EOS and Block.one made major announcements in June, celebrated one year from the mainnet launch, defended a bunch of controversies – you can get a quick recap in our previous digest. This month hasn’t brought in many catchy headlines yet, but this makes it a good moment to assess overall prospects — from minor partnership announcements to core problems that affect the EOS blockchain.
The Lumi Wallet team has picked the most important news surrounding EOS for you and broken down major think pieces ]that have recently been discussed in the EOS community.
As Block.one has previously stated, EOSIO v.1.8 has to be implemented by the majority of block producers to run Voice and provide other features for common EOS users, such as the announced 12x increase in transaction speed.
The stable release of v1.8 is now live on GitHub. The main features that were upgraded are the Consensus Protocol and state history plugin, also this version is ready to support Voice. To make the network run on this new protocol, BP’s and users have to conduct a full replay of the chain from genesis – after that is done (by Dan Larimer’s approximation it would take a couple of months), EOS will enjoy all the features from this upgrade without splitting the platform.
Block.one also released EOSIO Strategic Vision, a document that describes the foundational pillars of EOSIO. Here they are:
-Scalability: more apps, more users.
-Developers: better tooling, faster app development
-Users: Greater security, less friction
-Enterprise: Greater flexibility, better compliance
And seems like they are walking the walk: EOS is one of the most popular protocols for dapps, and new upgrades for users and developers alike roll out almost every week.
The latest release of this kind happened shortly after the announcement on #B1June – EOSIO released EOS Virtual Machine, their high-performance Blockchain WebAssembly interpreter. It is designed to suit the growing performance needs of blockchain applications and is specially tailored to provide extremely fast execution of on-chain processes.
It is the first shot in the battle for Virtual Machine standard between blockchains, because basically, whoever has a better suited VM for their needs, has better speeds and scalability. However, the current release is still in development and not intended for use in production environments yet.
Recently there was a lot of news surrounding a wide variety of projects on EOS. Here is a quick recap:
Bithumb, the largest Korean cryptocurrency exchange, announced that it will begin participating in EOS voting. According to BTCKorea.com (the parent company of Bithumb), it will initially participate in the Block Producer vote with its own-account EOS tokens. Bithumb states that it will support BPs that contribute to the improvement of the EOS ecosystem. With Koreans owning about 10% of EOS tokens, and Bithumb, which holds the largest amounts of EOS in Korea, it is expected that the Asian disproportion in BPs will only deepen.
Switcheo launched Cross-Chain Atomic Swaps on EOS and NEO. “Atomic swap” means you have two users on different blockchains, and using the atomic swap you can make sure both transactions happen simultaneously, via smart contract. It’s called Atomic because it can’t be separated. That means, user can make the swap immediately and without endangering their funds, as the transaction is secure within a smart contract.
Dfuse, the blockchain API company, raised $3.5MUSD in seed financing led by Multicoin Capital, a thesis-driven cryptofund and global blockchain thought leader and Intel Capital. The new funds will be used to expand a cross-blockchain technology platform and grow its engineering and customer success teams. Dfuse was launched in June 2018, shortly after the launch of the EOS Mainnet. Multiple EOS projects, including pixEOS, Cypherglass, and Everipedia utilize its blockchain API, so good news and investments in this platform influence the whole ecosystem in a positive way.
Dmail, a messaging platform built on EOS and Chintai, a token leasing platform powered by EOSIO smart contracts, come together to enhance UX and make the entire process seamless, so that users won’t have to manage their resources manually and will get notifications about the movements of their funds automatically.
pEOS, the smart contract implementation of a privacy token that is based on the technology that powers the anonymous cryptocurrency Monero, announced that they are allocating 25% of their total incentive funds in PEOS tokens to the new pEOS Privacy Fund. This new fund is meant to support third-party, privacy-oriented projects and they invite teams with such projects to contact them. Also, on the 30th of June, the first transaction of PEOS using a Ring Signature was spotted.
Effect.ai, a decentralized platform for Intelligence development and AI related services, started working with the Australian and New Zealand governments. The project outline is broken in to a three-phase overlapping rollout to help build, monetize, and then run artificial intelligence solutions. At this stage of construction it basically provides independent contractors with tasks to train AI algorithms, so the more big entities that participate, the more tasks there are for independent contractors. Now they have successfully finished the pilot program in the country of Georgia and are already structuring satellite imagery for the government of Singapore, essentially building their own Google Maps. The public release of Effect.ai is scheduled for July 10th.
Everipedia, a wiki-based online encyclopedia on the blockchain, has announced the official rollout of the Everipedia 2.0 public beta on everipedia.org. Everipedia 2.0 has been rebuilt from the ground up and has reworked user interface using React. Developers state it significantly increased the speed, performance, and usability of the service.
The EOS governance debates are still in progress. In the previous digest we went over the existing proposals from the 1 token one, 1 vote concept to Dan Larimer’s proposal to pay users to not vote.
