Reddit Posts
How the Cardano Foundation just told ¾ of SPO’s they yet again offer no value.
Cardano: Contingent Staking is a nothing burger
Cardano: Contingent Staking is a nothing burger
Cardano developer IOG’s response on why 60% of all nodes went offline the other day
To The Cardano Shill Shitting on Ethereum
31% of Cardano SPO Nodes Have Upgraded to v1.35.3
20% of Cardano SPO’s are on Vasil version 1.35.3, Charles defends why it’s ready to launch.
SPOOK INU BSC | Incredible Graphics | Multiple levels | Huge plans for future development ! | Slipage : 2% | Tax 10%
Thinking of being an SPO? Have tenacity
Choosing the right stake pool. Cardano
Mentions
That’s a huge topic - but essentially there are two problems here: 1. Focusing on a small subset of decentralisation around SPO builder distribution as it’s framed by Cardano, and then applying that lens to all other chains and suggesting it covers all decentralisation. 2. Even within this small subset, the metrics are cherry-picked and applying them in this manner just hides the actual detail and complexity. For example they used “Pool names” to differentiate SPOs, but multiple are run under different brands, but operated by IOG. Trying to force rank for a fake leaderboard, rather than honestly deconstructing specific and idiosyncratic risks is more problematic than it is valuable.
the majority of SPOs disagree with low K. Why didn't they fork Cardano after IOG for years lied about an increase in K being just around the corner? They even voted on increasing K to 1000 and IOG just ignored them. the majority of SPOs disagree with the existence of minpoolcost. Why haven't they forked that away yet? You realize your fork wouldn't be listed on any centralized exchanges, wouldn't have the "ADA" ticker, and as a result would end up with a tiny market cap? Even if it eventually did get recognized by exchanges, it'd have a different name like "Cardano SPO Edition". Who will be paying the army of Haskell developers to work on your fork? IOG & Charles certainly won't touch it. You won't have a treasury to pay developers since the fork's treasury would be worth next to nothing.
No they don't. 1. It is impossible for stake pools to make changes like block size, K, or minpoolcost, without IOG's permission. That's not "decentralized" 2. Parameter changes like block size don't require a hard fork. A hacker who gains access to IOG computers would be able to set block size to 0 right before an epoch change and freeze the network. 3. Hard forks don't actually require SPOs to adopt it. Charles saying 70% of SPOs need to update before they can hardfork is a lie, as this isn't a technical requirement just a social "we promise". IOG can push a hardfork without SPO agreement and SPOs would be left on a dead chain that's impossible to upgrade.
Mt gox .. celcius all over again. Just my opinion. I hope to help people see they can "opt in" to take control of their identity/ privacy/ voting and intellectual property rights. F the 'casino coin go up cause a greater fool assumed so' narrative. There's more here than inflooencoor/investoor sucker bets.(maybe not in bitcoin) Build, create, start a business .. Hodl is just price speculation. Why do I want the settlement layer more expensive? Rather than the company launching a product or service to rise on account of the utility provided to customers. The chain is only keeping proofs of seed phrase. But a tenacious group of humans that capitalized on a market need are the ones creating value in the Web3 space ad a whole. Whats bitcoin do? Why is it more expensive than any other 2015 style payment channel? No, thanks.. you guys can chase that 2x to 90 grand. *Hodl crypto bros*🤣 P.S. same for Ada. It can stay at a more stable price and our company would still validate the customers tx on chain.. utilizing the SPO security. In closing.. Build better. Help people. Then talk about a commodity price.
On open stake or liquid stake, yes ... examples: Cardano has an open staking model , so no matter what happens to the SPO you delegate with, your funds are always in your wallet on which only You (supposedly) have control of. On Cardano (any many other L1's, dunno, Tezos is another example, you don't even lose the rewards if something happens with the stake pool operator because they accrue directly in your main amount each epoch. Eth is the same, except the staking options are more diverse, and some probably request a lock period. The simplest way to know this is to simply check if what you are delegating for stake disappeared from your wallet ... then it's locked in a smart contract, and it takes ownership of your delegated funds. An example would be Agix on erc-20, after you enable the stake, your agix is locked in a smart contract and disappears from your wallet. But remember, a smart contract should be an autonomus script, with no third party having ownership on the funds (supposedly). Just check how diverse the staking model is on PoS chains, and you will understand how it differs from traditional banking accounts.
[NASA already using Hedera](https://partnerships.gsfc.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/SPO_AccomplishmentsReport2020.pdf)
Talk about it is very much alive. So far the dReps and SPO model/concept is pretty darn good compared to the typical DAO nonsense we see commonly in crypto.
Especially for larger amounts, the Apy % is to sexi ... compared to the native options. Take any chain, Cardano, has a decent 4.5% apr, depending on the SPO, but any random Dapp, like Minswap, will offer you 30% or more with IL included. For a few k's, it might not be worth the risk, for a few millions or hundreds of K's, i'm pretty sure it's a no-brainer decision. The passive income generation is simply to big to ignore, on some amounts, you can make your life a vacation IF the Dapp is steady and doesn't get hacked or the founders don't run away with the coins.
Mithril will have two entities. The "aggregator", which will store the full Cardano transaction history, and will act as the base to "retrieve" each transaction, and the "client", which cryptographical will take snapshots from the "aggregator", and recreate the transaction history. I am not sure, but SPOs will probably need (for security reasons), to have the full transaction history, so they will need to run Cardano's full node, without Mithril. But, as Mithril matures, and Cardano's full node becomes bigger, maybe it is going to be created a solution for (especially smaller) SPOs to run Mithril, and retrieve the Cardano's history through other SPOs. The end users, that don't care about the full transaction history, as you said, in any case, would not care about what their SPO is doing. The Mithril is more important to be enabled in light wallets' backend. So, when you look at your history, on your personal wallet, you will know that is not based on a specific SPO, but through a cryptographic algorithm, it will show you your transactions, based on the snapshots that Mithril has taken through different SPOs. So, in a decentralized manner, you will know your exact transactions, and you are going to be 100% sure that they are ok, without downloading the full transaction history of Cardano
I am not a Tezos user, and I am not fully aware of its staking mechanism. I have heard though that is the only other protocol (from the relatively big ones) that has a liquid staking mechanism, with similar pros to Cardano. Cardano's staking mechanism is working like this. You are choosing a Stake Pool Operator (SPO), and you delegate your ADA to them. Your ADA never leaves your wallet, and there is no slashing, if your Validator misbehaves or becomes inactive. If this happens, you just stop getting rewards. The rewards distribution is every 5 days (it is called an epoch). But because every time you get the ADA rewards, you are getting those for 2 epochs prior, you will need to wait 15-20 days to see your first ADA rewards. Then you will earn every 5 days. Also, your rewards are auto-compounding. Lastly, in the future, if side-chains come to Cardano and they have native tokens, their transactions, will rely on the validators and the security of the Cardano protocol. So, depending on the SPO you delegated your funds, you might get tokens from the side chains, as rewards. As I said, I think Tezos has also a great staking mechanism. Also, I have heard that you have a great Governance, and a fully decentralized, system. Maybe, I should dive deeper into the ecosystem, and even buy some XTZ. Can you suggest anything, for any newbie in the Tezos ecosystem? P.S. For Algorand fans (I am a big too). Algorand had also a fully liquid Pure PoS mechanism, but it changed a bit with the Governance vote. Now, you "commit" ALGO, so you are not locking them per se, but if you move them, you are losing the rewards. This is why I believe Cardano's staking mechanism is more "liquid". I love Algorand though.
