RE: EOS Is An Accident Waiting To Happen
I am all for engaged debate no matter the platform, but I feel as though I lay out my points. What kind of detail would you prefer? Because I have no problem going into more detail if required.
Let me see if I can elaborate further.
On claims of the hype levels
The valuation for EOS is insane. Dan might have a track record of being able to create products in the cryptocurrency space, but on the other side, Dan also has a history of giving up on projects and moving onto the next idea he has. First Bitshares, then Steem and now EOS.
To his credit, Bitshares and Steemit are still running fine (although, the current state of Steem has a lot of people feeling frustrated). But Dan seems to suffer from "tortured genius syndrome" when things stop becoming a challenge he gets bored and moves on. It's understandable, people like Dan need to be challenged but what happens if Dan leaves EOS and it dies? What if the luck runs out?
On its technical/speed claims
Until the mainnet launches, we're all speculating that EOS can achieve what they claim they can do. People have invested in the hopes that EOS will deliver on its promises.
Given cryptocurrency is a speculative niche investment category and many projects before EOS have proclaimed to be faster, better and stronger only to fizzle out, I think it's fair that I am sceptical until proven otherwise.
If the scalability problem was as simple as implementing Delegated Proof of Stake, other projects would have done it by now. The scalability problem is complex and the solution to solving it requires sacrificing certain things to achieve it in a decentralised fashion.
On the "Ethereum killer" label
A claim that keeps on being echoed, especially here on Steemit. It's a huge slap in the face to Ethereum considering that EOS' ICO was run on-top of Ethereum as an ERC20 token (like a large majority of ICO's are). I used to also be an avid reader of Dan's blog and he used to speak so highly of Ethereum.
People cite EOS being Proof of Stake (PoS) opposed to Ethereum's current Proof of Work (PoW) are making it superior in terms of speed. But once again, it completely disregards the work that is being done with Ethereum, eventually, a PoS type implementation will make its way into Ethereum as well.
Ethereum currently underpins the entire cryptocurrency market when it comes to a technical decentralised application platform. Other projects have tried to unseat it, Qtum and perhaps more notably Neo which have both failed to bring developers onboard and meet the hype that surrounded these projects (Neo more-so than Qtum).
On the vulnerabilities/issues
As easy as it is to believe Dan is telling the truth that all issues have been fixed, he loves to blame other people and seems to fail to take accountability. Considering he is leading the project it doesn't matter who is at fault, the responsibility falls on his shoulders. That's how business works.
I do find it concerning that a project sitting on allegedly billions in investment is reliant on seemingly insecure third-party libraries/helper functions. As a developer I understand the importance of "not reinventing the wheel" but I am also mindful of only taking on a third-party dependency if it is absolutely needed.
On Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS)
DPoS makes trade-offs known as the scaling trilemma, EOS specifically makes a trade-off between scalability and decentralisation, something they have not made a secret.
Proponents of EOS argue that it is immune to censorship resistance, when in fact the way in which EOS is designed makes it a centralised system and therefore can be taken down if an attack is concentrated enough (government, ISP).
You also have issues with corruption and collusion where theoretically Block Producers could bribe voters in exchange for votes and offering to share rewards.
Two weeks ago Vitalik actually expressed concerns about a potential flaw EOS' DPoS algorithm on the EOS Github in an issue.
The last paragraph in Vitalik's comment says it all:
In general, it's not possible to achieve BFT safety on a block without at least two messages from most nodes that directly or indirectly reference that block; this algo tries to do it in one round and it's likely impossible to actually do that safely. If you want an intuitive and good way of doing this, I recommend just using the algorithm in our Casper FFG paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.09437
This issue is now resolved thanks to Vitalik providing insight into the potential issues and effectively the final solution appears to be the solution already implemented into Ethereum's Casper FFG algorithm which Vitalik recommended EOS use.
People are so caught up in "killing Ethereum" they fail to realise that Ethereum while it has some issues, a lot of people are working to resolve them and Vitalik is on the same wavelength as Dan when it comes to algorithms and blockchain.
On bagholder claims
I know one person specifically who got caught out with the previous bull-run and he held because everyone said it would go back up, but he was left holding a heavy bag of EOS. He has said to me that when EOS goes back up he is cashing out his sizeable position because he believes after mainnet launch, it's going to go up and then back down.
On lack of long-term big picture investors
I know many proclaim to be in EOS for the long-haul and see the value in EOS as a technological marvel. But once again, I know people who have lost a lot of money on Bitcoin falling in price, as well as people who lost money on the recent Verge (XVG) hype.
