Everpedia Founder Shows Why The Push For Continued Decentralization Is Vital

Source

Larry Sanger is not happy with EOS.

For a while now, the Wikipedia founder has internally complained about the centralization of the EOS blockchain. Sanders chose that platform to build his decentralized version of the online "encyclopedia".

At the heart of his issue is the over representation of Chinese entities in the validating and adding of transactions to the blockchain. Much like Steem, the top 20 are the ones who handle the majority of that. Since they are elected based upon the stake each person has, distribution of tokens is vital.

We cannot continue to build dapps on EOS if the network is de facto centralized in the hands of the Chinese. I’ve been making noise internally at EP about this since I learned about it earlier this summer. Sorry, but it can’t go on much longer, as far as I’m concerned.

https://bitcoinist.com/eos-is-de-facto-centralized-says-wikipedia-co-founder/

This is something that many in the cryptocurrency community choose to ignore. Having a lot of power in the hands of a few entities does not sit well with many developers and entrepreneurs. Bitcoin took a lot of heat with the accusation it is centralized with only a handful of companies controlling so much of the mining pool.

Proof of Stake blockchains operate a bit different but do suffer from a similar problem. In defense of EOS, it is a rather new blockchain, being only a year old, so the ability to flatten the distribution out in a short time is not practical. Of course, one of the big selling points of EOS, before launch, was the fact that the ICO was a year long, a move that was done to try to spread distribution out.

Obviously it did not work.

As I wrote in the past, at the time of launch, almost 50% of the tokens were in ten wallet addresses. Since we do not know who owns them, the number of people or entities controlling that stake is unknown.

Steem still has a similar problem although not quite as bad. This is partially due to the fact that the blockchain is three years old and the distribution has spread out a bit. Also, with Steem, there is a weekly reward pool that helps to put tokens in the hands of other users. I am not sure what mechanisms EOS has in place to keep the flow of tokens moving outward.

Either way, this is a good reason to applaud the fact that Steemit Inc is selling a portion of their stake. As the largest holder of STEEM, it is good that it is put on the open market so others can buy some of it up. It hurts in the short term since it is hell on the price, but, over time, it can be of great benefit.

Having a solid distribution of the token will make entrepreneurs like Sanders more comfortable with a platform like Steem. For this reason, it is vital all of us keep pushing to get the reward pool spread out more. As more people join and use the different applications, this could be an ideal way for it to happen. Even as newer people focus upon the specific app tokens, their SP can also be enhanced.

Having the distribution spreading out also will, over time, help with the Witness votes. Right now, a couple major accounts can have an enormous impact on the top 20. As the community, especially applications, start to accumulate more SP, it opens up the door for changes to the top 20 list if needed.

Also, I do not know where all the witnesses are located but I do believe the representation, geographically, is fairly spread out. I never heard of an over abundance of the top 20 being from any one area in particular.

So, in this regard, Steem is doing well.

Please keep this in mind each time you power up some SP. A little bit, consistently, ends up being a significant amount over time.

And who knows, maybe Sanders will see the trend on Steem and take a look at this blockchain as a solution for his new project.

---

If you found this article informative, please give an upvote and resteem.