You’ve got your terms mixed up: Delegation = using a staking key to vote for an SPO. Nothing at stake, funds never leave your wallet - you’re just signalling to the protocol. Liquid staking = providing capital to an aggregated staking pool, who then stake it. Direct PoS = you stake capital with a validator, that secure the network. Cardano is the former, Ethereum is the latter, although you could argue SPOs are similar to Ethereum validators. Both protocols have liquid staking tokens, as additional out of protocol services.
Yep. That was just a non-binding vote - nothing has been implemented. But again, you can write perfect game theory in academic papers, what’s implemented is what matters. minFee means that a small SPO that only proposes 1 block per epoch is charged a 55% fee, making them unprofitable. But no you’re correct it doesn’t solve the nothing at stake problem. It relies purely on social consensus which is far less secure.
There are a number of parameters that don’t fit the previous modelling, but the most egregious is the MinFee being set at 340 ADA which massively skews SPO profitability.
you dont have to trust the SPO at all. you trust the chain and network parameters.
Well it has been refreshing to to hear 'ghost chain' comments for awhile. "The Big argument within the cardano space at the moment is around Contingent staking - whether we allow stakepool operators to deny delegators based on a variety of factors so that those stake pools can meet the KYC or money and tax regulations within the country that they operate. A stakepool was designed to be a business, and as such a business should reserve the right to refuse service." Personally it doesn't bother me as delegators can also refuse to use the business (stake pool) if they don't agree with terms/conditions set by it. Remember the SPO needs to delegators as well to find the sweet spot in pool saturation to receive rewards; they will be plenty of smaller SPOs to absorb delegators. Democratization working as it will work.
nope, the percentage return is unreliable because it uses the fraud that is CPI the ONLY thing that matters is cost:reward ratio if rewards > cost of running pool then the SPO network will be healthy costs paid in FIAT makes crypto appreciation fundamental to the calc
the minimum fee for a block producing SPO is 350 an epoch, so at an absolute minimum SPOs are getting 350 ADA every 5 days, thats 2100 ADA or US$735 a month - at the bottom of a bear market the fixed fee doesn't change but let's just play your fantasy, if you cut it in half you are still making a lot of money, you could cut it down to a 10th and you are still profitable - and this ignores all price appreciate of crypto important to note you can run a pool on a $100 ex-business tiny pc trust me, you are completely wrong and in 10 years SPOs are still going to be profitable people A LOT smarter than both of us has study the game theory and incentives of the rewards/spo ecosystem
>his will lead to a scenario where EVERY SPO has the KYC barrier and we no longer run an anonymous egalitarian chain wher or, you know, someone who disagrees can just start a non contingent stake pool. since literally anyone can start one. and if there is a market for that, it will exist. if crypto won't make some effort to work with governments, governments will do everything they can to ban it. they won't be successful, but they will keep it from being what it can be.
There won't be a scenario where every SPO implements KYC because not every SPO is in favour of contingent staking.
Charles is trying to convince the community to change the entire protocol to defend against a hypothetical scenario where the SEC comes after stake pool operators for not doing KYC. He wants to build into the protocol the ability for stake pool operators to have the ability to fire their delegators for not providing KYC info. Many in the community, myself included, think this will lead to a scenario where EVERY SPO has the KYC barrier and we no longer run an anonymous egalitarian chain where anyone and everyone gets the same exact treatment. He has engaged in finger-wagging and immature Musk-like tactics of threatening to dial back the expressiveness and elegant determinism of the system just to get people to agree with him (and I sort of agreed) until I thought about it for a while. IMO, it will change the tokenomics and make this into a permissioned chain...which goes against the Satoshi principles IMO and will cause me to seriously look into forking the tech stack to one that is anonymous and decentralized. This CS argument will be voted on by the community (which is cool, IMO) but having a condescending ideologue in the center of the whole issue tipping the scale in his favor is fucked up, IMO.
Good question. They could do so with DIDs. An SPO could require that a delegator submit a DID. No DID no delegation
Respectfully, but I think we are asking the wrong questions. There are various PoS models, and only some are affected by it. Cardano uses technically DPoS, although they like to argue they aren't DPoS. So why does the delegation on Cardano causes foreseeable regulatory issues? Because there is a strong factor of SPO ( aka node operators) acting on behalf of delegators. E.G they vote for them on node updates, and aren't entirely trust-less as they can raise margin to 99%, and take the rewards. It is principal agent problem at its finest. Of course, the argument from the side of Cardano is that they aren't DPoS in the first place, since they claim that no actual ADA is being delegated - only a stake key. Fine. In my opinion, this is a very weak argument which doesn't change the "acting on behalf" and principal agent problem dynamics. And as we see, they are scared enough that regulators won't see it their way, and are working on solutions. Obviously, they go for the solution which would strengthen the position of whales and big SPO's, and assure that IOG/Charles won't have problems with SEC. That's why they don't like more ambitious L2 solutions, or something more complex. Quasi permissioned staking is obviously very unattractive for delegators. Charles would argue that "you can run your own private Stake Pool" - tiny detail is you need at least 2m ADA to make it viable. In my opinion, the Delegated PoS is the actual problem here, the contingent staking is only a symptom of it. DPoS creates various issues, like big holders of ADA getting on average 30% more rewards compared to small ones, and the obvious regulatory issue as it creates business relation between delegators and SPOs. It wasn't build with regulations in mind, and as much I am for crypto ethos and decentralization - Cardano won't be able to avoid regulations and its current staking model isn't really prepared for it. However, this doesn't mean entire crypto will be affected by it, or all PoS projects. There are actual crypto projects where "build with regulation in mind" isn't an empty sales pitch. For example: Pure PoS of Algorand doesn't create principal agent problem, since it has no delegation in the first place. There is absolutely no relation between node operators, stakers etc. There are more projects where you participate in the consensus by simply having coins in your wallet. There is nothing to regulate, nodes operators aren't even for profit businesses in some cases etc. DPoS is probably one of the worst options among PoS designs, although details matter. Overall, the situation is similar to projects which launched with an ICO, and promoted their stuff in the US, despite SEC repeatedly saying this will classify them as securities. Founders like Hoskinson knowingly shat on regulations, but under the current SEC crackdown they might not get away with it. They will be forced to heavily redesigning their protocols (and say bye to convenient staking) or get sued.
I wouldn't consider it the future or anything. As far as ADA goes the key word here is choice. If this is implemented SPO's can choose to utilize it or not. There will still be a massive amount of pools that won't care to use it and users will still have a massive amount of choices of those pools. There will be certain entities operating on the chain that need to comply with certain laws and regulations and would need to utilize it. If those entities bring value to the chain and some users then why would I care? I don't have to associate with them if I don't want to share my data with them. And as with any financial decision you should do your due diligence so that you don't associate with a malicious pool that utilizes it. It's fine if you think it goes against the principles of crypto but for me in this case I think it's a fine choice for the chain to have.
In creation of blocks delegators are giving their “vote” to the SPO. This doesn’t eliminate their voting power in other governance issues though.
Feels like a broadly 50/50 split right now. Hopefully the anti side can be the more convincing. The whole proposed feature is based on a hypothetical scenario of government regulation requiring an SPO to only allow stake based on some criteria (posited as country of citizenship.) Yet, if you make the argument about other hypothetical government regulations that could logically follow from it, such as censorship of transactions based on delegation, the pro side say it's invalid criticism because it's hypothetical.
