There's ~100m eth so your numbers are way off. I have a sneaky suspicion you don't really know what you are talking about.

Like i said, it's just a rumour, but from a fairly informed source.

Do you have a better estimate?

Total amount of fundraising ETH did initially was about 20 mil? 1-2 mil sounds like a feasible early VC check to get 10%, not including games you can play later to increase your stack further.

10% with the current market cap would put him among the top 10 richest people in the world... I highly doubt these numbers are accurate.

"With the usually apathetic voters/stakers"

What makes you think eth stakers are apathetic?

all experiments with onchain voting seem to have that problem, just like with voting in real life.

read up on the DAO exploit and carbon vote. Even in a drastic situation turnout was low.

It's a permissionless industry and I suppose people can try different things, but one thing that sets apart Bitcoin from everything else - it is not a democracry.

Democracy was designed for cities of 50-60k in size, where only rich landowners got to vote and everyone else was basically peons. It doesn't scale and is not particularly great.

PoS is just another string of boneheaded attempts to make democracy great again...by marrying it with plutocracy? idk.

Would you care to vote with your measly stake if you know the insiders have over 50% anyway?

"the insiders have over 50% anyway?" This is false. Hard to take the rest of your premise seriously when they are not based on facts and sound more like maximalism.

That's a hypothetical conjecture.

In any distribution, the small number of players usually controls most of the wealth, as we've seen throughout the history.

What are the odds it will not be a handful people, coordinating their interest vs everyone else? That's inevitable.