POS or not?
Is this long term perspective? How can CKB deal with high number of transactions like traditional payment systems or is it not meant to be used for fast transactions?
A similar question could be asked, "Can Nervos Network become more efficient if it switches to a single centralized database held by JPMorgan or not?" Well maybe it could be called more "efficient"... but at what cost? The main purpose of "crypto" is supposed to be open, decentralized, censorship resistant... So if you sacrifice that, then what's the point? Many POS protocols sacrifice a lot to centralization to achieve scalability (note: you can also have a very efficient centralized POW protocol, but there's no point in designing such a system, because the point of using POW is to make it decentralized, open, etc... You can also have an inefficient, slow unscalable POS protocol). Nervos's architecture is designed specifically to scale, while preserving the most important benefits of decentralization. See this: https://medium.com/nervosnetwork/nervoss-multi-layer-architecture-designed-with-scalability-in-mind-7655910d9828
Nervos has been designed from day one with scalability in mind. A key element of our philosophy is that blockchains lend themselves to a multi-layer design, with the highest-value functionality — store of asset — performed by Layer 1, and high-volume transactions shifted to Layer 2. "Attempts to solve the trilemma typically commit a key error: the assumption that all transactions must take place on a single, base layer of the blockchain. This is to misunderstand what is actually revolutionary about blockchains, and what their transformational power can accomplish"
Обсуждают сегодня