1. If you can control the underlying parameters of stake pools you can change the landscape of SPOs quite fast. They literally would just need to change few parameters to create even bigger pool conglomerates. Can they do it within a day? Probably not. But it is easily doable over the course of few months. After that, they could push any change they want. 2. Yeah, I remember the statistic you refer to. I think it is vague though, ICO of ADA took place in Japan, and roughly 80% went to Japanese investors for $0.002. Retail was buying after that for 2 cent. So, was it really 80% retail and a decentralised worldwide distribution? Maybe. My bigger issue is that they did the ADA ICO as some "casino coin" (ada coin back then). This could become also a regulatory issue, but better not to touch such topics within Cardano community. 3. I don't want to twist my words here, but in my opinion if a SPO can deny delegetors it fulfills the definition of permissioned staking. Ok, Charles used the argument that "if you don't like it you can run your own pool". Fine, the tiny detail he doesn't mention, you need millions of ADA to run a viable private pool by yourself. Therefore, it isn't permissioned if you are a whale, only permissioned for the average Joe. Don't get me wrong, I have fully understanding if you would deny certain stakers as SPO, I am not some cyberphunk idealist. My point is rather, it is the design of delegated PoS which creates the need for such "solutions" in the first place. The problem was foreseeable, it was Charles that denied that there is an issue with delegator-SPO relationship. Same with big players getting more rewards. Those are inherent DPoS problems, and I can't really imagine how such system will work well in course of 10 years or more. Of course, unless they fix it, but then again - why chose a design which requires so many fixes? We were promised a design "built with regulations in mind" , meanwhile it isn't prepared for quite reasonable and mild regulatory framework.
Appreciate the answer. ​ 1) ...if there is a function build-in, which allows to surpass other decentralization mechanisms, I am not a fan of it and don't consider it truly decentralized - Which function specifically are you talking about? I assume the fact that IOG controls the keys to update the protocol. To answer that - it doesn't surpass other decentralized mechanism such as the fact that majority of SPOs need ot upgrade to the newest version of the node in order for the upgrade to take place. Still, key ownership needs to be decentralized - agree. ​ 2) Governance will need a fairly decentralized coin ownership, and the PoS performing really well. -- Don't want to search for it rn, but I believe Cardano has one of the best distribution of base asset among all blockchains. ​ 3) If you followed the recent events, you can see that they consider to make the entire staking process permissioned -- That's outright false. The only thing that was suggested is "contingent staking", which will allow SPOs to arbitrarily accept or decline delegation from any wallet. And there are lots of reasons outside of regulation on why one might want it. I'm for example Ukrainian. If I were SPO, I wouldn't want a dime from russians. I'm not willing to partner with them to produce blocks on the blockchain. As of now, there's no way for me to deny delegation from them. Also, if this change is to be implemented, it'll be only done after proper discussions within the CIP framework & I understood it'll be done only after MBO is in place. ​ 4) Moreover, there is a certain degree of centralization among stake pools, and it looks like they get more centralized over time. I count them in terms of entities behind nodes, not the actual nodes -- Yeah, we (Cardano) are not dumb, nor dishonest. So it's the only way we track MAV (Nakomoto coef). You can see the stats for here: [https://balanceanalytics.io/dashboards/insights/](https://balanceanalytics.io/dashboards/insights/) (wait a bit, takes time to load). You can see it's not declining. ​ 5) Another problem - whales have a higher APY if they run a pool compared to small delegators -- Yes, the difference in APY is 1-1.5%, so let's not pretend here like it's "another problem". Can it be improved? I hope so. We have CIP-50 for this one. Work in progress. ​ 6) The current model resulted in kind of Proof of Popularity and rich getting richer. -- Demagogy. MAV value is best among all peers & it's stable \~20. ​ 7) I just think their current delegated PoS model isn't a good model to build a governance on. - Fine with me. We'll try our thing - maybe we succeed, maybe fail.
You can stake 0.01Eth if you join a pool like rocketpool you just can’t run your own validator. People think that one click staking on a chain like Cardano is the same as Ethereum staking. It’s not. Ethereum staking is the same as running an SPO on Cardano and you need 1,000,000+ Ada to have any chance of validating a block.
Incorrect "Fees will need to 100x (that is 100 TIMES not 100%) in the next few years" in a few years rewards will drop about 20%.... also SPOs will not only be getting transaction fees from ADA by other native tokens, as well as any sidechains they wish to support honestly, being an SPO is one of the most lucrative ways of being involved in Cardano, especially with the amount of resources, skill and effort it requires - ie very little. to suggest that cardanos security is at risk due to reduction in inflation is legit hilarious, if you establish a successful stake pool it is a NO BRAINER
Good grief. You say that like you actually understood something. Do you work for Joe Lubin? Cardano delegators never lose custody of their ADA. SPO's try to gather as much stake as possible because that determines \*their\* rewards, a percentage of which is automatically transferred to the delegators in proportion to their stake. Daedalus is a full-node wallet. There are over 1M ADA holders and many of them run these full nodes, providing additional security for the blockchain. Nothing else comes close to that. Bitcoin has 15,000 full nodes. Each Daedalus user contributes to security whether they stake or not. It takes some bandwidth, some time to maintain sync, or update. It takes some care and feeding, but so does CoinBase or Rocket Pool, for that matter. For Cardano, it is explicitly about your keys, your coins. You can choose whether to stake them or not, but unlike ETH, you always retain control of the asset. If an SPO is either dysfunctional or malicious, then you might not see any rewards. But your principle is never in danger and rewards gets paid out more or less continuously. If an SPO misbehaves, they will lose delegators and suffer that way, but their ADA isn't in danger either. Just their livelihood. The delegators lose just a week or so of rewards. So yes, the delegators actually do work, and contribute value to the security model. The SPO's compete for delegators, but if they hit a max level the pool saturates and some delegators go to other (unsaturated) pools. This encourages decentralization. Whether you are a delegator running Daedalus, or an SPO running a few relay nodes and a primary, it can all be done on consumer-class hardware. That can be done without permission from anyone. You can pony up 32 ETH and spend a bunch of money on a brutal AWS workload, and claim that you are in self-custody of your staked ETH. And you'd be right. Put your node on Rocket Pool, gather up some staked ETH, and earn RPL there, as well as the ETH staking rewards... and now you are a SAAS: that's a security. Thus ends your lesson, midwit.
You are talking semantics. If you as a user want rewards you put your Ada into their SPO. Sure you can take it out whenever. But you are still using them.
you aren't actually giving the SPO any tokens what is actually happening is for each ADA you hold you get a lottery ticket for the right to mint a block if you are successful and win the block lottery then you grant the SPO to use your lottery ticket to mint the winning block
I’d suggest you look up how to become an SPO and how much is needed to be staked to be profitable.
Eth validators can be up 66% of the time and still be profitable. Anyways we are comparing apples to oranges. Your comparing a validator I run at home (32eth) myself to delegating to somebody on Cardano. Not an apple to apple comparison. If you want it apple to apple compare running my own validator (32 eth) or about 50k usd to a SPO on Cardano and you want it profitable about 1 million usd.
On Ada, you aren’t staking, your giving it to a SPO that is staking for you. You can do the same on eth fren, Rocketprool, Stakewise v3, Lido, all do the same thing.
