Cardano vs. EOS

English General Discussions
41

Thank you for your response, here’s mine :

Does Graphene Really Exist? If So, Where’s the Performance Proof?
As every open-source project, you can audit yourself the code and the way it is used in the application stack.
bitshares.org is a hosted version of the open source graphical interface anyone can download from github, so it is indeed a centralised front-end (as Steemit) - otherwise it would require an IPFS storage which is hard to manage.
You also have the choice to select you own node in the bitshares.org settings.
I you look at an explorer, you could see both orders and transactions, but I haven’t measured how it could be faster than ETH, and I haven’t time get actual market data from a self hosted node.

What Security Trade-Offs Does EOS/Graphene Make?
I work in CS, and yes it’s all about trade-offs.
I would also like have a better view about the choices they made, but one trade-off they made is the dPoS : you have a subset of the nodes creating blocks (with validators, witnesses, etc.), so in a naive implementation it is less decentralised than PoW. but in reality, the decentralisation level seems enough, by the way, you could also do a proxy voting with Bitshares (as Cardano’s planned Ouroboros Praos).

More Deceptive White Paper Games.
They prefer to implement over defining in a formal way the protocol, it’s a choice less rigorous, but we’ve also seen beautiful proofs with no implementation…

Verifying Marketing Sources.
I also don’t like the marketing stuff they write ; as the last post Dan submitted to Steemit about Cardano, which doesn’t give much proofs but some “consciousness phrases” I’ll say.

Faking It Until They Make It.
As I said, you can audit the pull requests done on the EOS github, do your benchmarks. They are not good vulgarising things, but they build and anybody can ask a security or audit firm to analyse the platform.

Hope it helps.

42

So, is this all about software quality, design decisions, concepts?

For many years I worked in finance IT, and almost always the quality
of the code was very bad. It has remained the same until today: Still
new projects are being started the same way. These projects are doomed
to be a disaster from their very beginning. Their maintenance will be
a nightmare, full of bugs, unfinished, almost impossible to extend or
improve.

Here is what makes me think: I never enjoyed working in such projects,
but it cannot be denied, that these software components are essential
to today’s banking IT. They are maintained by a legion of paid
developers, they are tested over and over again, and it is almost
unbelievable how much time and effort is spent every day to perform
new rollouts, finalize new releases, integrate bugfixes.

Though there is so much unnecessary complexity in all of this banking
software, ito still lives on, and it is productive since more than a
decade. It will live as long as the banks and insurance companies will
live. Security and reliability is added to such ugly software
just by tedious work: Manual hard everday’s work done by so many
people who are spending the lifetime doing this.

To sum it up: There seems to be some sort of effectiveness in
completely stupid software. That sort of effectiveness is realized by
hard work of human individuals supporting the software 7 days a week.

What we are talking about here, would be a completely new
approach, a completely different world of finance. It would be a
software much more independent of humans, maybe based on AI.

OK, I would like that very much as all of you. But this will most
likely be a slow evolution. It will not be achieved by a
single project like Cardano, but it will happen gradually and in an
unforeseeable way. Maybe some crazy ideas will succeed in this. Maybe
there will be great chaos somewhere that leads to simplicity and
elegance in the end.

Many of the people who have written here seem to know a lot about
EOS. So you see all the drawbacks. You might also see some risks in
Cardano. Still, my impression is, that nobody can really be
sure. Nobody can rule out one project and completely rely on the other
one.

Of course, the scientific approach done by Cardano is most
convincing. I agree. But I would not feel confident, if I would not
also look around elsewhere. The world is large, and there are a lot of
smart people living in places widely separated from each other …

43

Agreed on:

  • Gradual evolution of blockchain is the reality.
  • Good to look at all options to understand differential capabilities.
  • FinTech code is usually atrocious.

Respectfully disagree on:

There seems to be some sort of effectiveness in completely stupid software.

I’ve worked in FinTech for a while, too, so I understand your point here, but I think this is changing quickly. See my “Blockchain Patent War Coming” post, which summarizes why Bank of America has more blockchain patents than any other company on Earth. It also summarizes why I think the banking industry in general is weaponizing its collective patent portfolio to attack Cardano and other blockchain-based projects in the future.

Still, my impression is, that nobody can really be sure. Nobody can rule out one project and completely rely on the other one.

Fortunately, we don’t have to completely rely on Cardano because Cardano is building interoperability between all platforms. And we know this interoperability will be reliable and not crippled for strategic reasons because interoperability is embedded within Cardano’s core philosophy and operating model.

Nevertheless, it’s this reliable interoperability that will enable Cardano to be the “one platform to rule them all.” No other project can, nor will they ever, come close to Cardano in terms of interoperability because all the other projects have conflicts of interest that will fundamentally undermine their incentives to achieve reliable interoperability. This creates a virtuous cycle for Cardano and a strategic trap for all the other projects, from which they will never be able to escape without depending on several layers of the Cardano Platform for their interoperability over the long-run.

Those are a few more reasons why I have so much confidence in Cardano and zero confidence in EOS.

