Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin recently discussed what he thinks about the recent Ethereum proof-of-work (PoW) fork topic that’s been finding its way into a number of conversations within the crypto community. Buterin remarked at the ETH-Seoul conference over the weekend, that he believes the people introducing the forked token concept are basically a “couple of outsiders” that “mostly just want to make a quick buck.”
Vitalik Buterin shares his thoughts on the Ethereum PoW Fork Idea
Many in the crypto world have discussed a possible ETH PoWfork (ETHW). This would make it different than the Ethereum Classic Blockchain. Bitcoin.com News covered the story of the Chinese cryptominer Chandler Guo. Guo explained that he was involved in the birth Ethereum Classic (ETC). After the idea gained momentum, a website named ethereumpow.org appeared and a handful of exchanges chose to list it.
Presently, the IOU tokens for ETHW are worth $138.69 per token, according to coinmarketcap.com metrics and against Tron’s USDD stablecoin, ETHW is exchanging hands for 142.27 USDD on Poloniex. This weekend, co-founder of Ethereum Vitalik Buterin discussed ETHW during a Q&A session at the ETH-Seoul conference. Buterin dismissed the possibility that a fork like this would see long-term adoption. “I’m not expecting it to have substantial, long-term adoption,” Buterin stressed.
Buterin complimented Ethereum Classic (ETC), the Ethereum developer and cofounder. “I think Ethereum Classic already has a superior community and a superior product for people kind of with those pro-proof-of-work values and preferences,” Buterin stated. When Buterin was asked about the ETHW proposal, he explained that those involved with its creation are just a “couple of outsiders that basically have exchanges, and mostly just want to make a quick buck.” Buterin added:
I hope that whatever happens, doesn’t lead to people losing money.
Digital Currency Group CEO Barry Silbert Discusses ETHW, Buterin Doesn’t See Fork Harming Ethereum’s Ecosystem
Buterin’s commentary follows the statements the founder and CEO of Digital Currency Group (DCG), Barry Silbert, has made about the ETHW idea on Twitter. Silbert tweeted the Galois Capital account via Twitter. said: “[For what it’s worth]We are here to support you. [Ethereum proof-of-stake]Additional to [Ethereum Classic]I have never intended to support this. [Ethereum proof-of-work] fork. [Ethereum]Miners need to move to [Ethereum Classic]They can maximize their revenues over the long term. Simple as that.”
Silbert has also made other statements on Twitter directly to some of Chandler Guo’s threads, and Guo asks Silbert in one tweet: “why only [Ethereum Classic]?” The DCG executive replied and said it is “the smart play for [ethereum] miners” and he also mentionedAntpool has taken the lead in supporting the Ethereum Classic chain. If someone is a… toldSilbert stops engaging with Guo responded and said: “I like and respect Chandler. Just disagree with him on this strategy.”
Meanwhile, at this weekend’s ETH-Seoul conference, Buterin detailed that he doesn’t expect Ethereum (ETH) to be deterred by the possibility of another fork. “I don’t expect Ethereum to really be significantly harmed by another fork,” Buterin remarked. On Twitter, it’s business as usual for Buterin, as the software developer tweeted about stealth addresses for ERC721 (non-fungible tokens) NFTs on Monday. “A low-tech approach to add a significant amount of privacy to the NFT ecosystem,” the Ethereum co-founder said.
What do you think about Vitalik Buterin’s opinion concerning the possible Ethereum PoW fork that has been discussed ahead of The Merge? Please comment below to let us know your thoughts on this topic.
Images by CreditShutterstock. Pixabay. Wiki Commons
DisclaimerThis article serves informational purposes. This article is not intended to be a solicitation or offer to sell or buy any product, service, or company. Bitcoin.com is not a provider of investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. The author and the company are not responsible for any loss or damage caused or alleged caused by the content or use of any goods, services, or information mentioned in the article.