We proved that DPOS is even stronger than it was thought to be on paper.
No, we proved that DPOS was a shit as it was before, that's why JS managed to put their sockpuppets easily and without control, and that's why witnesses had to freeze his SP.
Now with the changes done in that DPOS we have managed to improve our resillience against these kind of attacks.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Any consensus mechanism is shit with a bad distribution. Don't blame DPoS.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Proof of stake is called, obviously if you have a bad distribution this system is condemned to the failure but the amount of votes available for the witnesses and also the lack of an upvote decay were vectors of attack already in STEEM.
We have solved one issue but the system should be improved yet. I should blame only to the bad distribution?, the one that we have now isn't very encouraging also, I mean most of the stake is holded by whales and orcas still. Hasn't changed so much.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I should blame only to the bad distribution?
I said no such thing. But DPoS is not to blame. Implementation is key, and as you suggest, there is still room for improvement.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
As has already been stated, we didn't change DPOS: we changed the distribution and took away the governance powers of exchanges. In the grand scheme of things these we very minor tweeks. The term "Layer Zero" was legit born in the wake of the attack. All of this history has extreme significance.