With Nearly $200 Million on the Line, EOS Is Building A Voting System

There’s an account on the EOS blockchain with $35 million worth of tokens in it that no one can touch – and its balance is growing constantly.

At the end of EOS’ first 12 months as a live blockchain, this account (called eosio.saving) will be worth close to $192 million, assuming the recent EOS market price of $4.79.

LIONBIT

In theory, that money is being set aside to fund all sorts of initiatives that might be beneficial to the EOS community: building out new tech features, conducting security audits, sponsoring meetups, hiring lawyers and lobbyists.

But there’s one problem: there’s currently no system in place to actually allocate the funds.

The EOS blockchain network was incomplete when it went live in June, with much of the functionality stipulated in the network’s “constitution” and white paper remaining unbuilt. A key aspect of the EOS protocol was, according to the white paper, “a defined governance process” which avoided other blockchains’ “ad hoc, informal, and often controversial governance processes that result in unpredictable outcomes.”

That governance process included the ability for token holders to vote in referenda based on the number of tokens they held. But that process of voting doesn’t exist yet, and as such, EOS’ governance system has been in flux since launch.

The referendum system, as the voting mechanism is known, seems to be at the heart of the question about where the eosio.saving money will eventually go.

While the white paper doesn’t mention referendum voting, the EOS constitution explicitly requires the process for making decisions that affect the entire network, like setting up a system to spend the eosio.savings account funds. Also, in a twist of circular logic, a referendum is needed to ratify the still-provisional constitution itself.

Highlighting what needs to be done to push EOS forward, Daniel Keyes, the co-founder and COO of EOS Nation, a standby block producer, told CoinDesk:

“There was no referendum system built in at launch, so it’s up to us as a community to come together and build that.”

And moving on that advice, Keyes is acting as project manager for a team composed of different block producer candidates, who are working together to build the referendum system.

At the same time, a group known as the EOS Core WPS Working Group is developing the “worker proposal system” or WPS, a mechanism described in the EOS white paper that would be used to submit proposals and allow token holders to vote on whether to fund them using tokens from the eosio.saving account.

And already, the working group has published the back-end code for the WPS. Although, as mentioned, the WPS code must be approved in a one-token, one-vote referendum, so the working group is waiting for the referendum system to be put in place.

Spend it

That said, the WPS carries added significance now as the EOS community is split on what to do with the funds.

While some, including members of the working group, would like to see the money used for the benefit of the community, prominent voices are urging the community to scuttle the WPS, remove its source of funding, and perhaps “burn” or destroy all the tokens currently held in the eosio.saving account.

Stepping back, the money currently accruing in the savings account is funded by “inflation,” which in this context refers to a predictable increase in the total supply of EOS tokens.

Every year, the supply rises by 5 percent, and four-fifths of that increase automatically goes into the account. This process is made possible by a funding mechanism that was coded into the EOS protocol at launch.

TIP

With that, the working group suggested in a recent blog post that one million EOS tokens (around $4.8 million) be transferred out of the eosio.saving account and used to fund high-priority projects like the EOS arbitration body – which rules on disputes among token holders – security tests, and an online portal for the WPS.

They also want to set up an “emergency committee” to assess project proposals, though they promise to dissolve the committee once the “emergency” situation has passed. Proposals approved by the committee will then be put up for votes by token holders (these will be similar to referenda, but have a lower minimum threshold for token holder participation).

According to Orchid Kim, a community builder at the block producer candidate EOSYS and a member of the working group, creating the referendum voting mechanism and allocating the savings to future projects is the only way “for EOS to live up to its expectations.”

“We should not rely on Block.one, the block producers or continued volunteerism,” she continued.

Block.one is the company headed by Dan Larimer that developed the code behind the EOS protocol and conducted the $4 billion ICO, but did not participate in the network launch.

Kim concluded:

“Bootstrapping any decentralized process is a complicated and daunting task. There are many things to build and fix.”

Burn it

Some community members disagree with Kim, though, arguing that EOS should ditch the WPS and the token inflation that funds it. Most notably, Block.one CEO Brendan Blumer endorsed this view in late July.

