Until it takes 5000 votes, rather than, 50 to control who the witnesses are we are kidding ourselves that the chain is safe.
Even better would be 50,000.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Until it takes 5000 votes, rather than, 50 to control who the witnesses are we are kidding ourselves that the chain is safe.
Even better would be 50,000.
More isn't always better. Are the 50 in charge bad actors? Will they become corrupted? What happens if they become corrupted. That's the interesting thing about DPOS. When people at the top exploit the system, the only way they can actually make money is by selling the token, and that creates an ecosystem that balances itself because the people selling are losing influence over the network.
To say that the network is controlled by 50 is simply not true.
What happens if those 50 decide to fuck around and find out? What happens when someone creates a fork that nullifies all their stake and moves on without them. Is it worth it to remove those 50 from the ecosystem at this time? I think not. But assuming that it never will be and they'll control everything forever is just false.
I'm pretty happy with the things as they are.
I will be greatly disappointed if bonds aren't in this hardfork, I think we have been kneecapped long enough.
Forking away from bad actors is our trump card, provided it doesn't get played too often.
Not much chance of that with the current makeup of the body politic.
Our crowd is too small to divide over superficialities, imo.
Doing so would be bad for everybody.
If those 50 decided to fork the code, there would be very little that could be done about it.
I'd prefer that number to be 5000 to preclude even the thought of a takeover, but, at this point, the chances of a forkening happening at all are small.
'We are a happy family.'
Joey Ramone