Https://Twitter.Com/Proofstake/Status/1443432834459340807?S=20 So I read this as on Cosmos, blockchains have to

Question

Https://Twitter.Com/Proofstake/Status/1443432834459340807?S=20 So I read this as on Cosmos, blockchains have to

trust the security of other blockchains they are connected with. Would that not incentivize blockchains who don't have well established security (or even if they could establish a reputation as secure) to just opt for Shared Security. Get that (Secured by Cosmos) badge thus creating an optional (not forced like Polkadot) standard for other projects to use which in turn would increase the value of Atom while maintaining robust security in the ecosystem?

Not trying to be a hardcore fanboy but in a round about way I feel like he unintentionally highlighted why COSMOS is so fricken awesome.

Please correct or enlighten me if I'm wrong or ignorant. Also not trying to bash Polkadot. Way too ignorant to talk smack about other projects. Except for Doge :)

#atom #blockchain #cryptocurrency #english

0

30.09.2021

1 ответов

15 просмотров

Jazz · Accepted Answer

So first of all, shared security is applicable only on consensus level. It protects you from 1/3, 2/3 validators takeover of the network. It does nothing to prevent let's say smart contract exploit on a parachain. So far no Tendermint core project suffered 1/3 attack. Ever. Second, shares security, aka Interchain staking, is coming to Cosmos late Q4. I'm not trying to bash on Polkadot but I don't see why would anyone still build on Polkadot over Cosmos at this stage. It can't scale past 100 parachains, they don't have IBC yet etc, while you have unlimited scalability here over at Cosmos, working IBC and cosmos SDK is pure quality

210 похожих чатов

Https://Twitter.Com/Proofstake/Status/1443432834459340807?S=20 So I read this as on Cosmos, blockchains have to

1 ответов

Похожие вопросы