Big news in the blockchain world as Solana has officially surpassed the 2000 TPS mark, making a bold statement in the ongoing race for scalability! This puts Solana not just ahead of other major cryptos but also challenges traditional payment processors like credit card companies in terms of transaction speed. Isn't this the same network that has had issue or network congestion a few days back on top of countless outages? What’s more, while BNB shows high TPS, its centralization is a concern. Solana’s feat is significant as it combines high throughput with decentralization, something we've been advocating for a long time. There isn't any much difference between BNB and Solana when it comes to centralization. Both use a proof of stake protocol that is favors centralization more. With Ethereum priced at $3k but managing only around 62 TPS max, and Bitcoin at about 11 TPS, can we start speculating? Could we see Solana hit a $3k price point soon? What are your thoughts?
Ethereum's problems are well known. Everyone is trying to avoid those high fees. Same with Bitcoin especially with the ordinal turmoil but if we are to speak about the most secure and decentralized network. Nothing beats Bitcoin and you know that. Yes, Solana did face congestion issues recently, but it’s important to note the context and the speed at which the Solana team has addressed these issues with updates. This responsiveness is crucial in technology spaces, especially blockchain. Solana vs. Ethereum Congestion: Remember the early days of Ethereum? When it faced congestion, it was indeed chaotic—more so because it was breaking new ground at a time when the ecosystem wasn't as mature. Solana, on the other hand, has not only managed to resolve similar issues quickly but has done so while maintaining a TPS that dwarfs that of Ethereum during its early years. It's important to make these comparisons with a historical lens, considering how fast blockchain technologies are evolving. Ethereum and Bitcoin Congestions: Both Ethereum and Bitcoin have had their fair share of scalability and congestion challenges. Ethereum's high gas fees during peak congestion times are well-documented, and Bitcoin has faced its own scalability issues, leading to the development of solutions like the Lightning Network. This shows that growing pains are common in evolving tech landscapes. Decentralization - Solana vs. Binance: Regarding decentralization, Solana and Binance (BNB) take different approaches, especially given BNB's more centralized control structure. Solana operates on a proof of stake model that is becoming increasingly decentralized as the network grows and more validators join the ecosystem. This contrasts with Binance’s approach, where control tends to be more centralized, reflecting in how decisions and updates are pushed across the network. In summary, while no blockchain is without its issues, what's important is how these challenges are met and what the roadmap looks like for addressing them. Solana has shown commitment to scaling effectively while maintaining an impressive TPS, positioning it well for future growth and adoption. Let's keep the discussion factual and forward-looking, focusing on how these technologies can evolve to meet growing demands. |
|
|
|
Οι σκέψεις μου είναι πως είσαι ένα spam bot που γράφεις σε local boards για να κάνεις shill το Solana. Αν απ' την άλλη θες μια πιο δυνατή απάντηση, τότε θα σου πω πως το Solana, όπως κάθε άλλο shitcoin, δεν είναι decentralized, και το development του βασίζεται σε μια ομάδα που κατέχει και τα περισσότερα stakes. Πέρα απ' το ότι είναι Proof-of-Stake (που είναι τα θεμέλια του centralization), το blockchain του Solana ξεπερνάει τα 100 TB, κάνοντας το BSV να μοιάζει με decentralized: https://solana.stackexchange.com/a/149. Επίσης το δίκτυο έπεσε αρκετές φορές στο παρελθόν από bot attacks. Το Ethereum και ακόμη και το Bitcoin έχουν υποφέρει από συμφόρηση και κοιτάξτε πού βρίσκονται, η κριτική σας για τον Solana φαίνεται κάπως επαναλαμβανόμενη και απλοϊκή. Η τεχνολογία εξελίσσεται και ο Σολάνα είναι μέρος αυτής της εξέλιξης. Ανυπομονώ για πιο εποικοδομητικές συζητήσεις που αντικατοπτρίζουν τις τρέχουσες εξελίξεις και όχι ξεπερασμένες απόψεις. Προσπαθώντας να κατευθύνετε τη συζήτηση μακριά από το κατόρθωμα του Σολάνα, βαρετό. Επίσης τι γίνεται με τον σύνδεσμο που δημοσίευσες; Είναι αυτό περισσότερο μια προσωπική παρωδία που δεν μπορείτε να αντέξετε οικονομικά να φιλοξενήσετε δεδομένα TB; Πόσο φθηνές είναι οι συσκευές αποθήκευσης αυτές τις μέρες; χαχαχα |
|
|
|
Because Bitcoin and Ethereum are more heavily focused towards decentralization first(while having more TPS on layer-2s), while Solana is mainly geared towards better user experience first(hence high TPs on base-chain), then decentralization second.
