Polkadot Vs. COSMOS Vs. Octopus Network Vs. NEAR Protocol: Fat Hubs Are Better Than Hub Minimalism - Deepstash

Bite-sized knowledge

to upgrade

your career

Ideas from books, articles & podcasts.

created 7 ideas

HACKERNOON

Polkadot Vs. COSMOS Vs. Octopus Network Vs. NEAR Protocol: Fat Hubs Are Better Than Hub Minimalism

Polkadot Vs. COSMOS Vs. Octopus Network Vs. NEAR Protocol: Fat Hubs Are Better Than Hub Minimalism

hackernoon.com

STASHED IN:

45 reads

When it comes to the topic of the Internet of Blockchains, the contributions of Cosmos and its founders cannot be ignored. In 2015, Jae Kwon and his collaborators created Tendermint ,...

One is that the code of the hub is simplified, so the security and reliability go higher. The other is that the hub will dedicate its limited capacity to process cross-chain transactions, thereby reducing the cost of cross-chain transactions.

The designers of Cosmos followed the 

Take a look at the real-world blockchain interconnection topology, and you can easily find that Ethereum is at the center of the Hub-and-Spoke network, with bridges connecting all important blockchains.

The motivation for doing that is not because Ethereum is minimal, but precisely because...

Polkadot has always been compared with Cosmos. Although the term is not used, Polkadot also practices Hub Minimalism.

The minimalized Polkadot Relay means that decentralized applications including DeFi can only be hosted by paracha...

Octopus Network is the third noteworthy multi-chain network after Cosmos and Polkadot. Its goal is to launch and run a large number of Web3.0 applications in the form of application-specific blockchains, aka appchains, which are safe and effic...

1 Reaction

Comment

It's time to

READ

LIKE

A PRO!

Jump-start your

reading habits

, gather your

knowledge

,

remember what you read

and stay ahead of the crowd!

Takes just 5 minutes a day.


TRY THE DEEPSTASH APP

+2M Installs

4.7 App Score