All of these people are pinning their hopes on EOS "mooning" and they all plan to cash out in hopes they completely offset their losses or the very least, they claw back some of the money they've lost.
Conclusion
I think if EOS can pull off everything that it claims to be able to do, and that it is immune to censorship resistance, and most of all is immune to serious vulnerabilities being exploited it's a great project.
Like I said in my post, EOS reads great on paper but until it goes live, nobody can truly know what to expect or how things are going to go. I do know that it's normal market behaviour for a project to launch something, for it to "moon" and then go back down. The same thing happened with Neo a few months ago when it reached $196 USD and now look at it, it's $52 USD.
The cult-like behaviour of investors around EOS is concerning because I know for a fact people are going to lose money. Is it the fault of Block.One or Dan? Absolutely not. But my article never once blamed the EOS project itself, I simply pointed out the hype is dangerous and people are going to lose money. I stand by that. It's just common sense.
Neo is a prime example, but do you remember WaltonChain (WTC)? Everyone was talking about WTC a few months ago, that hit an ATH of $45 USD and now it's sitting at $11.16 USD.
That's the thing with hype, it's a dangerous thing and over time it fades.
I have no bias towards EOS, I am just a realist and a bit of a pessimist. I feel like EOS is being given a pass of sorts because of Dan's track record and intelligence when it comes to blockchain related products. That should be priced in, but its current evaluation is not realistic.
Admittedly, I do find it disappointing that people are reacting to my post the way they are. I can tell that some people have a lot riding on this project and if it fails, they lost more than they can afford to lose.
I am especially disappointed in @dan flagging this post instead of leaving a comment and participating in a healthy debate like you have done @captaincanary - I appreciate you took the time to write a comment sharing your thoughts. This is a democracy, everyone should be entitled to an opinion without being silenced for it.
That's the thing about the blockchain, my post is forever cemented into the Steem blockchain and Dan's reaction to flag an attempt to silence my opinion is also recorded. It's his prerogative to do so, but I will admit it does not reflect well on him nor the EOS project. Especially considering Dan said he was no longer going to be voting or participating in Steem in his resignation letter.
I have spoken to a few people about this post and while they admitted it was very forward and direct, confrontational at points, the few people I have consulted agree that it didn't deserve to be flagged and were actually quite surprised Dan acted in the way he did.
I will follow this post up a little after the dust settles from the mainnet launch and I'll do a write-up on what happens. Maybe EOS goes up and stays up, or maybe it goes up and then comes back down at a price slightly higher than it is now or the same price.
I read the first part and stopped as once again you have mis information, Dan did not “leave” the other projects, he never “owned” them. They are for he community to continue to develop.
You have a serious misunderstanding pal and it will cost you financially, but that is your issue.
You have a serious axe to grind here it seems @aclarkuk82 - I spent considerable time and effort responding back to criticisms of the article only for you to respond half-heartedly and honestly, I find it quite rude. But I guess what can I expect from someone who clearly has such high praise for EOS given your posting/comment history which seems to be heavily EOS related. I am guessing you're quite possibly heavily invested and can't see EOS from any other perspective.
Oh, so Dan still works for Steemit Inc and works on Bitshares? Seems strange he would write a resignation letter that he posted on Steem here where he announces his resignation from Steemit Inc.
I never said he owned them. Maybe if you read my comment before responding to it, you would have seen what I actually said. Let me quote what I actually said, my own words word-for-word.
I am not the first person to question whether Dan will stick around with EOS, an article on Bitcoin.com linked here also ponders the same question. A relevant quote from that article is:
You're acting like I've called EOS a bad project which I never did. All I ever did was call out the incessant levels of hype surrounding EOS and advise people to be careful. The whales are circling EOS and looking to take profits. Dial down the cultism by a few notches @aclarkuk82 you're scaring me.
I am just not another sheep blindly following the herd and believing in unsubstantiated promises. Given the prolonged bear market we have been in the last few months, the conditions are not exactly ideal for trading most cryptocurrencies lately (except maybe today).
The only financial cost here is people investing based on hype, I can almost guarantee that most people invested in EOS haven't even read the whitepaper. I've read it and it's technically impressive what they're attempting to pull off. But once again, anyone can write words, actions are what matter. It's not the idea, it's the execution.
lol ok, I will give you a response that hopefully does not 'hurt" your feelings, offense is taken not given.
Semantically he quit as CTO I will concede to that, but that simply means Dan will not govern the direction or write code. Steemit is an open source project, anyone can contribute and develop the platform, it is not the Dan show for sure and never was in my opinion.