In the end, which protocols are 'better' will just depend on what you want to prioritize: decentralization or cheap fees/fast txs.
I myself have seen where the dev team and Solana leaders turns down topics on anything being implemented that would make Solana itself less decentralized, so to me based on first hand sight I could not agree with you at all. This is definitely a huge feat being accomplished by Solana. |
|
|
|
|
The Transaction Scheduler is a cutting-edge solution designed to address and mitigate blockchain network congestion issues, particularly within the Solana ecosystem. This innovative tool aims to enhance network efficiency by allowing users to schedule their transactions ahead of time, thereby spreading transaction loads more evenly over time and reducing peak congestion.
Key Highlights:
Alleviates Network Congestion: By scheduling transactions for future execution, the Transaction Scheduler helps in evenly distributing transaction loads, significantly easing network congestion.
Minimizes Transaction Drops: It reduces the likelihood of transaction drops during periods of high demand by providing a more balanced approach to transaction management.
Flexible Scheduling and Dynamic Fees: Users gain the flexibility to schedule their transactions as per their convenience, coupled with a dynamic fee structure that incentivizes transactions during off-peak times, potentially lowering the overall transaction costs.
Tiered Validator System: Incorporates a two-tier system consisting of full validators and sub-validators, optimizing resource allocation and enhancing network scalability and security.
Security and Integrity: Implements rate limiting and surveillance measures to prevent exploitation of the scheduling system, ensuring the integrity and security of the blockchain network.
The Transaction Scheduler represents a strategic advancement towards solving the perennial problem of blockchain congestion. By combining innovative scheduling with economic incentives and robust security measures, it paves the way for a more efficient, user-friendly blockchain experience. This solution not only promises to enhance the operability of the Solana network but also sets a precedent for addressing similar challenges across other blockchain ecosystems.
Full read is found at - Transaction Scheduler for Capacity Management in Solana
This article provides a suggestion or an idea utilized to pick at to provide a solution for Solana's congestion.
|
|
|
|
|
I am almost getting prepared to Announce my project, with the announcement of my project will include the release of the product Alpha, upon release what is recommended? I do not have a team nor do I plan to obtain one until Alpha is released, I want to work on obtaining investments to build a team around my Alpha to prepare for Beta. Can I do a private sale? or go directly for an ICO upon Alpha Release?
|
|
|
|
You should build the project first and then community will form on its own if the project is worthy. Otherwise, if you're building community before project, that's just a scam, you are making promises to people so that they would invest in your token, and then you fail to fulfill your promises yet take the money.
Satoshi didn't build community and ask for money to make Bitcoin. Why crypto devs think that they are better than Satoshi and ask for money for development in the form of ICO?
For when my product is ready and in Alpha do you have any tips on how to build a community when the time comes to build one? |
|
|
|
1. How do you successfully build a community around a blockchain project without revealing too much prematurely before building a strong enough community?
You cannot build a strong community around your project when people do not know what the project is about, you have to first of all build the project for people to see if there is an actual utility in it, and if there is people would want to use it and you can grow the community you want. 4. How can I establish trust within the community while maintaining security?
Quite a lot of people invest in new projects basically out of the hype and because they want to make money quickly, it is somewhat like gambling, they don't trust the project or believe in anything about it, they just buy many new projects and see which one yields them profit. Having said that, if you offer something unique, people might buy your idea, but whatever you want to launch should be able to service certain needs and it should be a new idea, not what many developers have tried and failed in. Prolly you might get people who would be interested. Thank you for the response, so in general if I do not want to reveal much on my project due to its uniqueness then wait until I have a finished alpha version, got it. My project is going to be open source so in the end I do want to build trust around my project but I will have to wait until the right time to announce it. Any tips on where I can build a audience? where can I find investors once I have my alpha ready? Any Telegram Groups that work for this as well or Discord/Reddit? Any numbers I can contact? Emails? |
|
|
|
|
I am creating a new blockchain project, I have in the past launched a failed ICO where I had not built a community around my project ( I consider this my immature days as I was less prepared) but right now I have projects revolving around the Blockchain & Cryptocurrency community 2 of them which are custom blockchains.
