Improving Adoption and Accessibility of POA Network


#1

It seems the overwhelming majority of cryptocurrencies is still owned and transacted by speculators who often hold on to their coins rather than by regular users in day-to-day transactions. There are reports on the number of crypto wallet users/accounts, circulating coins, etc., but these metrics are not always reflective of a true coin flow.

Besides recently introduced POABridge and POA20 (yay!), what are POA Network plans on speeding up its adoption and improving accessibility? What are the targeted user groups now and long term? Are the improvements to accessibility related to the POA Network roadmap to become a platform with multiple PoA networks connected by interledger protocols in the 2nd half of 2018?

I’m curious to hear thoughts from the POA team and other folks on the forum!


#2

I’m curious as well. As I understand it the current goal of the project is the build the best mouse trap and hope the world beats a path to the door. But I’d also imagine that with a team as sharp as this one is… There are almost certainly some things in the work to help spread the message and extol the virtues of the platform to a wider audience.

One thing that could go a long way might be talk about how Ethereum has a bit of a scaling problem that few are discussing… A problem that POA has already accounted for via multiple PoA networks.

(Discussion of ethereum’s scaling issues in this article)


#3

Ethereum can’t process a lot of transactions per second. This was exposed on two particular occasions in the last year as I’m sure most know. First was when all the ICO’s were launching. Second was everyone trading crypto kitties. The network was all clogged up. Transactions were lost or backlogged from too many transactions sent per second. POA Bridge is a solution.


#4

Ethereum has its share of scaling issues. However, that article is authored by a rabid Bitcoin maximalist, eager to put down Ethereum and Bitcoin forks, and the data should not be taken at face value.
The Ethereum chain size with FAST Sync is a little over 70GB, compared with BTC 170GB.

The quoted number of Bitcoin nodes at 115,000 is simply too high, compared with 9765 on Bitnodes and 9372 on Coin Dance. Looking at Luke’s dataset, there is a discontinuity in adoption rates across the 0.15 set of releases and on to 0.16, so I question his methodology.
The number of Ethereum nodes is reported at around 16K,


#5

No doubt PoA-based networks are less susceptible to scaleability and transactions per second challenges due to the underlying consensus mechanism and a more centralized (at least in its default version) architecture.

However, it seems there are problems and/or constraints of a different nature. For POA Network specifically, being based on Aura and UNIX synch time means that if “authorities” are distributed over a large geographic region resynchronization and consistency can become a challenge.

I wonder how effective multiple PoA networks are in solving these problems!


#6

Would like to hear @Micwebnet thoughts on this.

Geographic diversity among the validators not only maintains the integrity of the network but also enhances fault tolerance in the event of an extreme circumstance. You bring up an interesting perspective that it could actually be problematic.

Reference: