(1) Since some people laugh at Cardano project and it's peer review aspect, let me share a story from work for all of you (2) There is company called Databricks and they open sourced recently a technology called: github.com/delta-io/delta . This technology is super important
(3) In BigData delta allows one to perform DELETE and MERGE operations contrary to Hadoop + Hive where this is not possible, seeking through many partitions finding customer data to remove and then rewriting it is not only expensive as an operation but also very dangerous
(4) This promising technology is something that many companies, which have big data turn into as they need to be GDPR compliant. (5) I was always reading and accepting all details from their website as given and the "truth"
(6) There is however an amazing Principal Developer at our company that found some of the claims from their website as dubious, e.g. ACID claims on such a distributed file system (7) It turns out this is not the first time this company advertises something that is simply not true
(8) on another occasion this company made untrue claims about Cassandra database and this then became source of disputes e.g by dr. @martinkl - my fave expert in distributed systems (9) All professional developers also know of course famous Jepsen tests -> jepsen.io
(10) Jepsen tests are now used for many many years to validate databases - claims that vendor make against harsh reality. In many cases claims on paper never met with hard reality of distributed systems, sometimes it was a basis for vendors to fix those databases, e.g. mongoDB
(11)Why am I writing all this. IT IS TRULY an advantage that Cardano's Ouroboros went through a rigorous process of being reviewed by academics on major conferences. It is a slow and methodical process but correct one. Cardano critics have often no experience in claims vs reality
(12) Wait, does it mean it for sure will succeed and become world's financial operating system or part of it? Of course not - this post is to show you that this claim of peer reviewed approach is something to brag about - albeit of course at the end of the day - adoption is key.
(1) Some haters of #Cardano are not only bag holders but also imperative developers.
If you are an imperative programmers you know that Plutus is not the most intuitive -> (playground.plutus.iohkdev.io)
It is, however, intuitive for people with IT financial background, e.g. banks
(2)
IELE + k framework will be a real game changer because there will be DSLs (Domain Specific Languages) in any programming language supported by K framework. The only issue is that we need to wait for all this
(3) Good news is that the moment we get IELE integrated into Cardano, we get some popular langs. To my knowledge we should get from day one: Solidity and Rust, maybe others as well?
(1) Hi, I saw your $BTC rant.. I hope you are aware that Bitcoin is not the only crypto and in #Cardano what we are trying to achieve is far more than you may think at first.
(1) A lot of business people look at some of "creatures" like @michael_saylor would say on CMC through the eyes of adoption only. They look at transactions, market cap, number of developers, etc.
(2) This shouldn't be of a surprise because world is full of cases where best tech won and full of cases where best tech didn't win. This kind of thinking provides grounding and rationality - rather than "being in the clouds"
(3) I work in IT for a bit now, mostly in agile environment - very much like the whole ETH is done and customers can benefit from our features on the platform very fast. We have continuous integration, continuous development, etc. We also have mutable databases...
(1) I wonder if you guys are aware but apparently #Ethereum team as @IvanOnTech mentioned today is temporarily abandoning sharding idea (ETH 2.0) and want to introduce PoS in ETH 1.0. If they complete this successfully - this will push them to TPS - somewhere between 100-1000 TPS
(2) It is awesome for users and scary at the same time.
They are taking agile approach to blockchain development, which is far from easy as some design changes are tough to make once they have been made but they listen to users and users complain about TPS now.
(3) My guess is that it is scary for business users / enterprise users but retail folks appreciate it (yield farming, DeFi folks)
Where this approach has a benefit is that they already have ecosystem of developers and they don't try to predict what is needed on the market.
(1) We had a conversion with one developer from Avalanche blockchain yesterday about an infamous graph below.
Avalanche may indeed have so many validators voting at the same time but ADA follows design similar to $Algo, where there is a VRF function secured by SPOs in a VRF file
(2) VRF function design by prof. @silviomicali which Ouroboros Praos adopted is very elegant because you have over 1400 validators but at given slot all of them are not voting.
SPOs!!! Protect your VRF file like your eyes, if they get compromised, we are done!
(3) We have really so many validators albeit in terms of network consensus you don't need to sync up so many validators between each other for block production, VRF design is super elegant. As if you had so many validators but you don't use them all at once for one block prod.
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