One of these custom blockchain projects I am wanting to release within the next month or two which I am currently coding and working on by myself and I'm eager to learn from your experiences and gather insights.
Here's what I'd like to discuss:
1. How do you successfully build a community around a blockchain project without revealing too much prematurely before building a strong enough community?
2. What steps have worked for you in fostering engagement and attracting early supporters?
3. When is the right time to start engaging with the community? Should it be during development or closer to launch?
4. How can I establish trust within the community while maintaining security?
5. What communication channels (besides Bitcointalk) have you found effective for community engagement?
|
|
|
|
One of my favourite quotes comes from an anonymous: Stay away from ‘still’ people. Still broke, still complaining, still hating, and still nowhere . If that is such a big problem, I really recommend you to approach a successful mentality. Jack Ma says that in every complaint there is an opportunity. Would you not consider starting your own forum and doing a better job? Maybe use some not "so outdated" design if that is the main problem? Then I challenge you to grow it and see if it's as easy as it seems. Personally I believe that complains about "sh** coins" are an opportunity so I'm working on a project for that ( https://goodcash.network/HowItWorks ) I don't say I will be successful but it's my way of not complaining and TRYING at least to do something. Whether others see it like me is another story Now please be a good boy and solve the problem. Remember to not give up Eh I do have a alternative mapped out, still takes time even so. I am not in the mindset that I would say building an alternative is easy I am saying that this forum is already well established to be better not just leave it as is. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah forums they are outdated and old, we all probably have been in one or a couple before bitcointalk still every other forum I have been in no matter what the purpose was way more organized then this community, there is nothing useful being talked about I visit and revisit and it is still the same bs spammy and dumb questions in wrong threads. No one is doing nothing about it, other groups outside the forum are owned by diehard ETH fans or other blockchain supporters in which productive talk outside of such blockchain can't be talked about because it is always seen as shilling. There is not productivity in no group what so ever. Everything is about personal gains, seriously the most disgusting community I have come across and this thread really do not matter as no one does nothing about it anyways, Bitcointalk does nothing to change anything although being the top platform for the majority of the community.
|
|
|
|
Could you actually post some technical details about how it actually works? Something that someone could use to implement their own software?
As it stands, this is just a whole lot of marketing mumbo jumbo with no details as to how it works which means that there can be no evaluation of whether this is actually decentralized or not. Just because you say it is decentralized doesn't actually make it decentralized.
Unlocked to reply to @achow101, blog has been updated to include a technical overview. Thread has been locked again as I am focusing on the business side of things on the project and do not want to get to caught up in convo. PM me if you have any questions. P.S Flow has just made my day, validating that our MVP the Sub-Zero Protocol is right in the money. https://medium.com/@scroda/3-projects-that-aim-to-surpass-the-blockchain-trilemma-d774da02994cUnlocking this thread, looking for further discussion. |
|
|
|
|
Post reserved, seeing some similarities between other projects wanting to input my feedback after doing some research.
|
|
|
|
|
Stay informed, new things to come in the year 2020.
|
|
|
|
Thundercore, Flow, and Scroda are taking us into a new era where the Blockchain Trilemma is surpassed. Breaking the consensus protocol down and accepting the bad in blockchain which is centralized scaling which comes in the form of a leader and/or committee and introducing the good alongside it which is decentralization and the security it provides thus obtaining perfect harmony; Yin and Yang. https://medium.com/@scroda/3-projects-that-aim-to-surpass-the-blockchain-trilemma-d774da02994c |
|
|
|
I always wondered why I never saw pledge like bounties on projects, which would have ensured that a product was actually being developed even if was for the testnet. As investors you set the rules, your the one that the project needs not vice versa. Investors failed to established a norm that would have prevented all this chaos and still are. ICO's are not the problem investors are. I was just looking at how Namecoin used https://www.bountysource.com/ to offer a risk-free way of investors to be able to donate while being ensured that a product is actually built. We have failed to utilized the tools that have been right in front of us. Being blinded by greed. |
|
|
|
tokens don't even need a white paper since they are not doing anything whatsoever. basically all the token does could be summarized in a very short couple of sentences like this:
"a useless token created to raise funds for the creators out of thin air. investors are gambling their money when they put it in these tokens. they have different odds depending on the pumping power of the creators and market sentiment".
that's all you need to know about tokens and it is exactly the same for all of them. the rest is just advertising techniques they use to try and fool the newbies into believing what they are doing is not-gambling.
