"Nano has a unique consensus mechanism called Open Representative Voting (ORV). Every account can freely choose a Representative at any time to vote on their behalf, even when the delegating account itself is offline. These Representative accounts are configured on nodes that remain online and vote on the validity of transactions they see on the network. Their voting weight is the sum of balances for accounts delegating to them, and if they have enough voting weight they become a Principal Representative. The votes these Principal Representatives send out will subsequently be rebroadcasted by other nodes.
As these votes are shared and rebroadcasted between nodes, they are tallied up and compared against the online voting weight available. Once a node sees a block get enough votes to reach quorum, that block is confirmed. Due to the lightweight nature of blocks and votes, the network is able to reach confirmation for transaction ultrafast, often in under a couple seconds. Also note that delegation of voting weight does not mean staking of any funds - the account delegating can still spend all their available funds at any time without restrictions.
Because Nano accounts can freely delegate their voting weight to representatives at any time, the users have more control over who has power with consensus and how decentralized the network is. This is a key advantage to the design of Open Representative Voting (ORV). With no direct monetary incentive for nodes, this removes emergent centralization forces for longer-term trending toward decentralization of the network."
Open Representative Voting is just a proprietary term for Delegated Proof-of-Stake (DPoS) consensus [1]. Basically transaction validator nodes are elected by votes weighted by the sum of the amount of tokens in the voters' wallet.
Apparently Nano wanted to highlight the fact that anyone can become a validator instead of a preselected list by coining a new term.
While better than most DPoS chains there is still a higher risk of centralisation than with PoW. [2]
PoS doesn’t work for money. It works as system of value transfer for the wealthy at best. Ask the millions of stranded wallets that can’t move funds because of fees. The other arguments around centralisation are moot then, if you can’t actually use the system.
Bitcoin cannot scale well enough to be used as a global currency
.Consumes a huge amount of energy
.Is extremely slow at processing transactions, degrading usability
.Has high transaction fees, which would be even higher if it were to be more adopted
.Most people in the industry do not think that Bitcoin is/can be a day-to-day currency
Bitcoin is not capable of scaling upwards. If the price of bitcoin reaches 1 millions us dollar. How much do i need to pay for one single transaction or how many miners do i need to keep bitcoin alive?
Government tries to fight climate change and bitcoin destroys all hard earned energy reductions. The network needs more energy then a whole country (today). I don't want imaging how much energy it will consume in 10 years.
Before you spread any kind of information's. Please provide some proven facts about all your assumptions otherwise it just malicious gossip and no one will trust in your advises.
It is not production ready so yes, there is still a part that is centralized and it is being worked on. It is not a secret, they are very transparent about it.
That doesn't address the issue that I raised in that a "landed gentry" has been created by airdropping millions of tokens to a relatively small group of people. The only way to get hold of tokens is to buy them from these people.
BTC isn't a tech for the commoner either. Institutional investors are swooping in and driving the price up. The mining isn't done by a bunch of people but data centers. China has a lot of influence in the network. I don't think that's a good thing.
I didn't say there is an airdrop function. 100% of the supply of Nano have already been distributed by way of an airdrop. This is stated on the homepage of the project.
Bitcoin has so far only one use case holding it. It is to expensive to buy some small things with it, can't really scale without suffering high transaction price changes and depends on all miners. Bitcoin wanted from the begin revolutionize the money world didn't happened so far. Now everyone says it will replace gold. Just false promises.
"Bitcoin Average Transaction Fee is at a current level of 17.08, up from 8.904 yesterday and up from 0.5638 one year ago. This is a change of 91.79% from yesterday and 2.93K% from one year ago."
As normal user i don't want to pay so much money for a single transaction it will never replace money with such high transaction cost.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAk2ou6EFMY