Did you know the first use of the term “Ethereum 2.0” was by founder of Ethereum Vitalik Buterin back in April 2014 when he first began exploring the benefits of proof-of-stake (PoS) blockchain protocols?
At the time, Ethereum 2.0 referenced one thing and one thing only: a version of the Ethereum blockchain protocol secured entirely through proof-of-stake validation, as opposed to proof-of-work mining.
Over the years, Ethereum 2.0 as a term has evolved and grown to encompass other improvements to the network including optimizations for scalability, smart contract functionality and blockchain interoperability.
Given recent discussion over proposals to speed up Ethereum’s transition to PoS, certain developers such as the Ethereum Foundation’s Danny Ryan are pushing back on using the loaded terminology of Eth 2.0.
“It’s not just about naming things. It’s about how the Ethereum roadmap has kind of evolved over the years,” said Edgington, adding: “It’s not just about changing names for the sake of it. It’s about saying, ‘We’re not doing a new chain anymore. This is no longer the plan. We are upgrading the existing chain.’”
As plans for Ethereum’s future change, so, too, will conventional naming for its updated roadmap. Keeping up with constant iteration to Eth 2.0 and what this upgrade will actually entail, however, is a “moving target” that, according to Foxley, many mainstream financial analysts are in the dark and left wondering about.
Some, as I point out, are also worrying about the impacts of an imminent PoS protocol on the long-term value of ether. Given that under PoS it will require less computational energy to create new coins on Ethereum, could the market value of ether be negatively impacted as a result?
Listen to the full podcast to hear from Foxley, Edgington and Kim on what’s at stake for Eth 2.0.
Links mentioned in this podcast: