I think that the argument is that people who hold enough ETH could fraudulently give themselves more ETH and then take over all the ETH. Which, yeah, I can bel

I think that the argument is that people who hold enough ETH could fraudulently give themselves more ETH and then take over all the ETH. Which, yeah, I can believe that a 51% attack could destroy a proof-of-stake system even more spectacularly than it could a proof-of-work system. But I'm not sure why I should care? Spectacularly destroyed, astoundingly destroyed, stupendously destroyed. . . regardless of the adverb, it's still been destroyed.