EOS: Lack of Decentralization Exposed with Reversed Transaction
Blockchain protocol EOS, run by Block.one, has just become the subject of a new crypto scandal. It all began on November 9th, when a picture emerged on Reddit of a moderator on EOS reversing a transaction that had already been confirmed.
According to the Reddit user u/auti9003, a reverse transaction occurred without the owner’s permission. The arbitrator, Ben Gates, referred to the blockchain project’s constitution as a basis for his decision. Gates wrote:
“Under the powers afforded to me as arbitrator under article 6 of the Rules of Dispute Resolution, I, Ben Gates, rule that the EOS account in dispute should be returned to the claimant with immediate effect and that the freeze over the assets within the said account is removed.”
Many EOS users weren’t happy with the findings posted on Reddit. One user by the name of ethswagholder said:
“What a pile of garbage is EOS? Why would anyone use this over a bank account and traditional legal system? These guys raised $4BN to recreate the legal system using a token that is neither censorship resistant, nor immutable. Brilliant.”
This isn’t the first time EOS’s model of governance has been questioned. Back in early October, allegations were made accusing the platform’s major block producers (BPs) of “collusion” and mutual voting. It was suggested that the main EOS nodes took part in mutual voting, with a handful of payoffs to remain in power of the EOS blockchain.
Daniel Larimer, CTO of Block.one, confirmed the project’s lack of decentralization in an interview last month. Larimer told Colin Talks Crypto:
“Decentralization isn’t what we’re after. What we’re after is anti-censorship and robustness against being shut down.”
Well, that should give you some peace—ha! Larimer still claims EOS is more decentralized than Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) because it takes 11 BP’s to control the network. For Bitcoin and Ethereum, it would only take around three to four pools.
Featured Image: Depositphotos/© garloon