đŚ Vitalik: Should $ETH be a store of value rather than a fee-burning token?
In his latest comments, Vitalik Buterin argued that focusing on ETH as a store of value makes more sense and is more meaningful than focusing on ETH as a token used to burn fees.
This could mark a shift in direction since The Merge and EIP-1559. According to the argument presented, if we want $ETH to become an effective fee-burning token:
1ď¸âŁ There would need to be substantial fee spending, reducing validator income and potentially creating conflicts in operating the network.
2ď¸âŁ The people in charge would have to intervene heavily to ensure every new trend and product makes its way onto Ethereum and attracts users.
3ď¸âŁ Fees would have to be high, resulting in a poor user experience.
These things run counter to decentralization and CROPS:
⢠C â Censorship Resistance
⢠O â Open Source
⢠P â Privacy
⢠S â Security
These are the qualities Ethereum is striving for to make $ETH a store of value. EIP-1559 will no longer be the main focus, but it will continue operating as usual and will not be removed.
Solanaâs Toly agrees: you canât focus on fees as a product; you need to choose a product that brings value to users and do it well.
In the previous cycle, The Merge and EIP-1559 coincided with $ETH rising from around $1,500 to nearly $5,000. The image in the post is a chart illustrating the âstore of valueâ thesis, with an arrow pointing toward $10,000 â this is my perspective, not a target stated by Vitalik.
Do you think $ETH pursuing the store-of-value narrative is more convincing than the fee-burning approach? đ
#ETH #Ethereum #Layer1
In his latest comments, Vitalik Buterin argued that focusing on ETH as a store of value makes more sense and is more meaningful than focusing on ETH as a token used to burn fees.
This could mark a shift in direction since The Merge and EIP-1559. According to the argument presented, if we want $ETH to become an effective fee-burning token:
1ď¸âŁ There would need to be substantial fee spending, reducing validator income and potentially creating conflicts in operating the network.
2ď¸âŁ The people in charge would have to intervene heavily to ensure every new trend and product makes its way onto Ethereum and attracts users.
3ď¸âŁ Fees would have to be high, resulting in a poor user experience.
These things run counter to decentralization and CROPS:
⢠C â Censorship Resistance
⢠O â Open Source
⢠P â Privacy
⢠S â Security
These are the qualities Ethereum is striving for to make $ETH a store of value. EIP-1559 will no longer be the main focus, but it will continue operating as usual and will not be removed.
Solanaâs Toly agrees: you canât focus on fees as a product; you need to choose a product that brings value to users and do it well.
In the previous cycle, The Merge and EIP-1559 coincided with $ETH rising from around $1,500 to nearly $5,000. The image in the post is a chart illustrating the âstore of valueâ thesis, with an arrow pointing toward $10,000 â this is my perspective, not a target stated by Vitalik.
Do you think $ETH pursuing the store-of-value narrative is more convincing than the fee-burning approach? đ
#ETH #Ethereum #Layer1
