Quote from: prix on April 26, 2017, 04:24:33 AM

Quote from: Reavon on April 25, 2017, 01:59:19 PM

1. a ranking in finding a block the higher you are to the 1st rank add very much to centralization because the top 50 could than maybe easyly 51% attack
the rest.
2. the client is optimized to 101 nodes , increasing the amount of nodes would require rebalancing the code processing and much more under the hood it simply is not PoW work which can scale naturely with more nodes. Its is a very different approach with is strenghts and weaknesses.

Can you speak in detail with code examples? Why do you think it's easy to attack? For now it is only your words. Without proofs.
For example in NXT you can attack only with (I don't remember for sure) if you have more 90% of NXT supply.
And if you attack you kill NXT and you amount. You loose money. It does not make any sense and it is very expensive.
If top 50 can "easy" attack when they have more chances to block generataion, then we can wait for the attack from 50 with the current system.
I do not think that LISK is so vulnerable.
What is "rebalancing the code processing"?
Why NXT or Waves (it's not POW too) can scale, but Lisk not? Are you think the LISK scalability is bad?
If the LISK gets spread, then it can not be scaled to 1001 delegates? Is that what you're trying to say?

In your defense of the current system, you expose Lisk to the weak.

Sorry you missed the point , i wasnt saying Lisk is scaling bad nor was i saying that the current lisk Dpos were vulnerable. I pointed out the problematics with the thoughts of a user who offered ideas to improve lisk and why the current Lisk implementation is better than what he was proposing.