How can we make consensus really democratic?

How can we make consensus really democratic?

By MikeZillo | Blockchain Insights | 11 Nov 2020

We often read about Proof of Work, Proof of Stake, delegate Proof of Stake, proof of Concept, proof of Value. But, what are the prerogatives of the consensus in a Blockchain?

Let’s start from the Blockchain Trilemma

Blockchain Trilemma

In Proof of Work we have lots of computers looking for a solution and the more the computational power available the highest the probabilities to find the solution with proprietary machines in the pool.

In Proof of Stake, the procedure is similar and even if we do not talk about computational power, we are still referring to the biggest delegate with the highest number of votes, represented by frozen coins on the Validating Node.

What is the difference? Well, in the PoW we have lots of servers calculating algorithms while in the second we do not have the machines and a high electricity consumption.

What are the risks?

People with a lot of purchasing power can purchase a lot of machines to achieve a higher computational power in the Proof of Work. People with a lot of purchasing power can purchase a lot of coins to achieve a higher weight in the decisional process in the PoS.

A lot of money then can make aggregation of malicious people with intentions to create situations of double spending and approve only some transactions, rejecting others.

PoS is more scalable than PoW (as far as we know today), and about Security and Decentralization they are quite comparable.

Others have been created, such as the delegated Proof of Stake, accepted from the TRON blockchain for example. In this case, there are 27 different delegates that are supposed to vote for the approval or denial of transactions. In this case, there is the chance to create aggregations like political parties, where the retail users can choose the Super Representative to vote for, basing their evaluations on the Prospectus of the Node, its projects and its way of taking decisions.

Then we also have the hybrid PoW and Pos, with a sort of dual layer of validation, exploiting database of information approved via PoS and periodically checked on the PoW blockchain of Bitcoin, to make lighter the validation process. We have a better Scalability than PoW and a comparable scalability to PoS. Good Security. Good decentralization.

A way of validation the Blockchain is the Algorand one, that I acknowledged some months ago. The so-called “Pure Proof of Stake”. It works actually as a Proof of Stake, but the approval of the chain is not given from the pool of biggest stakeholders and every block is validated by “randomly” chosen Stakers. I put randomly into commas because there is a solid algorithm that understand what are the deserving Stakers, taking into account who is validating the Blockchain seriously, ethically and consistently. So, creating a pool with deserving Stakers, they will be among the validators of the blocks, bypassing the problem of monopoly that could be faced with traditional Staking.


Source of the image:

In the PPoS (Pure Proof of Stake) we have max decentralization, great scalability and great security.

What suggestions can you bring to validation methods even more

  1. Secure
    2. Decentralized
    3. Scalable

If not taking the best of the Proof of Stake and inserting a random variable for choosing the validators?

Let’s start the debate!


Daily Trader, Mining Farm Project Manager, Blockchain consultant, Cryptocurrency evangelist. You can find more videos here

Blockchain Insights
Blockchain Insights

Working as a consultant for Blockchain projects, an operative experience comes by itself. In this Blog I am share Blockchain applications, pros and cons, practical use cases I got in touch with. Of course, a good understanding of the topic will be provided with dedicated contents

Send a $0.01 microtip in crypto to the author, and earn yourself as you read!

20% to author / 80% to me.
We pay the tips from our rewards pool.