The notoriety of proof of stake (PoS) on Hive
A few days ago, I was reading a proposal post where two people were arguing. One party accused the other of failing to deliver on the last promise of their previously funded proposal, and they are now attempting to write a new proposal requesting additional funding from the Hive DHF.
The other party defended themselves by claiming that they had delivered on the last proposal and that the accuser was simply hating on them. So the other party provided some proof, some stats pulled from the chain, to prove their point, but they also said a few things to defend themselves.
However, I was expecting them to pull some stats from the chain to prove their point, but they didn't, which proves the other person correct to some extent because they used stats from the Blockchain to make their point. I understand the accuser's point.
I mean, they were probably frustrated that another person was getting their proposal funded despite the fact that they had not provided clear proof that they had completed the last job for which they were paid. I think this is what makes PoS flawed and exploitable.
What Is PoS, like I'm 5?
So, if you clicked and started reading but do not know what PoS is. I would like to break it down. PoS simply means proof of stake, and in a system like Hive, you must own staked Hive to participate in governance and dictate how the reward pool is distributed.
The main reason Hive uses PoS is that it wants to reward longevity and skin in the game. I mean, most functional utility networks find ways to reward retention. It is similar to how we have a government system in which having a stake automatically qualifies you for vetting and determines who gets what and when. Who remains at the top of the list of witnesses, who falls to the bottom, and who is eventually kicked out.
This system actually tries to secure the chain's future and keep it running, making it more appealing and valuable to investors, as well as providing far more potential incentives for choosing to be a part of the system.
This is where PoS defeats PoW (proof of work).
If you look at Hive, you will notice that the system can be destroyed by PoW, particularly when it comes to rewards. Governance is a critical issue, and while it should be accessible to all, Hive believes that putting something on the line to participate in governance protects the network more effectively.
Nonetheless, we are already aware that governance is a dirty game.
People find ways to exploit flaws in the system, which is how PoS is frequently manipulated. When it comes to proposals, most owners try to form or build connections with the most powerful stakeholders; this ensures that their proposal will be funded even if a large portion of the ecosystem disagrees with why they need the money.
However, it can sometimes become a cash cow for those who likely produce nothing of value in order to be paid on a daily basis. Now, it is always difficult to get defunded when they are close to their biggest supporters, and when they are sure they will get funded, they do not care what anyone thinks, which could lead to the system being manipulated by those who understand proper politics.
Politicians Thrives By Owing Themselves Favors
I have seen cases where a powerful stakeholder sees nothing wrong with what another stakeholder is doing because their political relationship blinds them to wrongdoing.
Politicians stay in business by having another thing over another politician. So because they both have something on themselves, it just cancels everything and makes them continue their platonic relationship.
On Hive, this creates a centralized hollow in which major events only occur at the top.
In reality, PoW can be exploited in this way, but that is a topic for another day.
As a result, the most influential stakeholders may make decisions that do not truly reflect the needs of the chain or the general public.
Centralization, Or?
Centralization is what Hive stands for again, and while anyone can choose to mitigate this deficit by purchasing their own Hive off the market, staking it, and attempting to enforce their own voice with their stake, you may need a large stake to make your voice heard.
Conclusion
Personally, I have only voted on a few proposals. I have a small stake in Hive, and it may not matter when the 500k guys come into play. However, I believe it matters to some extent. Small owners can actually band together when it comes to proposals.
Also, each account has 30 witness spots, but I only vote for about 7 or 8 of them, because I do not think it is a good idea to just vote for everyone who sends a memo. Sometimes I believe that a witness' work sells them to the general public.
However, if a witness begins to lose the votes of key stakeholders, it may not be because they are bad at their job; rather, it is likely that they have offended the hierarchy.
Unfortunately, I believe PoW will be far worse for Hive than PoS. The Chain's future is what matters most, and it is often the case that people care the most when they have a lot to lose.
However, I believe that governance needs to improve. The governance aspect is extremely dirty and heavily criticized, and rightfully so. This is why I believe that anyone can have a voice if they choose to.
Interested in some more of my works
Is it Easy To Make Money?
Nigeria: A Unique Business Market & Industry
Virtual Bank Apps In Nigeria: An Experience Of Gamification
How To Find The Next "BIG" Meme Coin
Personal Finance: Achieving Intentional "Saving" Goals
Playing The Survival Game: Human Nature In Introspection
"Un-PAYING" The Debt You Owe
Interested in some more of my works
Is it Easy To Make Money?
