The Logic of Upholding Proof-of-Work: Analyzing the Legitimacy and Feasibility of the ETH Merge Hard Fork

·

“Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.”
— Albert Einstein

The original vision of decentralization should not be dismissed—especially when it concerns the soul of Web3 and determines the future of the crypto ecosystem.

Rather than calculating gains and losses after transitioning to Proof-of-Stake (PoS), it is worth reflecting on why there is growing applause for centralization. Signs are emerging that highlight the urgency and importance of reaffirming decentralized principles.

After Aave and Circle complied with the U.S. Treasury’s sanctions on Tornado Cash, hundreds of addresses were inadvertently affected by Aave. Within a week, Tether’s circulating supply surpassed USD Coin, and MKRDAO began reassessing DAI’s collateral composition. These events illustrate the consequences of centralized stablecoins. If similar issues occur on Ethereum, they could fundamentally undermine its decentralization.

Without resistance, over a decade after Bitcoin’s inception, the blockchain trilemma may be resolved—by sacrificing decentralization, reducing the space to a conventional financial game no different from Wall Street. The vision that Satoshi Nakamoto introduced would fade away.

Fortunately, some in the crypto market still uphold decentralization. BitCoke and its invested mining farms have announced support for the hard fork and token trading, viewing it as a defense of Nakamoto’s blockchain ethos. EthereumFair aims to technically uphold the ideals of Proof-of-Work (PoW) and build a complete financial ecosystem for Ethereum PoW. This is a preparatory move to defend our original dreams. If we abandon our beliefs without resistance, the dragon-slayers may become dragons themselves.

Ethereum is facing its most significant hard fork, and this is not merely a last-ditch effort by miners to protect their interests. At this critical juncture, we examine the logic behind the ETH Merge hard fork.

The Legitimacy of Resistance

Ethereum’s shift to PoS means abandoning Nakamoto’s principles. This is the “mission” of the hard fork advocates. The ETH Merge hard fork can be summarized as a conflict between energy efficiency and scalability versus security and decentralization. This is fundamentally a dispute over blockchain development direction, not a fork driven solely by miner interests.

PoS will directly eliminate miners as network maintainers. While this may seem like shedding historical baggage, handing over control to new staking nodes will inevitably lead to greater centralization.

Currently, Ethereum’s TVL accounts for 60% of the public chain ecosystem. The PoW model has created a win-win situation for miners, users, and Ethereum, fostering the prosperity of today’s decentralized crypto ecosystem. As the EthereumFair technical community consensus states, PoW is the best way to guard blockchain’s decentralized初心 (original intention). Without it, decentralization becomes a distant ideal.

Ethereum grew on the shoulders of Bitcoin. Its success is built on two foundational elements:

Satoshi’s PoW model is not an unchangeable dogma. However, Bitcoin’s mainnet operation since its inception is the best testament to PoW’s value—what some call “Nakamotoism” has stood the test of time. In the blockchain world, decentralization, security, and scalability form an irreducible trilemma. Ethereum’s merge逃避 (evades) rather than solves this problem. Abandoning PoW eliminates the objectivity of transaction confirmation and severs Ethereum’s physical connection to the real world.

The logic behind upholding PoW is clear. In Bitcoin’s PoW, the principle for final confirmation is the longest chain rule. In Ethereum, it is the heaviest chain rule under the Ethash algorithm. In both cases, confirmation requires consensus among miners through a process of algorithm + miner hashrate + block confirmation. In PoS, confirmation depends on the consensus of staking nodes. Not until the fifth phase of the Merge will true random number confirmation be achieved. Until then, Ethereum will resemble a random digital walk.

Let’s analyze Vitalik Buterin’s perspective. In his view, transitioning to PoS is necessary for TPS (transactions per second) upgrades. However, this shift is also a competition for capital (32 ETH) and efficiency, driven by the need to compete with new Move-based chains like Aptos and Sui. The first step in the Ethereum 2.0 roadmap was the launch of the Beacon Chain, aiming to introduce a safer and more efficient proof-of-stake mechanism to Ethereum’s consensus layer. After merging with Ethereum 1.0, it intends to move away from high energy consumption toward a staking-oriented consensus.

Key events in the transition to PoS include:

Today, “Ethereum 1” is the “execution layer,” handling transactions and execution, while “Ethereum 2” will be the “consensus layer,” managing proof-of-stake consensus. After merging into a single chain, the term “Ethereum 2” will be retired, leaving only “Ethereum.”

