I found this unofficial explorer where you can see the top accounts and select which of them participate in the consensus.
Taking the top 1000: if we consider both online and offline we have a total stake of about 6.614 G algo and 33% of the stake is owned by the top 26 top accounts. If we consider only offline ones we have a stake of about 1.981 G algo and 33% of the stake is owned by the top 15 top accounts.
From Algorand documentation:
If a super majority of the votes are from honest participants, the block can be certified. What makes this algorithm a Pure Proof of Stake is that users are chosen for committees based on the number of algos in their accounts. Committees are made up of pseudorandomly selected accounts with voting power dependent on their online stake. It is as if every token gets an execution of the VRF. Users with more tokens are likely to be selected more. For a committee membership this means higher stake accounts will most likely have more votes than a selected account with less tokens.
Since the algorand dashboard shows 407 validator nodes in the last week, and since according to the other explorer the super minority is 26 (15), what is the pseudo-random selection criterion?
If my calculations are correct, the possessed stake has a very low weight.
Furthermore, assuming that at least of 2/3 of the validator nodes are honest, but the relay nodes are not, what is the minimum value that can still make the network function?
I think it is of paramount importance, both for decentralisation and transparency, that algorand adds such metrics in its dashboard,