I placed my first-ever order on the Google store last year for a Pixel phone. Then a FedEx employee left a voicemail asking suspicious questions about my package. Then my phone went missing. FedEx later said they had no record of an employee calling me and would "investigate". It took two weeks of relentlessly following up to get a replacement. FedEx was never able to locate my stolen/missing phone. Never order directly from Google and avoid FedEx at all costs.
Reminds me of the original version of blockles [1] on i'minlikewithyou (later OMGPOP) [2]. That was one of my favorite games back in the day. From reading the Wikipedia article, it looks like they were a YC company too.
In contrast, "Algorand delivers the fastest finality possible thanks to its Pure Proof of Stake (PPoS) algorithm invented by MIT Professor Silvio Micali. The consensus mechanism doesn’t admit forks at all, which reduces the risk of micro forks to zero. The block creation time on Algorand is less than 5 seconds, and all transactions reach immediate finality." [0]
And although Algorand doesn't include some of the more "controversial" privacy features, it's still RTBF-compliant. [1]
Algorand is the exact opposite ethos from Monero. They are partnered with the World Economic Forum and being used for things like vaccine passport haha
I have no memory of opting in, I checked under Settings -> Google and "COVID-19 Exposure Notifications" was set to "Off", and the MassNotify app was still installed on my phone. It has no icon and the only way to find it is going to Settings -> Apps & notifications -> See all apps and it comes up under "Massachusetts Department of Public Health". Then when you go to the Google Play Store and search "MassNotify" or "mass notify" or even "Massachusetts Department of Public Health" (the exact name of the app), it doesn't come up in the search results. You have to go to "Manage apps & device" on the Google Play Store then scroll down to "MassNotify" which doesn't even match the name of the app in the other settings menu. This is pretty shady.
Algorand has been Proof of Stake for years (2019 MainNet launch) and it's actually carbon-negative [1]. It's a shame more people don't know about it. Its founder is a Turing-award-winning MIT professor (Silvio Micali) who solved the blockchain trilemma [2] with the Pure Proof of Stake consensus algorithm. The tech is leaps and bounds ahead of other cryptos.
That sounded interesting but I couldn't understand from the links how a blockchain can be carbon negative:
>To achieve a carbon-negative network, Algorand and ClimateTrade will implement a sustainability oracle which will notarize Algorand’s carbon footprint on-chain for each epoch (a set amount of blocks). With its advanced smart contracts, Algorand will then lock the equivalent amount of carbon credit as an ASA (Algorand Standard Asset) into a green treasury so that its protocol keeps running as carbon-negative.
I'm pretty familiar with the basics of cryptocurrency and blockchains, but the above paragraph makes almost no sense to me.
They're going to buy carbon credits to offset the carbon emissions derived from using the network, then lock them away so they can't trade them off at a later time. That is definitely some marketing lingo tied around "we buy carbon credits".
It's times like this I ask myself whether I'm slow, or whether the text in question is needlessly complex.
My pessimistic side suggests this could be purposeful obfuscation of implementation by using complex language. No one will question their solution if no one can understand it.
On the other hand, I'm a big proponent of the Algorand project and based on the general quality of their work (the tech, docs, tutorials, etc.), I'd be surprised if there were anything malignant going on.
I just read about it. It seems highly susceptible to disruption by a minority stake, via the birthday paradox.
If only a fraction of the stake holders are validators at any given time, but the set of 1000 validators is selected randomly from token holders, then all you technically need is 1000 tokens (or more) and given enough time you will be selected as the only validator, right? You can then validate a fraudulent transaction, breaking security.
Now perhaps the amount of time it would take for this to occur would be longer than the heat death of the universe if you only have 1000 tokens, but at the very least, this substantially reduces the stake required to mount such an attack below the 51% required in a PoW system, right?
thats why currently the minimum stake amount is 32 eth. Also, you'd learn you were the validator for the cycle only when you are awarded eth. If you try to push through a false transaction you can get slashed (Losing some of your stake). all in all, makes it impractical at best.
Would it be reasonable to assert pure proof of stake is less risky than delegated proof of stake? I don't claim to be an expert in crypto but from what I've read it seems like pure proof of stake is a leap ahead of other consensus algorithms in terms of security, energy usage, etc.
It's a shame people don't understand that there's multiple aspects. Ethereum is much more decentralized, secure, have more dev mindshare, better community, tooling, and ecosystem. Let's also not forget that Algorand is powered by and centralized around team-run nodes.
I don't think the initial "It's a shame more people..." is meant to make people forget about Ethereum. I think it's to signal that not a lot of people know about Algorand, and doesn't anything about other projects.
Since you seem to indicate that you know what you're talking about, care enough to make a proper argument? You say Ethereum is more decentralized, secure and better tooling, but you never actually make a cohesive argument, only giving a list of "reasons" without any backing. I'm mostly interested in why you think Ethereum is "more secure" than Algorand, and what threat model are you considering here even?
> Algorand is powered by and centralized around team-run nodes
Hm, I run a Algorand node but I don't work for the Algorand team. What do you mean that Algorand is run by team-run nodes really? How do you even know which node belongs to who in the first place?
What's stopping Mercury or Brex's partner bank from pulling the carpet out from under them too? The bank I switched away from to join Azlo is archaic and frustrating to deal with but I'm having second thoughts creating an account with another banking startup if it might close a few years later. I now have to inconvenience my clients and ask them to update the ACH information they have on file. I have no idea if there will be problems getting my money out either. I never expected this from a bank.
I also have tinnitus from chronic ear infections when I was a child. I find that the WHM doesn't get rid of the high pitched hum but temporarily adds a white-noise-like sound on top of it.
