Sun Yuchen VS Steem community was the most discussed topic in the industry last week. On February 14, Sun Yuchen completed the acquisition of Steemit. In order to prevent the on-chain capital power, the Steem witness node jointly launched a soft fork, turning the "witness" seats bought by Sun Yuchen into huge sums into empty talk; subsequently, Sun again launched a "capital attack" and united several well-known exchanges. , Crushing 99.96% of the Steemit community with 0.04% of voters, and won a temporary victory …
The competition for voting rights in the Steem community is still over. Many big names have spoken, and the domestic and foreign communities are uproar: Is decentralization just a joke? DPOS, POS, POW mechanism, who can be fair? Can I do whatever I want as long as I have the money? Who should we trust to vote? Should the BM that buried this deep-water bomb in the early years be carried away?
In the afternoon of March 6, RenrenBit CMO was invited to the ChainNode live broadcast room, Zi Cen , founder of HelloPool, director of BitShares, and founder of GDEX Cancer , and had an in-depth exchange with the host Jun Yao on this issue.
- Half a year of research and development can't beat BM's mouth? Isn't Voice worth looking forward to?
- BM: The reason for not using EQ to purchase EOS is that B1 cannot have more than 10% share.
- BM's "social" road
- BM will transfer the steem to the EOS. Is it good or false?
- EOS retail: BM is like a dream young man
- Can incentive model adjustment improve EOS online voting? BM release new ideas for governance
The ins and outs of the Steem incident
Both guests stated that they have paid close attention to this incident. Mr. Cancer said that the BTS community had discussed this matter as soon as possible: Should BTS take some action to deal with this kind of hidden danger?
"Steem is the second project of BM. In fact, this mine was buried in the early stage of the project. In the early days of bm, a large number of coins were mined in advance. At that time, some controversies had been triggered. He promised that the coins that were mined in the future would not Participating in the voting at that time suspended the contradiction of the Steemit community, but a thunder point broke out in this acquisition. "Cancer analysis believes that Sun Yuchen will consider the hard fork as a hacking attack and an infringement of his private property rights, thus uniting The exchange ticket warehouse was changed, and the seats of witnesses were changed.
Zi Cen shared the latest developments that are concerned about the incident. There is an important detail. South Korea has a large ticket warehouse to pull the community and Sun Yuchen back to the negotiating table for negotiation, and strive for bilateral approval instead of approval. Hard forks or soft forks solve the problem.
Steemit and Voice: Who is the better decentralized social?
In Zi Cen's view, the two projects are essentially different. Steemit is an application that uses the form of a public chain, and Voice is a smart contract application built on the EOS chain. From the perspective of operation and maintenance costs, the operating cost of Steemit will be much higher than Voice; from another perspective, when it is important During the iteration of the update, the governance and consensus formation of the public chain will encounter more resistance, just as this acquisition event.
For projects like Steemit, if they fall into the weak phase of the core team's promotion, they will face a big dilemma in long-term development. If they use lighter smart contract products such as Voice, the response speed and adjustment ability will be greatly improved. On the other hand, Voice's user size may also be more "portable".
Zi Cen is more optimistic about the early stage of Voice development. "Media platforms with a reward mechanism must pay more attention to it in the early stages. Although we don't know what the future development prospects are, the early dividends must be huge."
Is DPOS fair? Is POW the best choice?
Both guests agreed that the focus of this debate should be on the choice of the exchange, not on the consensus mechanism. Cancer said that foreign communities will pay more attention to the fact that exchanges can use users 'voting rights, can they also embezzle users' assets? In fact, for exchanges, if you want to participate in the governance of the chain, you can add a sentence in the user agreement that "the user deposits coins to this exchange, which means entrusting voting rights to the exchange." A large number of users do not even Will focus on this agreement. This incident will bring everyone's thoughts on the DPOS mechanism, and may also cause exchanges to more actively weigh their choices.
Zi Cen believes that every head exchange should be equipped with an expert in DPOS to measure whether it is necessary to intervene in community affairs. How to grasp the scale of intervention? Because for the exchange, this kind of incident is a very big public relations crisis, losing the trust of users and falling into a state of scorching.
Because of the "heavy loss of trust", instead of having to worry about the exchange's ticket positions being controlled again, because they do not have sufficient motivation, cannot bring about an increase in transaction volume, and they cannot afford the anger and counterattack of the community. The performance in this incident was actually very powerful. The same is true in POW. The head mining pool certainly has the ability to vote forcefully, but in the long-term development, such "willfulness" cannot bring them sufficient benefits, so they will not do so. Therefore, it is not necessarily fair that POW is more fair than DPOS, which depends on the self-control of the head platform.
BM is a willful genius
As the founder of Steemit and the author of the DPOS consensus mechanism, BM has previously publicly stated on Twitter: "The quality of the DPOS chain depends on its owner and the token holders who have entrusted voting, and fight for power on the Steem chain. "Welcome." When asking the two guests for their evaluation of BM, they got a very consistent answer, "He is a technical genius, but wayward."
Cancer mentioned that BM has brought many unprecedented innovations to the blockchain industry, such as graphene architecture, DPOS mechanism, and decentralized exchange. The products designed by BM around 2013 were not really used until 17 and 18 years. Accepted by the industry, copied and used by other projects, this is where his genius is. At the same time, it is undeniable that some of his own expressions were immature and too wayward. Maybe he needs a good entrepreneurial partner to limit his "willfulness." As a member of the BitShares Council, Cancer believes that BTS has become very decentralized, and even if BM returns to the BTS community again, it will not cause such a stir because of "willfulness."
At the end of the show, Zi Cen said that the victims of the incident were first the steem community, followed by the exchange, and then the Tron team, and for the audience outside the venue, we were the "winners" of the incident. The topic that should really be considered at this moment is: how to avoid being involved in such negative disputes and avoid such problems? As far as the investment of adults is concerned, no one will "backfire" for you. You should first improve your discrimination and decision-making ability.