A look at potential Ethereum forks, led by some miners, who face grim prospects after the Merge to a proof-of-stake model that's expected as early as September
what they don't seem to realize is that so far there is no plan to change the chain ID for replay protection (EIP-155). That means anything you do on one chain can be replayed by anyone on the other resulting in loss of funds. @muneeb : If I was doing the Ethereum PoW fork (I'm not), I would not fork app state. The only state you need to fork is ETH economic distribution at the merge block, reset all other state and let any devs deploy fresh apps/contracts.
BloombergOlga Kharif
Context & Ripple Effects
Ethereum’s move to proof of stake had progressed from a developer’s broad post-June timeline to a tentative September 15 Merge date, sharpening the deadline for miners considering an alternative proof-of-work chain. The related coverage also frames the upgrade around a major reduction in Ethereum’s energy use, leaving a PoW continuation with a distinct technical and economic case to make.
The immediate issue is not merely whether miners can sustain a fork: without a chain-ID change, transactions signed for one chain may be replayed on the other. Muneeb’s proposed design—preserving ETH balances at the Merge while resetting application state—would avoid carrying existing apps and contracts into the new chain.
First-order effects
Prospective Ethereum PoW fork organizers face a replay-protection problem that can expose users to duplicated transactions and loss of funds unless they alter the chain’s separation from Ethereum.
A fork that follows the proposed balance-only approach would give ETH holders an initial economic distribution, but developers would need to deploy applications and contracts anew.
Second-order effects
Existing Ethereum application users and developers must treat any PoW fork with copied state as an operational risk, rather than assuming their transactions and contracts behave independently across both chains.
Miners pursuing Ethereum PoW are pushed to compete on more than retained hardware: safe chain design and the ability to attract fresh application deployments become prerequisites for a usable network.
Third-order effects
If proof-of-work continuations repeatedly inherit application-state and replay risks, post-upgrade forks may increasingly separate token balances from application ecosystems rather than attempting to duplicate a live smart-contract platform.
The Merge illustrates a broader mining-to-infrastructure transition: protocol upgrades can strand a network’s incumbent miners unless they find a technically viable alternative role or chain.
The trend: Ethereum’s transition to proof of stake is turning miner-led fork plans into questions of application security and ecosystem rebuilding, not simply consensus preference.
We currently have more than 1 million #ETH. If #Ethereum hard fork succeeds, we will donate some forked #ETHW to #ETHW community and developers to build #ethereum ecosystem. https://twitter.com/...
@barrysilbert
Barry Silbert on x
@Galois_Capital fwiw, our full support is behind ETH PoS, in addition to ETC, and have zero intention to support any ETH PoW fork. ETH miners should move to ETC to maximize their revenue long term. simple as that
@hasufl
@hasufl on x
after some reflection, here's my take on a eth pow fork 1. many, incl me, have predicted for years that miners would fork ethereum to extract the final juice out of their investment. it doesn't take nostradamus to see this.
@aridavidpaul
Ari Paul on x
Agree. I'm open minded to “unknown unknowns”, but as of now, I don't see any value proposition for ETH PoW. Competition welcome, but as Hasu notes, not if the game is just to dump on retail. https://twitter.com/...
@zooko
@zooko on x
All this noise I'm hearing on Twitter about “ethpow” and “post-merge pandemonium” makes me really glad Ethereum is making the leap first so that Zcash can learn from it. https://twitter.com/... ...
@pseudotheos
@pseudotheos on x
the fact that people think an ETH PoW fork will be anything more than a retail trap means we haven't learned anything from nearly a decade of social consensus hard forks Nearly every smart contract on the POW fork will be broken in some capacity
@jackniewold
@jackniewold on x
IS A CIVIL WAR COMING TO CRYPTO? Ethereum's merge is coming, and with it comes the risk of a blockchain fork that could split the network in two. So, what are the odds of a viable Ethereum fork? How could it happen? And what does it mean for crypto investors? Read on:
@seldo
Laurie Voss on x
Ethereum is moving to proof of stake but the people who burn coal fields to make money want to keep doing that so they are considering forking back to the environmental disaster chain: https://www.bloomberg.com/...
@petejkim
@petejkim on x
I'm seeing people talk about ETH PoW fork plays—what they don't seem to realize is that so far there is no plan to change the chain ID for replay protection (EIP-155). That means anything you do on one chain can be replayed by anyone on the other resulting in loss of funds.
@muneeb
@muneeb on x
If I was doing the Ethereum PoW fork (I'm not), I would not fork app state. The only state you need to fork is ETH economic distribution at the merge block, reset all other state and let any devs deploy fresh apps/contracts.
@justinsuntron
H.E. Justin Sun on x
(1/2) I'm not sure if @VitalikButerin really said that. I need to clarify that @Poloniex supports #ETH hard fork solely for the public good and not for profit at all. Poloniex currently does not charge any fees for eths/ethw trading. https://cryptoslate.com/...
