Emurgo

A while ago, we talked about how consensus works và went over the basics of Proof of Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS).

Bạn đang xem: Emurgo

The gist is that PoW provides the most proven security khổng lồ date, but at the cost of consuming an enormous amount of energy. PoS, the primary alternative, removes the energy requirements of PoW, and replaces miners with “validators”, who are given the chance lớn validate (“mine”) the next bloông chồng with a probability proportional to lớn their stake.

Another consensus algorithm that is often discussed is Delegated Proof of Stake (DPoS) — a variant of PoS that provides a high màn chơi of scalability at the cost of limiting the number of validators on the network.

In this article, we will go over how DPoS works, its benefits, its tradeoffs, và how we can mitigate those tradeoffs lớn achieve sầu a higher màn chơi of scalability, while avoiding censorship & double-spover risks.

What is Delegated Proof of Stake?

DPoS is a system in which a fixed number of elected entities (called bloông xã producers or witnesses) are selected lớn create blocks in a round-robin order. Block producers are voted into lớn power by the users of the network, who each get a number of votes proportional lớn the number of tokens they own on the network (their stake).

Alternatively, voters can choose khổng lồ delegate their stake khổng lồ another voter, who will vote in the bloông xã producer election on their behalf.

A note on semantics compared to lớn PoS, from Dan Larimer: <1>

Block producers are those responsible for creating and signing new blocks. They are limited in number, & are elected by the voters.

The number of blochồng producers in a DPoS network is up to the consensus rules of that chain. Here are the numbers for some of the more well-known DPoS chains:

EOS: 21BitShares: 101Steemit: 21Lisk: 101Ark: 51

A round in a DPoS blockchain with N bloông xã producers is as follows:

N bloông chồng producers get elected from the pool of bloông xã producer candidates.The ith bloông chồng producer signs the ith block, until i=N.

A bloông chồng is finalized (i.e. cannot be reversed) when it is voted on by (2/3+1) of the block producers. Otherwise, the longest chain rule is followed. Finality is an extremely important property when aiming for interoperability between blockchains.

The blochồng reward và inflation mechanism for each DPoS implementation depover on each project’s reward model, and are beyond the scope of this article. Dan Larimer has written in-depth on how DPoS operates under various conditions. <2>

Voters can also “fire” a bloông xã producer if they are found khổng lồ be malicious (i.e. try khổng lồ censor transactions or double spend) by not voting for them in the next round.

As a result of the limited number of bloông xã producers, DPoS is able to handle transaction throughput that is multiple orders of magnitude greater than today’s PoW.

Too Good to Be True?

As we have written previously, DPoS is a protocol that sacrifices decentralization for throughput due lớn the low number of bloông chồng producers.

So while DPoS makes sense for many applications that require a high level of scalability, we (và most other serious blockchain developers) believe sầu that DPoS is not decentralized enough to lớn be a base layer that acts as a store of value & ledger of ownership for Web 3 applications.

The base layer of a blockchain that can transfer financial value must be fully decentralized & secure. The base layer must not be compromised.

Interestingly enough, despite heavy marketing from certain projects promoting DPoS as being “superior” khổng lồ PoW blockchains like Ethereum, even 1/2 of 880 users in a recent Twitter poll realized that this comes at the expense of decentralization:


Many have sầu written about the flaws of DPoS as a decentralized system, one being Vitalik Buterin, who argued that there are incentives for forming cartels và bribing voters. <3>

Given that we don’t accept anything less than full decentralization for the base layer và we can’t make assumptions about the honesty of network participants, DPoS doesn’t seem like a good fit for a blockchain that handles, among mỏi other things, financial transactions.

What about Using DPoS for Specific Use Cases?

We are not the first lớn think of this. As Myles Snider explains:

“If DPoS systems can still offer the requisite levels of censorship resistance, permissionless-ness, và trustlessness that decentralized databases require, then DPoS is better for a huge range of decentralized applications.

For certain use cases — absolutely censorship-resistant digital gold, peer-to-peer digital money, etc., a tradeoff in favor of decentralization at the expense of performance may make sense.

For the vast majority of applications, scalability is far more pragmatic.” <4>

For applications like a social network or game, every phản hồi or in-game movement doesn’t require the full security of a fully decentralized network, but they vày require high throughput. Thus, DPoS seems lượt thích a perfect fit for these kind of applications.

Xem thêm: Quy Định Chung Về Các Trường Hợp Phải Chào Mua Công Khai Là Gì ?

