Controversy over centralization
This point is currently the most controversial place about EOS, such as 21 super nodes. Many people think that in order to achieve high performance, only 21 block producers will have centralization problems. There is also the DPoS mechanism. Many people have doubts about whether this mechanism is sufficiently secure. In addition, the consensus mechanism of DPoS and the 21 super nodes seem to some people to have problems in resisting censorship. For example, once the government requests to shut down and the nodes are relatively concentrated, will there be problems?
Once the 21 nodes are controlled, it is equivalent to controlling EOS. Is this consistent with the decentralization and security pursued by the blockchain?
EOS is more centralized than Ethereum and Bitcoin. However, it is different from a centralized company. It uses a consensus mechanism to achieve transactions, and has a blockchain community governance mechanism. This is a solution that balances decentralization and performance.
From the perspective of Blue Fox, there may be no conclusions about these issues, because real social experiments are needed to see them. One is that decentralization is not an end, it is a way to achieve an end. 21 Is a super node and less than 10 super miners more centralized? Is DPoS a more effective consensus mechanism? All this requires social experiments to explore. Are there any factors that have not been considered?