Recently Dan wrote two articles on his medium blog that meditate on general government issues and point out several possible solutions for them. Both were based on the assumption that most of the systems that include humans tend to distribute power according to the Pareto principle (also known as the 80/20 rule).
The first one sketches out what a good governance system is and why even modern democracy is far from ideal. The main point is that it doesn’t matter which metric you use to choose your leaders – if there is only one competition, like popular vote, it is not prone to be rigged in favor of the minority which will suppress the majority. And this is the basis for tyranny.
The only way to ensure that the fittest for the job get the office is to have thousands of competitions in different fields that would select the best for each field, not just the best at mass deceit. The key to the decentralization of governance is keeping it open to new people and avoiding creating entry barriers that are biased toward any single minority.
Regarding blockchain governance, if its governance is based on any single metric, whether proof-of-stake or proof-of-work, it will become dominated by the entrenched few who are most adept. However, having a lot of metrics provides more Pareto distributions, and the more independent those distributions are, the more decentralized the network will become. And blockchains based upon any single proof-of-x metric will become centralized even if those in power spread propaganda about how decentralized the system is.
In the second article, Dan states that vote-buying results in centralization due to economies of scale. While the blockchain may know about 21 producers, it has no way to enforce those producers to operate on independent hardware. He also points out that this problem isn’t unique for the EOS blockchain: the same is true for Bitcoin mining pools. There can be several “pools of record”, but nobody can guarantee that there isn’t a single node behind it.
Considering that he comes with the proposal of dividing the existing 21 producers into 4 categories, choosing them with the addition of new metrics and therefore new Pareto distributions. He suggests achieving this by:
- Giving RAM voting weight
- Giving Stake-Time Voting weight
- Giving Infinite Stake-Time (essentially, volunteer token-burning) voting weight
- Rewarding non-voting users
Producers would be voted according to this scheme:
– 8 producers voted by EOS Staked^2
– 8 producers voted by Days staked * EOS staked^2
– 3 producers voted by RAM holders
– 2 producers voted by (avg EOS burned / Day)^2
This proposal seems to successfully develop the idea of 1 token 1 vote, widely supported by EOS community, merging it with Dan’s previous proposal to pay users to not vote. Still, it looks like the debates about the governance system are far from over – and while it stays a major issue for the EOS blockchain’s credibility and very existence, it seems we’ll continue to revisit this topic.
Dive Into EOS
Being a constantly developing blockchain with a handful of projects blossoming on it, EOS seems very complicated for a newcomer at first glance. Therefore, the community is trying to give an introduction to the EOS basics in as simple terms as possible. For anyone who feels like they’re floating in all the terms and ideas, here is a nicely put-together EOS Handbook that can give a quick boot camp on all things regarding this rookie blockchain.
And for the developers who are interested in building on EOSIO, Block.one will run a webinar on July 10th, giving an exclusive walkthrough on the tools and possibilities of the blockchain. Registration is still open here.
Educate yourself every day, build a brighter future today, stay encrypted, and don’t forget to get all the important news on EOS from the Lumi Wallet Digest. See you soon!
LiquidApps Makes It Checkmate For Costly EOS Computation
EOS scaling project LiquidApps, best known for its off-chain DAPP Network, has achieved another major breakthrough. Not content with driving down the cost of vRAM, LiquidApps has pulled off the same trick with vCPU, bringing low-cost computation to EOS projects without compromising decentralization.
The horizontal scaling solution pioneered by LiquidApps, first with DAPP Network and now with vCPU, is the polar opposite of traditional blockchain scaling approaches, which operate vertically through increasing node validation capacity. The latter method eventually reaches a ceiling that thwarts further optimization attempts. LiquidApps’ approach, which involves taking the bulk of all computation off-chain, frees up precious resources on the EOS network while dramatically driving down the cost of computation to dApp developers.
Checkmate for costly CPU
To demonstrate the efficacy of its new vCPU product, LiquidApps has created LiquidChess, a simple but effective proof of concept. Two-player chess games can be experienced, with the moves recorded on-chain but the computation to verify the legality of each move occurring off-chain. There’s also no need to create a blockchain wallet to play the game thanks to the LiquidAccounts service that provides free accounts for EOS dApps.
Blockchain chess might sound like a primitive proof, but it’s a move that resonates far beyond the confines of the 8×8 board. The ability to perform computation off-chain opens the door to virtually unlimited CPU usage, far in excess of anything a blockchain could provide. Just as importantly, it does so without materially forgoing decentralization. The same DAPP Service Providers that supply vRAM on the DAPP Network can now provide vCPU to the same clients. For the first time, developers can build and run dApps cheaply without having to worry about coding a viral hit, whose runaway success lands them with unsustainable computational costs.
Why cheap CPU matters?
As EOS has matured, it’s had to contend with a number of growing pains that have deleteriously affected dApp development. Reliable CPU has proven to be a particular sticking point due to limited capacity at times that’s frustrated developers. Staking EOS tokens entitles projects to a time-denominated amount of Block Producer resources. The high volume of transactions on the network have meant there hasn’t always been enough CPU to go around, or at least not at an affordable price.
