“Mad Scientist” Calls Ethereum A “Self-Assembled Ponzi Scheme”

“Mad Scientist” Calls Ethereum A “Self-Assembled Ponzi Scheme,” Says Proof Of Stake Doesn’t Solve Its Problems.

A “mad scientist” from Skerry Technologies goes after Ethereum and bashes the coin from multiple standpoints.

Not a lot of people know Nicholas Weaver, the self-proclaimed “mad scientist” working at Skerry Technologies. Apparently, it seems that Weaver has a bone to chew with the Ethereum blockchain. According to him, the network is unreliable – at least it came off in that perspective during his recent interview with Bloomberg TV. He had a few points to make about Ethereum.

Ethereum is a “self-assembled Ponzi scheme,” says Skerry Technologies Chief Mad Scientist Nicholas Weaver.

He discusses the highly-anticipated Ethereum Merge, the Ethereum global computer and its potential impact on the entire crypto ecosystem https://t.co/8ZVPxpX4Tt pic.twitter.com/knv9IB9NdB

— Bloomberg TV (@BloombergTV) July 26, 2022

Proof Of Stake Delayed For Too Long

For some time now, Ethereum developers have kept on promising to upgrade the network into a proof-of-stake system. This has grown popular as the “Ethereum merger” that will technically migrate the network from the current proof-of-work model to the futuristic proof-of-stake model. PoS is touted as the more efficient model due to its less energy usage in mining.

From Weaver’s point of view, the fact that the delivery of the Merger system has been postponed multiple times makes Ethereum a bad system. The “mad scientist” went on to call Ethereum a “self-assembled Ponzi scheme” in terms of its internal economics. He noted that introducing PoS doesn’t solve this issue.

Next, Weaver had something to say about the network’s throughput. According to him, the Ethereum Global Computer is very slow – about a 1/5,000th as fast as a small Raspberry Pi computing module. Again, he argued that the migration from PoW to PoS won’t improve the system in this respect.

“Those Who Have The Most Money Make The Rules”

PoS models favor those with higher stakes, giving them more leverage in network governance during voting events. For this reason, the shift of Ethereum from PoW to PoS is a bad idea, according to Weaver, because it consolidates power among a few high-stakes entities and leaves the rest with no significant voting power.