Can be seen differently: the de facto delegated PoS of Cardano is one of the riskiest designs regulatory-wise, and Chuck is scared he might get hit. Delegating your funds to a third party creates a principal agent problem. It is hard to deny that stake pool operators act on behalf of delegators, at least to some extent. In case of Cardano it is even worse, because SPO’s aren’t anonymous entities and delegators chose them based on certain metrics like fees, popularity etc. There were also cases where rewards got stolen, fees/margin raised to 99% etc. SPO’s also chose whether they upgrade their nodes, so their control goes even beyond financial ones. People like Charles would probably argue that ada isn’t actually delegated and twist their words around staking addresses etc., but ultimately it doesn’t have any effect on the incentive model. I am pretty sure Gensler understands those things much better than average ADA holder. It is also unlikely they would “ban PoS”, as most projects would simply start to rebrand themselves as something else, after tiny changes. Regulators will rather ban certain characteristics, and this might hit projects which weren’t developed with regulations in mind, and ada doesn’t look like particularly well designed for it, I would give it an very average score.
Taking a different viewpoint here (and not supporting the SEC), but it's not the mechanism and technical design of staking that the SEC is looking at - its that investors are allocating their coins towards maintaining a system with the expectation of financial rewards. Some staking operators offer massive finanical rewards over others. Whether you hold or the SPO holds control over the coins is probably immaterial.
Fair question, this would seem to be an intentionally open ended option. Cardano SPOs could be the validators or it could be a separate set of validators for the project entirely depending on requirements. It would be up to the project to determine what they want and for the SPO community to want to participate.
This is the explanation I got from the cardano developer sub Reddit regarding mainchain and sidechain security on Cardano. “The sidechain periodically saves a hash of its state to a main chain block. Thus the correctness of the sidechain state can be verified by checking its hash against the hash that is stored on the main chain. In this way all parties that secure the main chain now also validate the state of the sidechain regardless of the number of validators on the sidechain itself.” This would seem to imply that it does inherit extra security by all Cardano SPOs once an SPO that agrees to validate the side chain mints a Cardano block. To be fair, I don’t know how this is similar or different to an Ethereum side chain and I do recognize that the onus of security is on the sidechain itself initially appears to be with its own validators. I would be interested to know the differences between an Ethereum sidechain and a Cardano sidechain though since the topic keeps popping up.
There are only few options to claim that it is "best in class" 1. You know only 1-2 competing project 2. You are clueless 3. You are lying. The 51% attack threshold is totally meaningless if Cardano uses such primitive VRF and you know which SPO's are usually producing blocks. Moreover, only 70% of ADA is staked and actually participating in the consensus. This is less secure compared to other PoS blockchains, which use way more sophisticated and secure VRF, where 100% of all coins participate in the consensus, and you have absolutely no idea who will produce the next block. Cardano is a dinosaur in comparison. Block production IS NOT very decentralised. Most Stake Pools are in hand of few entities, and it is getting more centralised - and Shelly isn't even completely out for 2 years. That's a poor result. Block production doesn't matter anyway, and is not enough to call it truly decentralised, as Charles held majority of genesis keys till recently and had full control over the protocol. If there is a backdoor you are not decentralised. Lack of transparency also. Illiquid and non custodial staking isn't a novelty anymore. The delegated PoS is a poor design, because it turns into a Proof of Popularity, which can be seen on Cardano. Moreover, you will run eventually in regulatory problems, as it is pretty clear that SPO acts on behalf of delegators - principal agent problem at its finest. Look it up. There was even already a regulatory proposal for that, where SPO's would need to KYC each delegator. I doubt it is off the table. Other points: They deleted the entire test net with a buggy version of Vasil update. Deleting of test net can happen, the problem is that they almost updated the main net to the same buggy version, including Charles running around on twitter saying SPO's should update to this specific version. Thanks to lucky circumstances they didn't, and the bug was fixed before. I have no words for such terrible quality control, and how Charles downplayed such dangerous event, and how bad his mistake was. I mean, they would almost delete the entire blockchain, it can't get worse than that. 60% of nodes going down can become an issue if it will happen in higher frequency. The issue is not that it happened, the issue is that they have no clue what happened, and that it was triggered by some unknown transaction. Guess what is gonna happen if someone knows how to trigger it? Still not an issue? Claiming that everything is fine, without finding the actual bug is just repulsive imho. Same with the word twisting: they had partial node outage and call it an "anomaly"? If 1 out of 2 engines in your airplane goes off for two minutes you don't call it an anomaly as if nothing happened, only because you arrived safely to your destination - you say there was a problem and you gonna investigate it. And ADA holders still wonder way Charles has been called so often a snake oil salesman? That's why!
Yeah, right. Comparing "volume" between account model and EuTXO model...just ridiculous. Totally meaningless metric anyway, few whales/exchanges relocating funds can shoot it up. Also, "two months" rofl... They not only almost deleted the main net, Charles was also screaming on twitter at SPO's to update to this specific version! Thanks to lucky circumstances and slow SPO's, this update never went through, and THEN they fixed it, while the test net was already broken. Meanwhile, Chuck wasn't really upset about the poor quality control, only about the publicity and community knowing the truth. All that was downplayed and misrepresented, exactly the same as in case of 60% nodes going down. If you don't see anything wrong with it, you are brainwashed. Mistakes can happen, yet the lack of transparency and honesty is mind-blowing. If you can count and have minimum technical knowledge, you would know that these parameters have very little impact on actual tps. Even after Vasil update, where some transaction types occupy around 90% less space, real tps is still around ONE, at 30-50% network load. Cardano won't be able to handle any higher traffic without tiered pricing (higher fees) or accepting much longer transaction time. Further block size increases are small tweaks, they need something like input endorsers to see a meaningful upgrade in tps, but you are unlikely to see it anytime soon. It is ignorant to think that Cardano needs fees of ETH in order to not be competitive, we are not in 2015, and smart contracts aren't a novelty. Very different landscape. Not interested in becoming an American, I enjoy my place without daily mass shootings, no hordes of homeless people/drug addicts, and a culture which doesn't celebrate a narcissistic, lying salesman like CH. Thank you for the idea though.
It is far from the truth , Algorand did a way better system in 2019. They just changed the rewards payouts in order to push on-chain governance, yet on the consensus level it is still clearly the better staking design - every coin participates, no annoying stake pools, no delegation, you stake by holding coins it in the wallet, no locking etc Delegated PoS is not really that good, it turns into popularity contest where rich get richer. By delegating you give also certain part of you voting power to the SPO, which acts on your behalf. Textbook principal agent problem and a huge regulatory risk - don't complain if regulators ask SPO's to perform kyc on each delegator, it was already proposed once, and is probably not off the table.
From reading my SPO telegram chat the outage was less than the gap between blocks during normal production
IIRC, it was even a part of some regulatory proposal in the US, SPO's would basically need to KYC each delegator. It didn't get through yet, but I doubt it will be off the table. SEC is apparently also going to be more active. The issue is, there is also no argument that PoS has to be designed in such way. Cardano is - but many don't have such problem. And to avoid that, they would need to completely rework their consensus. Moreover, yes, the form is indeed very much like a security.
>Also, I have some regulatory concerns. Technically, we delegate our ADA (or voting power) to someone, which might be seen as SPO acting on behalf of delegator, which leads to principal agent problem. Unnecessary regulatory risk imho. Yes, very much staking ADA in it's current form could be considered a security as no actual work is being done by the initial holder. It's an investment in a common enterprise with expectation of return for the work of another. Textbook definition of a security imo
Whether it will work out remains to be seen, it is getting more centralized now. After using it for 2 years, I am not as convinced as I used to. No slashing is great, but they have minPoolCost to avoid creation of many, tiny, malicious pools. This specific parameter (fee) is leading to more centralization, as nodes operators with more ADA have clear advantage here, which leads to smaller pools not being competitive, which leads to more centralization and so on. Vicious circle. Also the delegated PoS model has some downsides like: SPO's are chosen based on popularity which is never good for safety or decentralization. Avoiding it from user perspective requires a lot of research, unlikely smaller holders will invest that time, and I think crypto is already complicated enough, asking average user to chose the right SPO is too much, but if they don't do it results in centralization. Also, I have some regulatory concerns. Technically, we delegate our ADA (or voting power) to someone, which might be seen as SPO acting on behalf of delegator, which leads to principal agent problem. Unnecessary regulatory risk imho.
