As the EOS blockchain has developed further, and start to be on its own. I am reminded of a blog post that I made earlier about the EOS Blockchains inception, the article back then was based on what I knew at that time concerning EOS side-chains, as time goes on I feel that the time has come for me to update, rewrite, revise and extend this earlier written article.
First off the label of side-chains is a very all-encompassing one, this term can be referring to anything from various varieties of code Forks or chain Forks. But in the spirit of wishing to be as accurate as possible, I think it’s best to use the categories that I first heard coined by Thomas Cox, which is categorized as sister-chains and daughter-chains. I believe these categories accurately convey the core differences that exist between many of the various varieties of Code and chain Forks, as well as others. A daughter-side-chain would be something that refers to as a chain that is in some way subordinate to a parent-chain, while a sister-side-chain would have its autonomy and not a subordinate to any chain, but might likely still use similar software, like in a case of an EOS based side-chain.
As the EOS blockchain begins to develop more and more, new projects have begun to migrate away from the EOS mainchain and coalesce into their communities. In the past, splintering communities were largely considered a negative and in some cases even a controversial matter, especially when you consider that it usually signified a splintering of that blockchain’s general community, so as the EOS Community begins to experience new sister-side-chains appearing, I can imagine that it naturally makes some EOS holders a little nervous. So in this video, I will attempt to explain how sister-side-chains and daughter-side-chains, should not be looked at as a negative, in fact, it’s quite positive for EOS mainchain holders, and here’s why.
First, off the Greater EOS, IO Ecosphere is not just made up of the main-chain EOS holders, it will also be made up of potentially many daughter-side-chains and sister-side-chains, all linked together with inter blockchain communication. Furthermore, many of these new daughter-chains and sister-chains, that were released using the genesis snapshot, as well as more updated snapshots, taken from the EOS mainchain, which freely gives EOS-mainchain holders free additional funds which they would not have had ordinarily, to do with as they please. In the past under legacy Blockchains, hard forks were almost always looked upon as a bad thing, because this often signified the creation of a new competing blockchain. In the legacy system of Blockchains, usually first-generation Blockchains, in particular, competing for blockchain communities tirelessly compete for overdominance, which in my opinion is reflective of the winner-take-all nature of proof of work Blockchains, often the aftermath of a contentious hard fork can lead to significant lingering negativity between competing communities.
Case and point, look at the example of the Bitcoin and Bitcoin cash controversial hard fork. There were a few reasons why this hard Fork occurred, but the main reason was ultimately the scaling debate, one portion of the community wanted to go in a different direction, by using a second layer solution to address the scaling problem of the Bitcoin Network, Solutions such as the lightning network. While others believe that the scaling should be done at the main protocol level, through continuously increasing the block size. This debate raged for a few years before it finally came to its irreconcilable conclusion, with contentious results for both communities.
Regardless of where you stand on the scaling debate, I don’t believe that anyone can see this as particularly healthy for the greater blockchain community. In my opinion, the hyper-competitive nature of proof of work Blockchains has created a somewhat toxic atmosphere, to friendly competition in this current blockchain industry. I have heard various blockchain maximalist calling all other Blockchains crap coins, scam coins, among other various colorful descriptive and unflattering terms. And In fairness, 90% of all Blockchains today fit these detailed unflattering assessments, and deserve every ounce of skepticism one can muster. But as I have said before, there are still existing 10% that are legitimate projects; it’s a matter of opinion on the importance or impact of said projects in the future. But ultimately time will tell the story of what projects are destined for some measure of mass adoption, while others go the way of the majority of dot-com stocks during the dot-com bubble. Ultimately the free market will decide so. There’s no reason to put down a legitimate competing project if the fundamentals are sound.
Remember the example of the notorious scam coin bitconnect. Many stated that bitconnect was a scam, and it was clear to anyone to see, but despite all of the warnings that the majority of the cryptocurrency community gave to many so-called investors about this scam coin, many still ignored these warnings and invested heavily in it. Eventually, the market decided, and gravity reasserted itself, and unfortunately, a lot of people lost their money, and in some extreme cases their life savings. There are many morals to the story; some may learn from this to always do your research and be vigilant when investing your hard-earned resources. Which is very true and I agree wholeheartedly with this assessment. But in my opinion, I mostly take from this story that when most people have invested and financially incentivized, in whatever project that might have taken their fancy. All of the logic, facts, and reason in the world will not deter them from their course of action, often the only thing that will change people’s behavior is gravity reasserting itself, aka the market deciding.
Much like Dan Larimer, I consider myself a voluntarist to a certain extent. I believe that a truly free market ultimately holds many of the answers to a fairer and freer society with the absolute least amount of coercion possible. Freedom means that people have the option to go their way if they choose to do so. Instead of focusing on coercing people into one way of doing things, we should instead focus on building up, out-innovating, and outcompeting all others. If we truly have the right answer, then time will surely show it. We are all a part of the greater crypto community, so let us not forget who our real competitor is.
