“Neurons can freely choose which ones to follow, this is not the fault of NNS，&#￥@…”
First, it’s not really the problem
Second, blockchain explorers are not charged: 55% of neurons are not involved in motion proposals, do you think they will modify their follow state for other proposals? The fact is that even if someone announces that they control the neurons of DFINITY and ICA and want to attack IC, the remaining 55% neurons will not modify the follow state. Attackers can easily reach a “supermajority”
The fork of the blockchain is different from the NNS proposal. The fork will not affect the data before the fork, and NNS can directly modify the data on the chain. The problem with NNS is that security is built on trust in the neurons organized by the developers of the ICP. Even if there are more development organizations (20?) in the future, IC only has multi-signature security.
NNS lacks a safety mechanism, and other proposals cannot be implemented immediately even if they reach an “absolute majority”. A motion proposal should have the power to suspend the execution of other proposals.