Shulou(Shulou.com)06/01 Report--

This article is to share with you about how to achieve NEO and other platforms of the comparative analysis, the editor feels very practical, so share with you to learn, I hope you can learn something after reading this article, say no more, follow the editor to have a look.

Functionally, dApp platforms should have the same functionality (I think it depends on their VMs), which means that the main differences in attributes include: decentralization, extensibility, finalization, and ecosystem quality.

Decentralization

True decentralization requires adequate network distribution, and network nodes are spread all over many places, which increases the fault tolerance of the network (many nodes can disappear without affecting consensus).

DBFT/ dPoS chooses a small number of nodes to improve scalability and finalization. In these designs, the goal is to make enough nodes structurally dispersed while retaining other advantages.

Decentralization also requires less control over consensus (a high degree of regime decentralization), which means that no individual or organization can control what is in the input block or decide which blocks are valid. Since these entities (nodes, block generators, miners) are controlling these blocks, they cannot be allowed to control the contents of the blocks together.

In PoW and PoS, the network achieves this decentralization by encouraging users to participate in consensus. Many users propose that blocks mean more decentralization and no trust mechanism is needed, but users do so in order to get incentives, and they will do anything that motivates them (economic principles).

If they don't have a chance to dig into the mine, they won't make anything, and then they'll all join the pool, where they can make some profit, not nothing, and slowly the pool gets bigger and bigger, so they get a bigger share of the block reward, and so on and on. Eventually, the consensus mechanism will be completely controlled by the mining pool, the percentage of the total hash rate continues to grow, the network is again centralized, and eventually only a small number of people provide blocks for the mining pool.

If they want to stop your trading, they can do it right away, and the miners / brokers are not involved in the process, and the hash rate percentage is large enough to detect false congestion within a few hours (if not minutes in PoS), then the network will be severely damaged and a new blockchain branch is needed (which may not be appropriate for these actual use cases).

At this point, trust in honesty and competence is needed more strongly on the network than existing centralized institutions, such as your bank, because at least some malicious activities in centralized institutions bear legal consequences.

Consensus mechanism generic block rewards can encourage users to create blocks, but in the end this mechanism will erode itself and become centrally controlled (centralized), as Bitcoin and Ethernet Square have demonstrated, and because of their design, this scenario will continue to be inherited in every PoW/ PoS / dPoS network.

NEO needs to roll out the nodes steadily rather than the rapid expansion of the mining / heap mechanism, which has the advantage that the number is balanced to achieve scalability, and the network can run without over-motivating the nodes to run.

There are many improvements in our consensus mechanism, but fundamentally speaking, this is a more effective approach.

Scalability and finalization

It's easier, it's a question of consensus efficiency, and how many nodes need to get messages (and how far away they are). Scalability refers to how many transactions can be processed all the time, and finality is the speed at which they are proved to be immutable.

PoW allows users to test nonces to generate hashes, allowing them to declare the validity of blocks, spread this information, and receive rewards, which is not only inefficient in energy efficiency, but also very inefficient in reaching consensus. The network is huge because it is an open process, which means that everyone needs to spend a lot of time to reach an agreement. In addition, they need to confirm that because other miners can fork and change the longest chain (that is, the truth), which is a very slow and inherent defect.

PoS has users involved, skipping the mining process and greatly improving efficiency, but it still takes a lot of time for each user to get the message. Compared with PoW's poor scalability (several transactions per second), scalability is slightly improved (4-5 times), but it is still not a significant value. It also depends on incentives, and if you don't have enough computing power to win the block, you don't get a reward, then you join a mining pool, and the pool starts to get a larger proportion of the block reward, which attracts more people to join. You know how this development ends.

It's true that there is trust in PoA, just like dBFT, but you have to trust the trustworthy and honest people these people point out. Of course, they may or may not be trustworthy. PoA is an intermediate step in the decentralized consensus mechanism, where they realize that scalability can be achieved by limiting the number of nodes, but they do not use real authorization to relinquish control. The spread of its network is very fast, but there is the problem of centralization of political power.

DBFT is the simplest solution. Don't motivate users to generate blocks, but motivate them to manage the network. Having NEO allows you to decide who runs the node, you can get rewards from the network you are using, and consensus nodes tip transaction costs (maybe one day without even any incentive).

The consensus process is completed quickly, you only need to check whether the chunk is valid according to the defined criteria, get the chunk, verify, sign, pass, and have a more efficient PoS, which is why the TPS is higher (hundreds or thousands), which means that the node can verify the chunk more quickly and cannot change the chunk, which means that once the transaction is on the blockchain, it is final. There is no need to confirm that the user's experience is very important, and the transaction actually takes only 20 or 10 or 5 seconds, not minutes or hours.

DBFT ensures the decentralization of the regime through a fair voting system and has the network architecture needed for high scalability, and the final determination of the same block is the most important.

The above is how to achieve the comparative analysis of NEO and other platforms, the editor believes that there are some knowledge points that we may see or use in our daily work. I hope you can learn more from this article. For more details, please follow the industry information channel.

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.