Nigeria: A Unique Business Market & Industry
Virtual Bank Apps In Nigeria: An Experience Of Gamification
How To Find The Next "BIG" Meme Coin
Personal Finance: Achieving Intentional "Saving" Goals
Playing The Survival Game: Human Nature In Introspection
"Un-PAYING" The Debt You Owe
Politics people are always the slowest (not counting army in times of peace possibly) to keep up with change, and this seems to be no different on Hive. I mean it might take some time for people engaged in politics on Hive, that with ecosystem unity means power even more than anywhere else. There is no "others" to cede responsibility on, the whole chain suffers.
Partially because of this I tend vote only for validators with significant stake on Hive. Bigger chance for evoking ownership mindset and responsibility in politics. This is a beauty of this system IMO. I hope it will work out eventually, it's all experimanetal :)
I know which dialog you mentioned and even though I support proposal, I was not satisfied with line of defense by accused party.
Sincerely I wished the accused party actually provided some cogent form of defense, if they had done so, it could have provided some form of vote of confidence on the people who are voting for the proposal. Unfortunately the accused could not and it's really disappointing.
Personally I vote for only witnesses that are vocal on the chain, has significant stake on the chain and are not scared of criticism while prioritizing the chain before any other things.
This is actually a good way to gauge the ones that are putting in some decent jobs on the chain and I buy your idea as well.
I think the system should work out eventually. I think it's flawed but I believe it's flawed because of the way it can be exploited
You don't have a small stake! 5-6 of "you" make up for a 500k guy. And there aren't so many 500k+ guys. But there are more orcas and dolphins. I don't consider myself as having a small stake even if I have half of yours. It matters. But unfortunately, most people choose to be inactive when it comes to governance, and that's how some of those bad things you mentioned happen.
Well, I think the big push that determines whether a proposal is passed mostly depends on the big guns. However I do agree that orcas (when voting together) makes impact. There are many orcas, but sometimes not united enough to counter the voice of one or two 500k guy, even if they're not there much. I feel that disunity in opinion in many orcas is why the voice don't count sometimes
Differences of opinion are ok and we should protect that. Unanimity is not what we should thrive for. Hopefully, on critical matters more people will find a common ground. However, that often comes after some drama, if there are different sides with opposite views on what is the best thing to do.
View more
Greetings @josediccus ,
Appreciate the fact that you wrote about this subject...giving us food for thought.
I admit I really have not given much thought to the subject...I try not to vote for anything. ^__^
Hope you are feeling better today.
Kind Regards,
Bleujay
Thanks. I think it's a subject that's important. I believe that everyone should be aware of what system Hive is running, the advantages and disadvantages and why it's important to create that awareness. Thanks for the support always.
I like PoS more than PoW also. I think it's just a disagreement on what they think is the result. If you don't like it, then don't vote for it. I also agree that the smaller guys can add up and make a difference. It's tougher to collect all those small votes when compared to the whales.
Yeah, the smaller guys also have some good role to play. For me, PoS actually prioritizes the security and longevity of the chain, so I'll go for it.
I believe that Hive gives the possibility for anyone to become influential in the decisions of the network, but of course in theory there will always be someone who manages to have greater power within a certain ecosystem, because they have more resources or have done more for that place. It's incredible that there are many people who join Hive knowing this and still complain because x or y person has a lot of stake, be it in Hive or L2 tokens.
Yeah, you're right. Hive actually gives anyone the opportunity and I think that the PoS system is open for everyone. There are always people that will have advantage over others no matter what he system. I think some people just think it's unfair that it's only the people with stakes that are given governance opportunities
Yeah, I think of it like this: on a social network like Instagram and Facebook you're just a user, just another number for the big techs, but on Hive you can invest your money or time to build a strong profile that will certainly give you influence, so on web2 you don't even have a chance, but on wer3 you have the chance, however difficult it may be at times.
I believe 30 witness votes per account is to many. 1 account = 1 vote would eliminate some of the circle jerking imo.. but you know my 15K HP don't mean shit so I keep my mouth shut.. mostly 😆 🤣
Exactly, 1 per account is probably ideal and 30 is way too much. The HP below 150k in my opinion might not really make too much impact, unless they band together
This is exactly what has been happening in recent years!
I agree, but I think people just find ways to exploit any system.
but this does not justify the current situation.
!PIZZA
View more
Interesting
What's interesting?
If hive operated on proof of work mechanism, lot's of people wouldn't participate on voting proposal. Proof of stake is the mechanism suitable for chain like hive, because even a small account with little staked, can still participate on voting, although will lack weight. Now if hive operate on (pow) proof of work, what will determine the vote weight ?
View more