At the time, Blumer was responding to a Twitter user’s observation that “even with the wonders of compounding,” the 1 percent inflation that top block producers – those that verify transactions on the network – divvy up among themselves, might seem insufficient.

As such, the user expected “whale” block producers –those that hold a large number of tokens – to go after the larger 4 percent inflation by awarding WPS contracts to themselves.

“We already saw how the voting system works,” another user commented on Reddit, referring to the perception that whales vote friendly block producers into the top spots in exchange for a cut of the earnings.

Unlike the referendum system, the voting system for electing block producers is already in place. Because the system is based on the one-token-one-vote approach, many of those both inside and outside the EOS community see accounts with large numbers of tokens as determining the outcomes of votes.

The user then added: “Getting rid of [the WPS] completely is the only best option.”

Yet Kim said that EOS Core WPS Working Group members “recognize the fears that some in the community have” and have put in place numerous checks and balances to safeguard the system.

For example, the working group proposes burning half the tokens in the eosio.saving account on an ongoing basis.

It’s likely that the situation will come to a head soon, though, since Keyes told CoinDesk that testing on a minimum viable product for making referendum proposals and conducting votes could begin as soon as next week. The full rollout of the implementation will follow sometime after that.

Much like the debate around the WPS, there remains a continued debate around the EOS constitution, which is currently in “interim” status because it has not been ratified through a referendum (again, there is no referendum mechanism available on EOS right now).

As such, Keyes underscored the importance of using the new referendum system to solve EOS’ lingering questions, telling CoinDesk:

“We’ve got this worker proposal fund collecting a million dollars a day that we can’t do anything with, we’ve got an interim constitution that people are eager to make changes to, so we want to get something to market as soon as possible.”


IZX

Here at Dollar Destruction, we endeavour to bring to you the latest, most important news from around the globe. We scan the web looking for the most valuable content and dish it right up for you! The content of this article was provided by the source referenced. Dollar Destruction does not endorse and is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or other materials on this page. As always, we encourage you to perform your own research!

Source
Author: David Floyd
Image Credit


Don’t forget to join our Telegram channel for Crypto, Business & Technology news delivered to you daily.

 

Fed Up and Forking: Rival EOS Blockchains Are Becoming a Reality

It can be hard to keep track of all the struggles and controversies surrounding EOS.

First came the stop-and-go launch, followed by controversy over locked accounts – then more locked accounts, this time on the orders of an “arbitrator” that many in the community hadn’t realized existed. Next came a fake order purporting to be from the arbitrator, the fallout from which led EOS architect Dan Larimer to propose a whole new governance structure or “constitution.”

Just one problem: there was and still is no system in place to vote on a constitutional change. Meanwhile the voting scheme that is in place – for choosing the block producers (BPs) who maintain the EOS blockchain much as bitcoin’s miners do – has put several BPs that aren’t following all the rules of the constitution in charge.

For some EOS community members, it was all too much.

Take Douglas Horn, who told CoinDesk:

“I’m a really big believer in the potential of EOS and of EOSIO software, and I came to believe that it was on a bad path.”

As such, Horn thought he could do better, and recently authored a white paper for Telos, a fork of the open-source protocol behind EOS called EOSIO.

And his is just one of several groups that have decided to take the software, tweak it and set up a new network.

EOS Force is another example. They propose an EOSIO-based main chain with side chains incorporating features of ethereum, zcash and cardano. Another is ONO, a social network that was going to launch on EOS, but decided to fork it instead. EvolutionOS, which aims for more even token distribution and lower RAM prices, is airdropping ethereum-based tokens and plans to launch its own EOSIO-based blockchain.

And other examples include WAX and Worbli.

Telos, though, appears to be the fork with the most momentum and support. For instance, several of its team members were involved in the EOS launch, and in more than one case, those people are helping build Telos while continuing to support the EOS network.

“We think the cross-pollination will benefit both Telos and EOS,” said a team working as Keten.io on Telos and Dutch EOS on the mainnet.

According to Horn, Telos’ launch could come as soon as next month, with the aims to make two significant changes to the EOS that exists today: curtail the power of the largest token holders known as “whales” and launch with more solidified governance mechanisms that can be enforced directly on the blockchain.

