EOS topic (Dan Larimer project)

The speed will depend on the size of SAFE (how many nodes). For instance a very small network of a few thousand nodes might have 250 groups and if each group can send one coin in 2 seconds and on average max out at 20 coins concurrently then the network would max out at 2500 coin transactions per second.

But now if the network is small (say 50,000 nodes) then would be approx 6000 nodes and 60K transactions per second

It could be way faster than this as we don’t yet know the exact process needed for a coin transfer but its been mentioned that nodes can do 100’s of transactions (non-coins) per second and this could mean not 20 coins at once but 100+ coins concurrently. The reason I suggest a coin takes 2 seconds to transfer is the necessity of 2 groups in the approval process and lags between them.

So if its 100 coins concurrently then a small network would be 300K and a growing network with 1/2 million nodes (could end up with 250-1000 million nodes in the end) could have anywhere from 300K to 3 million. And a world wide network would be over 500 times that.

1 Like

Just want to mention I have started a forum about EOS a number of weeks ago… Francis (@frabrunelle) helped me out with setting up the discourse forum. It’s around 130 members right now.

I wasn’t really a big fan of blockchains over the last year as things became congested with transaction spam and whatever. But after watching a presentation from Dan Larimer I got excited about EOS. For those that want some more info:

  • It’s a bit like Ethereum with a virtual machine on a blockchain supporting smart contracts.
  • It uses Delegate Proof Of Stake. You can vote for several miners (called Block Producers). Those 21 with the most votes are allowed to mine blocks.
  • BPs work from fast data centers.
  • A new block every 500 ms. The idea is that a decentralized exchange feels like a regular exchange because of the speed.
  • No transaction costs. Stake a bit of EOS on your account and you’re good.
  • The EOS virtual machine scales horizontally. Add more cores and the thing becomes faster.
  • 1 blockchain allows for hundreds of thousands of transactions per second.
  • There’s a testnet coming in February with support for linking multiple eos blockchains. Hop from 1 chain to the other in only 2 seconds.
  • EOS is based on the Bitshares “graphene” engine.
  • The whole thing goes live in June this year.


Delegated Proof Of Stake Whitepaper

Video of Dan presenting the whole idea

What I like about the project is the speed. This thing can really support the next Twitter or Instagram. Instead of being in the hands of some small companies it’s now in the hands of the community and some code.

Another thing I really like is the fact that it’s coming at the moment Ethereum and Bitcoin have reached their limit. Transaction costs are way too high and Raiden and the Lightning network take longer then expected. So hopefully people can store their cryptokitties on EOS without any delays in the near future.


Felicitation Eos with launch


:+1: Another crypto baby crawls :stuck_out_tongue:


It sounds like a hell of a car crash happening over at EOS. I can’t believe they thought giving 21 dudes so much power to reverse transactions among many other things wasn’t going to bring up some huge problems. Sounds more like a bank to me than a crypto currency.

It’s not just 21 dudes. Block Producers got chosen from a group close to 200. Every several minutes the votes are updated. So if any Block Producer behaves bad it will loose votes. They can not just block someone’s account. You’ll need 15 out of 21 to edit their config files and manually add the blocked accounts. They only blocked accounts from people that requested for it due to phishing or other ways they lost a private key. So one Block Producer could say: “Hey, let’s block account xyz” but than the other BPs would ask: “why”? There is close to no chance that next to 1 evil BP 14 others will say: “Yeah, let’s block this account for no reason”.

Dan Larimer stepped in though, saying that only contracts should be stopped when there’s a The DAO drama or something. Like a big error in the code.

I actually like the idea of a governed blockchain. I don’t like the idea of a “constitution” but voting for a group is a good thing IMO. Especially if you saw the problems with Segwit-signalling and other discussions happening with Bitcoin. Miners on EOS can not just be there for the money. They have to really work for the community to get their votes.


Fair enough, but how do you prove you lost a private key?

What I read recently is this:

"Now one BP, Simon from EOS store, is under fire from the EOS community for failing to prevent a double spend due to “some private affairs.” According to community member “Daz”, Simon “failed to update [his] blacklist” on one of the frozen accounts, causing “that account to lose its assets.”

Simon apologised for this oversight saying that he “didn’t receive the last blacklist.” Apparently the BP, who is paid $10,000 per day for holding the post, “didn’t attend the meeting [of BPs] these two days” as he had “something else to do.” When pushed on what he could have been doing that was more important, Simon responded “some private affairs.”"

Which to me sounds like the most stupid idea. Relying on human interaction like this is like taking a huge step back from what bitcoin solved in it’s trustless model. I too am interested in how goverence models can work, but this just takes it to the extreme and was clearly going to have major problems from the get go, which is has.

So this guy messed up, and when they tried to vote him out he went from rank 21 to 9. Proving the voting system is not fair. Then when it got very controversial it turned out 1 guy had so much voting power he could basically overrule all.

David Larimer doesn’t have the best track record of seeing a project through, so my judgement at the moment is that this will turn out to be a very troubled project, until they strip back the governance model to something more like a normal, trustless blockchain, but the voting will really be in the power of a handful of individuals(like now). The money they have will keep them going for quite a while, but I guess it will be wasted a lot and eventually Dan will leave for some new amazing idea with another hyped up ICO.

We will see, but I wouldn’t be putting a dime in this project. It is very entertaining to watch though.

An article talking about David Larimer (his real name is Daniel) should be moved to trash immediately :wink:.

You are probably right, but I saw this story many times and talked about a lot on Eos subreddit. Are you saying this didn’t happen? Or at least one of these BP’s didn’t mess up in someway? And if so, why have EOS been trying to change its constitution?

I realise I may be ignorant to many facts, but if you follow it so closely could you please enlighten me about recent events?

1 Like

It’s all experimental. The idea of a constitution is more like a user agreement. Don’t steal other people’s coins and stuff like that. But it got a bit out of hand where every little problem with someone’s wallet/priv. key was going to the Block Producers to vote on. So now they’re changing it. If there’s a DAO-like error in a contract they might vote to stop the contract. But not every little problem with someone’s account will be solved by the Block Producers. So we’ll probably see a simplified version of this constitution.