<html>
<p><img src="https://steemitimages.com/DQmXgovdfrKe39BSuaFuqxvMf8bvNtuHAUiGj6sczwcnHGX/image.png" width="484" height="289"/></p>
<p>The posts written by Dan Larimer regarding EOS and Ethereum have been filled with much meaningful content that may be difficult to process. In this post, I will summarize some of them:</p>
<h3>"Response to Vitalik Buterin on EOS"</h3>
<ol>
<li>EOS has a merkle tree structure that allows simple verification of blocks.</li>
<li>EOS uses DPOS which results in fewer full nodes and thus is more prone to attacks and centralization. However, Dan brings up that Ethereum Hash Rate is concentrated over a few mining pools.</li>
<li>All cryptocurrency nodes can be easily shutdown by governments or ISPs anyways as their information is known. However, since cryptocurrencies are used for legal applications, this shouldn't be a problem.</li>
</ol>
<p><img src="https://steemitimages.com/DQmYDXQyfxSieVYmYgK4T9Rn9484CcZ84zh4xdwwQRMJgd7/image.png" width="1007" height="483"/></p>
<h3>"Response to Vitalik's Written Remarks"</h3>
<ol>
<li>Low voting participation in EOS can be remedied, and is not a major flaw since stability can still be ensured. Large voting players will vote rationally for self-interest</li>
<li>The bandwidth system implemented in EOS and Steem for transactions in order to remove transaction fees do not significantly hinder "poor" accounts from executing transactions</li>
<li>Dan responds to the lack of slashing condition by stating that badly behaving nodes will have their reputation and revenue affected. Furthermore, he states that the addition of a slashing condition is trivial.</li>
</ol>
<h3>"Casper as an EOS contract"</h3>
<ol>
<li>Casper does not provide much value since most of the blockchain security comes from the <strong>proposal mechanism</strong> (PoW)</li>
<li>DPoS is a better proposal mechanism as it prevents centralization due to formation of mining/staking pools</li>
</ol>
</html>
hiveblocks