Channeling Ahab

The first thing that stands out about Telos is the decision to cap the number of tokens any one address receives during the initial distribution at 40,000 (with certain exceptions).

The idea is to remove whales from the equation – primarily because on EOS, tokens equal votes, and right now, there’s a “hyperconcentration of voting power” in the hands of just a few, according to Horn.

According to the Telos white paper, 1.6 percent of EOS holders own 90 percent of the tokens. The largest holder by far, with 10 percent of the total supply, is Block.One, the company behind the EOSIO protocol. (Larimer is Block.One’s CTO).

Controversially, the company recently announced that it would use these tokens to participate in block producer votes going forward.

To reduce the influence of these heavyweights, Telos will distribute its TLOS tokens to EOS investors according to the original “snapshot,” but with one big difference: it will lop off any holdings above 40,000, a move that Horn said would affect just 0.63 percent of accounts.

Does that mean that “communist” Telos is going to “steal their coins,” as one Reddit user alleged?

Horn doesn’t think so, telling CoinDesk, that no tokens are being taken from larger holders to give to someone else, rather the project is giving EOS whales brand new TLOS tokens – albeit fewer of them than they might have gotten otherwise.

In this way, Horn expects Telos to eliminate the chance that token holders collude with BP candidates, who can currently earn the equivalent of thousands of dollars a day in EOS coins and might share those profits with the whales that elected them.

Telos isn’t alone in worrying about this phenomenon.

One Telegram user recently wrote: “I’m sick of seeing seven voters propping up puppet BP for rewards. I consider that type of manipulation stealing.”

Additionally, block producers that are elected based on a few whales’ votes sometimes fail to do their jobs. In a recent blog post, Ben Sigman, a cryptocurrency investor that’s written extensively about EOS, claimed that seven of the top 21 BPs weren’t complying with the rules, for example, by failing to maintain a public website or disclose ownership information.

The only exceptions to the token cap on Telos, however, are the Telos Foundation itself, which is being allocated six million tokens, and the founding participants, who will split another six million. Horn defended this decision, pointing out that these tokens are less than 2 percent of the total supply and saying Telos’ founders “are putting in a lot of effort and a lot of costs.”

Ready and on-chain

Telos’ other main priority, Horn said, is that, “Everything needs to be ready at launch.”

He said it was “crazy” for EOS to go live without “all the necessary pieces in place.” Citing the arbitration system specifically, Horn said many users were confused and surprised when a largely unknown body called “ECAF” began issuing orders in June.

Horn could also have mentioned the ability to vote in referendums, which is necessary to change the constitution, as Larimer has proposed doing. EOS Nation, a standby block producer, has begun testing a system for conducting referendums, according to a roadmap published in July, but EOS users still have no ability to propose or vote on protocol changes.

For Horn, it’s also important that all of these governance mechanisms, to the extent it’s technically possible, happen on the blockchain, rather than on Twitter or in Telegram groups, where misinformation – such as the fake arbitration order – can easily circulate. (It should be noted that ECAF has since improved its processes.)

“No, no! Everything’s going to be on-chain, who said off-chain?” Horn said, in response to a question about off-chain governance, adding: “On-chain, on-chain, on-chain, on-chain.”

Telos arbitrators, for example, will be elected in a similar manner to block producers. This wasn’t the case with the EOS launch, where arbitrators were selected through opaque off-chain processes.

And while Telos’ own constitution has not been finalized, Horn emphasized that “bullshit that’s unenforceable” won’t appear in it, such as the (original) EOS constitution’s provision that “Members shall not initiate violence or the threat of violence against another member.”

The constitution should look like “a contract or a software licensing agreement,” Horn said, not “something that Alexander Hamilton [would write].”

Finally, Telos aims to increase network reliability and security by automatically kicking unresponsive or noncompliant block producers out of the top 21 slots, without waiting for a human arbitrator to weigh in.

Meanwhile, standby block producers (the 30 immediately below the top 21) will periodically have to prove they’re ready to step in, or their pay will be dinged.

Healthy competition?

