forty years to mine.
In 80 years, how much will it cost to make the next dollar?
Government power to make more money and do good work with a positive return rate is probably a good thing? I think?
Assuming you have good democratic government systems and responsible control over the money.
Really wish we had that.
Some say that deflationary money is bad. It encourages hoarding instead of investment.
I think maybe spending is not better than saving? Except if you are a banker doing the loaning.
What business ventures I have fraught, I did with saved money. The bank wouldn't even see me.