Regarding @eosgo's recent video of @dan's "Explanation of New BFT+DPoS w/ Daniel Larimer - Part 2 of 2", I may see a problem here.
When some of the original operating specs were released, I raised an objection to the idea that block producers were going to be limited to ~21 because of the lack of dynamic decentralization and opportunity for anyone to run a node. The only answer I received is that sacrifices must be made in decentralization to achieve positive user experience/efficiency.
Now in this video linked below, @dan describes the block producers as likely to be well known entities such as universities and small governments. He goes on to describe voting within the community as the fix for dysfunction. Concluding that "if there is lots of fighting, you can vote them all out".
How is that working in congress right now? How does tyrrany of the majority work out in any democracy for the individuals? With the revelations around the entirety of the media and deep state colluding to get Clinton elected in the last US presidential election, what reasonable and informed person thinks that voting is going to help problems of collusion in governance between a small set of powerful and privileged people?
More to the point, is @dan serious about his stated intentions to secure liberty through his projects?
I'm starting to think I was fortunate to sell my ETH tokens when I did and haven't had the opportunity to reenter a major position at a good buy price.
Thanks to @eosgo for the video share and the illumination on this project's current status. Paging @larkenrose, @dollarvigilante, and @strategesis. Would love to hear your thoughts on this.