Despite his criticisms of EOS, Horn stressed that EOSIO is a “worthwhile” project, and acknowledged that he and others now building Telos were themselves involved in the EOS launch.

“We’re all part of this EOSIO community,” Horn said, adding:

“We’ve had the tremendous chance to look at what was done in EOS and say, ‘Hey, if we were to start over again, what would we do different?'”

Discounting the occasional accusation of theft or communism, the EOS community has been broadly accepting of Telos – and other forks – giving EOSIO another go.

“I think that competition is good for the ecosystem,” Daniel Keyes, from EOS Nation, a standby EOS BP, told CoinDesk.

A Reddit user echoed that sentiment, saying, “I welcome the chance to see how it plays out. Perhaps they will try out some things that work and all of us can become better for the experiment.”


WMPRO

Here at Dollar Destruction, we endeavour to bring to you the latest, most important news from around the globe. We scan the web looking for the most valuable content and dish it right up for you! The content of this article was provided by the source referenced. Dollar Destruction does not endorse and is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or other materials on this page. As always, we encourage you to perform your own research!

Source
Author: David Floyd
Image Credit

NEO, EOS, and Cardano (ADA) – 3 Best Coins to Invest in Right Now

Investing in cryptocurrencies is always a risky thing to do, especially for newcomers to the crypto world. Deciding which coin is worth it, which of them might have a future, and which will provide returns on your investment is never easy. This is why most people decide to go for Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH). These two have proven their value, and have a reputation as coins that can make you rich.

But, are those the only ones that you can trust? Is there no other coin that is a safe bet? Well, there is. In fact, there are three of them – NEO, EOS, and Cardano (ADA). Of course, you should not take our word for it, which is why we will see why these coins are the best choice for new investments.

LIONBIT

NEO, EOS, and ADA
There has been a lot of talk about these three coins in the last several months, and with good reason. Each of them has managed to make significant advances, in their own way. They have experienced a significant increase at the end of 2017, just like all other coins. Despite the fact that they were hit hard after that, the coins kept fighting, and have even managed to reach some level of stability, hitting certain prices, at sticking to them.

NEO and EOS, even though they have their own goals, were even seen as rivals. Each of these coins has been seen as a possible candidate that has the power to kill off Ethereum and replace it. Additionally, they represent the third generation of cryptos, as well as Cardano. While Bitcoin was the coin of the first generation and has become its representative, Ethereum belonged to the second one and had become a representative of the second wave.

Now, the third generation is struggling to find a coin worthy of being the primary crypto of the third wave, and all of these coins are possible candidates.

Where does the potential of these coins lie?
NEO has a lot of potentials, especially in the eastern markets. It is designed to be very similar to Ethereum, in terms of what it has to offer. Many would argue that it is actually doing everything that ETH is doing, only better. It is also very popular in China, which has been known for its skepticism towards cryptos. These things have earned it the nickname ‘Chinese Ethereum,’ and this coin has a potential to dominate this untapped market.

As for EOS, it has made significant progress recently by launching its own MainNet. True, the launch did not go without minor issues, and the network even had to go offline for a bit due to a glitch that was discovered soon after the launch. Still, EOS’ team managed to respond and fix the issue very quickly, and the coin did not have any large issues since. Despite the glitch, launching its own MainNet is still a big achievement, and EOS has a lot to be proud of.

When it comes to Cardano, this is a coin that has had a lot of success in terms of quality and stability. The coin isn’t highly-valued yet, but it definitely had the smallest price oscillations of the three. It is also among the newest cryptos, and while many other coins made a mistake of rushing things in order to be launched as soon as possible, Cardano did not. Its team consists of professionals and academics who know what they are doing and the best way to do things. This is why they were focused on developing ADA’s technology for months, rather than hurrying to put the coin out there.

As a result, Cardano has never had any big problems, nor did its price constantly rise and drop, as was the case with many other cryptos. It has been and still is, one of the most well-balanced cryptos in the market.

All of these cryptos have entered numerous partnerships over the last several months, and they continue to improve with new updates, projects, and products. They are all seen as good investments and coins with a bright future ahead of them. A large part of the crypto community expects that they would skyrocket as soon as the market allows it, which is why potential investors might want to consider purchasing them while they are still underpriced.


