RE: EOS EVM is Officially Live on Testnet.

a message from Douglas Horn telos co founder about eos vs telos evm @dapperd https://t.me/antelopeio/2224

"If there's some actual advantage in compatibility by limiting block times to 1 second, then EOS EVM is the only chain that seems to feel it's of value. All other EVMs with block times faster than 1 second seem to have no concerns about being faster than the Ethereum minimum time resolution of 1 second and I've never seen any technical concerns raised about this in the EVM world. When we were assessing this technical issue two years ago, we could find no reason to limit the block time to 1 second. We were certainly aware that Ethereum had a minimum time granularity if 1 second but it also has definitive block numbers.

Now, if the EOS team has some actual reason to do this, then I would like to hear that explanation but the reasons they included in their EOS EVM Deep Dive document make absolutely no sense to me. The explanation starts out, "While one half second blocks may be faster than one second, theoretically..." and the lack of logic gets worse from there. I challenge anyone to go through that passage sentence by sentence and come away with any kind of clear explanation.

I don't have access to their design documents and even their purported Deep Dive actually reveals little to nothing about why they made some of these decisions. My own assessment is that they're making them for reasons other than what is stated and using the stated reasons largely in a callous assessment that almost no one reads or understands what's being said and that anyone who does can be ignored. It pains me to say this because I generally like that team a lot and don't want to call anyone out about these things, especially when we have much bigger positives to collaborate on.

As a relative example, the original plan for a gas token was to create a new GAS or EVM token for this use. At Telos we rejected this idea from the start because it is more cumbersome for users and it doesn't equitably reward all TLOS holders. Creating an EVM token means that other money can be created and given to someone to get an outsized benefit. Eventually, EOS EVM chose to go with using EOS as the gas token, which is the right decision, but it took a while and there seems ti have been a lot of "spin" on the reasons behind the original and eventual decisions. To me, the 1 second limit also seems spin-heavy, logic-light. I don't mind though because for whatever reason, the EOS EVM team has now locked itself into a decision that gives Telos EVM a clear, objective and easily shared metric of being faster. EOS EVM put itself not only behind Telos EVM in terms of speed, but also others like Fantom & Avalanche. Speed refers to block time. Period.

In terms of capacity (tps), the jury is our. The tests EOS published were on an unaudited version running on a pre-beta version. I don't see how those numbers have any more validity than numbers from Solana or Polygon. They're simply too premature to put any credibility behind. Perhaps they'll turn out to be accurate, but that needs to be shown on a real network. They got excited and jumped the gun, who is no crime, but also nothing anyone outside of EOS seems to care about.

Ultimately when it comes to capacity, both EOS & Telos EVMs are likely to be under capacity for some time to come. Also true, Telos EVM usage is likely to outpace EOS EVM for some time after the EOS EVM launch. If both were pushed to capacity, however, the fact that Telos EVM is writing two evm blocks per second while EOS is only writing one per second strongly suggests to me that Telos EVM would have a maximum capacity of roughly twice that of EOS EVM.

I look forward to learning more and will update my understanding as new information is presented, however I have already read all currently available documentation and explained articles as well as personally using every iteration of the EOS EVM testnets to date."

from douglas horn @dapperd

Posted using ThiagoRe.com