Even better — if we use a PoW network lượt thích Ethereum as a secure base layer & build our DPoS chain on Layer 2, we can run the majority of an application on the highly-scalable DPoS chain, while still using the secure base layer for parts of the application that require high security, like in-game currency or ownership of assets.

As Vitalik Buterin put it:

If you have sầu an application which really requires very fast transaction confirmations, & for such fast confirmations to happen reliably, then IMO the correct tên miền in which to build such systems is level-2 platforms on top of secure base-layer platforms lượt thích Ethereum.

The level-2 platforms can be built in such a way that they depkết thúc on the second cấp độ for performance, but not safety (see: state channel hubs, Plasma operators). They can then have the incentive sầu of reputation & expected future revenue khổng lồ drive them to perform well in the present, and the negative sầu costs of any failure are mitigated. <5>

That way, there is always the option of falling bachồng to the secure PoW mainchain in case a blachồng swan scenario occurs.

For example, if bad actors were able khổng lồ take over the majority of bloông chồng producers on a DPoS Layer 2, users’ tokens (potentially worth millions or billions of dollars) would still be secure on Layer 1.

This would not be possible in standalone DPoS blockchains that are not backed by a more decentralized Layer 1 — if the chain is compromised by bad actors, the tokens would be at risk along everything else on the chain.

Hard Forks on Layer 2 Chains vs. Layer 1 Chains

On a DPoS chain, if an adversary gained control of the network through acquiring a lot of stake, then the blockchain would be forced khổng lồ hard fork in order to lớn censor that adversary.

On a blockchain that contains a ledger tracking ownership of tokens or other digital assets (as most Layer 1 chains do), a hard fork could be catastrophic. It undermines faith in the network’s reliability as a long-term store of value (e.g. one that a person might invest their life savings in).

But in the case of a non-financial application running on Layer 2 that stores anything with value on a secure Layer 1, hard forking is not such a catastrophe.

In the case of an ứng dụng or game running on Layer 2, as long as the integrity of the underlying data is maintained, hard-forking is a viable solution.

Increasing Layer 2 Security Further With Plasma Cash
*

Plasma is a technique that enables the secure transfer of assets through blockchains, in which the security of the system is guaranteed by the “Root Chain”, even if the “Plasma Chain” becomes byzantine.

Using Plasma, users can transact with tokens on the Layer 2, while still only relying on Layer 1 for security. If an adversary gained control of the Layer 2 as we discussed above sầu, users would have the ability to “exit” their tokens back to Layer 1.

Even without Plasma, building a DPoS sidechain to a secure Layer 1 provides a lot more security, since DApp developers can separate which parts of the DApp are stored on the secure base layer and which parts are stored on the scalable sidechain. With Plasma, developers have even more flexibility, since they can perkhung additional transactions on the sidechain that still only rely on the base layer for security.

So far, any examples of Plasma Chains have sầu been using Proof of Authority (PoA) with a single Plasma Operator authority, và explore scenarquả táo in which that operator is an adversary. This threat model considers only one Plasma Operator on a sidechain, and requires very rigorous security proofs khổng lồ guarantee movement of funds between the sidechain và the mainchain.

However, in the case of a DPoS sidechain, where there can be multiple block producers elected by the sidechain’s community, the threat Model is vastly different. We believe sầu it is simpler to lớn create a secure link between the DAppChain and the Ethereum PoW mainchain through Plasma, as the attaông xã vectors from a malicious group of blochồng producers are much different.

At Loom Network, we are moving along with our Plasma Cash implementation for ERC721 tokens, mix to release later this month, which will allow game developers to deposit their ERC721 tokens on Loom DAppChains & use them in games.

Conclusion

In order lớn run large-scale games và DApps on a blockchain, it’s necessary to lớn sacrifice some decentralization in exchange for higher performance and cost efficiency — & DPoS seems to lớn be a perfect match for these use cases.

We have also seen that the DPoS algorithm is probably not the igiảm giá khuyến mãi solution for a store of value, since trust in the network is required when there are a small number of validators.

Xem thêm: Cú Tát Vào Giấc Mơ Ô Tô Giảm Giá Năm 2018 Có Thực Sự Giảm? Cú Tát Vào Giấc Mơ Ô Tô Giảm Giá Năm 2018

Thus, we think that utilizing a decentralized mainnet (i.e. Ethereum) as a Layer 1 and running DApps on highly scalable DPoS sidechains provides the best of both worlds.


Chuyên mục: Đầu tư tài chính