Here at Dollar Destruction, we endeavour to bring to you the latest, most important news from around the globe. We scan the web looking for the most valuable content and dish it right up for you! The content of this article was provided by the source referenced. Dollar Destruction does not endorse and is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or other materials on this page. As always, we encourage you to perform your own research!

Source
Author: MaxPositives
Image Credit

Don’t forget to join our Telegram channel for Crypto, Business & Technology news delivered to you daily.

EOS “should be doing 50,000 transactions per second in a few months”

Michael Novogratz, former hedge fund manager and founder of Galaxy Digital, spoke about the commercial scale applications on the EOS platform in an interview recently. He also remarked the state of institutional investors in the market currently and their participation through hedge funds.



Novogratz’s Galaxy Digital LP partnered with Block.one, the company behind EOSIO for a $325 million fund known as the EOSIO Ecosystem Fund earlier this year. When asked about EOS in an interview with TheStreet, he elaborated on EOS [EOS]’s consensus algorithm. The algorithm in question is known as delegated Proof of Stake, where a group of about twenty staking agents are in charge of producing the blocks.

Due to these twenty parties having a large amount of processing power, the EOS blockchain will be faster, stated Novogratz. Recently, reports emerged that EOS has hit a transaction speed of 2800 transactions per second. He said:
“And because it’s just twenty and those twenty have big computing power behind them, the EOS blockchain will be much, much, much faster than the other blockchains. It’s already doing 5,000 transactions a second. It should be doing 50,000 transactions per second in a few months.”

He spoke about EOS’s detractors saying it is not decentralized. Just last month, 21 block producers on the EOS platform unanimously decided to freeze seven EOS accounts that were suspected to be carrying stolen funds. This was followed by an outcry from the cryptocurrency community. Novogratz stated:
“EOS’s critics say it’s not decentralized enough and that’s a very fair debate, back and forth, that you can participate in…EOS is the first blockchain where commercial applications can be built and experimented with. Lots of people find that very appealing.”

Novogratz also recently spoke at the Blockchain Week in Korea last week, where he stated that “a herd of institutional investors” is heading towards the cryptocurrency market. He explained his statement, saying:
“I think institutional investors are slowly coming to the realization that blockchain will be Internet or Web 3.0 and they’ll want to participate just like they want to participate in the Web.”

He went on to say that the first step towards participating in the market is through hedge funds. Funds such as Sequoia Capital, Polychain Capital and Benchmark Capital are the current source of participation from institutional investors.

The second step, according to Novogratz, is the purchase of new coins from ICOs, which is already being conducted through venture capital investments. He also mentioned the involvement of notable venture capitalists such as SoftBank, SBI Holdings in Tokyo, and multiple funds in the Chinese space.

When speaking about the consumer, he stated that the user does not “care about the wiring behind it”. He stated:
“Like the television, you turn on a television and you watch it. I think the blockchain, on the architectural level, is an infrastructure that most people won’t bother with, once it’s running properly.”

Novogratz echoed the statement made by Cory Johnson, Chief Market Strategist at Ripple, who had earlier stated:
“There’s not a lot of B2C [Business to Consumer] activity, the consumers all they see is the trading in cryptos and digital assets but I don’t think they really see the technology behind it.”


Here at Dollar Destruction, we endeavour to bring to you the latest, most important news from around the globe. We scan the web looking for the most valuable content and dish it right up for you! The content of this article was provided by the source referenced. Dollar Destruction does not endorse and is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or other materials on this page. As always, we encourage you to perform your own research!

Source
Author: Anirudh VK
Image Credit: Unsplash

Don’t forget to join our Telegram channel for Crypto, Business & Technology news delivered to you daily.

EOS RAM price hike finds a three-step solution

In a blog post on 12th July, Block.one’s Dan Larimar released ‘A Three-Step Plan’ for Lowering EOS Account Creation Costs. Last week, the prices of EOS RAM rocketed above 900 EOS/MB [=$6,399 at press time], according to MarketstackD.io.



