Listen, friend, there is an important topic being discussed more and more loudly in the crypto world right now: how reliable is Bitcoin's security in the long run, especially when compared with the secure architecture of Ethereum. At first glance, it may seem that Bitcoin is a time—tested monolith. But it's not that simple.
Ethereum researcher Justin Drake raises a troubling question. He says that Bitcoin is vulnerable to the so-called 51% attack. The bottom line is that if someone invests about $10 billion in mining equipment, they will be able to gain control over most of the hashrate and, in fact, begin to dictate the rules within the network. It's not fiction, it's just math and economics.
Now let's compare it with Ethereum. After switching to Proof-of-Stake (PoS), Ethereum validators protect the network not with computing power, but with capital. To attack the network, you need to control more than half of all ETH in staking, which is approximately $45 billion. At the same time, it is almost impossible to simply buy such an amount of ETH — it would affect the price and cause a lot of suspicion. That is, it is both expensive and logistically difficult to do this.
And that's where another expert joins in, Grant Hammer from Etherealize. He says: with each halving (and this is when the reward for a block in Bitcoin decreases), the income of the miners decreases. In the future, they will earn mainly on commissions. But if these fees are not enough, then the incentive to protect the network will also disappear. This means that it will become easier and cheaper to attack it — according to some estimates, in a few years the cost of such an attack may drop to $ 2 billion.
Ethereum wins in this sense — it has a broader and more decentralized base of validators. And if someone tries to cheat, they risk their money, which is blocked on the network. Loss of capital is a strong deterrent.
In short, both Drake and Hammer believe that Ethereum has a more stable security architecture today. Especially considering that the crypto infrastructure will become an increasingly important part of the digital economy.
And so I think: if that's the case, shouldn't we reconsider our views on Bitcoin as "digital gold"? Maybe Ethereum is really more reliable for storing value in the future? What do you think?
