- Solana founder offered an opinion about the Sui centralization debate.
- A decentralization test should be objective rather than subjective.
- A blockchain solution cannot be decentralized if the minority group can unilaterally block the majority.
Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko has weighed in on the ongoing debate around Sui’s governance and the true meaning of blockchain decentralization. His comments come as the Sui network faces pointed questions following its intervention in the aftermath of the multi-million dollar CETUS DEX exploit.
Yakovenko offered his distinct opinion on how blockchain users and developers should actually understand and measure the concept of decentralization.
According to Yakovenko, a decentralization test should be objective rather than subjective. The Solana co-founder outlines standards that can determine whether a blockchain protocol is decentralized. For instance, Yakovenko stated that a blockchain solution cannot be decentralized if the minority group can unilaterally block the majority from making changes or functioning.
Yakovenko’s Litmus Test: What Makes a Blockchain Truly Decentralized?
On the contrary, the renowned blockchain expert condemned the situation where the majority can block the minority from exiting or forking its chain by withholding data or initiating an emergency upgrade on the bridge contract.
Related: Sui Blockchain Fast-Tracks Whitelist Function After Messy CETUS DEX Hack
Yakovenko’s opinion appeared to criticize the action by the Sui team, following their intervention by altering the protocol after the infamous CETUS DEX exploit, where a hacker stole about $233 million from their liquidity pool.
Solana Co-Founder’s View Appears to Critique Sui’s CETUS Hack Response
Shortly after the attack, the Sui team informed users about moves to prevent further fund theft. The Sui team stated that it locked its contract and confirmed that it paused the transfer of $162 million of the compromised funds. The team also noted that they are working with the Sui Foundation and other ecosystem members to resolve the issue.
The team’s action triggered an argument within the blockchain industry, with stakeholders stating taking strong positions on the appropriateness of the actions. Cyber Capital founder Justin Bons sided with those disagreeing with the Sui team’s actions, citing the dangers of decentralization in a supposedly decentralized environment. Bons thinks Sui’s validators are colluding to censor the hacker’s transactions, which amounts to centralization.
Industry Split: Bons Slams Sui’s “Centralization,” Gupta Defends as “Governance”
On the other side of the debate, Sui Foundation’s Amogh Gupta disagrees with Bons’ opinion and those who consider the Sui team’s intervention a risky precedent.
Related: What Does the CETUS Hack Mean for DeFi Security on SUI?
According to Gupta, the Sui team embarked on a legitimate exercise of distributed governance. Gupta stated that the validators’ acts of reaching an agreement over a particular event should not be considered “colluding.”
Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational and educational purposes only. The article does not constitute financial advice or advice of any kind. Coin Edition is not responsible for any losses incurred as a result of the utilization of content, products, or services mentioned. Readers are advised to exercise caution before taking any action related to the company.
