Algorand future

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 24, 2021

How will algorand survive after 2030 if giving grants to them cost 2.5 billion till 2030 this is very much wastage of grants in the name of technology

Nodes can support either way even if they are offered 0.10% reward they would support. There is absolutely no sense to give early backers 25% of algo total supply.

This is not how blockchain should work but peer to peer network to help reach consensus.

Giving grants to early backers Is wastage of money and should be corrected during governance phase.

post by SGen on Aug 25, 2021

I totally agree… Does anybody want to create with me competitive algorand network which will have fair distribution of the coins?

post by robert on Aug 26, 2021

Blockchain is very competitive space now. Having superior technology is not enough to stay in the game. We need to have a strong community and a portfolio of products. I’m not sure what’s the best strategy to incentivize builders and build communities, but I think there is no way without grants.

post by SGen on Aug 26, 2021

what about fair distribution of coins? some kind of much more transparent grant system should be also incentive… also opportunity to run the relay node in fair and competitive manner.

post by scholtz on Aug 26, 2021

how do you want to distribute coins?

post by robert on Aug 26, 2021

1. Grants: AFAIK grants are distributed by “contracts” and by gitcoin. Some grant projects are listed in the developer site. Ethereum community had (or still has?) been voicing same problems - many grants without open list of grants (which project receives grants and what they are supposed to do)? Maybe we can have a Quarterly review? This is what Cosmos is doing for example: ICF Q2–2020 Funding Recipients.

2. Relay node. I wanted to join the relay nodes group but was late in the party and the list was closed and now way to join the ecosystem of relay nodes (which was a bit disappointing).

But it seems it’s changing now. At the end of the day, what matters is to see a good flow of the resources, not too high concentration (let’s face it - concentration will always be there, BTC and ETH are highly concentrated, most of the other coins are super concentrated) and open ecosystem.

post by SGen on Aug 26, 2021

lets issue the same - 10 000 000 000 fair coins…

lets distribute 90% among ordinary people by the giveaway and staking mechanism… each person who signs up will receive same amount … eg 100 coins per day… it gives us 90000000 days per person… or if the community would be of size 50000 people, it would be enough for 1800 days (5 years (with 10% apy for example 4 years))

@scholtz, I have read your proposal for the technical realization of the governance, and I liked it… this way the community would do the decisions, for example grants approval, when the times come the fork from the algorand github, and most importantly I believe we should have some kind of constitution with rules on how things will work and can change…

have you implemented it?

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 26, 2021

Grants should totally be up to the community to decide and the algorand foundation is wasting grants in short term makes me nervous … in the end governance would not have power to issue grants…

post by D3G on Aug 26, 2021

Howdy! I totally agree that the grants should be decided also by the community, because after all, the community should benefit first and the most from these!

Speaking of distribution and other tokenomics aspects, imo Algo is highly centralized and controlled by a hand of people who are wasting and wasted already too many resources as we’ve seen until now!

Idk if governance will change anything, especially when a large concentration of tokens is in the hands of the same people who have decision-making power today.

These grants paid for start-ups are just a waste, because without a defined user base, it’s very tough to achieve adoption and traction in the space!

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 27, 2021

Such huge grants benefit the selected group of people who can in turn can become bad for the ecosystem.

If such grants are issued out of circulating supply the governance would not hold enough power to issue grants later on.

Issuing grants and decision making is the crucial part of governance else the governance would be powerless which makes selected people and early backers more powerful I’m sure this isn’t the future purpose of algorand.

post by scholtz on Aug 27, 2021

not yet… algorand foundation and other community members quite demotivated me in this matter, but it should be quite easy to make.

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 28, 2021

Governance can’t work according to how much algos someone holds because the early backers and selected relay nodes owners already have enough of algorand to do things according to how they like…

This form of governance is just like a communist party where you can’t do anything but listen and follow orders… if Micali is a real genius he would have taught such problems … Micali rushed to make algorand and patent it how he forgot to make a proper governance and because of his incompetence algorand would fail.

post by bhaney44 on Aug 28, 2021

No. Algorand is succeeding and will continue to do so.

