concerns about decentralization: Pi Network is in criticism

because of opaque supernode selection

Veröffentlicht:

Von:

concern about decentralization in the PI network

Within the Pi Network community, the concerns about real decentralization grow, especially in connection with the selection process of so-called supernotuality. These play a crucial role in the validation of transactions and the stability of the blockchain. However, the opaque selection process has raised doubts about the fairness of the network.

lack of transparency in the supernode selection

The selection process for supernotion in the PI network is increasingly criticized. In the test phase of the platform, only three supernacres were active, all of which were checked by the PI Core Team (PCT). These were in Canada and Finland, which led to considering the geographical distribution and centralized control. In contrast, Bitcoin and Ethereum rely on thousands of independent nodes worldwide to ensure real decentralization.

According to current data from Piscan.io, the number of active nodes in the PI network has risen to 42, and there are now three main validists. However, the identity of these validators remains unknown, which raises the question to what extent this growth reflects a real decentralization or is just an attempt to appease critics.

Although PCT has announced that the Supernode rolls to the Pioneer Community, the selection criteria are still unclear. A lack of transparency regarding a public list of approved supernotion and a clear approval process has fueled speculation about insider influences.

Criticism of communication on the part of the PI network has also become loud. A Reddit user who questioned the role of supernotion only received vague answers from representatives of the network. The team confirmed the technical purpose of the nodes, but could not explain how the users can participate.

Among the pioneers that operate standard nodes, frustration is great. As reported sources, many receive no bonuses despite months of activity. This raised the question of whether everyday pioneers have a realistic path to the supernode or whether the selection process prefers participants with special knowledge and resources.

headwind from the community and criticism of experts

The controversy around supernotion triggered a broader criticism of the structure of PI Network. Justin Bons, founder and Cio from Cyber ​​Capital, has referred to as fraud due to its centralized model, questionable tokenomics and a mining structure that is similar to a snowball system.

BONS expressed concerns about the dependence on Stellar technology and argued that this restricted the ability of the platform to develop a robust decentralized financial system. Although the PI network has taken steps to clear up concerns about manipulation-for example by supporting Pidaoswap-there are doubts.

Additional efforts, such as the introduction of .pi domain, could not stop the falling value of the PI-token, which recently fell below $ 1. In order to restore trust in the network and strengthen decentralization, PCT's community members call for more transparency in the selection processes and the network structure.