If the main goal is going mainstream, then PoS makes way more sense. PoW is simply not sustainable long term in this context

Keep in mind, I'm NOT bashing PoW. There are situations where PoW makes way more sense than PoS, but in regards to mainstream adoption, PoS is a better option

I get the argument behind the security that comes with PoW, but sticking with PoW and working for mainstream adoption is simply not possible.

If Ethereum had kept up with the PoW model, there would have been no way for it to implement things like sharding which will help it scale tens of thousands of times through L2s.

One of the main reasons why Ethereum created the beacon chain was to be able to integrate L2s more deeply into the chain and rely on them for mainstream scalability.

It honestly makes more sense this way as Ethereum gets to focus on security and decentralization and the L2s get to focus on scalability

Because of that, Ethereum L2s now have some of the fastest and cheapest transactions on the market and this will only get better as time passes on

• Scroll already developing a zkEVM
• Polygon already has an open source zkEVM live testnet (yes it’s an L2 rollup separate from the Polygon PoS since its secured by Ethereum and gas is paid in ETH
• Polygon already developing a data availability chain
• Loopring already working on developing a zkEVM

All of this would be way less significant on a PoW chain.

I’m not saying that PoW is bad. It has its pros and cons. But as said in the title, if the main focus is mainstream adoption then yes the PoW model isn’t the most eligible model to achieve this feat.

This also doesn’t mean that PoW chains shouldn’t exist, like Bitcoin for example

I like that PoW and PoS can both coexist in this market

It doesnt make sense for Bitcoin to go PoS as much as it would make sense for Ethereum since Ethereum has way more demanding functions