Other Sister-side-chains using modified versions of the EOS IO Software, with their own coin holder distribution would still be linked to the EOS mainchain through inter blockchain communication, and benefit the Greater EOS IO Ecosphere by being the testing ground for all sorts of niche decentralized applications, that could easily be integrated/ported over the main chain, (especially when you consider it’s all running on the EOS IO software). Some of these applications may potentially have game-changing innovations. This would logically increase the value of the EOS IO Ecosphere and the EOS mainchain, especially when you consider that the EOS Mainchain will be the most widely used and valuable of all the Greater EOS IO Ecosphere Blockchains.
All Greater EOS IO Ecosphere-side-chains would be a net benefit to the EOS mainchain holders, due to niche governance and operational models that many of these alternative EOS-Chains will use. This will have a greater impact on EOS-IO adoption rates by attracting any potential future blockchain holders that for whatever reason disliked the EOS mainchain governance or operational model. Essentially, being more attractive to a broader community of users. Greater adoption rates of the EOS IO Software Is essential because, as more and more people become integrated into the EOS style of blockchain, people will begin to naturally gravitate towards the larger EOS IO blockchain communities, because larger EOS IO communities will be developed more naturally with greater numbers of developers as well as higher volume of integration to the traditional money markets, much in the same way that currently many altcoins gravitate towards bitcoin when transferring value from, and into the cryptocurrency ecosphere.
Consider the positive feedback loop that this system creates, and many EOS IO sister-side-chains will create niche operational improvements, which benefits the EOS IO Ecosphere by attracting a wider field of investors, that will increase the rate of innovation happening within the EOS IO Ecosphere. The more numerous the EOS IO ecosphere becomes, the greater number of train and experience block producers, and C-plus-plus developers that can be supported, the greater number of developers familiar with it, and working on EOS IO c-plus-plus based software. That increases the number of decentralized applications, which further increases the demand for EOS IO Ecosphere Ram, CPU, and Bandwidth, which raises the token price for EOS IO ecosphere holders, especially the larger EOS IO communities, which in turn attracts more investment, which repeats the process.
I believe that we are witnessing the start of future crypto-based global stock/currency market, that will be running on the EOS IO operating system. Much in the same direction that the American Stock Market has different Stock Exchanges such as The New York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange, the NASDAQ, The Electronic Communications Network, and others. There’s no telling what the EOS IO ecosphere will grow into when it is fully-grown. But one thing that is certain is that we are witnessing something that can only be compared to a once-in-a-Century opportunity, those that can see the possibilities will likely profit greatly. Those who cannot likely be remembered only as a cautionary tale with moral implications along the lines of, how to miss a rocket ship to the moon, or how to trade in, a Lamborghini for a Kia.
EOS IO side-chains will be ecosystems in and of themselves, testing what works and strengthening the greater EOS IO ecosphere in the process. The Greater EOS IO Ecosphere is a Metroplex, and like any metroplex, it has one Big City at its center AKA (the EOS mainchain) surrounded by many suburbs AKA (all EOS IO side-chains) all interconnected and working together for a better future for all that are involved. The time is rapidly approaching, where this investment opportunity will pass the overwhelming majority of crypto investors by, the EOS IO Software is creating new standards of blockchain operations that will become normalized in the future blockchain industry to come, a significant paradigm shift has occurred between the legacy system of blockchain, and the new standard that EOS IO based Blockchains or setting.
A contentious dichotomy currently exists between legacy Blockchains, and it’s third-generation counterparts, dichotomy being defined as a division or contrast between two things that are represented as being opposed or entirely different. And not even the EOS blockchain escapes the accusatory finger pointing, of some Legacy blockchain communities. Traditional legacy blockchain naysayers have accused the EOS blockchain of being too different to be considered to be a blockchain. They are entirely correct about EOS being different, but incorrect about EOS not being a blockchain.
The EOS blockchain is very different from its traditional counterparts, and that’s because EOS IO Blockchains, we’re not made to be a re-creation of already struggling blockchain models, instead it was made to be an innovative leap forward, a rethinking of the whole structure of traditional Blockchains and approaching them from a different angle. The final result is the EOS IO operating system, and it is the future of the cryptocurrency industry, and this possibility alone is a source of great anxiety amongst the traditional legacy blockchain communities, the Old Guard never wishes to be removed from its place of prominence, and so they will fight to hold on to their position, but if history is any judge of events, one standard has remained true throughout the dawn of time, the world does not stand still, change always comes eventually. And if you are not adapting expediently enough, you will be replaced. This fact is inevitable. Older slower and less innovative technologies are always eventually replaced by their newer more flexible, and more adoptable counterparts and the blockchain industry is no different, all that remains to be seen as who will ultimately benefit from this changing of the guards.
To all EOS holders, you are standing, on the right side of History.