Dear Silvio Micali,
great job on creating the algorighm for the concesus… Few years ago I also wanted to start the blockchain like algo which would not work on mining, but in my opinion it was supposed to work on legal consensus of users…
I would like to quote from the proposal:
Currently, in Algorand, every account can participate in consensus, but not governance. Governance is the power of deciding non-consensus tasks, the funding of grant proposals being an example.
Your idea for this blockchain is quite good, but actual progress is quite bad. I am CTO of regulated exchange, and i requested funds from the fundation. Also we have created application for covid testing and we have tested approx 400 000 people now.
Employees of algo foundation made it quite clear for me to be demotivated.
Because you mention the funding of grant proposal through governance protocol i very doubt it will get any better… Who owns the algos now? I believe the majority of algos is owned by people who started the project. 2.7 billion algos are there and there is no transparencny on who owns how many… 19th JUNE 2019 122,400,000 $ were given to investors at 2,4$ … that is 51 000 000 ALGOs… you claim to give 200 000 000 algos each year for grants… Who owns rest of 2 000 000 000 algos?
I have quite high doubt also about funding the nodes… You fund only nodes which you consider to be core nodes and you do not allow anyone else to be funded by this mode. On the other side the indexer nodes which has the highest value added are not funded anyhow.
If the governence will be ruled by the initial stakeholders, what is the point of this? Now it is bad, what will happen if more monopoly will get into it?
People who has money will want to gain more money. Rich will get richer by influencing the environment around them… Is this really your vision?
So in my example, if we as the regulated exchange want to request money to do the research to be on the safe side of the law, and do not get any grant from algo foundation now, how will be able to get some funds after some group of people will be governing who will get the money? My answer is that they will get the grant money for themselfs.
In the other example… If there is an application which can do real good for humanity such ast covid testing application, and you refuse to finance some update to be able to use algos for signing and verification of results, i really dont understand what you are trying to achive here… If algo foundation does not do its work now, how will it work after your governence vision will be in place?
Note that there are other flows… For example algo wallet is not public?? Are you afraid of your random function to be broken and by iterating the seed will be able to reconstruct existing wallets? Or why you do not want to publish it? (sorry for the expressive language, i know you want to publish it, but did not gave any terms nor you respond for any help with translation support)
Will this be subject of this governence?
For me not just to complain but also suggest some solutions
- When stating some terms, please be more specific… Never use term will happen in future without specifying the at least time range
- Please make a simple table of grant receivers with name and amount … i know that those 200M per year is not much in the scope of 2.7B algos in circulation, but you can do this at least…
- Other forms of grants such as support for Nodes should be much more transparent…
- Please make the algo wallet source public … I really want to see slovak translation there, as well as public source makes it much better to check for security concerns
- What about some decentralisation of power? For example if riccher would gain less rewards then poorer I believe that it would be much more fair…
- I believe that the fee should be now decided to be for example 0,001 algo now, 0,0001 algo in two years, 0,00001 in 4 years and 0,000001 in 6 years… The reward of this fees should be divided between those who provide technical support so they pay for HW and bytes transfered, and the staking rewards… This would also give people incentive to build on algo network as they will see that even if the price goes 1000times up, it will not ruin their business case…
I hope Silvio that you read this forum, or that this message will find you well… The purpose of this message was to pinpoint some flaws that are currently in algo and proposals how to solve them.