Thanks for the encouraging words. I've been traveling so I haven't been able to dig in to the security model of what you're describing. I'm all about incentivized nodes, but I'm still not clear how protocol designs can be enforced in models like this. As long as all nodes interpret the custom json the same way and there are no malicious attacks, then everyone is happy. Multi-signature controlled smart contracts and escrow accounts are for when people do NOT get along and there is not consensus. That's why I think something more robust might be needed, along with a process to upgrade and change the protocol as needed.
I haven't been following the Steem Alliance talks, though I've been asked to join the Discord. I'm wary of any plan which continues to give Steemit, Inc centralized power as we've been down that road before and expecting different results is silly.
I don't think Steem would depend on EOS as much as Steem governance would depend on a system which can actually accomplish on-chain smart contract trust. It could be on some other chain for all I care. I'm not a maximalist for any coin, I just want to see the world improve.
Agree with almost all points in this.
Yep, but in the event of a malicious node or a break in consensus due to bad code, all other nodes can easily determine that the break has happened, as they all post a hash of their state every 10 minutes to check that they are in consensus.
Interesting. Thanks for the high-level overview. Sounds quite a bit like a side chain but using Steem for the checkpoints. Pretty cool. :)
Here is a good overview... I wish I would have seen this post as well. Glad so many of us are on the same page. https://steempeak.com/steem/@dlux-io/steem-alliance-proposals-or-dlux-side-chain-actions