LiquidApps’ vCPU is a milestone in blockchain scaling, not just for EOS, but potentially for other smart contract chains too where the same technique can be applied to slash the cost of on-chain resources and free up valuable block space and node verification capacity. LiquidApps just changed the game for good.
EOS New York proposes unified incentive model for stakeholders
Recently, EOS New York published a proposal about creating a unified incentive for stakeholders and improving decentralization and performance of the network. According to the post, the blockchain is mostly operating on default EOSIO settings, with very little features differentiating the EOS blockchain from the EOSIO software on which it is based.
The proposal shows that the current EOS incentive model is structured to encourage users to exhibit behavior beneficial to the individual, but not necessarily favorable for the blockchain as a whole. In the search for greater returns, users can perform actions that contribute to lower decentralization on the network, such as Sybil attacks and vote trading. This could lead to a consensus being held by a few powerful actors, which could prevent businesses from deploying on EOS.
The blog post read,
“In a Sybil attack, the attacker subverts the reputation system of a peer-to-peer network by creating a large number of pseudonymous identities and uses them to gain a disproportionately large influence.”
Since individuals can register several block producer accounts and increase their voting weight at relatively insignificant costs, the EOS consensus model is not Sybil-resistant. The proposal addresses this by adjusting and reallocating inflation, with block pay and vote pay reduced to 0% and token-holders being awarded 100% of inflation through staking rewards or by lending to REX.
Further, the 1 token 30 votes will be changed to 1 token 1 divisible vote, where each additional block producer votes for divides, rather than multiplies, the total vote weight. This would make voting coordination between large stakeholders no longer feasible.
The post also proposed that voting divert 50% of inflation that otherwise would have been received, where 20% is earmarked or burned to create a buffer that makes it more profitable to self-stake, rather than self-vote. This, combined with sending 80% to the block producer rewards pool, creates a general disincentive to vote.
To counteract this disincentive, a voting inflection point (VIP) has also been proposed and set to 30% of issued EOS, where if the total tokens voting relative to the total supply drops below the VIP, staking rewards are toggled off, inflation is reduced and all of it is awarded to block producers. The total votes are expected to always float around the inflection point, standardizing the capital threshold of attack against the network.
Additionally, block producers will be paid a percentage of EOS tokens in the pool based on rank, with higher ranks reaping higher rewards. Further, block producers that miss more than a certain number of rounds scheduled in a specified pay period will not be eligible to claim pay for that period. Once this threshold is reached within the given period, the total inflation of the system issued to all stakers and block producers decreases rapidly for that period and refills slowly over time, ensuring BP performance as a shared top priority for token holders.
The inclusion of a staking model ensures that staked resources are not diluted and can provide DApps with funding for EOS accounts, while attracting token holders to the platform. Overall, this will allow token holders to earn greater rewards without impacting decentralization on the network.
Finally, the blog also claimed that since EOS is currently too large and valuable to be subject to change all at once, the proposed changes are to be rolled-out slowly in phases.
EOS Keeps the Bearish Run Intact; Price Hovers Around $3
EOS is battling in the downtrend for a long time. The coin was at $4.3 on August 01, 2019. The month ended with a substantial loss of 23.57% at $3.3. The fall continued in September also. Lately, the currency has experienced a little improvement, and the same is indicating towards a better future.
We have entered in the last quarter of the year. All eyes are upon the board for a better closing. Let’s have a look at the last month’s price movement of EOS.
The last month started with a moderate price movement in EOS. There was an uptrend noted, which took the EOS price to $3.9613 from $3.2560 by 21.8%. Later, the price fell to $3.7153 by 6.21%. Then, again, it went up and reached $4.2384 by 14.55%. Later, the tremendous fall brought EOS price down to $2.4193 by massive drop of 42.92%. There was a recovery in the last few days. That took EOS coin price to $3.1259 by 29% progression. The month locked 6.54% loss as it opened at $3.3445 and closed at $3.1259. The ongoing month is reflecting upward movement. In the last few days, EOS moved from $2.9971 to $3.3700 by 12.4%.
EOS Price Prediction
EOS is dealing among the top ten cryptocurrencies in the market. Traders are still hoping for an improvement and thus sticking around. EOS is also speculated to experience the price rally soon.
As per the current statistics, the market cap of EOS is at 2,935,684,716 USD. Out of the total supply of 1,032,096,275 EOS, there are 935,396,263 EOS coins circulating in the market. The ROI is at 204.31%. The 24-hour volume is at 1,675,918,670 USD.
EOS has recovered strongly and likely to break its next resistance of $3.25 soon. By the end of 2019, EOS is likely to trade above $4.20. We would recommend long-term investment as it would give a colossal profit.
Resistance & Support Levels
R1: $3.25, R2: $3.33 and R3: $3.42
S1: $3.08, S2: $2.99 and S3: $2.91