https://steemitimages.com/DQmUnMBo6nRA52Jr92uT7nymVFQnu8euw7utjXCwXAEhXup/image.png
https://steemitimages.com/DQmac4dsBNdLVh66GtCNVB19vwvPoJqcDrACABJpB2gjpuj/image.png

DAN LARIMER WROTE THIS REVIEW, I'M JUST simplifying HIS WORK.

BLOCK INTERVAL
EOS: 0.5 seconds
Steem/BitShares: 3 seconds
Ouroboros: 20 seconds

IRREVERSIBILITY
EOS: <= 2 seconds
Steem/BitShares: <= 45 seconds
Ouroboros: > 5 hours

-Cardano has " Distribution Security Issues"
-Security Concerns addressed by Randomness
-Ouroboros is Unfit for Decentralized Applications

CONCLUSION
Cardano’s Ouroboros algorithm is not mathematically secure due to bad assumptions regarding the relationship between stake and individual-judgment being distributed by the pareto principle. Furthemore, their algorithm is not “new” but a less secure slower variation of the DPOS algorithm I originally introduced in April 2014. The authors of the paper failed to cite relevant prior art or to justify why their deviations from existing art are an improvement.

A blockchain consensus algorithm claiming to value peer review needs to consider who they consider their peers and all such reviews should be public. In the blockchain space, our peers are other blockchain technology companies. From this we can see that DPOS (and variations thereof) is one of the fastest growing consensus algorithms in terms of the number of unique projects choosing it.

I am going to go a step further and claim that much of the academic research and proofs performed by Cardano’s team only bolsters the support and justification of many core DPOS concepts, even if their approach is suboptimal compared to designs of EOS, BitShares, and Steem.

All quoted from the original article ( https://steemit.com/cardamon/@dan/peer-review-of-cardano-s-ouroboros )
you can also find it On my blog as re-steemed