In Smart Contract Wars, Dan Larimer Strikes Back
Many are calling for answers after the EOS leadership last week instructed its block producers to censor transactions from twenty-seven different EOS accounts. Now, Dan Larimer has taken to Twitter to defend the platform and enlighten members of the community on how Ethereum could similarly reject blocks that contain specific transactions.
Subscribe to the Bitsonline YouTube channel for great videos featuring industry insiders & experts
Arbitration on Decentralized Platforms
It’s safe to say that 2018 has not been the best year for the cryptocurrency and blockchain community. With ICO hype long gone and the price of popular tokens continuing to descend toward their Q4 2017 levels, many in the community have been looking for a reason to vent their frustrations.
With the EOS Smart Contract platform mainnet launch in June, most have been watching to see what a smart platform with essentially unlimited funding could do. When the launch didn’t go as smoothly as many had thought it should, multiple parties began to take notice of some peculiar characteristics of this new and extremely well-funded delegated proof-of-stake platform.
After some investigation, it was revealed that the EOS ECAF (EOS Core Arbitration Forum) had the ability to give orders to the elected EOS block producers to freeze accounts, once they had decided certain accounts had been compromised, and only later communicate those details to the community.
This all was observed by actions on June 17th to freeze accounts based on leadership consensus, reached in a private conference call. Many in the EOS and larger cryptocurrency community were not thrilled, and have since demanded changes to the EOS arbitration methods.
EOS vs Ethereum
EOS creator Dan Larimer has defended the platform by comparing its arbitration methods to smart contract heavyweight Ethereum:
From the Ethereum "Constitution" (https://t.co/ZWZn5D2bO0) calls for arbitration. Ethereum also supports freezing and reversing of transactions and has done so. Ethereum is governed by use of centralized Trademark held by a single entity.
— Daniel Larimer (@bytemaster7) June 24, 2018
Larimer followed up with an elaboration, offering specifics of how arbitration orders under Ethereum are made by a 60 percent consensus, while EOS demands 100 percent consensus for all arbitration orders. Larimer argues that, despite Ethereum’s relative longevity, EOS is a superior smart contract blockchain given its need for 100 percent consensus, as opposed to 60.
Smart Contract Rivalry Heats Up As Larimer Lashes Out
The Ethereum network also has the potential to impose censorship. Some may consider that a ticking time bomb, while others may admirecompliment the incentive structure of Ethereum and maintain that any transaction censorship would lead to chain forking or users migrating to other pools. In the end, a censorship-resistant mining pool would emerge and accept those transactions.
Regardless of the validity of Larimer’s position on Ethereum, the smart contract wars are sure to heat up while these platforms continue to be put under the microscope as they test their new styles of decentralized governance.
Does Dan Larimer’s concerns about Ethereum’s ability to suspend or freeze accounts make you question ETH? Sound off below.
Image via Pixabay