Haha totally agree, still I give it a max of 3 pages as it can be explained how they work alongside the ethereum or any other platform to make their concept work plus it all depends on the features, shitcoins yea should keep it at a max of 1 sentence. |
|
|
|
|
Yeah we know what Ethereum is, yeah you are built on top of the ERC20 protocol. So you offer no real solutions when it comes to the protocol level of things, you are most likely just building a small scale use case scenario. Get to the point what makes you stand out, minimal on the buzzwords as you do nothing at the protocol level.
This is not for project that actually do provide solutions at a protocol level.
|
|
|
|
For an AI wanting to obtain memory states and live on forever a incentivized blockchain would surely be the way to go, say if we reached a point where we could store our memory states on the blockchain such as altered carbon, would you really want to store that in a regular distributed system? No you would want to obtain the security that blockchain provides in a trustless manner, as our memory states would need to live on forever.
If only AI or blockchains would work that way. While I have no idea how consciousness can be stored -- no one has, humanity hasn't yet the slightest clue what consciousness even is -- I'm fairly certain it won't be on a blockchain. Maybe one day humanity will be able to externally store memories (beyond mere audiovisual reproductions) and minds (be they human or artificial) but that technology is probably still a few generations out and won't be technology we'll be able to fathom. If not blockchain then what else? what would you trust to store your consciousness on? and yes it is far out which even more exaggerates the point that AI has no business being on the blockchain in this point in time as it has no real use for it. Would you really hypothetically speaking put your consciousness in the hands of a central authority? |
|
|
|
I think the "problem" with "blockchain the technology", ie. outside the context of cryptocurrencies is two-fold:
1) Permissioned blockchains still seem rather pointless. For most use cases classical distributed databases (or distributed systems in general) are doing a much better job. Even in the iRobot takedown scenario the main properties that were missing are security and robustness. That you can do in a distributed manner without using "blockchain the technology", in a much more reliable and efficient way at a much lower cost.
This was something I was talking about in another thread also about decentralizing Github, there are benefits to a normal distributed system the real question is how long do you need the file to be maintained for? Is security of importance? If so blockchain would allow for such security to be achieved in a trustless manner. Do you need the file to live on forever store it on a blockchain with incentives, short term? go with a regular distributed system. For an AI wanting to obtain memory states and live on forever a incentivized blockchain would surely be the way to go, say if we reached a point where we could store our memory states on the blockchain such as altered carbon, would you really want to store that in a regular distributed system? No you would want to obtain the security that blockchain provides in a trustless manner, as our memory states would need to live on forever. 2) Permissionless blockchains without PoW-based consensus algorithms so far are often either not really permissionless or not really secure or both. Most of the time you either have (a) committee-based validators or an other form of central coordination which mostly rids of permissionlessness -- which leads back to (1) above. Or (b) variants of Proof-of-Resource like PoS that -- as of now -- are still mostly work in progress in terms of security and robustness.
I guess there could be ways in which permissionless blockchains could support AI and vice versa but I think the overlap where they would complement one another are rather limited. I'm afraid in most cases you'll end up with either a shitty AI or a shitty cryptocurrency.
I think to reach true scalability we need a bit of both, while still not sacrificing security in the end;Ying and Yan. Read on my idea here, https://medium.com/@scroda/scrodas-sub-zero-protocol-walkthrough-c1677f3d60faStill true I am no in agreement neither that AI should be used on the blockchain as of yet, only in extreme cases such as mentioned above. |
|
|
|
I believe it would depend on what your definition of a blockchain is. Because if your definition includes arriving into consensus through POW, then I believe all those "use-cases" would NOT need a blockchain, but a database.
This is where I would have to agree, there are many different consensus mechanism coming to light as time goes by. Most of you are assuming it would be costly because of PoW or similar mechanism in which require transactions fees in a fully decentralized network, that is a foolish assumption. No, you misunderstood. I was talking about the costliness of POW/hashing itself, which would require a large amount of computational resources. It's inefficient for those use-cases. Where in my statement do I show to not have understood such obvious assumption? Any consensus mechanism which is highly demanding on computational resources will obviously have fee's, they go hand in hand  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
