Realistic but unpopular opinion. If you’re fine with accepting the type of centralization involved with Ethereum PoS then commit-chains should be no different

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a die-hard Ethereum fan and I’m also all in for PoS. It’s more sustainable long-term than PoW and if Vitalik and his team find it a better solution then who am I to argue? Those people are literal geniuses.

However, I’m also very realistic. I see people here that hate on sidechains and commit-chains but then you see the posting bullish comments about Ethereum’s PoS…

Both PoS and certain (but not all) commit chains use similar mechanisms of validation and anti-cheating slashing for security.

Let’s take Polygon for example. Its very popular in the Ethereum community but every now and then you see doubts about Polygon’s security.
If you don't trust Polygon's (or any other similarly reputable and trustworthy sidechain) mechanism, then technically you shouldn’t also trust Ethereum PoS either.

This entire argument of it being "off chain" is technically irrelevant since any suspicious activity done “off chain" is stomped over by the PoS validation check.
So in reality, the only people who have an idealistically valid argument are the ones in favor of PoW, but that’s not the point of this post

The point of this post is that you can’t support Ethereum PoS and then go talk smack about commit-chains and sidechains

I’m pretty sure that this might rub off some people the wrong way but it’s literally just the truth.
I expect some disagreement in the comment section from PoW supporters, but PoS supporters (myself included) have no real argument regarding this.