That’s different. Cardano uses the Tezos model of account delegation, not staking. It’s more equivalent to voting for a Baker or an SPO in return for rewards. You don’t actually have anything at stake in this model (as long as you choose the right validator).
This is false, Charles tried to force an update but the SPO's said no. SPO's wanted to do more testing. This is decentralized.
This is why fundamentally I do support both, but Cardano has the edge here over Ethereum. 3,000+ SPO’s and the minimum needed to run a pool is pennies compared to ETH, and anyone can stake to any pool, fully liquid staking etc. your funds never leave your wallet. it really is just the superior choice for that particular comparison.
It’s not securing the network - it’s similar to Tezos with liquid delegation of the wallet to an SPO (who is actually staking and securing the network). Delegation is just a form of voting.
There are multiple ways to be a sidechain. Your premise that a Cardano SPO would need to have similar processing requirements as a Solana validator is begging a lot of explanation of your understanding of how it works, because in reality it would be just verifying a Mithril certificate or compressed rollup proof that the Solana sidechain posted back to Cardano every 20 seconds not physically processing the Solana blockchain. The point brought up during the Twitter space discussion that this all stems from is that Solana can avoid the shut downs by leveraging Cardano as the trust layer and continue to operate with its validator set at the problematic 400ms block times business as usual.
Security and scalability guarantees. Also you generate multiple revenue stream as an sidechain SPO on Cardano through with mamba tech.
>cardano did stop producing blocks for 25 minutes last year It was a bug on the end of epoch which lasted 15 minutes longer than the usual (normally 3-8 minutes). Transactions still went into the mempool, no stoppage, halts or restarts. The only down side to this was some SPO's lost out on blocks. The rest of your comment is just blahblah. You are always coping about Cardano or Charles. You even invested in UST/Luna, no one takes you seriously.
>there is a blockchain. It does handle smart contracts and there are hundreds of projects being built on it. [https://defillama.com/chains](https://defillama.com/chains) Doesnt seem anyone is using it. >notoriously slow moving project with no promises about ADA price Of course the developers don't outright say it. That would be a security. It is wink wink from them. The people who outright say it are staking pool operators/youtube shillfulencers. >stake for 3-5% a year Where does that money come from? Cardano supply inflation that is dumped for USD. SPOs push hard on marketing. They recruit stakers promising yield. Stakers get sucked into the information bubble/cult-like community and spread the gospel . More people buy. More usd is moved from new people to the people selling their yield. (probably SPOs) Those nodes are probably expensive. ​ >does any blockchain have retail sales? Yes. The business of a blockchain is selling blockspace. Cardano blockspace makes meager sales. [https://cryptofees.info/](https://cryptofees.info/) >Buy the coin, like any other crypto project. No commission beyond that Multi levels here. SPO, and staking. Only way to get profit is to sell ADA for USD. >|Emphasis on recruiting/ cult-like community Only way to make yield is to sell ADA for new money. Only way to make money from cardano is to sell supply inflation to other people. [https://moneyprinter.info/](https://moneyprinter.info/)
Cardano. ADA Stakers in the future will also get DUST on top of ADA rewards. DUST is used on Midnight it is a Sidechain hosted on Cardano SPO’s that will have private Smart Contracts.
Assuming with SPOs you mean Stake Pool Operators, how does staking relate to the security of the code dapps are written in? Or what else does SPO mean?
What you just posted does not make my statement false. You can run an SPO with atleast 340 ada, to be a successful block producer its about the same as the Ethereum requirement when it comes to pledge, but thats not the barrier for entry. You could argue about the pledge to be a successful block producer is as costly as in Ethereum. Slashing is still not sound money, who in earth would be comfortable with getting their funds slashed because their computer crashed?
What exactly is a lie there? please elaborate if I got something wrong. A simple google search will tell you that an normal affordable pc will do just fine, as well as min. 340 ada to run an SPO. An uptime of 24/7 is required. If your PC crashes or something you will just miss out on the rewards, but it wont slash the hell out of you and you wont loose anything staked like in Ethereum.
More lies. Do you even know the hardware and currency requirements to be an SPO? Of course not. Printing money to fund today’s spending on security is how this financial crisis started. The only crypto that pays its own security budget is Ethereum. Cardano goes brrrrrr.
You mean “Running an Ethereum validator is different to delegating your Ada to a SPO”
That's definitely interesting, are there any metrics on how much collision there is between SPO slot leaders? If there are multiple slot leaders don't they have to compete to make a block as fast as possible, leaning more towards a PoW style consensus?
Stop spreading FUD please, since you clearly have no idea how Cardano works. 1.) Cardano's TPS can be increased ANY TIME by adjusting certain network parameters, such as block size and slots. The reason TPS is kept low is because there's not enough demand for the network yet. Hell, even fees can be adjusted at any time. 2.) You can't just straight up compare TPS of one network to the other. That's just nonsensical. Cardano supports eUTXO. That means a transaction can include multiple sub-transactions within it, so what other chains would do with X transactions, Cardano can do it with 1. This is a good thing since it decreases network congestion. 3.) Cardano's Hydra can make a lot of transactions instant, no matter the congestion, since multiple Hydra heads can be opened and closed independently. 4.) Cardano has, if not the best, one of the best staking systems. No slashing, no lockup period, no minimum of a quarter of million. Anyone could in theory be an SPO today with a very reasonable budget. But I get it. You guys love echo'ing what the last Cardano hater did. Maybe that's why Charles called r/cc subs idiots.
As 2017 ADA holder, I can say there are many problematic things: 1. The founder itself. He checkmarks quite all sociopath traits - arrogant, manipulative, dishonest, argumentative, virtue signalling, fragile ego, when exposed he plays the victim, he doesn't care about investors. He accomplished to be quite unpopular with all projects he was part of - bitshares, ETH. His reputation is terrible. And no, it is not due to competitive nature of those projects. Gavin Wood has a normal reputation, so does Vitalik. It was only Charles who was the problem. And then more recent events? His engagement with XRP community? Or ETH? Or ALGO? Or ETH Classic? Wherever he goes, he causes unpleasant emotions, achieves nothing, and act like an idiot. His actual accomplishments? None, he is only successful as snake oil salesman and shilling his projects. Anyway, he is a smart shark who doesn't care for community or some third world countries. I could go on, he lied many times, but generally, Charles is bad and incompetent. Quite good at hyping, NGL, but that won't be enough long term. 2. The project itself is extremely delayed. Main reason for the delay is, that it was initially planned as some casino coin in Japan, and advertised as such. The opportunistic switch to smart contract platform and most paper were published late 2016- early 2017, while the ICO itself took place 2015. So, at the release, they had nothing. It was never "measure twice cut once" approach. 3. The design is quite flawed, and they don't work according to their own research papers as average ADA holder think. Peer reviewed process is overstated by them. 4. SPO Model is the heart of ADA- the incentive model is not implemented as it should, and will lead to centralisation around most popular and rich stake pools. We see it already. The research model was fine, but they implemented few "extra" parameters. P2P reviewed academic research is worthless if they don't implement it. 5. The way native assets on Cardano are treated is flawed. Basically, things like USDC and other business models doesn't work on Cardano, because the issuer has no option t design a freezable assets. It eliminates many business models from start on, due to the model itself, or regulations. Not offering such option is bonkers. Result - 5 years old platform without a meaningful stable coin. 6. The Defi on Cardano is actually not truly decentralised, due to their workarounds concurrency. Scoppers (sundae) models and similar have many downsides. 7. Natively low TPS, high transaction fees and high finality time. It makes Cardano not feasible as tool for unbanked in developing world. Generally, it makes it not very practical for common use cases like payments. Not achievable with 5 minutes finality and 0.2$ fees. 8. Bad developer experience. Promised things like alternative Rust client or ERC-20 converter? Typical Charles, never delivered. Other tools doesn't look much better. Haskell was a bad choice under such circumstances. 9. Tiny ecosystem. Self-explanatory, bad dev experience, no stable coin etc. 10. User experience is quite bad. They didn't even achieve to get a wallet with dapp connector, and people had to use some new and unproved third party wallets, some of them closed source etc. How to solve all that? Probably by forking it, getting rid of Charles and his dumb moonbois, implementing the research, and give the project actual use cases and good user experience. Or by migrating to a blockchain not run by a narcissistic sociopath.
