Editor's Note: This article is from:Chatting with William (ID: William1913), Author: William Chen, reproduced by Odaily with authorization.
Editor's Note: This article is from:
Chatting with William (ID: William1913)
Chatting with William (ID: William1913)
, Author: William Chen, reproduced by Odaily with authorization.
The most exciting news yesterday was the fight between Justin Sun and Steemit. Although Steem is the originator of many currency circle content platforms such as Bihu, I don't know much about this project.
1
Probably what happened was that Boss Sun bought Steemit from the chairman of Steemit. According to our external understanding, we bought this project and a large number of tokens, anyway, we bought the dominance of this project.
Then Boss Sun’s operation, everyone understands. After coming, he should take advantage of the trend to enter some kind of BTT network, and then issue tokens on the wave field. Anyway, everyone knows the routine.
Then, people in the steem community didn't want to see this scene, so they launched a soft fork, and all the coins in Boss Sun's hands were abolished.
Then Boss Sun must not sit still, he pulled Binance and Huobi, took out a lot of coins to select new witnesses (that is, EOS super nodes and the like), and made another soft fork to abolish The operation of the previous community.
That's probably how it happened. However, there are many points worth discussing about this matter alone, and they all involve the core issues of the consensus mechanism:
1. PoS, what exactly is Proof of? Is it a currency, or a community, or?
2. Exchanges participate in node voting, is it compliant?
3. How much power does the currency holder have?
In fact, DPoS is the same as PoS, and it is the same as any non-PoW currency. It will encounter this problem: who will decide the development direction of the project? Who will decide specific matters? Who are the governance and regulators of this project?
The reason why this issue has only been discussed and no specific cases have been encountered is because the mainstream PoS consensus projects are relatively centralized projects, and there is no problem with centralization. Whoever initiates the project listens to whoever It's over.
So what if it is decentralized? Everyone has an answer, and that is to listen to the community. But the community always needs to have a final decision-making criterion, such as voting to make a decision. So the question is, how to vote?
Bitcoin is currently the most decentralized cryptocurrency. No individual, company, or team can decide on certain changes to Bitcoin, and even minor changes require negotiation and renegotiation. However, any controversial BIP needs to come and go and discuss for half a year or even several years before it will be included in the version update. Especially after the hard fork of BCH, the community is cautious about any improvements to Bitcoin.
2
To put it bluntly, the current Bitcoin is that before a complete consensus is reached, people tend to maintain the status quo.
Because Bitcoin is aimed at currency, it does not require technological innovation or system updates. Its main appeal is stability. However, blockchain projects need continuous improvement, and they will inevitably encounter many different problems along the way.
So back to the core question, PoS, what exactly is Proof of? According to our general understanding, which is also my current understanding, it is: whoever has more coins has the final say.
In fact, the DPoS model is very clear: users vote with coins - select nodes - nodes make decisions. In theory, there is no problem with this, but the biggest question at this time is: can exchanges participate?
There is no doubt that as long as it is a slightly less centralized currency, the exchange that holds the most currency should be the exchange. Theoretically speaking, the exchange is indeed not qualified to move the user's currency, but how can there be so many reasonable people in this world, the exchange will use it for you, and you can't stop it. What's more, if the exchange sets up a mining pool, everyone is still willing to give the currency to the exchange.
For example, Tezos, which has the largest staking scale at present, I believe you are familiar with the first few verification nodes:
image description
3
(By the way, Google search can directly get the results we want, but Baidu search...what the hell is it?)
Then when the exchange enters the market, there is no doubt that the party supported by the exchange will be the party with more coins, that is to say, the party that has the final say, then can we draw a conclusion: PoS is Proof of the exchange?
Your answer is definitely no. How can the trend of a project be determined by the exchange? Isn't that a "godson" project?
However, whether it is the project party, the community or the market, it is absolutely impossible and impossible to refuse the exchange to participate in the node (or staking). The participation of the exchange is an inevitable thing.
Then the question comes to the third one, how much power should the holders have?
