Yes, we agree on this point - but that's a different claim than what the original commenter was making:

>Bitcoin is not going to go PoS and anyone that actually thinks it will - or even can - doesn’t understand the most basic elements of bitcoin or crypto in general

These are all arguments for why you think it's a bad idea, not arguments for why it couldn't be done.

Also, considering how critical Vitalik has been towards Russia's imperialism - to the point where he openly laments not being able to return to the country until after a regime change - I question the sincerity of your attempt to paint him as some sort of agent for Putin.

>Bitcoiners won't do it but they absolutely could, just like Ethereum did.

This was the original claim that you reacted to. We all agree that Bitcoiners won't do it.

It seems that we now agree that they could do it.

Your last question is why they would do it.

These are all vastly different topics, but if you wanna talk about the merits of PoS, we can change the topic.

>There is no active development

The client is still being updated regularly, and the most recent consensus change happened way after Satoshi left the project. The latest hardfork was in 2017, and the latest intentional compatibility breaking consensus change was in 2013.

It's true that there hasn't been significant changes in the past years, but this is a matter of lacking motivation from the community. It would still be entirely possible if they wanted to do it, which is what the poster above said in the first place.

I'm actually very familiar with the document titled "a peer-to-peer electronic cash system". It doesn't contain any reason why this would be impossible.

Ethereum just made the change from PoW to PoS. Why would it be harder for Bitcoin?

That depends on what you mean by "control".

Regardless of your stake, you cannot take money that isn't yours. At best, you can lose your entire stake in order to rewrite the ledger history if - and only if - you control more than two thirds of the entire total stake.

The downvotes confuse me. How is this not an accurate statement?

Sure, but that's an aspect of their culture, not their tech.

When people say "the basic elements of bitcoin or crypto in general", I would expect that to cover technical aspects, not just what the hivemind is currently thinking.

How do you suggest regulating things like DEXes, where no single person or entity has any control or insight beyond what is publiclaly available?