According to the EthereumFair research team, these two upgrades are not exclusive to PoS. Protecting PoW does not only benefit miners, mining pools, and hardware manufacturers. PoS is not a panacea; it has been explored for years and is not a全新的 (brand-new) algorithmic concept. Vitalik might argue that 32 ETH is more decentralized than thousands of mining machines. However, a better solution than abandoning PoW for PoS is to keep Layer 1 for essential functions like consensus and记账权分配 (bookkeeping rights distribution), while improving performance through Layer 2.

“Sacrificing Layer 1 security and decentralization is completely unnecessary.” This is the core idea of EthereumFair, aligned with BitCoke’s official stance: security and stability are the foundation of a public chain. Efficiency is not the only goal; many applications, especially those involving large funds like lending and抵押 (collateralization), prioritize safety and stability. Improving PoW efficiency can be achieved through solutions like Layer2—PoS is not the best option.

In the view of hard fork advocates, the transition to PoS has a more significant negative impact: fragmentation. A public chain’s core competitiveness lies not in a specific mining model but in its robust operation and ability to build an ecosystem. This fork crisis could split the community and on-chain ecology. Such a split occurred before—in 2016, after The DAO attack, the community that insisted on the immutability of the blockchain became Ethereum Classic, while those who rolled back to pre-attack states formed today’s Ethereum.

The result was Ethereum Classic’s struggle and Ethereum’s prosperity. Was Ethereum Classic wrong? This time, hard fork advocates need a belief in the fork’s legitimacy—a legitimacy that best interprets decentralization. The EthereumFair team believes forking is not just about splitting; it requires long-term development recognizing reality.假设 (Assuming) the forked Ethereum-PoW chain encounters problems like:

These challenges are real, but the fork’s rationality should not be questioned. Abandoning PoW would turn Satoshi’s fairest mining mechanism into a capital game. In Ethereum 2.0, the minimum stake is 32 ETH. Under PoS, all nodes must vote on each block; only blocks with 2/3 of staked ETH votes are valid. This design inherently excludes small stakeholders and relies on whales. To ensure network stability and enhance token value, increasing stake requirements becomes the only solution, further排斥 (marginalizing) decentralization.

Thus, the much-discussed “Ethereum 2.0” is essentially a new project. Conventional forks require hashrate to decide, with miners as key players. This PoS fork focuses not on hashrate but on capital博弈 (games). Currently, under PoW, Bitcoin has 14,516 nodes globally, with over 90% being full nodes. Ethereum has 4,896 nodes. After switching to PoS, the number of stakes may rise, but decentralization cannot be guaranteed.

In this future-determining game, miners face life-and-death choices:

  1. Sell mining machines and use the proceeds to participate in PoS staking.
  2. Switch mining machines to the Ethereum Classic network.
  3. Support the Ethereum-PoW hard fork, rebuild the PoW ecosystem—the hardest path but most aligned with decentralization.

The most difficult path has already gained ecosystem support. For example, exchange BitCoke supports hard fork token trading, and its invested $100 million Ethereum mining farm will fully support the fork. BitCoke’s strategic vision of asset tokenization and global DeFi development becomes a backbone for hard fork advocates.

Since the spirit of Satoshi Nakamoto, Ethereum has been the great hope of the crypto world. But today, it strays further from its original purpose. This is the mission of the resisters—decentralization must be reconsidered.

The Battle for Redemption: Competing Roadmaps

After establishing the legitimacy of the hard fork, how to execute it becomes the core controversy.

BitCoke has announced its official plan: supporting all ETH hard fork tokens and related airdrops, listing hard fork token contracts, and predicting hard fork tokens could reach $1,000. Justin Sun has stated that USDD will support the forked Ethereum-PoW chain, solving on-ramp and off-ramp channels for stablecoins. However, Chandler Guo’s perspective focuses solely on miner interests, advocating for protecting their benefits.

Notably, Chandler Guo’s views are overly focused on miner benefits without a clear development timetable. Whether it can attract enough developers, applications, and user participation remains to be seen. Merely attracting miners lacks user appeal; creating common interests between miners and users is essential for the forked PoW chain to thrive.

Thus, more ecosystem forces will make better choices in the博弈 (game). Capital inflows are率先 (taking the lead). Vitalik also encourages miners to transition, which can protect miner interests while minimizing damage to the Ethereum ecosystem. However, the potential harm of miners flooding into Ethereum Classic has raised market concerns.

