Topic: Is DPoS Flawed? (Read 187 times)

At least, ARK's DPoS model is much more decentralized than that of STEEM. One address is able to vote for one delegate at a time. This would make efforts of compromising the network with people's stake largely unfeasible. Big exchanges like Binance and Huobi will have a hard time taking over the entire ARK blockchain because of this. To my surprise, no other DPoS blockchain has adopted ARK's model. I guess that most developers don't care about decentralization as long as money keeps pouring in. Thanks to the decentralized and open source nature of crypto, anyone can easily create a fork out of an existing project to build a better version of it. I'd like to see a decentralized version of TRON in the future, if there's enough interest/demand from people in the mainstream world to make it happen.

Let's hope DPoS improves for the better, as several blockchain networks adopt this novel consensus algorithm for unparalleled scalability.

binance already pull a move that was hated by the community (although they withdraw it later) when the steem saga is happening. but that's not all their fault, since lots of users were sending tokens to binance to get interest. that's not gonna change, so there should be some system to limit how much an address/exchange power hold over the voting thing. if it's not controlled it's very possible exchange will control the whole network.

say if people moving their coins out of binance then it would make binance less influence, it would depend on the coin holders, i think if they see binance doing harm to their holding or project chance they will taking their coin out. all and all it depend on the code how voter or dpos work. ark just have and use the one with common sense with decentralized. it's really nice and fun to see have decentralized dpos work, every delegates just want people to vote for them and they work hard for the community. ark community especially on slack are very active and delegates have creating ton of cool stuffs for ark as whole. i recommended you to download ark wallet and test it out.

Good point. I haven't read much about RDPoS, but it seems to be very similar to traditional PoS. I've seen a suggestion a while ago made by a STEEM member which aims to improve DPoS. It's a Reputation-based Delegated Proof of Stake where delegators need to have a good reputation (often displayed as Reputation Points) in order to produce blocks on the Blockchain. If they're elected based on the number of votes on the Blockchain, but their reputation is less the predefined value, they won't be able to participate in the Blockchain's consensus. There are so many ways to decentralize DPoS, limited to developers' own imagination. My guess is that various Blockchain projects will work together in order to prevent the events from STEEM repeating themselves over and over again. The hostile takeover of the STEEM blockchain by Justin Sun's witnesses, has urged the need to improve DPoS for the better. In its current state, large stakeholders (especially centralized exchanges) are capable of "dictating" the rules of the Blockchain making DPoS utterly centralized. We've seen Binance's large influence on the TRON blockchain due to the large number of votes amassed by its staking services. With an improved version of DPoS, centralized exchanges will no longer play a part in the network's consensus making the underlying cryptocurrency decentralized.

All in all, time will tell us if DPoS will be able to live up to the task or become replaced by other consensus algorithms with decentralization in mind. AFAIK, PoW is the most decentralized consensus algorithm in the world today (despite being resource-intensive and sluggish). It's no wonder why Bitcoin hasn't shifted from PoW to PoS (or its variants). DPoS may be flawed right now, but it can be improved over time. Everything will depend on developers themselves whenever they'd want to improve DPoS or leave it as is. So far, I'm impressed with the job "ARK" has been doing so far. Voting for 1 delegate at a time (per account) makes ARK's DPoS model a much more decentralized one. Just my opinion

"RDPoS" which stands for "Random Delegated Proof of Stake" sound like simple pos if it don't sound or it work different from pos then when this random delegate turn to stake it have a dead node. this "RDPoS" is sound just simply = pos. of all the dpos ark is still the best one out there.

Good to know. This is what we need in order to make DPoS a solid contender against PoW and PoS consensus algorithms. My guess is that diverse Blockchain projects will continue to build upon DPoS in order to make it as decentralized as possible. Projects like STEEM or TRON wouldn't care more or less about this, since they're utterly centralized. But other projects like EOS and ARK can work continuously in order to solve the inherent problems of DPoS. This is thanks to the decentralized and open source nature of Blockchain technology.

Speaking of DPoS, I've stumbled across a new cryptocurrency called "IoTeX" with its own version of the algorithm. It's called "RDPoS" which stands for "Random Delegated Proof of Stake" with a focus on decentralization. I've been reading about it lately, and the concept is very promising. Basically, delegates are chosen randomly by the network from a pool of participants. Every once in a while, current delegates are "switched" to other ones on the network, reducing the chances of centralization.  It would've been great if either STEEM or HIVE adopted this new consensus algorithm in order to make their Blockchain networks more resilient against big stakeholders. If successful, blockchains using RDPoS could become as comparable as their PoW or PoS counterparts in terms of decentralization. With the STEEM dilemma, I think that developers will focus on ways to further improve DPoS in order to minimize risks of centralization as much as possible. Just my thoughts

ark dpos and network is the best, it's not possible to freeze, tampering, or block any top 51 delegates from producing blocks. unless people unvoted you out of top 51 or your voting power is below that 51 delegates line then you're not able to make anything. if people/coder able to block, freeze or cherry pick a delegate from producing any block when it have the right to do so then it's not decentralized blockchain, also this is in the code not the dpos mechanism itself. dpos is fun and the best if it done right like ark.

EOS just shows and proof people's right about what they said DPO. The network is being run by cabals, the 21 block producers are working in clicks. To me it is not late correct all these wrongs, just open it up. I believe if the right thing is not done this could be the beginning of the end for the project

Some time ago, EOS' block producers managed to "freeze" accounts on the Blockchain. Back in the day, the "Ethereum contender" was just starting to blossom. Still, it raised some concerns on the level of decentralization of EOS' consensus algorithm known as DPoS. This algorithm is much more efficient than traditional PoS or PoW in the sense that it's highly scalable requiring minimal energy footprint. For long, Blockchain networks such as Bitshares, STEEM, TRON, Lisk, Ark, and EOS have been using DPoS in order to provide users with a democratic network that focuses on energy efficiency and high transaction capacity. But EOS' case, shows us that there's a lot of work to be done with DPoS. Something similar happened to STEEM a while ago, where Justin Sun's controlled witnesses confiscated funds on the Blockchain. That makes 2 cases where it has been proven that DPoS is utterly centralized.

Do you think that DPoS is flawed? Can it be improved? Does DPoS have a future? Or will it eventually be replaced by traditional PoS or BFT algorithms? Your input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance