1. I cannot vote on project proposals, Catalyst, including also changing company from A to B if needs be 2. We don't know whether their sharding is secure 3. 1 company behind it
4. it doesn't appear they have hard-fork combinator, thus upgrading of chain could be tricky 5. no information about long term funding, no treasury system 6. Written in golang vs Haskell, with unit tests and integration tests yet they have not upgraded chain yet
7. Trying to compete with Atala Prism with their (maiar.com). Phone number -> private key + public key 8. Seems like whole Romania got crazy about this project (national television coverage) 9. 2.500 eGLD seems pretty high to run a validator node
10. Staking experience poorer than Cardano. One needs to wait for 12 days "unlocking coins" 11. There is no slashing for validators but their are "jailed", they need to be manually unjailed. 12. Account based, thus they needed to shard 13. They have IELE + k framework + Solidity
14. Their 16k TPS is impressive albeit I think it #Cardano scaled to 1k on chain and 500k for layer 2 (Hydra) it won't matter at all.
15. Summary: interesting but for sure not battle tested blockchain for me too centralised at this stage. Why not -AWS? aws.amazon.com/de/blockchain/
(1) eUTxO model, which Cardano follows is far more superior when it comes to concurrency and parallelism. Account model of Polkadot and Ethereum forces them to shard, sharding is pretty hard and reduces security of blockchain and opens it to new attack vectors.
(2) Now both Polkadot and ETH 2.0 will be sharded blockchains albeit none of them proved yet that it can work well and stable. Academia didn't prove yet sharding works well with blockchains and #Cardano is following a classic approach - science first.
(3) Both Polkadot and ETH 2.0 follow more empirical approach let's try - maybe it works and if it works then yes it works. Who knows maybe it works?