[grubles]

That's not true at all. The decision makers in Ethereum care overwhelmingly about maximizing the value of their massive premine holdings. The latest EIP-1559 proposal (tl;dr ETH gets burned in every transaction) makes their stash an even larger percentage of the overall ETH distribution. Which is even more egregious when you learn that proof-of-stake rewards those with the most money (read: the decision makers).

[bo1024]

> The decision makers in Ethereum care overwhelmingly about maximizing the value of their massive premine holdings.

That's not the impression I got of Vitalik Buterin at all, nor others at the Ethereum foundation. Maybe you have a different set of decisionmakers in mind.

[CryptoPunk]

>>The latest EIP-1559 proposal (tl;dr ETH gets burned in every transaction) makes their stash an even larger percentage of the overall ETH distribution

That assumes they don't spend their ETH on fees, which doesn't make realistic assumptions about the makeup of this group.

>>Which is even more egregious when you learn that proof-of-stake rewards those with the most money (read: the decision makers).

PoS is no worse than PoW in this respect. Both PoW and PoS reward validators in proportion to their capital assets. In the case of PoW, mining ASICs, and in the case of PoS, ETH.

In any case, the fact that larger miners/stakers make more is neither surprising nor a cause for concern. It's the rate of return on capital being higher for larger investors that would be concerning, as that has the effect of concentrating wealth.

There is less of an economies of scale effect in staking than in proof-of-work generation, with smaller validators having a ROI on their capital assets that is closer to that of larger validators in PoS than in PoW.

So PoS should have a weaker tendency toward growing wealth inequality than PoW.