Quote from: o48o on June 20, 2024, 02:56:39 PM

SEC has decided it's now commodity, so we don't need to either, and if they don't see it as a security, no one has reason to. Centralization doesn't make it a security and idea of whole centralization around it is debatable anyway imho, especially when we compare it to other cryptos, like bitcoin. And i don't see PoS centralizing it any more then huge mining farms do to PoW coins. In same way, Bitcoin is centralized around people with biggest rigs and most money to run them when price of electricity is high and price of BTC low.

And vitalik isn't the main guy anymore, there are numerous active developers, and if we compare the numbers of active developers on both of them, eth doesn't seem to be that centralized around the main team.

I guess fear from crypto industry giants made the SEC step back from labeling ETH a security. But we can't deny ETH is less-decentralized than Bitcoin itself. Especially with how Vitalik still has influence over the project (even though many developers are working on it). The community considers Vitalik as a leader. Could you imagine what would happen with ETH's price if something bad happens to Vitalik? Bitcoin didn't have a problem with Satoshi Nakamoto's departure from the project because nobody knew who he was. People were following the coin itself. Not the one person (or group of persons) behind it.

I agree that huge mining farms centralize the Bitcoin network. Fortunately, miners alone aren't the only ones who're part of network consensus. They're separate from node operators. In the case of ETH, stakers (validators) also constitute themselves as node operators allowing them to take full control of network decisions. At least, that's how I understand it (please correct me if I'm wrong). With ETH now a commodity, the CFTC will now be in-charge of regulating it (not the SEC). Hopefully, ETH sticks to its original values of decentralization for the benefit of all.