Ethereum vs Cardano vs Udder – Heated Debate on Better Technology

Debate on better technology

The two leaders of Ethereum — Vitalik Buterin and  Charles Hoskinson – have come together in recent days in a kind of “Battle of the Crypto-Titans” and have debated about which technology is better Casper or Ouroboros. After Hoskinson gave a message to Buterin on Twitter, Buterin even claimed that Hoskinson’s arguments were “pathetic” and contained lies.

Having come to a disagreement between Buterin and Hoskinson in June 2014 on how to structure the then-young Ethereum project – Buterin wanted to get Ethereum as a not-for-profit organization with decentralized open source governance.

Charles Hoskinson left as one of the founders from Ethereum and a little later founded his own cryptocurrency project, IOHK and Cardano . Since then, Buterin and Hoskinson have been competing, especially considering that both projects offer a Smart Contract platform. In addition, both algorithms are based (in the future) on the proof of stake protocol.

Casper Vs Ouroboros

In a blog post entitled  How does Casper compare to Ouroboros? IKO chief scientist Aggelos Kiayias compared some of the main differences between the Ethereum Proof-of-Stake – Casper – and Cardano’s own consensus algorithm – Ouroboros. In the article, Kiayias writes that Cardano’s proof-of-stake is technically superior to Ethereum’s Casper implementation.

In the article, Kiayias explained that a proof of stake must have at least two properties: persistence and liveliness. While persistence ensures that the transaction history is permanent and immutable, liveliness ensures that every node in the network has the same information and all nodes stay in sync.

Cardano’s chief scientist Kiayias said that Cardano’s PoS protocol is superior because it provides “mathematically precise guarantees for each execution” and “precise, quantitative statements”, whereas Ouroboros is very concrete and has no room for interpretation. In contrast, Casper still needs “a lot of imagination” about how it will work on a high-tech level, says Kiayias.

Kiayias also noted that:

“good design, intuition, and good effort are simply not enough for a ledger consensus protocol of transferring assets worth billions.”

Therefore, the IOHK team is confident in their own design that offers “finality and the best possible guarantee”.

After Charles Hoskinson shared this post on Twitter, Vitalik Buterin wrote a slew of tweets a few hours later, saying, among other things, that the contribution by Hoskinson and Kiayias was “pathetic”.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.