An EthereumFair researcher stated: “When a large number of miners rush into Ethereum Classic mining, it is a short-term positive for ETC. But the secondary market needs sufficient liquidity to bear the pressure. If the coin price increases limitedly, the result will be a surge in ETC difficulty, making it harder to mine.” The most critical issue is Ethereum Classic’s limited capacity to handle such hashrate. Although Ethereum GPU miners consume less power than Bitcoin miners and have a lower shutdown price, forcibly mining ETC would lead to intense competition. A large influx of miners would create involution, prolonging the payback period.

The crypto world needs Ethereum PoW, not Ethereum Classic. According to MXMMarketCap data, ETC is currently around $40, about 1/50th of ETH’s price. Unless ETC rises to $2,000, it cannot fully accommodate Ethereum’s hashrate while maintaining the payback period—a 50x increase is an impossible miracle. Rational perspective says this is not miners’ way out. Neuroscience Ph.D@0xAA believes: “Ethereum Classic cannot handle Ethereum’s hashrate. The most beneficial solution for miners is to hard fork when Ethereum mainnet transitions to PoS, creating an Ethereum-PoW chain far more valuable than ETC. After all, Ethereum’s ecosystem is much richer now than when ETC forked.”

Future Ecosystem Builders

In Ethereum’s history, this is the second global crisis. The first proved Ethereum Classic’s weakness but left a faint light of decentralized persistence. This glimmer is not enough to start a prairie fire but gives the hard fork sufficient legitimacy.

PoW is so far the only proven completely decentralized and stable blockchain system. All PoS public chains have experienced security or accessibility issues because PoS systems rely on centralized nodes. Ethereum’s fundamental distinction from other public chains is PoW—something other chains cannot achieve. Ethereum transitioning to PoS is like discarding its own advantages, placing it on the same starting line as other second-tier chains. If mechanisms, speed, fees, and security are similar, why choose Ethereum PoS? Out of sentiment? This is the value judgment behind BitCoke and its invested mining farm’s strategic support for the Ethereum hard fork.

From a value perspective, BitCoke’s view is representative: PoW involves heavy asset investment with value anchoring and support, while PoS is a pure financial game without real value支撑 (support). Technically, legitimacy lies in the fair definition of block confirmation objectivity. From a consensus perspective, legitimacy is the effective adherence to and application of the PoW mechanism. PoS and PoW have no absolute优劣 (superiority or inferiority). But facing competition from new public chains, Ethereum’s internal conflict is an无效消耗 (inefficient consumption) of its dominant position.

There will undoubtedly be multiple Ethereum PoW chains. The tension between users, miners, and the ecosystem will determine the fork’s future direction. Ecological construction will become a long-term battleground after short-term狂欢 (carnival). This is the best of times—we can indulge in excitement; ordinary users will receive airdrops from various fork chains. This is the worst of times—we will witness the cruelty and bloodshed of ecological competition until a PoW ecological king emerges. Ethereum Classic is mediocre and hardly able to undertake the historical mission of new fork chains. New PoW chains like EthereumFair have the opportunity to create new horizons—though which chain will ultimately succeed requires time to tell.

The future belongs to builders long focused on ecological construction. In public chain competition, ecology is everything. Users do not bear responsibility for a public chain’s survival; better体验 (experience) and economic returns are their primal motives. Building a better Ethereum PoW ecosystem ensures the forked chain’s longevity, avoiding a fleeting existence into nothingness. Below, based on interviews with the EthereumFair technical development team, we introduce EthereumFair’s development philosophy, technical strength, ecological construction, and progress.

Public chain development requires supporting infrastructure. From a user perspective, a fully functional, ready-to-use public chain is attractive. As the EthereumFair technical development team states: “Ethereum’s PoW fork is fair—no investment institution will hold significant early benefits. We hope early supporters and friends will support the Ethereum fork chain led by the EthereumFair technical community. The Ethereum Foundation is shifting to the PoS branch; we will retain the original chain.”

The ETH fork chain EthereumFair is led by the EthereumFair (ClassZZ) technical community. Its ClassZZ public chain PoW technology has operated successfully for three years. The current R&D team includes mathematics experts, chip experts, and developers with over six years of industry experience. Specifically, the EthereumFair development team has achieved:

Clearly, for this fork, the EthereumFair community will support Ethereum’s PoW mining model, maximizing the continuation of the on-chain ecosystem. Ecology is the foundation of public chain competition. Attracting sufficient miner participation is essential for building network security and avoiding Ethereum Classic’s pitfalls.

