EOS

Hey I’m not criticizing the tech at all. My point was that EOS is forgoing immutability and creating a bad precedent like ethereum did during the DAO hack. What happens when a state wants to censor a tx? I thought the point of Blockchains is that so *no one* could have the power.

A permissionless dapp/protocol like 0x or Augur could barely run on EOS, and would probably eventually get censored by the block producers at some point. EOS has played with the slider between centralization / decentralization and scalability. *That is not innovation!* Innovating is when you do something new and do something that makes things better *without* having to face some severe tradeoff.

EOS is struggling now because they chose to do token/coin voting, and all those tokens are held in exchanges (or holders are apathetic). As some of the Bitcoin Core devs pointed out, this solution has come up and been dismissed many times. Why didn’t EOS know this?

Say whatever you like, EOS achieves higher dramas per second than any other chain.

EOS is taking an end-to-end approach having apps pay for centralized services and having user readable names and user experiences that people are used to. This basically says that decentralization doesn't matter that much, and parity to current usage is more important.

I've been a big fan of EOS from day one for reasons I've talked about at length. But by far my biggest concern recently has been around arbitration. Specifically, an unelected group called ECAF that issues network-level arbitration decisions.

Honestly, I don't understand the whole EOS thing. Why people decided out of all the companies in the world that could run a federated permissioned ledger that it should be one run by people with a track record of borderline fraud I will never understand.

"EOS is secure because the hegemon has a lot of power and can counterbalance the bad people"

Hmm, what other class of systems is that the security model of?

Based on what I’ve seen over the last couple of months, there’s a real chance that EOS will surpass Ethereum in one year in terms of developer activity and user adoption.

If the moat of Ethereum (ETH) is this easy to break by EOS, won’t EOS’s be as well? Just a month ago, people thought ETH would be worth 15x BTC. Smart contract platforms' battle will be fun to watch, but in the end, they’ll all commoditize each other. This is a prisoners dilemma in action.

EOS is the joke that never stops giving — from their token sale to their 21 nodes controlling everything, and now to just one node running their election. A MongoDB instance would be more decentralized.

EOS will surpass ETH. EOS could surpass ETH in dapp activity; as serenity delays continue, developer mindshare will wander; EOS smart contracts use C++ and compile into WebAssembly (better dev experience); on-chain governance works in EOS, isn’t close in ETH.

One of EOS‘s greatest strengths is in having 21+ independent, accountable, and well-financed teams like @EOS_Canada & @eosnewyork to help provide user support, develop infrastructure, and market the platform.

Governance is hard. See the EOS (on-chain governance) low retail voter turnout for electing the Block Producers and the Zcash Foundation Community Governance Process (off-chain governance meets social signaling). Currently, around 5% of EOS holders have staked tokens to vote for the Block Producers. 15% is needed. The EOS low voter turnout is a result of low retail participation and centralization of the initial investors.

I know lots of really smart people that are EOS fans; maybe I'm missing something here, but I've never heard a good justification for the structure of the sale. On balance, going for the continual-outflow model was a huge reputational risk that few things would have justified.