> has anyone ever done the modeling on the dynamic limits of decentralized network consensus? I did in the paper this post is about (in the context of bitcoin)

> has anyone ever done the modeling on the dynamic limits of decentralized network consensus? I did in the paper this post is about (in the context of bitcoin). Look at the section on Miner Centralization Pressure: https://github.com/fresheneesz/bitcoinThroughputAnalysis#mining-centralization-pressure https://github.com/fresheneesz/bitcoinThroughputAnalysis#min... > these high tps coins all seem to get around this by weakening decentralization Yes, that's true. > in order for every node to have an equal influence on the validity of every other node's vote The trick is to ensure that distance does not play a substantial role in a node's "vote". That's one reason that blocks must take so much time to be mined in bitcoin (10 minutes). Proof of work systems that have less-than-a-minute block times are just not very safe. It takes time for lots of entities to come to a consensus across the whole world. > I suspect the reason TX speed tends to stay mired in the tens per second region is that no amount of consensus accounting gimmickry will overcome the underlying physical limitations of true global scale decentralization of consensus. Yeah, there are physical limits. The speed of light is the ultimate limit here. You can't come to a consensus with someone faster than you can send and receive a response from them. And the minimum requirements for consensus probably require a lot more than one message and one response.