Anyone with the right judgement would see the major risks posed by EOS's governance system, that is the complete opposite of what a blockchain should be.
Allowing a minority of insiders to control everything, including the investor's money is a major travesty and a disgrace to the idea of cryptocurrencies themselves.
One can use Ripple as a comparison as an entity having a certain amount of control, but at least they are transparent with their code and do not allow transactions to be reversed or wallets to be frozen. What do you guys think ?
Is it normal for an entity to have this much.
The Take Home?
1.
Here is the deal, I personally don't own any EOS and never invested in it. I just don't like it personally BUT I don't understand why there is so much hate towards the project?
If you don't like EOS (like me) just ignore and let those who have their bags filled enjoy it. It is clear that like Ripple has its own diehards EOS has the same type of supporters so why waste time, energy and effort trying to convert them?
It looks like there is some third party involved that really thinks EOS might be a real competitor to Ethereum or other major projects. (CEKTAHT).
2.
The main point of having a cryptocurrency and a blockchain ecosystem is to escape the control and centralization from traditional fiat currencies.
If EOS offers the exact same thing as traditional systems, then there is no point in using it, and it absolutely is not worth 5 billion dollars USD worth of funding.
If i am going to trust strangers with my money, i will use a bank, because at least my money is insured if the bank goes bust (At least where i live).
If EOS goes bust, there is absolutely nothing shielding the investors, the insiders can unload everything they got, and disappear in nature with billions of dollars.
No need to use the TPS argument, other projects are doing it much better already, and don't offer the same inconveniences as EOS. (Ovitius).
"EOS IS CENTRALIZED, IN A BAD WAY." was by BLOCKHAVEN