All - Activity - Titi - Algorand

Algorand Decentralization Dashboard (xGov Proposal 3264792007)

Tldr: clarify what attack you mean in the nakamoto coefficient. Great site. What attack do you mean for the 33%? I was of the impression that the one 33% threshold was the threshold for losing liveness when nodes were Byzantine and the 20% threshold is losing liveness when there’s an adaptive adversary.

The xGov Council: Shaping the future of xGov

Is there a requirement that councilors should review a minimum number of proposals a quarter? How do we hold them accountable that they’re contributing meaningfully, no free loaders?

Mistook this as replacement for xGovs entirely. The current plan for xGovs is promising.

2025 Algorand Relay Program

Vital for speed in what, inclusion into a block first or getting transactions to all nodes quickly? Does it P2P transactions won’t get into blocks as quickly as relayed transactions?

As I said it was arbitrary, the point was for an element of randomness and commitment. Latter.

XGovs should be node runners so their addresses must be known, no pools no delegate. Doxxed by social media handle. 20 xGovs max. Anyone can select themselves to be xGovs and show proof of their portfolio e.g. what they’ve worked on, proven credentials i.e. certifications, degrees, research papers.

This can still happen even if they vote for themselves. How do we know the members are conflicting and will be?

Consensus rewards whitepaper concern

Zombie nodes will be suspended.

I was able to find the pieces of code that might be helpful and could be applied for suspended accounts if feasible. In the block there’s a list of proposed updates to expired online accounts as noted on line 139 - 148 in block.go under bookkeeper.

Thanks for replying, my post is a mere suggestion I’m not ripping the incentive paper apart or saying we shouldn’t do incentives at all. I’ll get back to you on where I saw the map but it’s a suggestion. The idea was that if it’s already in the map it can be used for suspension.

I don’t see the need for the minimum we already maintain a map of online accounts currently in memory it didn’t affect anything. People are going to drop off themselves because they aren’t making money and spending too much maintaining a node. As more stake is online the less chance you get.

A 50m account suspended is a big deal for the network. Paying 2 algos out 50m is peanuts giving the responsibility they have. Charge 0.0001 of stake. This way we have no problem with funding node runners and people will be incentivized to make up for how much they lost.

I was thinking along approach A but we don’t want to limit how much stake can go online. The network is most secure if all algos are online; improbable but possible. If we go the Bitcoin way, might lead to centralization if it gets harder to mine. I think we can base the fee adjustment on throughput.

Where are archival nodes in the P2P Gossip network story?

From what I’ve seen in code in P2P mode, nodes can announce their services as archival/catchup.

A worked example of how governance stifles the growth of the network: Goracle

There’s DeFi governance now. So participate in DeFi and get rewarded from governance.

Is it true you get priority in terms of receiving and sending transactions based on stake in the gossip network?

If there’s an attack, there’s no attack yet. Proposers are still randomly and independently selected.

LOL, I’m the one who posed the question so I at least know something. This kicks off if there’s an attack and it’s for consensus messages. Arbitrage bots are good.

I don’t see how it’s related, you can use your bot now if you want.

Former Algorand Researcher: New Protocol

How much of optimistic responsiveness do you think they might trade off with regards to sortition? More than Algorand or less? And is sortition what gives Algorand adaptive security?

I think they claim it does but the wording is confusing. What do you think?

A major concern when designing modern consensus protocols is that of communication complexity. A low communication complexity is essential for a scalable protocol. In the multicast model, Algorand showed a proposed mechanism.

Concerns over Binance Algo holdings getting too Big?!

you must have missed structured selling in the transparency reports.

Teal file size increase

i’m primarily talking about teal sizes; boxes were just an add on.

Why are we increasing teal file size? Please let’s not diverge from the principles we set forth in the beginning. I trust the devs but with and boxes I wonder why. Isn’t going to affect performance and bloat?

Would Algorand benefit from having a mix of small and massive Relay Nodes?

I think we just have to be patient and let the chain mature a bit. How did Bitcoin do it with their full nodes now at 10k? Ethereum and Monero all have/had nodes that aren’t incentivized. Our current relays are under contract. Let them run their course. Good to think about these things though.

Relay-participation pools

I have no problem with your product it might be helpful; just don’t present it as the official Algorand docs or way of doing things. It’s misleading. I see no disclaimer in your replies.

How do you put alerts on your node in case it's messing up?

Is there a calculator for that? I.e., to know what I should be doing? For the RAM, CPU, disk, and network what’s a good threshold to look at?