**TL;DR:** Nothing I said about Cardano proof-of-stake is wrong. If you're invested in Ethereum b/c you value the community, then I respect it, but people can't skate over objective technical fact just to serve their tribalistic biases. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't spend a lot of time thinking about the mental stability (or lack thereof) of faceless people on the internet I'm a Cardano dev; I write Haskell+Plutus for a living. You can DM me for proof if you want, but what I'm saying is publicly verifiable with the docs, so you shouldn't have to. I know Cardano has a lot of problems; the devtools designed by IOG are absolute trash, and companies like MLabs have to basically rewrite everything. In fact, I'd argue that the ecosystem would look a lot better if IOG just focused on building out core ledger semantics and stopped trying to solve every problem under the sun w.r.t. tooling, governance, frontends like Lace, etc. I deal with these problems on a daily basis. With that said, Cardano objectively does have advantages over Ethereum in terms of its core consensus mechanism. If proof-of-stake is done right, anyone should be able to delegate and receive their cut of the block rewards without having to lock up their coins with an SPO. If you have to lock up your coins in order to earn yield, you might as well keep your capital in USD and "invest" in a savings account, a money-market fund, or a sovereign bond. Cardano solves this problem quite nicely, as I laid out, so it's objectively better than Ethereum in that sense. Moreover, the Cardano community gets a lot of shit from ETHbros for pointing this out, despite being objectively right. Like Upton Sinclair said, "it's [really hard, if not impossible] to convince someone of a verifiable fact when their livelihood depends on them NOT understanding or being convinced of that fact." ETHbros are just talking their bags whenever they push back on this, but it's an objective technical fact that Cardano has better proof-of-stake.
I mean, he's kinda right... In Cardano, you don't have to lock in your coins in order to stake; you can delegate while keeping custody of your coins. "What secures the chain, then?" you ask? The SPO has to put up a "pledge" of coins before they can mine blocks; there's a minimum pledge that's low enough to maintain decentralization, but the onus is on the SPO rather than the delegators to keep their servers alive and stay honest. Nothing I'm saying is factually wrong (I can link the docs if anyone wants), but feel free to downvote me to oblivion since y'all are invested in ETH and don't like it when people present technical information that goes against the best interests of your portfolio. Sorry for being defensive, but Cardano's PoS legitimately does have a lot of advantages over Ethereum, and the ETH community has been nothing but salty and tribalistic about that fact.
And if a SPO misbehaves you stake to another, instead of having to slash/destroy through questionable governance.
Groundbreaking in 2012? Yea, but not in 2022. The EuTXO model seems to cause more issues for Cardano - there is still no meaningful stable coin, and many dapps are semi centralized in order to work around the concurrency. Tps is also very low and the “send 100nft in one transaction has very few use cases. Being marginally better than ETH in some aspects is standard in the industry today, Charles mentioning it all the time is quite distasteful Pioneered PoS? It’s a lie. There are already better systems without the clumsy and unfair delegator-SPO model. HFC? Another lie. There are already blockchains that don’t even fork. Native assets? Terrible choice not to give businesses more control about what they develop. That’s why you will never get native USDC or tether. It kills various use case models and doesn’t offer new ones. Hydra, Mitrhkk and other promises? Who cares about promises, ask Charles what happened to thing like Rust client. I am 2017 ada holder, and I am just skeptical, they didn’t really deliver much, and celebrate some stuff other projects had to begin with. The “‘measure twice cut one “ is also a lie, delays were caused mostly by poor planning. Don’t marry your investment and don’t live in a bubble, Chuck is a very deceptive person
>Cardano leader election into ouroboros epochs is also public, smart guy. No they arent, Cardano uses VRFs so nobody knows who the next pool to make a block will be, except the pool themselves. VRF keys are rotated so even if a pool was compromized an attacker has only a short window of attack. >Cardano doesn't suffer from MEV because there's not enough activity on the chain for a SPO to bother writing and maintaining a modified version of the client. As soon as that changes, bam, MEV. Wrong, Cardano doesnt suffer from MEV because transactions are not sequential inside a block like Ethereum, there is no potential to frontrun because there is no first/last transactions within a block. 3200 or 400000 validators, neither can be effectively DDoSed. But Ethereum is open to individual Validator DoS, and Ethereums own network participants are incentivised to do it. In summary: Your claims of higher security on Ethereum are false, Cardano PoS design is superior from a security and user experience perspective. Fact.
> Leader election into the epoch is public Cardano leader election into ouroboros epochs is also public, smart guy. > because of MEV (another thing Cardano doesnt suffer from) Cardano doesn't suffer from MEV because there's not enough activity on the chain for a SPO to bother writing and maintaining a modified version of the client. As soon as that changes, bam, MEV. > Yeah you can try to DDoS 3200 Cardano pools, good luck with that. Yeah you can try to DDoS 400,000 Ethereum validators, good luck with that. (Yes, multiple ETH validators are controlled by the same entity, but that's just as true with ADA pools.)
Anybody can buy rETH - not everybody can be an SPO, and you will need a few hundred thousand ADA delegated to have a chance to produce blocks each epoch. This is just the reverse argument, misleadingly comparing delegation and staking.
Well, still not best on the market though. Algo had a better staking model without annoying picking of the right SPO, yet with daily payouts, before they changed it to governance staking model. And there are more projects with good staking methods. He picks clearly one of the weaker opponents, and doesn't mention flaws in Cardano's staking model, and there are many like : \- financial/popularity contest with tendency towards centralization around such pools, 100 entities already staking 75% of all ADA, and it is getting worse \- possible regulatory implications of the delegator+ stake pool operator model, where both have technically a business relationship, and possible need for compliance coming along with that \- time consuming picking of the right SPO in order to support decentralization. No idea how they want to solve this in mass adoption scenario. and several issues more.... The constant talk about ETH is annoying. Assuming they want to migrate to Cardano, they still can't since Chuck still didn't release the ERC-20 converter, and Cardano couldn't reliably handle any higher traffic, even after vasil. Yes, staking is much better than ETH, but the overall talk is deceptive.
You can’t stake by yourself unless you run a full node and hardware with an EL and CL client. In Cardano you can’t stake unless you run a full node, SPO infrastructure, key management and relayers. You’re confusing delegation with staking.
