If the censoring miners or ”validators” both have the majority and refuse to build on top of blocks that happen to include the transactions they don’t like, such transactions would be completely blocked from the blockchain. Thus, censorship at the consensus layer is very dangerous for digital freedoms.
Currently, there are about 50% of Post-Merge OFAC Compliant Blocks on Ethereum, which means there’s a half of the whole network that doesn’t want to deal with Tornado Cash transactions. For now, they only block such transactions from their own blocks but are still okay to build on top of blocks that include them. However, if pressed to do so by governments or out of an abundance of caution, they might adopt stricter censorship and start refusing to build on top of such blocks as well. That’s the one step needed for Tornado Cash to be fully censored.
Quote: "Essentially, it would create an inverse pyramid whereby the holders of the native token could control the transactions of the said stablecoin."
Miners and validators in blockchains can censor individual transactions and extract MEV. Order providers in DAG can only sabotage the entire network, even if all they want is censoring a single transaction.
Both are just tools but blockchain is better suited for the tasks where the community/collective's interests should be prioritized over those of the individual, while DAG is a better fit for the tasks where individual freedoms are of primary concern.
- cascading donations: one can set up one's repo to automatically forward a percentage of donations to other repos, such as dependencies, thus sharing the donations with them. This is very relevant for open-source software development with its long "supply chains" and lower level libraries being often neglected.
- it's open, meaning that anyone can donate and receive donations. No geo restrictions (because donations are in crypto), no intermediaries, and no fees.
Summary: in blockchains, the power is concentrated in a few centers, while in DAGs it is more evenly distributed among users. That's because blockchain users only create transactions but have to rely on block producers to add them to the ledger, while DAG users both create transactions and add them to the ledger with no middlemen involved.
Perhaps you are referring to some other distribution. Distribution of one of the tokens and distribution of power are unrelated in Obyte.
The article is a bit more general and its conclusions would equally apply to a hypothetical DAG-based network that uses the same tech but some different way of issuing the native currency.