@hsakatrades
@hsakatrades on x
no-brainer move from His Excellencies pov. ETHPoW doesn't nuke into oblivion, some semblance of an eco forms, however insignificant: USDD becomes dominant stable, eco evoles around that. (Bonus: Polo user# marginally up) ETHPoW nuked: He still has a lot of free tokens. https://tw…
@econoar
@econoar on x
It's fucking mind blowing how many people think PoS for Ethereum means protocol level coin governance as well. I'm convinced it's more than half of people out there.
@jackniewold
@jackniewold on x
Chinese crypto miner Chandler Guo was the first to talk about the idea of a PoW fork, and with good reason. As a miner, he'll have to shut down his ETH mining operation. He'd love for the continued existence of an Ethereum PoW network. https://twitter.com/...
@jackniewold
@jackniewold on x
(TL;DR, probably not, but it's possible) First, we've got to get caught up on the merge. The merge is Ethereum's transition from it's current consensus algorithm (Proof-of-Work/PoW) to a new, more scalable system called proof-of-stake/PoS. It has a ton of benefits: https://twitte…
@dennis_porter_
Dennis Porter on x
I've been warning people for a long time that the ETH merge would likely lead to an attack on the PoW chain just before the merge. Now it looks like miners are already planning to fork away which will leave the current ETH PoW extremely vulnerable to attack.
@dennis_porter_
Dennis Porter on x
Choosing a date for the ETH merge while simultaneously kicking all the miners out of the ecosystem is like owning a business and advance warning your staff they'll be fired and replaced. You never warn staff they are going to be fired. Too much opportunity for retaliation.
@ntmoney
Nick Tomaino on x
The Ethereum PoW -> PoS merge next month is big: - $7.5B+ in annual supply pressure lifted - Transaction fees get burned, ETH becomes deflationary - Energy consumption decreases by ~99.9%
@hsakatrades
@hsakatrades on x
Best thing ETH1 can do is go for a full rebrand and cosmetically disassociate as much as they can from ETH (assuming you're not going to insta rebalance ofc.) ETH1 = Losing side of the fork wars Rebranded = Shiny new player in eternal L1 wars. Awaiting my consultation fee.
@adietrichs
@adietrichs on x
PSA: The merge will - as the name suggest - merge the Ethereum execution layer ("eth1") and consensus layer ("eth2"). So after the merge, both “eth1” and “eth2” are part of the same system. Anyone calling a potential PoW Ethereum fork “eth1” is trying to scam you. https://twitter…
@galois_capital
@galois_capital on x
In a few days, we went from ETH1 won't exist to ETH1 will exist but will plummet to 0 immediately due to on-chain pandemonium to considering bets on whether USDT will be redeemable on ETH1 to Vitalik dunking on me.
@kevinsekniqi
@kevinsekniqi on x
The Eth PoW vs PoS battle will not be determined by any more than just, quite literally, whichever network keeps $ETH ticker on Binance, Coinbase, and a few other major exchanges. Simple as that.
@_checkmatey_
@_checkmatey_ on x
Ethereum fork governance is essentially decided by Circle and Tether. Whichever fork they value USDC/USDT at $1 is the fork. They can't value at $1 on both (inflates 2x), and they won't value it at $0.5 on each. Thus, DAOs can vote until cows come home, it makes no difference. ht…
@galois_capital
@galois_capital on x
There are 5 main differences between this ETH1-ETH2 fork and the ETC-ETH fork. (1) The ETC-ETH fork was mainly due to ideology. It was PoW vs PoW; the miners could just mine whichever chain was more profitable.
@econoar
@econoar on x
The merge will be a huge success. Layer 2 will scale Ethereum. The masses will realize ETHs monetary policy is best in class. ETH will flip BTC. It's all inevitable but do you have the patience to wait and the conviction to withstand the FUD along the way?
@chainlinkgod
@chainlinkgod on x
I have yet to hear a convincing argument for why a Ethereum PoW fork after the merge should exist Ethereum Classic already exists if a PoW smart contract platform aligns with your ideals Seems like the desire is just to make money from selling forked tokens
@fatmanterra
FatMan on x
If you lived through the ETC/BCH contentious hard forks, you'll remember the brief yet fiery ideological warfare. But during the ETH1 hard fork, the psyops will be *far* greater - miners have big money at stake. It will be compelling. Don't fall for it - you will get burnt. FA.
@laurashin
Laura Shin on x
All the discussion around the upcoming ETH POW chain reminds me of how things went down at the time of the DAO hard fork. One big difference: keeping the old chain alive is being discussed more openly and directly with the Ethereum community. From my book, The Cryptopians: https:…
@hosseeb
Haseeb Qureshi on x
OK, I'll summarize @Galois_Capital's arguments: 1) If merge succeeds, ETH1 will continue to exist because of support from miners. DeFi, exchanges, devs need to deal with it. Acknowledging this fork is taboo in Ethereum-land. 2) The merge has a nonzero chance of failure. Done.