Daniel Larimar is a software programmer who created BitShares, co-founded the blockchain social platform Steemit, and is currently the CTO of EOS, Block.one.
The new EOS account creation fee is a result of the hike in the RAM prices on the EOS blockchain. The amount of RAM supply is controlled by the members of the EOS community and based on the availability of the hardware.

In the blog, Larimer has explained:
“Currently, the EOS blockchain has been configured for a total of 64GB RAM, of which 51GB have been purchased by users and speculators with less than 2% of it being used.”
Following are the steps included by the expert to solve the EOS RAM price crisis.

An update has been added to the EOSIO ecosystem by Block.one wherein the block producers can set a rate against the increase in RAM. The price of RAM will keep decreasing with every new addition of RAM by block producers, at the same demand.

Larimer suggested the producers to start increasing the RAM size immediately, at the rate of 64GB/year, which is 1KB/block. His calculation says that the new supply will add up to a value of over 23 million EOS in a year, going by the current selling prices of RAM.
In case of the prices remaining at a constant high, the community can adjust the numbers as per the collective need. Testing can also be carried out to keep a check on the growth rate and sustainability.

According to Larimar, EOS has overestimated the RAM figure required for a new account. A 3KB RAM usage per account has been hard-coded into the EOS blockchain where half of it is reserved for future expansion. In reality, when the RAM usage per account was audited, it only came up to a mere 512 bytes required per account.

Block.one is set out to bring an update that will cut the amount of minimum RAM required for account creation by 50%. The EOS RAM expert also wrote:
“Block.one will provide an update to the system contract that will create 1.5 KB of RAM per account and retroactively offset the overly conservative usage estimate.”
The users are likely to see this update go live by the end of July.

The third step of this solution is the free iOS hardware wallet of Block.one that is currently under development. It is free of cost and uses Apple’s Secure Enclave. A few unique users will be offered a free EOS account on the new iOS Wallet. Although the offer will highly depend on the market scenario, this free account will be compatible with any decentralized app that is in tune with the API of Block.one’s wallet.

Daniel Larimar concluded by conveying his commitment to the EOSIO platform in terms of scaling transactions and RAM.


Here at Dollar Destruction, we endeavour to bring to you the latest, most important news from around the globe. We scan the web looking for the most valuable content and dish it right up for you! The content of this article was provided by the source referenced. Dollar Destruction does not endorse and is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or other materials on this page. As always, we encourage you to perform your own research!

Source
Author: Priyamvada Singh
Image Credit: Pixabay

Don’t forget to join our Telegram channel for Crypto, Business & Technology news delivered to you daily.

Block.One Is Taking a Bigger Role With EOS (And That’s a Big Deal)

Block.One has decided to start voting with its hoard of EOS tokens.

Announced last week, the decision finds the startup that created the EOS software, now powered by the fifth most valuable cryptocurrency, breaking with precedent in a move that may have come as a surprise to those following the project’s decentralized launch.



That’s because since going live on June 14, the company has largely declined to exercise its influence over the code, preferring to encourage its users to unite, even in sometimes messy decision-making.

And there’s a good reason for that. For one, Block.One controls 10 percent of the 1 billion tokens set aside for developers prior to the network’s launch. Further, since decision-making on the platform corresponds to token holdings, the change could put the company in an extraordinarily powerful position, enabling them to decide who can determine truth on the ledger.

As of now, each wallet can vote to up to 30 candidates to serve as block producers, however, it’s worth noting that block producers with the most support on the network have less than 3 percent of the current token supply backing them.

This means that Block.One controls so many tokens, that the field of potential block producers could effectively narrow to the 30 it picked, if and when it decides to finally enter a vote.

It’s no surprise then, that the move has left some alarmed.

“I find it problematic that Block.one is now involved in selecting block producers, as it undermines their role as a neutral third party, and affords them a significant amount of influence over the network,” Arianna Simpson of Autonomous Partners told CoinDesk via email. (Simpson is not an investor in EOS.)

But others believe the decision is in line with necessity of innovation.

Christian Catalini of MIT’s Cryptoeconomics Lab argued that each new approach to crypto governance deserves a chance to be tested so the wider crypto world can benefit from its lessons, saying, “In general when you experiment you may land on solutions that may look appealing but don’t stand the test of time.”

