I know that dpos is a centralized solution but I don't think its possible to get high tps without having some centralization.
It is not possible in block chain centered crypto, because block chain centered crypto is requiring a much too much severe form of consensus, needing EVERYONE to agree *perfectly* on the *single* *totally* ordered list of transactions ever done ; on top of it, with a time-spaced unique seigniorage mechanism included.
This is not needed to keep the accounts of owners of coins. Of course, it is (largely) sufficient, but this strict ordering and time spacing is making that the thing can not scale.
For instance, whether the transaction from Joe to Jack came BEFORE the transaction from Alice to Claire, or after it, *doesn't matter*. Whether you got a confirmation of the transaction from Joe to Jack in block A, and you got another confirmation in block B, doesn't matter. The fact of having to chose between block A and block B is, concerning these transactions, not necessary. It is only necessary to indicate a winner of the reward.
I'd agree that the solution is probably to take the blockchain out of crypto. Then transactions can be instant without waiting for confirms. If Joe pays Jack, Alice and Claire, it doesn't matter what order they are processed in as long as Jack has the balance to send the transactions. Blockchains are doubling the amount of traffic, firstly we have the broadcasting of transactions, and secondly we get the transaction included in a block. A PoW blockchain coin generation distribution scheme would be a very small blockchain only needed by mining nodes. So all that is needed is a mechanism where people cannot forge their own coins and double spend.
Indeed. I'm trying to find a scheme where it is the owner of coins himself that is to prove that he didn't double spend, rather than having the global system showing that he didn't. That means that there mustn't be global consensus on much ; in fact only on "provided signatures for peer balances" or something of the kind. Everyone is supposed to keep his OWN transaction history to be able to prove validity of his current status.
In fact, you only need to have sufficient peers keeping your transactions sufficient long times in order to be able to verify that your actual balance is correct since your last "certified" balance ; if you don't bother keeping a past certified balance that is recent enough, then your problem that you cannot provide proof any more of right to spend.