Sure infinite coins can be fixed later, but the same can be said about Bitcoin. If POS works, it can be implemented on Bitcoin.
This was before the DAO hack.
I don't recall Vitalik ever claiming that arbitrary smart contracts built on top of Ethereum were provably safe. Back then nobody was applying formal proof to smart contract code, it was just regular devs slamming out Solidity scripts with minimal third-party audits. That's what the vulnerable DAO code was; there wasn't a formal proof within miles of that stuff. The hack did not target the Ethereum protocol itself.
Applying formal proofs to smart contracts does make sense, since failures are expensive and the code is short. There's been gradual movement in that direction but it's been slow.
Once Stanford gets fully restarted, I'll see if I can dredge those up.
Issuance right now is 2 ETH/block. The white paper just promised 5 ETH/block forever.
https://ethereum.org/en/whitepaper/
Net issuance will be lower after 1559 rolls out in August and starts burning a portion of transaction fees. Combining that with the PoS merge in half a year or so, and net issuance may well go negative. (Ethereum's PoS isn't really a scaling solution though.)
Yes, but can you convince the hardcore PoW maximalists to join your fork? IMO Bitcoin is doing its best to be a raw, pseudo-physical element.
That means immutability, costs rooted in the physical world, etc. The community will change its protocols sparingly and slowly.
To some who prefer rapid change and development this is unattractive. But to Bitcoiners, decentralization and immutability are the foundations of this new type of property. They are uninterested in technical gains that come with complexity and risk.
DOGE is problematic because it's an infinite coin with an inflation rate that is too high.
https://john-tromp.medium.com/a-case-for-using-soft-total-su...
> "Sure infinite coins can be fixed later, but the same can be said about Bitcoin. If POS works, it can be implemented on Bitcoin."
In theory yes, in practice no. BTC community elevated a clear con-man fake Satoshi because he took sides in a block size political battle. They can't even agree to increase the block size. This lack of leadership is a problem, moving to ETH2 is a serious project and requires a leader, priorities, direction etc. I don't think BTC can do any of this.