That said, the EOS community has largely expressed excitement about the company taking an active role in governance.

On a Reddit thread about the news, this reaction was fairly representative:

“I have been waiting for this. I think this is a good thing, and will continue to align interests … If Block.One makes money, I will make money as well most likely.”

But intermixed with the positive reactions, there were also observations like this one:

“I think EOS will do great things, but this makes it Ripple 2.0. It’s essentially a blockchain that is owned and run by Block.One. I’m not even saying that’s a bad thing, but let’s not kid ourselves either.”

How voting works

By design, EOS only has 21 block producers. The small size allows them to come to consensus very quickly, which is why EOS supporters believe it can surpass the leading blockchains by overtaking it in transactions per second.

The EOS community elects these 21 block producers in a continuous election, which allows bad actors to be removed at any time. Each wallet can vote its tokens for up to 30 block producer candidates. The 21 organizations with the most votes get to do that work, for which they are rewarded with some of tokens emitted through inflation by the protocol.

One of the reasons it took EOS so long to finally activate was because the software wouldn’t go live until 15 percent of the total token supply had been staked for votes, but, as of this writing, roughly 30 percent of the tokens are staked for voting.

Block.One’s founder tokens gradually release over a 10-year period. Until then, all they can do is stake them for use of the network, including voting. They can only cast one ballot and since all their tokens are staked until they unlock, they have to vote all of them or none.

As one redditor who looked at the wallet balances in the genesis block reported, 99 percent of EOS token holders control less than 14 percent of the token supply. The top 1,000 wallets control 85 percent of the supply. So, it remains very much a network controlled by its richest users.

Block.One is the largest single holder. Joshua Kauffman, who leads governance and community efforts for one of the top block producers, EOS Canada, told CoinDesk that he believes Block.One, ironically, wants to exercise its vote to undermine other whales.

There’s a few block producers with very little support from small holders, he said, suggesting they are propped up by whale votes. Kauffman believes Block.One wants a chance to vote for the technically strongest candidates with the most community support in order to support the consensus of the most users.

“It’s in their best interest and the community’s best interest to insure the best possible producers are the ones running the network,” Kauffman said.

When it announced its intention to vote, Block.One also expressed support for a code change so that it can support 50 or more block producer candidates. That way, it’s more widely spreading around its big votes, allowing the community to make the final decision about who gets into the top 21.

It would take a minimum of two months for such a code change to go live, according to Kauffman, so if Block.One waits for that change to vote, it could still be a while

Big decisions ahead

Besides changing out block producers, EOS faces other big decisions going forward, and by taking part in block producer elections, Block.One could make its say over those decisions even more decisive.

First, EOS hasn’t yet passed a constitution to govern the protocol, so it doesn’t have official rules for how block producers should resolve conflicts, as we have previously reported.

To fix it, Block.One has proposed a completely new constitution. The new constitution is much more narrow in scope than the one developed by the community. The company is asking longtime supports to jettison all that work in favor of a narrow proposal.

Block.One cofounder and EOS creator Dan Larimer wrote in a Medium post:

“”I have seen that if you give people arbitrary power to resolve arbitrary disputes then everything becomes a dispute and the decisions made are arbitrary.”

Second, the worker proposal system is coming closer to fruition. That system will allow the community to vote on paying tokens generated by inflation to teams that want to build new products to make the whole protocol serve users better.

With time, decisions about these proposals could also be important in determining the direction the network takes.

Even if Block.One abstains from votes in both of these cases, block producers with its support are likely to follow its lead, and the supporters of those block producers are likely to follow them.

By expanding the number of block producer candidates it can vote for, it might also expand the number that feel inclined to follow the company’s lead.

“I agree that Block.One has an oversized voice,” Kauffman granted, but he also pointed out that the best way for Block.One to grow its wealth is by increasing token value. Disenfranchising rank-and-file users by controlling the process won’t achieve that, he argued.

“They want this to be the community chain,” he said.

EOS is experimenting in a space that blockchains haven’t adequately grappled with, Catalini said.

He and his collaborator Joshua Gans explained in a 2016 paper, this means that EOS has dramatically lowered the cost of verification, but it’s now facing another cost also described in that work, the cost of networking.

