Topic: Solana and centralisation - High TPS (Read 80 times)

Power to validators are provided by the staking users. Solana should enforce the use of large number of validators and limit on the amount staked on each of them. Or place other restrictions to control the validators.
Everything comes down to how serious the Solana team works on to make the network secure. As the price and use of Solana keeps on increasing, the chances of it being targeted by *large companies would increase.

ok pretty much what I thought.

I dont real see an argument against some g(x) to incease btc blocksize but I suppose the smaller the block the lighter the chain, so more decebtralized to a point

I don’t know anyone who runs a Solana node and think it’s primarily large companies who were bribed into doing so. Even then, they’re constantly having to pause operations and restart their blockchain. It just isn’t a serious coin for people to use as a store of value. Maybe someday. I think Solana is primarily benefiting from Bitcoin’s clogged mempool and new investors wanting to buy the next big thing without realizing it’s shortcomings.

There is no way Solana will end up been EOS 2.0, the failure of EOS is to me because of the lack of clear direction from the team, the team is only interested in money they want to raise from the market, I understand your concern, but there will be a solution in future, we all have these issues with Bitcoin (China mining control) Ethereum also (Moving to POS) Solana has a strong community now, and I think solution will come

Can some one explain how solana will not fall into the EOS situation where due to the size of the block chain growth it wont end upbeing centralise on one or two servers maybe 3.

What solutions does it offer to get around this? I have taken a glance at the info on Solana and it seems to take a stratify out in


State Snapshots (Point 1): Solana uses a mechanism where it takes snapshots of the current state (like account balances) and disregards much of the transaction history for day-to-day operations. This reduces the data that nodes need to store and process, making it easier for more participants to run nodes. However, this approach can be vulnerable to edge attacks if the snapshots themselves are tampered with or if the mechanism for deciding what to include in a snapshot is manipulated.

Data Sharding (Point 2): Solana's concept of having mid-tier nodes that hold parts of the blockchain can be seen as a form of data sharding. This approach divides the blockchain data among multiple nodes, reducing the load on any single node. By incentivizing these nodes, Solana encourages distribution and redundancy. However, this system's security depends on ensuring that the nodes are sufficiently decentralized and that the shards are properly managed and verified.

Full Nodes (Point 3): Full nodes, which hold the complete blockchain, are essential for the network's integrity but are resource-intensive to operate. Solana anticipates that improvements in data throughput and storage technology will make it feasible for more participants to run full nodes in the future.

what to stop edge attack vectors on [1] and [2] and collapse of 3 in to EOS 2.0