Yes i did copy and paste it from there, they have a much more elegant way of explaining it than I do. >Why wouldn't someone just delegate to whoever is the most popular or gives them the best rewards? It encourages centralization. Its kind of one of the issues atm on Cardano and having Mspos (multiple stake pool operators) the influencers tend to get alot of the stake making the smaller operators struggle for delegation, the pledge to spin up a node is quite low so not hard for them to just keep spinning up nodes. However its still not overly centralised. The CEXs do soak up alot of stake and if reach saturation just spin up another node. >Not to mention the fact that Cardano has less than 1% the number of validators as Ethereum. Well there are over 3000 SPOs on Cardano currently, each SPO is capable of block production. If im not mistaken its 32 eth min to become a validator on eth, where as with Cardano there is a far smaller barrier to entry but saturation points are much higher so if you reduced saturation point from 64m you would have alot more validators required, it doesnt make sense to spin up loads of nodes but rather have 1 node with higher delegation. Neither one is perfect imho but I would rather not have slashing and no clarity on when my tokens would have liquidity again. >Cardano's POS is still a delegation, maybe not dPOS by definition. I was just going by the actual definition for the sake of the discussion. The space is young and continues to evolve. Be interesting to see what innovations come next :)
[https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/09/15/eth-may-already-be-showcasing-increased-signs-of-centralization/](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/09/15/eth-may-already-be-showcasing-increased-signs-of-centralization/) 40% of blocks produced by just two entities. There are currently 3200 stake pools on Cardano and Binance (the biggest SPO that I can see) for example seems to make up less than 10% of block production.
It’s all tradeoffs. Cardano followed Tezos with an LPOS model. It’s more convenient for delegators, but with other costs around SPO incentives and security. https://np.reddit.com/r/CardanoStakePools/comments/rdzbhq/two_years_after_reporting_a_problem_with_cardano/
The article that the guy sent literally describes what's at stake. Each SPO makes an initial pledge that affects how many blocks they get allocated; otherwise, anyone could just spawn a hundred stake pools and take a disproportionate amount of rewards. You only think there's "nothing at stake" b/c you're used to Ethereum's style of consensus where you have to lock up your coins in order to stake. With Cardano's design, the onus is on the SPO to present a pledge and therefore put something at stake. Again, this is all in the article that you didn't bother to read...
Yes , so i'm staking my add through delegating totally free to whatever SPO i find interesting. You do understand that you can also run a Stake Pool operation :)) and directly claim rewards while accepting delegation from others. Not sure what's your point ... It's an open stake mechanism, i can withdraw or add at any point.
*dPOS Cardano requires about ~1 M of delegated ADA to be able to produce a block as an SPO.
SPO can't steal your coins. Yes they can go offline so you stop getting rewards but the chain lives on. How often to you check your bank account? Or what level the gas in your car is on? Or how much beer you have in the fridge? It takes seconds to check and switching to another pool is effortless. This is something that's making you money. Take 10 seconds every 5 days to keep an eye on it. Worst case you end up with the exact same amount of coins you started with and they are immediately accessible and spendable. You just dont grt the additional rewards not and its unlikely if you choose a respectable pool anyway. Overall its a much better system than ETH. If this is the attack point you have to say that being locked up is far far worse.
>Got it, but still all those nodes under one umbrella. That doesn't mean they are controlled by a single entity, which is the definition of centralization. A single entity runs the CB node; its not the case for Lido however. >It is a concern but it's not a pressing concern. It is a pressing concern. Cardano's decentralization may not even be what it seems if MPOs like Binance or Coinbase have other validators that are being passed off as SPOs. There's no telling what validators in the SPO category are actually ran by an independent party w/o proper verification.
Your knowledge seems limited. How do you participate after you have delegated your stake? You don’t. Someone else does the validation for you. So you have to carefully research your SPO to make sure it is actually big enough to validate a block then constantly monitor things in case you get “a whiff of something” Seems like a lot of work just to ensure that the value of your coins isn’t eroded by the inflation caused by staking. You didn’t address the ultrasound economics of Ethereum vs shitcoin economics of Cardano at all.
You can participate in network validation on Cardano with 5 ADA. Why are you talking about offline pools? It's utterly irrelevant. 1m ADA in offline pools? Cool, that's 0.0029% of the circulating supply. > Only less than 1000 of the 3000 Cardano stake pools actually validated a block last epoch. Yep, by design. It's 5% per year as an average. > You have to trust your SPO when you delegate your Ada. Yeah you trust them, but at the first whiff of something not going right, just up and move your stake. No big deal at all. Liquid staking.
You cannot become an Ada validator with 5 Ada that never leaves your wallet All you can do is delegate your stake to a SPO. You have to trust the SPO to actually validate blocks. Only less than 1000 of the 3000 Cardano stake pools actually validated a block last epoch. Over a million Ada are staked in pools who have gone offline. You have to trust your SPO when you delegate your Ada. Given that the OP has conveniently glossed over this fact I conclude this is a shill post.
> Because ethereum POS allows a bigger number of validators. What makes you believe that Ethereums POS allows a bigger number of validators than Cardano, where anyone can participate as an SPO? If what they wanted was high decentralization, why place a high bar of entry? Let me tell you why. Making a peer-to-peer system with no limit of participants, have fully functional peer discovery and being performant, that has to stay synchronized, is a lot more complex to get right than the approach Ethereum took. It's the easy way out and actually makes it less secure dumping and locking your assets into fewer hands with no good way to penalizing them or getting them out. Unable to act swiftly.
Thats fair, they aren't decentralized, but please remember that Cardano was centralized for entire 3 years, till Shelley, and that rollout took also months, till early-mid 2021. And Cardano is also more decentralized in blocks production only, not entirely decentralized and independent yet. Unlike Cardano, Algorand started directly with certain level of decentralization, they plan improve it and to make relay nodes permissionless. The difference is , Algorand achieves thousands of tps at fraction of a cent after 3 years, Cardano achieves dozens of tps (if we assume that one transaction consists several assets) and has fees in 10-50cent range after 5 years. I think Algorand is clearly better suitable for most application. Here my thoughts to decentralization models and incentives: Realistic requirements to run reliable block minting Stake Pool on Cardano are 3-5 millions delegated ADA , so you need to be popular or rich, preferably both. We will have to see algorand requirements for relay nodes, but participation nodes are very cheap to run, so I assume relay nodes will be similar. The problem of delegated PoS of Cardano is the tendency to centralization around multi pools operators, since they can usually offer better deals for delegators, and are more popular. We have already seen the drama with small SPO closing their business early this year, because people would stake for free SundaeSwap coins with bigger multipools. Solutions? None, only altruism of people to run less pools, or staking with less attractive ones. Good, you can call this kind of altruism sort of paying for insurance to keep your money safe. I saw it that way when I was delegating to smaller SPO's on Cardano, in order to keep Cardano decentralized and safe. But if you ask me, I would prefer 1000x times to run some relay node for 100$ a month, it wouldn't be not only cheaper to me compared to trade offs with staking to some smaller Cardano SPO, it would be also less time consuming, and much better from taxation standpoint. Moreover, no need to check the SPO, they can always screw you over increasing their fees to 99,9%, whether they open new pools, update etc. Nobody is talking about those efforts, but the model of Cardano is simply extremely time intensive, and if users are not knowledgable it will get worse over time. Would I prefer to run a node for couple bucks? Absolutely And why do I think the pure proof of stake is much better? Seeing it from perspectives: Small Holders = no picking of SPO's, you don't have to research absolutely anything, great ease of use Middle and big holders = no dilemmas with whom to stake, no need run a Stake pool, supporting decentralization is easier and often cheaper, better from taxation and compliance perspective (also regulatory wise)
Yeah, but how often will you use 20 multiple assets in one transaction? Probably not that often. Not much demand for that. ADA doesn't even have 20 meaningful project and tokens built on it right now. It doesn't make a lot of sense for retail, transaction finality is still several minutes long which makes it totally unfeasible for any "bank the unbanked" scenario, not mentioning fees which already went up to 50cent, way to expensive for such speed and people with 100$ salary. On the other hand there is a lot of demand for reliably fast transactions and seconds fast finality for fraction of a cent, both things that Cardano can't even remotely provide, even after the incoming upgrade. Besides, Cardano is only marginally more decentralized than Algorand or Solana, and started also as centralized blockchain, they just called it "federated" because of 3 entities controlling it...great. Now you need roughly 5 million ADA to produce blocks as SPO, so be either very popular or very rich. No wonder the model is getting more centralized over time and people start choosing big multi pools operators. It will get worse over time, BTC used also to be more "decentralized" Solana has low requirements compared to that. But yes, they are quite centralized, but at least they are fast. And Algorand? Yes, they dont permit currently all type of nodes, but are definitely more decentralized than Cardano when it was released, exponentially faster and cheaper. Do you know where they gonna be in one- two years, once they become entirely permissionless? And tokenomics? Please, don't even start, Cardano went down 98% and stayed there for 3 years, only because small part of retail can dump on the rest it doesn't make the tokenomics good. Algorand might have had high inflation for year, but coins are distributed now, inflation is down to 4-5% and they still are not 98% down as ADA used to. Even now, ADA isn't far away from being down over 90% from ath, as a 5 years old project. Doesn't seem like there is much demand for the coin, aside speculation. True, because defi despite being released one year ago was almost dysfunctional, how can it be even called having smart contracts when no ambitious dApp can launch? Yes, I am an ADA holder too, but let us not repeat everything after Chuck. He talks a lot of garbage, and his kind of misrepresentation is not far away from the Solana guy.