Dan was part of a community-based project which is precisely the same EOS.
I believe Dan moved on as he is a great innovator in this space, is Dan perfect, of course not he is still human. That does not mean he has given up on it, Dan is merely moving on to bigger and better things. To truly excel at a task, I believe it needs 100% of your attention; otherwise, the tasks list spreads you too thin.
Dan will absolutely no stick around once EOS is running as he wanted, but again why is that a concern. Dan has already stated that he will divert his attention to writing dApps on the EOS platform, moreover he has hinted at "Steem 2.0" running on EOS.
Investing in a great project is not about "being a sheep" it is about performing due diligence and backing a project that you feel will deliver the next wave of distributed applications that will not crash when a single dApp consumes the network (Crypto Kitties on Eth). So you are right, do not be a sheep and blindly follow the crowd, but as you mentioned, you have read the white paper and where impressed. If that is the case, have you not been following the success of the testnet's running that are outperforming expectations AND has more features working than the white paper proposed.
Anyway, I will never tell people what to do with their money, but if someone slams ANY project with nonsensical and emotional based slander, I will respond.
good luck pal, no hard feelings I hope
Dan’s track record is what gives people the faith to invest. The crypto space can be risky, but he has proven his ability to address scalability and speed. I don’t think he “gives up” on projects. You said yourself that steemit and bitshares are running fine. The current issues with steemit don’t need Dan to be resolved - they are being worked on by steemit inc and the community (who let’s not forget have only been around 2 years).
The whole crypto space is driven by people with a passion for decentralisation, and there are some brilliant minds in the space. I’m sure there are brilliant minds working on Etherum, but that doesn’t make EOS a shit coin.
No disrespect @beggars, it’s fair that you are sceptical. But you are going pretty hard against dan and EOS at a time when they are trying to get on with the job. I’m not surprised he didn’t want to spend his time engaging in conversation.
But he had time to flag a post?
That's poor form
I am loving our debate here @bec-on-the-block and I am happy we can have this back and forth in a tasteful respectful matter. Really, this kind of interaction between you and I is what I was expecting the response to this post from others to be. I really respect you for the way you're engaging here and no disrespect taken.
I understand that and I think that counts for something, but the current evaluation is insane by any reasonable measure. It's a lot of money to just be riding on a single person and their reputation.
Even professional race car drivers crash every once in a while, professional athletes lose in events they're good at.
We're all human, we're not perfect and I think it's unfair to Dan and unrealistic for people to make financial decisions based on someone's reputation. But at the end of the day, people can choose to invest in what they want.
I think it's obvious that he reaches a certain point where the thrill of being challenged is lost. Bitshares and Steem were in a state where other developers could take over their development, they were fundamentally complete.
I've re-read my post a few times and I mention Dan once, but only in the context of mentioning he co-founded Bitshares and Steemit. But I am disappointed he felt the need to flag this post.
If it takes just one mildly critical post to distract Dan and EOS project from delivering on its mission of releasing a functional product, that's a whole other issue in itself. If they're trying to get on with the job, maybe reading Steemit posts about EOS is the last thing they should be focusing on.
Thanks @beggars - respectful conversation is what it’s all about as far as I’m concerned.
For me, I would add that the community around Dan is what adds a lot of value. He is revolutionary so he attracts great minds. He may well move on to other projects, but I don’t know how much that matters if there are people around to keep working on what he starts.
I think there was probably a time when Etherum was considered hugely overvalued as well, and it has probably grown in value a shitload since that time.
Anyway - I guess time will tell.
Cheers.
I understand that and I think that counts for something, but the current evaluation is insane by any reasonable measure. It's a lot of money to just be riding on a single person and their reputation. Even professional race car drivers crash every once in a while, professional athletes lose in events. We're all human, we're not perfect and I think it's unfair to Dan and unrealistic for people to make financial decisions based on someones reputation. But at the end of the day, people can choose to invest into what they want.
I think it's obvious that he reaches a certain point where the thrill of being challenged is lost. Bitshares and Steem were in a state where other developers could take over their development, they were fundamentally complete.
I've re-read my post a few times and I mention Dan once, but only in the context of mentioning he co-founded Bitshares and Steemit. But I am disappointed he felt the need to flag this post. If it takes just one mildly critical post to distract Dan and EOS project from delivering on its mission of releasing a functional product, that's a whole other issue in itself. If they're trying to get on with the job, maybe reading Steemit posts about EOS is the last thing they should be focusing on.