Some Thoughts (and Concerns) About EOS DPOS Block Producer Independence
In this video I'm discussing my personal views on DPOS (within the EOS community) and why it's important for block producers to remain independent. I think the community, via market forces to solve real problems, should lead the way when it comes to proposals and improvements with independent block producers getting involved to support the community efforts.
I also touch on an important topic I don't think is being discussed enough related to who controls the private key of a token contract (or any contract) on EOS and how much power that person has. Unlike other blockchains, EOS allows contracts to be modified while the chain is running, so multisig control of token contracts is going to be really important. Just like we have to trust the human beings make code changes to reference clients and mining software, we have to trust those who roll out code changes to smart contracts.
Relevant Links
- Are You Ignorant About EOS, STEEM, and DPOS?
- A Rational Response to the Crypto Twitter EOS Discussion
- Decentralized Blockchain Governance
- DPOS Consensus Algorithm - The Missing White Paper
That private key can be a 'dead'* key, correct? So if you wanted to have 'Code is Law' style contracts which can't be modified by anyone, you could do that. You could even take a contract which has matured over the years, duplicate it with a dead key and be confident both that it's a well tested and understood contract, and that nobody can usurp it in any way.
* provably unowned, like 0x111111... or whatever the format is in EOS
Yes! Excellent point.
I think you're raising a lot of interesting questions. People had some semblance of 'security' when it was default that 'code was god'. That OBVIOUSLY led to problems, as 95% of people aren't devs, and 99% of people aren't blockchain devs. Funds were lost, some livelihoods ruined, and reputations tarnished.
I think the shift to something more forgiving is absoloutely necessary, and despite how much people piss and moan about it, I think that EOS, with it's community and constitution is a step in the right direction (whether it's the be-all and end-all solution? I find that doubtful).
I hadn't thought about the ability to manipulate a token contract after people have signed up for it, and it indeed raises some very concerning questions. I was really excited about the "Virtue Poker" dApp for ETH, precisely because the contract allowed it to be trusted. I worry that this is just going to end up turning into another "terms of service" / "Can't be bothered to read this shit" trap that we're currently living in -- but perhaps people can be motivated to step up their awareness, or better yet -- maybe some institution of actual democracy can be implemented in more of the services that we utilize?
Thanks for sharing, dude.
You're welcome! Thanks for watching.
Two follow up questions for you (one related, one not):
I'm curious about setting up an EOS block-producer, and am wondering if it's generally the same system. (I.e -- there are 21 "top" block producers, but there is room for a hundered or so back-up BP's). Are you able to share if that's indeed the case, and if it may be worth it (say from maybe a "yeah you'll sign a few blocks here and there", or a "nah, you'll likely never sign a block, so I probably wouldn't bother" kind of perspective) to set up an EOS BP?
Thanks for the informative response. I hadn't really dug into the '3 year' rule for maintaining rights to property -- but I definitely like @dan's logic behind putting the onus on the property owner to put in the minimal effort to maintain their rights, rather than resting it on the community. I'd chalk that one up as a big win for the community at large, not because of whatever 'treasures' may get scored, but precisely because it's removing risk off of the communities shoulders, and placing it on individual property owners who must exercise due diligence.
As far as the naming / wording of the ICC / "EOS Core Arbitration Forum" stuff goes -- I've never been on to read too much in to names and the like -- but I deal pretty extensively with standardized construction contracts. One of the most appreciable parts of them is the "default" dispute resolution steps that must be followed if anything starts to go sideways -- so I think I can appreciate the intent of the system there.
As far as setting up a BP for EOS -- I don't see myself jumping in any time soon. The competition looks pretty vicious, hahaha.
But maybe if I start seeing some compelling dApps and the like, I might be interested in setting up a node of some kind.
Thanks again for the info!
You're welcome!
Full points to you guys on making this process as transparent as possible and to you personally for making it clear that you guys are working with multiSig to address the concerns.
A lot of folks probably knew the deal when they got into (tokens being modified in RT) but there is always benefit in keeping the issue out there for the people to see because people miss things all that time and then when they realize what he actual thing is they tend to start blaming others. In that manner the transparency not only increases the trust but kinds of distributes the liability evenly amongst the involved parties.
As I was also saying a couple of days ago on your response to 'twitter EOS discussion' that the introduction of human element is scary an probably a little 'fear' might actually be a good thing. In the end it is an experiment - we are all trying new things and seeing if they work or not.
Yes, I'd say humility over fear, but yes, we do need to be very cautious and concerned with all forms of power.
If I may ask another question while I have your attention. I remember seeing a really great interview of yours a while back where you talked about that there were some tentative plans of putting a upper threshold on the SBD to dollar peg. Now that the prices of SBD are at one dollar range, will we be seeing some measures to enforce the upper threshold of the peg?
It's being discussed. It's not a priority for Steemit, inc though so that makes things a little difficult.
Thanks for the reply man!
EOS will end up into a shitcoin or get dominated by a bunch of assholes just like Bitshares and Steem. As a programmer @dan is a genius but as a leader he is just an idiotic nerd with no sense of the real world..
Hahah. Well, certainly no one can fault you for being overly optimistic. :)
Want to make a friendly bet? Maybe in 1 year's time based on an agreed upon metric that you decide (dapp user adoption, etc) for both EOS and STEEM?
You're right, these videos are incredibly useful Luke. Your insights of the project are much appreciated.
Thanks! Glad to hear it.
i am follow and resteem for you
Upvote/Resteem: https://steemit.com/news/@bible.com/6h36cq
Onchain solutions is definitely the best approach as it provides the security and transparency that the community would appreciate to ensure that those voting members are accountable for their actions. It also allows for community participation which is imperative for any project needing the community to create the proper ecosystem for the protocol like Dapps.
On chain clarity sure seems better to me than off chain... something somethings.
Very good information Thank you
Your point of view is interesnet
it is always good that the community helps people who want to emerge, the obstacles on this subject must be left behind