Block.One, the firm that developed the EOSIO software, announced on Nov. 13 that it will begin participating in the election procedures for block producers (BPs) on the EOS blockchain.
“Small, but significant EOS token holder”
In its announcement, Block.One claims that it is a “small, but significant EOS token holder” since it holds less than 9.5% of the circulating supply. As such, Block.One holds nearly one-tenth of the voting decision power when it comes to electing BPs.
The firm says that the portion of coins it holds will further decrease due to the creation of new units to reward block producers through inflation. The announcement reads:
“Ultimately, we will begin participating in block producer voting to more actively join other EOS token holders in ensuring the EOS network remains as healthy and revolutionary as ever.”
A different blockchain
EOS is a network based on delegated proof-of-stake (DPoS), where 21 BPs are elected by coin holders and run the network’s only validating nodes. EOS needs to coordinate far fewer nodes than most other blockchains. While some have raised concerns that such an implementation negatively impacts the network’s decentralization, Block.One claims that it is a net positive:
“Improving upon Proof of Work blockchains, which are often governed and controlled by a small number of mining organizations and can be environmentally abrasive with high electricity requirements, EOS block producers are elected by millions of accounts around the world, can be changed at anytime by the voting majority, and offer the highest performance output with minimal energy requirements.”
Coordinating a much smaller and more trusted network of nodes, EOS developers have been able to ensure a half-second block time and a throughput of 5,000 transactions per second. Despite its purportedly high performance, the network has experienced some issues recently.
As Cointelegraph reported last Sunday, the EOS blockchain got congested by the EIDOS token airdrop, with users being unable to have their transactions processed. The incident caused the price of CPU time on the network to increase by over 100,000% over the course of 4 hours, reaching nearly 7.69 EOS/millisecond.