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 28, 2021

It cannot be successful unless it does the necessary things needed.

post by bhaney44 on Aug 28, 2021

To the contrary, Algorand is already successful as a global and multi-billion-dollar blockchain. As a member of the Algorand community, my focus is on growing the Network.

If you focus on complaining about the existing distribution, then you won’t be nearly as successful within the Network. However, if you focus on building and creating new value on Algorand more success will find you.

post by Maugli on Aug 28, 2021

Silvio’s original vision was to have Algorand as a REPLACEMENT for the wasteful BTC.

And where is Algorand on this chart after two years? We all know, where it is - you can see right of ADA, DOGE, LTC, as a minuscule rectangle.

Algorand is a success if you are in the “inner circle”. It is a failure, if you think about the transition from BTC and ETH era.

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 28, 2021

Long story short

Algorand is wasting billions which could be used for grants by community and not by algorand foundation … I don’t know what this useless governance has to offer to the community since it’s 1 algo 1 vote and the early backers would be able to control the system nicely I don’t think this governance is even MIT approved even Silvio wouldn’t approve his own governance in such design model because he understands governance isn’t easy to design.

post by robert on Aug 29, 2021

BTC didn’t have grants and have grown naturally by the early supporters and early backers who believed in the project, buy in early and got a lot of tokens.

There must be a big incentive for early adopters, otherwise, there won’t be any adoption and nobody will shill the network.

Algorand chosen a business way for creating the ecosystem. I don’t think it’s bad. Maybe not ideal as many of the decentralized visioners would think. At the end of the day we need to have both business and a solid system to have the blockchain to succeed. Otherwise it will be yet another interesting thing without passing a critical adoption stage.

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 29, 2021

It is not nice to build dreams blindly

Bitcoin is the first crypto

You think algorand will have adoption magically because it can process 2 seconds block time while keeping the network centralized by giving grants to few selected people … this blockchain surely has great tech but in terms of ethics and adoption it has failed

post by Maugli on Aug 29, 2021

Yes, Bitcoin was the first. While it was a magical thing at the beginning, now it is very wasteful of energy, i.e. has a huge CO2 footprint due to the proof-of-work operation. It is very slow, and the blockchain is not final, you must wait for several new blocks as a confirmation. Also, it became the playground of whales.

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 29, 2021

If you check flow, solana etc it’s just another crypto currency ALGORAND

If it was real we wouldn’t be on their track and with rank 47

If you need adoption you need to handle criticism and not just try to cover up failures.

post by Celestino_127 on Aug 30, 2021

What do you mean by wasting resources? , have you seen their report or made an analysis to make that decision?

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 30, 2021

I'm sure that they have seen real analysis from you to validate your instruction.

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 30, 2021

Algorand foundation follows Elon Musk on Twitter and advertises him to adopt algorand.

Why not spend 100 million in better marketing rather than begging Elon Musk and others?

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 30, 2021

How do you want to prevent that one person have more than one account? I was thinking about the global identity certification authority which would generate for each person a unique id, and would be bound to local governments electronic id cards (qualified signatures).

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 30, 2021

Also, I think you should check more on this, the reason ALGOs are not top of the market cap is not that the Algorand Team is doing a bad job, but they actually have a partnership with a firm that usually resells ALGOs when prices go up, so as to ensure stability enough for business applications and to ward off over-speculation which can get you in trouble with authorities.

post by Futurecurrency on Aug 31, 2021

I guess some people are really adamant about cryptos when it comes to understanding what cryptocurrency means and why we need Decentralization.

Aren’t we making a system that nobody can control and nobody is in charge of it but on algorand we have several loopholes

The early backers, relay node operators who algorand foundation gave away billions show there is no proper distribution and one entity can perhaps control the network.

post by Futurecurrency on Sep 1, 2021

I really think something urgent needs to be done about the 2030 plans

When governance kicks in 2030 tokenomics have to change and current distribution needs to go on supporting plans ahead of 2030.

post by scholtz on Sep 1, 2021

It has been done and the first question has been placed on the mainnet… Can you please check it, debug it, tell me how it can be improved?

post by SGen on Sep 1, 2021

Great job with the voting system…