The EthereumFair team sets mining difficulty from scratch, allowing even personal laptops to participate, benefiting ordinary users over large miners and pools. After resolving on-chain security, more participants are needed for co-construction. The forked chain should not be an exclusive, self-amusing venture like Ethereum Classic but an open “chain of chains.”

In development, the EthereumFair community currently focuses on implementing testnets, emphasizing difficulty control and block reward adjustments. It aims to provide mining programs identical to Ethereum’s for user download, along with infrastructure like block explorers, available for testing as early as August.

EthereumFair also intends to absorb external mining pools and large miners. After stabilizing the public chain, it will deeply engage with mining machine manufacturers, such as negotiating custom miners. The latest news is that exchange BitCoke and its invested $100 million Ethereum mining farm will fully support the hard fork.

Additionally, renowned funds and ecological partners will cooperate with the EthereumFair technical community to promote the Ethereum fork chain. For example, EthereumFair’s L2 public chain ecological R&D team will simultaneously join the current fork. Wallets like BitKeep, SWFTC, and PAXpocket will provide deep support, offering current Ethereum infrastructure and DEXs as primary tools for developers and users.

As Ethereum’s first successful fork project, ETF pays tribute to all PoW consensus blockchain networks. Address 0x00000000219ab540356cbb839cbe05303d7705fa currently stakes 13,185,717 ETH. It will distribute stETH’s SNT by public key (before September 6) to Bitcoin token holders (55%) and Dogecoin token holders (15% each), then by address (no transaction needed) to Ethereum Classic and CZZ token holders (15% each).

This forking spectacle is a流量盛宴 (feast of traffic) no exchange will miss. The following exchanges’ attitudes are confirmed; ecological construction profitability will attract their secondary market support, building trading depth for Ethereum PoW.

Mainstream exchanges supporting or remaining neutral:

Centralized exchanges’ involvement will solve trading depth issues. On-chain native financial assets will start with decentralized stablecoins, especially after Aave’s compliance with sanctions. DAI may become more decentralized, benefiting native on-chain stablecoin development. Specifically, although USDT and USDC may not openly support PoW or PoS fork chains due to the time needed for on-chain stability and early ecological maturity, early stages might use decentralized stablecoins like DAI and cross-chain stablecoins.

Moreover, to solidify the on-chain ecology, this fork’s focus is adding cross-chain functionality to the Ethereum PoW chain—not internally but externally, supporting connections to any other chain. This underlying technology ensures stable financial activities in the public chain’s early stages, avoiding death spirals from excessive speculation.

Because, beyond the spiritual legitimacy of the hard fork, strategic deployment is equally clear: what ultimately determines the fork’s success is the effectiveness of Ethereum PoW ecological construction. Lose PoW, lose miners; without ecology, there is no future.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main goal of the Ethereum PoW hard fork?
The primary goal is to preserve the Proof-of-Work consensus mechanism, which supporters believe is essential for maintaining decentralization, security, and fairness in network participation. The fork aims to continue the original Ethereum chain under PoW rules after the mainnet transitions to Proof-of-Stake.

How will the hard fork impact existing ETH holders?
Most existing ETH holders will likely receive airdropped tokens on the new PoW chain. However, the value and utility of these tokens will depend on the ecosystem’s development, including adoption, trading support, and DeFi integration.

What are the biggest challenges for the PoW fork after the Merge?
Key challenges include securing stablecoin support (e.g., USDT, USDC), attracting developers to maintain and build on the chain, ensuring network security without sufficient hashrate initially, and avoiding ecological fragmentation compared to the PoS chain.

Why are some groups supporting the fork despite the risks?
Supporters view PoW as critical for censorship resistance, security through physical work, and fair distribution. They believe abandoning PoW centralizes control and undermines Ethereum’s core value proposition compared to newer chains.

How can users participate in or support the PoW chain?
Users can monitor supported exchanges for token trading, run nodes or miners to secure the network, participate in governance proposals, and develop or use dApps on the forked chain to increase its utility.

What distinguishes this fork from previous ones like Ethereum Classic?
Unlike the ETC fork, which occurred early in Ethereum’s history, this fork benefits from a mature ecosystem of dApps, users, and tokens. However, it also faces stronger competition from the official PoS chain and requires rapid stabilization to avoid value depletion.

👉 Explore mining and staking strategies
👉 Learn about advanced blockchain consensus