Comparing Bitcoin and Ethereum

Ethereum’s $1 Trillion Mistake: Why Bitcoin Remains Unshaken

What is the difference between Bitcoin and Ethereum? In September 2022, Ethereum made headlines for what was hailed as the most revolutionary upgrade in crypto history. Known as “The Merge,” this shift eliminated 99.9% of Ethereum’s energy consumption by moving from Proof-of-Work (PoW) to Proof-of-Stake (PoS). Cheering crowds, glowing headlines, and environmental praise followed.

But what if this celebrated shift introduced a fatal flaw?

Ethereum’s decision wasn’t just about cutting energy costs—it was about cutting its connection to reality. By abandoning the energy-intensive processes that secured the network, Ethereum replaced a decentralized system with one vulnerable to human corruption. And that’s where Bitcoin stands apart.

Bitcoin didn’t just create digital money; it solved one of humanity’s greatest challenges: how to establish trust in a digitally decentralized system.

This is the story of why Bitcoin remains the unshaken force in the world of cryptocurrency—and why Ethereum’s move might be its $1 trillion mistake.

Book A Call Today

A Brief History of Trust and Money

For thousands of years, money has always relied on one thing: trust.

From seashells to gold coins, trust in money stemmed from its connection to the physical world. Gold, for example, was valued because it was scarce and required significant energy to mine. That energy-based foundation made it difficult to counterfeit, giving it properties that allowed it to be a financial accounting tool. Anyone who held gold in their hand knew how hard it was to find and mine, and therefore could rely upon it being something they could trust. Consider how ancient people used to bite into their gold coins as a way of ensuring its purity.

Bitcoin adopted these same principles. By using PoW, Bitcoin secured its network with the laws of physics—tying trust to energy and making manipulation astronomically expensive. When you own bitcoin, you know how much energy was used to generate it and how difficult it would be to counterfeit. The exact same principles allow anyone to trust and rely upon Bitcoin as a financial accounting tool.

But Ethereum’s decision to switch to PoS broke away from this timeless principle. Instead of relying on energy and effort, Ethereum placed its trust in wealth and human authority.

Ethereum’s Merge: A Fatal Trade-Off

When Ethereum transitioned to PoS, it was lauded as a breakthrough for crypto infrastructure services. Faster transactions, lower costs, and a greener footprint—what’s not to love?

Here’s the catch: by abandoning PoW, Ethereum introduced centralization into its system. In PoS, validators are gatekeepers who approve and secure transactions. To become a validator, you need to stake at least 32 ETH—an investment of around $128,000 at today’s prices.

This means the system inherently favors the wealthy, concentrating power in the hands of a few. Over time, these validators grow richer through rewards, reinforcing their dominance and control over the network.

Contrast this with Bitcoin’s PoW model, where miners are rewarded based on effort and energy—not wealth. The result? Ethereum’s PoS system begins to look more like the financial systems it promised to disrupt, with the rich gaining disproportionate control.

Why Bitcoin’s Energy Usage Is a Strength

Critics often argue that Bitcoin’s energy consumption is wasteful. But this perspective misses the point entirely. Bitcoin’s energy usage is not a bug—it’s a feature.

Here’s why:

1. Unbreakable Security
   Bitcoin’s PoW system anchors its trust in energy. To attack Bitcoin, a malicious actor would need to recreate all the energy ever expended into the network since 2009. That’s trillions of dollars of energy for just a chance at success. PoS, by comparison, is secured by wealth. If a wealthy entity—say, a government or billionaire—buys enough Ethereum, they can control the system.
   
2. Decentralization Through Effort
   In Bitcoin, security and rewards are distributed among independent miners who contribute effort and energy. Ethereum’s PoS, however, concentrates rewards among those who can afford to stake large sums of ETH, perpetuating a cycle of centralization.
   
3. Physics Over Promises
   Bitcoin ties its security to the unchanging laws of physics. Ethereum ties its security to human trust—a far more fragile foundation.
   

The Risks of Proof-of-Stake

Ethereum’s reliance on PoS introduces vulnerabilities that Bitcoin’s PoW avoids:

• Centralized Power: Validators with more wealth gain more influence, consolidating power into fewer hands over time.
  
• Censorship Risks: In 2023, Ethereum validators complied with government sanctions, censoring transactions on the network. This proves the system’s susceptibility to external control.
  
• Reversible Transactions: Ethereum has a history of rewriting its blockchain. In 2016, the network reversed transactions after a hack—erasing the immutable nature of a decentralized ledger in order to appease its wealthy investors.
  

Bitcoin’s Resilience: A Case Study

Consider the 2022 Canadian trucker protests. When banks froze protesters’ accounts, many turned to Bitcoin to receive and store donations.

Unlike traditional financial systems, Bitcoin couldn’t be censored, frozen, or manipulated. Its PoW system ensured that transactions were secure and unstoppable. No bank, billionaire, or government could interfere.

This example highlights the fundamental difference between Bitcoin and Ethereum. Bitcoin’s anchoring in energy and physics allows it to be truly censorship resistant.

A Tale of Two Systems: Bitcoin vs. Ethereum

FeatureBitcoinEthereumSecurityEnergy-backed (Proof-of-Work)Wealth-backed (Proof-of-Stake)DecentralizationTruly decentralizedWealth-concentratedCensorship ResistanceImmutableVulnerable to censorshipTrustPhysics-basedHuman-based

Why Bitcoin Will Outlast Ethereum

Bitcoin’s energy-intensive model creates a fortress of security no government, corporation, or wealthy individual can breach. Its decentralized network, secured by effort and physics, ensures fairness and trust without relying on human promises.

Ethereum, on the other hand, has sacrificed decentralization for efficiency. By replacing energy with wealth as its foundation, Ethereum has become vulnerable to the same flaws as traditional financial systems: centralization, manipulation, and control.

The result? Bitcoin remains the only truly decentralized, permissionless, and immutable system that will reliably be money long into the future. To call these other networks a “cryptocurrency” is to fundamentally misunderstand what money is, and why Bitcoin is so trustworthy as a digital currency.

As we move towards a more digital future, the foundation of trust becomes more critical than ever. Will you choose a system that bends to billionaires and governments? Or will you stand with the only system backed by substantial energy, not promises?

Bitcoin offers freedom in its purest form—a monetary system immune to manipulation and censorship.

When the stakes are this high, the choice is simple. Choose the system that endures. Choose Bitcoin—the unstoppable force.

Book a call with us today, and begin mining Bitcoin – choose trust.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this blog is for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice. Please consult with a financial advisor or conduct your own research before making any financial decisions.