There is a queue prioritized by a tx fee. It’s needed when there is a network congestion. It doesn’t make the system permissioned. You don’t need anyone permission to make a transaction in the system (except the permission if you are using someone else node to connect to the system - but you can always setup your own node and connect to the network without asking anyone for a permission).
1 Like
Why they are waiting? Maybe they don’t have enough fee?
1 Like
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
Especially from those funds which algorand gave free to early backers… someone should tell Silvio this isn’t a magic show adoption isn’t magic it’s real .
What do you mean by wasting resources? , have you seen their report or made an analysis to make that decision? @D3G
I don’t think you are making an objective report on this, maybe you should do more to prove your statement of “Algorand is wasting grants”. @Futurecurrency. I honestly do think that blockchain is a sport and everyone serves its purpose, there is no perfect one, to be honest. I have had experience building projects in several ones, even ones managed by DAOs and communities and they waste even more resources and do not support projects that would otherwise make the system better, you should probably do a very detailed report with data, interviews, and real analysis, otherwise your argument is hard to justify. I think you do need professionalism in making decisions about grants, and so I do not think that just any Tom, Dick and Harry can do this in the name of “community”
1 Like
Everything is useless unless something is up and running
Their marketing campaign looks bluff
Nothing is being done just promises and high tps with centralised relay nodes and no adoption and they have audacity to say if people support bitcoin nodes they would support algorand nodes… That’s why we are paying billions to relay nodes right cuz we know nobody would support if they aren’t paid.
1 Like
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 critisim and not just try to cover up failures
1 Like
Ask that question to algorand foundation
@Futurecurrency , Solana is centralized from the core with Alameda research controlling the field, and they had a rug pull just a week ago from LUNA Yield DeFi project. There’s no sense to just compare any blockchain projects like that. There is so much hype with tokens and coins out there, with many blockchain projects hyping their project. Hyping a project does not make it adoptable in the real world, you are actually centralizing it since you make people with less means not even be able to run a project on them.
1 Like
Algorand has its own philosophy of how they work, I don’t think it is objective to just make a statement that their marketing is bluff out of nowhere. They are gaining so much adoption with real-world projects, and firms as well as governments, you can view their Telegram grant updates.
It is reasonable to question on where they gave such huge grants and how much they are wanting to spend on marketing etc… and how will algorand sustain without grants in future as there is nothing in bucket after 2030 so algorand needs to tell people how they plan to handle things… criticism is good for crypto as it brings the best of things but sitting and let they do the thing doesn’t work anymore
Anyways, I still don’t think there is any other way of incentivizing people to build on your blockchain if you do not have grants @Futurecurrency
Grants are necessary to build things if algorand has bugs etc after 2030 do you expect community to spend their own money on this … nah don’t live that dream look at litecoin they had hard time getting funds for building mimblewimble…
It’s crucial to save things for 2030
The Algorand Foundation deals with the technical maintenance of the Algorand Blockchain. The blockchain also has forkless upgrades, this makes it very easy and costless to deal with bugs and improvements. Algorand already made partnerships with so many universities and companies around the world[check their page] that continuously make the project very much self-propelling in terms of constant talent inflow for years to come. Saving is a good idea, but i still see no reason to limit grants from Algorand’s side since they are actually spending on projects, trying to test new ideas and implementations, I think that’s actually what will make Algorand go further. Plus, Algorand is on Layer-1 still, and there very many projects building on it, once it will max out, there will still be another avenue for growth from Layer-2
Tell me after 2030 who will fix bugs for free
Also, I think you should check more on this @Futurecurrency, 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 and also ward off users who may just want to build on the platform. Anyway, that’s my own analysis for the last 5 months I have been here, and it may differ from the intentions, but I do not see any bad intention in them willing to throw money just for innovation(which enables you to stay relevant). And I don’t think the Algorand Team is not well-informed, just look at their team.
1 Like
@Futurecurrency , I am sure they are seeing your posts, by the way, I hope they will respond because it’s a logical and very important question. But also try reaching out to them through other channels