• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

Implications of the Two-Tier Model regarding Centralization

GeauxSheaux

New member
So the novelty of the Dash two-tier model (underlying PoW with MN PoS sitting on top) provides an interesting new layer that seems to add a bunch of functionality to the blockchain.

Detractors of Dash seem to cling to the fact that it is very centralized. According to the Dash whitepaper, the MN layer performs 3 functions: 1) lock in instant transactions to prevent double spends, 2) coin mix/private send, and 3) potentially execute smart contracts in the future. Deterministic ordering should make any coordinated attempt at MN foul play very difficult to achieve, but it does seem as though these MNs could end up being centralized points of failure. Would coin mixing through MNs be traceable if someone were to gain access to just one of the MNs? What are some other specific concerns that arise from this PoS layer?

I've read the entire whitepaper, read the entire Wiki, and watched a bunch of videos without much luck in finding a technical rundown of the potential pitfalls of the two-tier system. Can anyone address the centralization concern?
 
Back
Top