When is the Tezos dev team looking to dump that BTC to pay for structural improvements to the chain? All at once? Over time? Please compare those monies with IOGs current cash assets. IOG and Emurgo cashed out at the top of the market. Fewer original ADA held by the foundations—path toward decentralization. P2P means nodes and relays run independently of a central organization needing keys to change the blockchain’s parameters (which, currently, IOG, Emurgo, and the Cardano Foundation share 7 keys used to initiate hard forks, with 75% SPO’s needing to update notes as well, to implement; soon this will be handed over in Voltaire). 30% of Cardano stake pools run on AWS, from what I recently found. I assure you though that this “30% of AWS-run stake pools” are not “minting blocks” for the chain. Meanwhile, Solana and Eth have this problem in spades. Also please lose the TPS argument in your other comments. Both ERGO and ADA have an EUTXO model allowing hundreds of thousands of address sends per transaction, and DAGs and L2s will be built on top of that, in the next 3-5 years. Good luck with all your endeavours. Thanks for sharing. I hope you find more chains to be happy about amigo.
While I agree with your general point that hype and fud are pathetic means to trade by, influence even, it takes a schizoid to think that everything is hype and fud. "just to grab the momentum for a possible pump too" There is no race between ETH and Cardano and it would be up to SPO's, projects and exchanges to upgrade to the new software, that make up the metrics to allow for the fork. It happens whenever ready and nobody went and paid others to "install and test faster" to push a date.
The mindset that tx fees are the rewards of people staking to help secure the network and validate txs makes way more sense. Burning the payment a delegator or SPO gets, even partially, does not fit into that. If it ever starts failing, to switch the monetary system and pass a token burn mechanism takes less than a year.
The date was selected after an SPO call on discord where SPO and dapp developers were surveyed on 3 separate dates and this is what they chose. On the exchange side, I presume messaging came from the Cardano Foundation, who work closely with exchanges to help get them upgraded and track all of their progress. This was not a unilateral decision or an assumption on their part.
Nope literally right in the quote. Your upper limit is clearly >$2000 every month or >$24000 per year A full node can be run on any decent processor from the last 10 years, 16GB of ram and 1TB SSD which you can pick up for <$500 Validating requires a 10kb/sec connection which means you can get by with a standard home internet package Cardano on the other hand requires 2 servers per SPO at least (normally 3) and probably redundancy since if you have down time your delegates will go elsewhere so 6 servers geographically separated plus advertising to attract delegates
It’s been pretty clear for awhile now that there’s always been 3 requirements. Why so many were exclusively fixated on the SPO metric.. who knows. Maybe it’s cause it’s the only one that can be tracked via data publicly available. Also, I never even considered the total number of exchanges Cardano is listed in. I just figured if coinbase, binance, kraken and a couple others upgraded it would be sufficient. It’s out of my control though so I haven’t really given it too much thought.
It isn't doing nothing. It is pledging the stake of my wallet to an SPO who processes the transactions of that block. They have a higher probability of processing that block (up to a point) based on the amount of stake pledged to them. Larger pools (up to a point) have a higher chance of reaping rewards, but the rewards are lower. A smaller pool will get them less frequently, but when they do, it is a much higher amount. Incentivizes decentralization quite effectively and is the reason the Nakamoto coefficient for Cardano mogs both BTC and ETH. Slashing is a superfluous security feature. It's unnecessary and punitive to innocent users which will become evident when you read the first article about a grandma who had her investments slashed by a stake pool that made an error. Cardano's staking has been working flawlessly based on a peer-reviewed paper for over a year and a half. Never needed a "Merge." But since your response was polite if mildly uninformed, I'm going to help you out by leaving the first breadcrumb on your journey to learn about a superior staking system. [https://cryptouniversity.network/cardano-staking/](https://cryptouniversity.network/cardano-staking/) Also, a bit amusing going on about security when the holes in the Solidity's porous code on numerous bridges were hacked for billions of dollars just last year.
Charles 1 month ago on twitter all SPO’s update for Vasil don’t stall it’s safe!
Cardano shill have been misleading us all week about the 75% of SPO being the requirement for update when it was clear that there were 3 requirements. **Only [2 out of 140 exchanges are ready](https://iohk.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/7981157534105-Third-party-readiness-for-Vasil-upgrade), and they need 80% of them by stake to be ready.** I'm like Cardano, but you shills are making the rest of us look embarrassing.
It’s passed testing. 1.35.3 was not a version they didn’t test. People vote with money all of the time, especially when decisions are being made. How is this different? My money is still on the blockchain, just with an SPO that shares the same opinion as me on the readiness of the new version. We’re at 62%, are the majority of us wrong?
How does everyone feel about the Vasil Hardfork on Cardano? Can ETH cause a rally and ADA ride its coat tails? After all that FUD last week they SPO's are upgrading now. At this pace they can upgrade right around the 2.0 hardfork.
tldr; A reported 31% of Cardano's staking pool operator (SPO) nodes are now running the protocol's latest software. The update fixes a critical bug found in Cardano’s previous implementation. To be ready for the upgrade to Vasil, 75% of SPO nodes must be on the newest version. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
I agree Adam on this. Rushing to upgrade to a new version w/o proper testing is a recipe for disaster. The bug already destroyed the testnet, so if it wasn't caught before mainnet then Cardano wouldv'e been destroyed. Now the SPO community knows not to upgrade their nodes by Charles' word alone and instead test upgrades before pushing them to mainnet.
that is literally the issue. Charles doesn't have the power to rollout the upgrade. it is up to the stakepool operators to accept it. but charles gets the blame when it is the SPO commnity choosing not to upgrade until further testing. as it should be the community decided.