EOS Drama Continues As Heated Exchange With Block Producer Emerges

Avi Rosten

The ongoing drama surrounding the EOS platform’s controversial consensus mechanism took another interesting turn today - as a screenshot apparently showing a conversation with an EOS block producer (BP) has emerged.

Posted as an image on popular subreddit r/cryptocurrency, the screenshot shows a heated Telegram exchange between an EOS block producer, and another unidentified EOS participant - who chastises the BP for failing to freeze some accounts as directed by the EOS Core Arbitration Forum (ECAF):

eos chat.jpg

While the authenticity of the conversation has yet to be confirmed, the post has generated a stir on social media, with popular cypto figure Whalepanda chiming in on Twitter:

As recently covered on CryptoGlobe, this aspect of the EOS governance model has been highly controversial within the crypto community - as many critics have pointed out that the 21 block producers act in principle as a highly centralised concentration of power.

Despite the fact that EOS allows for BPs to be continuously elected, because of the enormous centralisation of the token’s holdings - the system effectively ensures that EOS whales exert a massively disproportionate influence over who is elected (as argued yesterday).

This latest revelation - if legitimate - again seems to underscore the problems associated with a system that places too much power in the hands of individuals.

Not only does it illustrate the problems of a protocol which might fail to punish bad actors, but it also points to a worryingly dystopian form of governance - where a kind of central committee issues diktats, backed up with threats of legal action.

While the future of one of the world’s largest cryptoassets remains unclear for now, it seems reasonable that token holders might start to question the platform’s organisation if instances such as this one continue to emerge.

EOS Stays on Top as China Publishes Top Crypto Project Rankings

Neil Dennis

China's Center for Information and Industry Development (CCID) has released the 13th update of its ranking of global crypto projects, with EOS remaining at the top while two have been added since its previous update in May.

Of the total 37 projects ranked, second and third place were Ethereum and TRON - swapping positions with each other from last time. TRON was only added to the list in February, debuting at number two. 

Bitcoin, the world's largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization and volumes traded, came in at 11, one place higher than its May showing.

Cosmos and Zilliqa Added

The two debutants were Cosmos and Zilliqa: the former debuted at number 10 - one place above Bitcoin - while Zilliqamade its first appearance at 24.

Cosmos describes itself on its website as a "decentralized network of independent parallel blockchains"  that can "scale and interoperate with each other".

Cosmos has ranked highly on other lists: by developer activity it was ranked first in April this year. According to State of the Dapps website, it currently ranks fourth by the same metric.

Zilliqa, meanwhile, says it is a "scalable, secure public blockchain platform", that uses sharding - a method for distributing very large data sets across multiple machines or networks. On its test net Zilliqa said it achieved a throughput of 2,828 transactions per second.

Evaluation Model

The methodology for the rankings used by the CCID was unchanged and involves three basic categories: basic technology, applicability and creativity.

  • Basic Technology: this sub index accounts for 65% of the total ranking index and evaluates the function, performance, safety and decentralization of the public chain
  • Applicability: this sub index is 20% of the total and evaluates how easily the public blockchain is able to support practical applications and assesses node deployment, wallet application, development support and application implementation
  • Creativity: this sub index is worth 15% of the total and examines the continuous innovation of the public chain based on factors such as number of developers, how often the code is updated and which other projects have influenced the code

The Table in Full

So, here's the CCID full rankings: