EOS has been surrounded by a lot of controversies. To start with, there was the stop-and-go launch of the EOS Mainnet. Next up, there was the controversy revolving around locked accounts, followed by more locked accounts. Apparently, the second time, the accounts were locked on the orders of an “arbitrator” which went unnoticed by most of the people in the community.
After those controversies, were done, we had another controversy revolving around a fake order which claimed to be from the arbitrator. This led to a proposal by Dan Larimer, the architect of EOS, to make a completely new governance structure (or as many would like to call it, “constitution”) for the cryptocurrency.
These controversies have piled up against the cryptocurrency and have made supporters of the cryptocurrency find Telos a better alternative.
Telos caps the number of tokens every address receives during the initial distribution at 40,000 (of course, with exceptions). The main idea behind that is removing whales from the equation—tokens have equal votes in EOS. According to Douglas Horn, the author of Telos’ whitepaper, there’s a “hyper-concentration of voting power” in the hands of a few.
Telos would distribute TLOS tokens to EOS investors according to the original snapshot to reduce the influence of such heavyweights. The difference here would be that it would simply lop off holding above 40,000, affecting a mere 0.63 percent of the accounts.
When it comes to EOS, 1.6 percent holders own 90 percent of the tokens, with the largest holder, the company behind the EOSIO protocol, Block.One, owning 10 percent of the total supply. Telos, Horn expects, would eliminate the chances of token holders colluding with BP candidates, who can potentially earn the equivalent of thousands of dollars on a daily basis in EOS coins. These candidates might share the profits with those whales which elect them.
Everipedia, the decentralized encyclopedia, has announced that its operation is going to go live on the EOS blockchain instead of the Ethereum blockchain as it initially was supposed to go with.
The decentralized encyclopedia wants to offer a truly open and censorship-free database of information to users, something it believes Wikipedia doesn’t provide. Developers of Everipedia claim that there are way too many regulations, and “bureaucratic-type overseers” that Wikipedia has to suffer from. This makes Wikipedia “attractive only to a relatively small portion of potential encyclopedia writers.”
Dr. Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia, is the Chief Information Officer (CIO) at Everipedia, making an inherent connection between the two.
Being decentralized, Everipedia is expected to benefit a lot from EOS’s supposed decentralized nature. Just how much censorship resistance can be provided by the platform, however, remains unproven as of now.
That isn’t all. A blockchain startup based out of Australia called Havven said in a release on Wednesday that the startup is expected to issue a stablecoin, nUSD, on EOS by the end of the year. It had first launched on the Ethereum network in June, but has now shifted to EOS.