Blockchains don’t only need to come to consensus around the truth, they also need to find a way to coordinate economic activity around the world. That’s their networking cost, and “that’s the one that really changes market power and market structure,” Catalini said.

He added:

“That’s the one we don’t really have a governance structure for; that’s why you’re seeing so many false starts.”


Here at Dollar Destruction, we endeavour to bring to you the latest, most important news from around the globe. We scan the web looking for the most valuable content and dish it right up for you! The content of this article was provided by the source referenced. Dollar Destruction does not endorse and is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or other materials on this page. As always, we encourage you to perform your own research!

Source
Author Brady Dale 
Image Credit 

Don’t forget to join our Telegram channel for Crypto, Business & Technology news delivered to you daily

Here Is How Tron’s (TRX) MainNet Launch Outgunned That of EOS

The word ‘outgunned’ is defined as outdoing or overwhelming your opponent by superior forces. Once you read the word, you think about the numerous Hollywood movies where the action hero with the most guns wins the final battle. But this is no war-zone; neither is it a movie. It is the world we love of crypto and blockchain. In this world, we have witnessed the launch of two magnificent Mainnets in the last one month. That of Tron (TRX) and that of EOS (EOS).



Both were equally exciting for the buzz around the crypto-verse was that these two projects were plausible Ethereum killers. But that is where the similarities end. The launches of both MainNets were totally opposite as shall be elaborated.

Constant communication by both projects

Justin Sun has overcome FUD to become one of the most trusted faces in the crypto-verse. His constant communication to TRON believers is second to none with clear milestones and roadmaps of when the MainNet was to be launched as well as what would happen after. We knew the dates and exact time with timezone references, as to when the MainNet would be launched as well as the Genesis block. There is also constant communication on the status of the ERC20 token migration as well as coin burns and token lockups.

EOS, on the other hand, has no such public figure to reassure the project believers about what was happening during the Mainnet launch. As a matter of fact, no one knew for sure if the MainNet was to be launched on the 2nd of June or the 3rd of June. Also, there is no one figure to elaborate the on-goings in the current constitutional crisis.

Bugs and Bug bounty programs

With the respect to bugs, the EOS MainNet was found to have a severe bug only days before the launch of the MainNet. This bug could allow a rogue miner to hijack the entire network using a smart contract and start wrecking havoc in the form of mining other blockchain networks. The bug was patched and a bug bounty program was soon initiated with a reward cap of $10,000.

Tron then took it upon itself, through Justin and the Tron Foundation, to make sure they had a lucrative bug bountyprogram when the MainNet was launched on the 31st of May. The upper cap of the reward was set at $10 Million meaning the best of the best of security experts and teams probably went knocking at the door of the Tron Foundation seeking to test the MainNet. As a result, the Mainnet has not experienced any known bug since the genesis block went live.

However, EOS has experienced another glitch that has resulted in several accounts being frozen as well as a constitutional crisis.

Constitutional crisis

Block.one, the creator of EOS, is proposing the abolishing of the current constitution less than a month since the MainNet released the Genesis block after a voting stalemate. On the other hand, the Tron project currently has Super Representative elections ongoing with plans of a constitution in the works.

The difference is clear

One can argue that Tron managed to learn from the immediate mistakes of EOS. This is a very valid way of viewing things. Then again, TRON has for the longest of times being the underdog in this crypto-verse with EOS enjoying parade-like praise since the inception of the project. This means that the team at Tron had to put in double the effort to prove their mettle. The planning and execution witnessed through the Tron Foundation can only be described as being meticulous. Perhaps it is this attention to detail by the team that will eventually make Tron end up outshining Ethereum.


Here at Dollar Destruction, we endeavour to bring to you the latest, most important news from around the globe. We scan the web looking for the most valuable content and dish it right up for you! The content of this article was provided by the source referenced. Dollar Destruction does not endorse and is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or other materials on this page. As always, we encourage you to perform your own research!

Source
Author: DAVID GEKKO
Image Credit

Don’t forget to join our Telegram channel for Crypto, Business & Technology news delivered to you daily.