Difference in PoS algorithms between Cardano, EOS and NEO


#1

Hi @vantuz-subhuman,

This question was posted by @magnetar on another thread:

“I would be interested in a summary ( for laymen ) of the differences in the PoS algorithms in the so called blockchain 3.0 coins such as Cardano, EOS and NEO.”

Could you please provide more details on this when you have a chance? I thank you in advance.


#2

I’m sure @vantuz-subhuman will provide an outstanding answer.
Not sure who is able to read into details of multiple projects, while they are still under development, and so effective facts are available in parts.

In the meantime I consider this one as a good (non-tech) read, in order to understand Cardano’s Ouroboros key points. (It’s an answer to an accusation, from EOS side, linked at the beginning of the answer)
https://iohk.io/blog/on-the-ouroboros-design-how-rigour-and-engineering-are-essential-for-critical-infrastructure/

Based on this introduction to Ouroboros there are two significant evolutions named Praos and Genesis.
In short the differences to Praos are


Btw: just today Praos is under peer-review at crypto2018 in Israel: https://paymentweek.com/2018-1-23-proof-stake-protocol-ouroboros-praos-accepted-eurocrypt-2018/
Genesis was just announced and if it keeps his promises, it should solve the first time the fundamental doubt’s on PoS blockchains. @cf_maki.mukai wrote a great summary about the 45min video presentation.
Summary: Ouroboros Genesis


#3

Thank you, @werkof. Very much appreciated!


#4

I like Hoskinson’s quote regarding Larimer: “It can be summarized as evil Charles stole all my brilliant work and didn’t cite me. DPoS is better. Their math stuff validates me. Their stuff doesn’t work. Peer review is what I say it is. I’m a genius."

It does seem like Larimer is awfully boastful about EOS. Apparently many people literally buy into his hype. I guess they just look at his figures - the 1/2 second block time and 20k tps. According to him there is no trade off between performance and security. Promise the world and they will come, I guess.


#6

I just love it how IOHK slaps Dan Larimer with the link about the discussions on Delegated Proof of Stake going back to 2011…pretty much debunking Dan Larimer’s claim that it was his idea…LOL…Smart guy, but no shame…trying to take credit for somebody else’s idea…
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=27787.0


#7

In EOS, everyone votes (delegates) for who they want the block producers to be. The 21 entities who have the most votes ONLY get to be block producers. At anytime people can change their vote to change who the 21 block producers will be. If they make a code change, the number of block producers (21) could be changed upward, but right now, it will be fixed at 21. This makes the system somewhat centralized, this also makes the system fast.

In Cardano, (afaik) anyone can be a block producer. Chance of you being block producer at for any given block is proportional to your ADA holding. You can give your chance to be block producer to someone else (delegate), or keep it for yourself.

These are the main differences afaik.

By limiting block producers to a small known fixed set, EOS will be faster, but ADA will be more decentralized, with more block producers, and block producers joining and leaving the system on an adhoc basis.

I don’t know enough about NEO.


#8

Thank you, @CashMeOutside. Just a couple of question: In EOS, everyone votes for block producers on what basis? What prevents a group(s) of self-serving voters/influencers to take a stronghold in the ecosystem? Thanks again in advance.


#9

thank you.
Just 21 seems very low to me because with current TCP/IP structure it shouldn’t be very difficult for a evil adversary to find 11 responsible heads in real world and corrupt them.
Also - from a very outsider point of view - it looks to me that a wannabe EOS minter will have to spend a lot of his revenues for marketing to become and stay elected.


#10

If you have 51% of the voters, you have the network… but that’s not really news, is it?

Maybe. But we have systems a bit like this IRL. How easy would it be to corrupt 11 US senators? Oh man AIPAC, it already happened, EOS is doomed.

Seriously, idk. These 21 are major holders, so it’s pretty unlikely they would fup their own system.

It will be interesting to see how much YOU kids have to spend on marketing your staking pools. :wink:


#11

So do you want to include the US finance system into this comparison or divert from a little centralization problem? :wink:
If this is really “21 major holders” than what’s exactly the difference bottom line compared to the traditional FIAT system? You could split up your business and investments to multiple nations currencies. Add a bit of solid gold and some stock shares and you’re fine. The main difference then is that it’s YOU deciding when and whom you trust, and not an unknown crowd of stakers who can switch in every moment their delegation to someone you don’t know.
As it looks, enough investors trust the compromise EOS has reached regarding development effort and transaction speed. Cardano is taking a different approach here, and is trying to achieve genuine decentralisation with much more research and development. But compromises must also be made in this respect.

I agree this would become interesting: as long as the IOHK staff didn’t mention the game theory thing having capped revenues after a certain size, I seriously feared that pools would start fighting against each others instead of caring to be one of many stable and reliable pools. Now this capping rule seems to be a “game changer” to me, transforming all pools into responsible team players of a big whole. With a capped revenue it becomes crucial to focus on reliable uptime. It doesn’t make sense to invest too much in marketing. Especially not on the Broadway…

2018-05-01_20h10_51


#12

Just run multiple pools.


#13

I’m not a pool operator - in fact there is none up to now. So I don’t know how these pool operators will be elected or replaced by new/other ones. So for sure an interesting question how this will be handled. I expect that it will become a free&open market where you have to calculate your costs (datacenter + marketing) and the available market potential (concurring pools, direct access to a regional or special group of people willing to delegate to your pool) But for shure you will have to build and promote a brand as an pool operator.

Btw: fun fact that all thus crypto people and projects are talking about decentralisation and at the very same moment most if them are pushing brands like mad. Brands and their value IMHO is exactly the opposite of decentralisation.


#14

Why are you expecting different behaviour? That’s the human nature. Just look around in the space, it seems to me much-much worse than the religious wars. The crowd is not smart, despite every individuals in the crowd think they’re.:slight_smile:


#15

Is that similar to how DASH instant send works ? The people running the master nodes are the only ones producing blocks for instant send thus making it faster ?

It seems like Cardano could create a similar feature if a demand developed for real world use of ada as currency like buying a coffee.

:laughing:


#16

Apparently that is a concern with EOS at the moment.