4 Likes
44

Does anyone else find themselves searching for and bookmarking ADALove’s post? I know I do. Thank you so much for this insight. :slight_smile:

3 Likes
45

Thanks for sharing your knowledge @ADALove ! This is an awesome thread!

Could you perhaps also share your thoughts about the “new non Blockchain” approaches like raiblocks and radix?

How do you think that technology will pan out in the future compared to Cardano?

46

Look at Charles Hoskinson response in boxmining interview at 1:54:10. He talks about EOS

People tend to forget that Philip Wadler is working on Cardano project.

1 Like
47

Thanks a lot for this extremely high quality content. Really enjoyed the reading!

48

Yes, comments from some persons on the forum are proving to be real gems, and ADALove is definitely one of the writers to follow :grinning:

49

I see there is a split in the forum: One half tends to discuss on trading, howto’s and speculation about prices/rates. The other half reflects on the Cardano project and its goals.

Both parties are legitimate, but I think they do not co-exist very well here. No synergies.

50

How could they?
While both are legitimate, the “trading party” only cares about technical analysis and profit. They are the “crypto crowd” who happened to find Cardano. The “Cardano project party” cares about Cardano, not making ADAs. What synergy could there be there?

51

The two are not mutually exclusive. I read comments from people who are in posting in both categories. The difference is the initial question and path the discussion takes, no?

There is probably also a progression (as humorously presented in the ‘If Google was a guy’ series https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuOBzWF0Aws where through the series we start with a guy asking what is Bitcoin, and gradually works his way through understanding more of it). Where people start with the basics, and with understanding more and more of the blockchain start to make links to the Cardano project and the blockchain in general. Not all will do this, but probably a significant number of people will.

1 Like
52

Awww, that made me smile. :slight_smile: Thank you for such a kind and thoughtful comment.

4 Likes
53

In general, I think it’s useful to keep this basic rule of thumb in mind: Charles is relentless about absorbing good ideas no matter where they emerge; so, no matter what any other blockchain project is doing, the team will analyze it rigorously, and if it works, it will be added to Cardano’s roadmap.

In fact, the team is already integrating Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) into Cardano’s roadmap to maximize scalability. DAGs are the primary thing that projects like Hashgraph and IOTA have that Cardano doesn’t currently have, but those other projects don’t come even close to Cardano with respect to optimizing the balance between security, scalability, interoperability, decentralization, and sustainability. Cardano’s capacity to optimize all these factors is what makes Cardano the ideal platform upon which most real-world applications will be built.

Projects like Railblocks and Radix (and all the others that claim incredible speed boosts) are making trade-offs between security, degree of centralization, and network cost, among others. In particular, they suffer from too much centralization for my taste.

However, I don’t consider myself an expert on their projects; so, I’m not sure if they have any realistic path to true decentralization in the future. But that’s why I say to keep the rule of thumb in mind: No matter what the latest faddish project claims to do, if it’s truly an innovation worth building, then it’s an innovation that will eventually land on the Cardano roadmap.

5 Likes
54

Thanks @ADALove !!
:grinning:

I share your sentiments absolutely! (I needed to hear it from someone else though, instead of only my own brain echo lol). I love Charles’ approach of being rooted in vigorous research and validation as well as aiming to create the best solutions, whatever they turn out to be.

I come from a science background so the Cardano process is a particularly “attractive” endeavor, from my perspective. Yes, it can take longer, but you usually leap further! :wink:

1 Like
55

@ADALove where did you get that please? The issue has come up in another topic and I haven’t been able to find that info anywhere.

56

Ha! I knew I heard this somewhere recently. I thought it was in the video but, it was here, the video talks about dapps.

57

I seem to remember CH saying something in one of the recent interviews like “mathematically, blockchain with sidechains and DAGs are the same”. Maybe that’s where the confusion arose.

58

Exactly what ADALove said:

There’s always a trade-off.

Charles even says so himself that maybe one of these DAG teams (IOTA and Hashgraph) may be right and will be able to create a reasonable trade-off profile. It is something he, and his team (or teams) will look into as more information becomes available.

He also mentioned that DAGs aren’t new, DAGs are used on blockchains. However, with IOTA and Hashgraph they are trying to get of the blockchain - and just use the DAG as a replacement for the blockchain (from my limited technical understanding).

IIRC, he did mention in one interview that their concern is that the tradeoffs in regards to security are probably going to be too high (for them). They’ve placed a lot of emphasis on their provably secure Proof of Stake protocol. I think the onus is on IOTA and Hashgraph to demonstrate how secure their DAGs are compared to blockchain, which I think will be a very difficult endeavor.

59

He talks about DAGs in this interview , it starts with a question about hash graph and tangle at 02:10:00 and he shares his opinion on DAGs around the 2:16:05 mark :wink:

5 Likes
60

@RobJF I’m not sure which interview it was in, but I’m pretty sure he said it in one of these videos below, too, because until today I never saw the video that @Bullishdong gave us (thanks for that!).

1 Like