Quote from: justdimin on June 26, 2024, 05:32:01 PM

I would say it is a bit centralized, but also it's like gold or silver basically. Doesn't mean anyone owns it, doesn't mean it's like stocks, there isn't a CEO, it is basically price of grain or whatever, and you can bet on those things. But at the same time, crypto and commodity are different things, mainly because one of them could be used as a currency. Meaning that, while I agree that ETH could be called commodity for one way of using it, but it could also be called currency for another part.

So, I do not know what people should call it, SEC could call it a commodity if they want to, it is their own right and they can do whatever they want to, but I personally wouldn't call it a commodity right now, because it can still be used.

No CEO? You might want to double-check your phrase. Especially when Vitalik is at the center stage of the project. Everyone follows him as he were some sort of celebrity or god. Just like foolish investors following Elon Musk to buy/sell Dogecoin. Some say many developers are working on ETH, but without Vitalik, I fail to see how the project would be a success. He would've stayed anonymous like Satoshi, and no one would even care if he was alive or dead. His public image can negatively-affect ETH in the long term.

I still consider ETH a security because of the PoS mechanics. You're entrusting your funds to big exchanges and corporations. It's a lot different from mining where you can easily set up a rig or farm at home (even if there are companies running huge mining farms). Both miners and node operators determine network consensus. Not like Ethereum where stakers (validators) are also node operators. The SEC just backed down because of fear from giants like BlackRock, Fidelity, and VanEck. Not because it was wrong. Money talks, right? Why should we be worried about this? As long as we have a truly-decentralized coin like Bitcoin, nothing else matters. Cheesy