I do. And it’s really the only way to (practically) scale the network beyond 10x of what it is now.
Imagine still having humans (whether it’s DFINITY; or someone else; or a bunch of named neurons each controlling some 10-20% of the voting power) having to put together and vote through proposals to replace every single broken replica on thousands of subnets consisting of tens of thousands of servers. Even if physically possible, it would be utter chaos.
So building in automation and a having the NNS manage the IC at a (much) higher level (as in e.g. “approve onboarding of 1K more nodes in Asia, 80% of them storage focused”) is the only possible way that the IC could scale to anything like its imagined scale. So if DFINITY or whoever is still in direct control of assigning machines to subnets in a few years’ time, I would be more concerned about why growth has stalled to that extent; than about lack of decentralization or scalability
I’m gonna continue holding.
I believe in dfinity, but the notion of “true democracy” needs a helping hand.
I read your pros & cons and I’m impressed, I would feel more confident Leaving my money invested in ICP if you were at the top of the innovation team.
Are you kidding me? at this time you sold all of your icp and you still like to give suggestions to the team, nor hate the team more? I would think it is the price killing you rather than the project. Anyway, I don’t know what you are talking about, I would rather believe the team. Winter will pass and spring will come again.
I think the inflation/unlocking is causing mathematical quirks that is throwing off the market price, and the market price watchers. As an investor, I’m very neutral on the question of whether now is a good time to invest.
I would like to hope so, but my hope is not based on this forum, nor on the marketing, but merely in my faith of crypto enthusiasts recognizing the potential of this protocol.
$ICP needs to move beyond crypto enthusiasts. These people function on narratives rather than the tech and its usefulness. Hopefully IC can be useful to people building real products that improves lives.
I would like to express my appreciation for the insightful and professional comments provided. As a non-technical user, I have observed similar issues with scalability, centralization, and top-down approach of . Your observations and analysis have effectively articulated my own observations and concerns.
I sincerely hope that the leadership of Dfinity takes these comments into serious consideration and takes action to address these issues. With a current market valuation of one billion dollars, it is imperative that these issues are addressed in a timely manner. Failure to do so may result in a significant decline in value and an erosion of the community, ultimately making a full recovery improbable. In addition, I believe that professional investors would likely reallocate their resources elsewhere.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Keep building. This is only solution.
Thanks for the post
These, very substantial concerns, are what has been raised - with little to no response from Dfinity
Maybe Dfinity listens to logic? Or maybe we sink into oblivion after the next Bull run
Regardless, appreciate you taking the time to share
Thanks for explaining in Depth Zane
maybe he bought at a -98% , and now sold at -99%, no big deal .
regarding NNS, I’m not sure if even Bitcoin is more decentralized that NNS voting mechanism, because for example who are the ones controlling the BTC upgrade mechanism and protocol, isn’t it just a repo on github, with a group of developers contributing to it? And decisions of what will be deployed to the miners, is 100% miner decision, so nobody else controls the network, apart from all mining pools, who are like a group of corporations and they’re the only ones who will tell all their miners in a pool which version to upgrade to, and which to ignore (remember the segwit debate and split of bitcoin to bitcoin-cash and few other forks? because miners are in control and anyone else who is not a ‘100% in miners interest’ does not have a vote). Maybe NNS is the best possible solution for now? at least it allows the stakers and the developers into the voting process…
Sounds like a slimmed down internet computer. Diet ICP.
Mind elaborating on what happened?
What happened was that at that time the ICP to XDR exchange rate (which determines the ICP to cycles conversion rate) was set by an oracle, by voting on NNS proposals. And there was one such proposal every N minutes.
Additionally, there was a single upper limit on the number of proposals of all types for which rewards had not yet been distributed. Rewards are distributed once a day.
The bug that triggered the issue (IIRC) had something to do with the rewards calculation (in the Governance Canister) failing, possibly because it required too many instructions to complete. More instructions than could be executed in a single round. As a result, rewards could no longer be distributed and the list of proposals whose rewards had not been distributed kept growing.
When the list size hit the limit after a day or so, no more proposals could be created. Including proposals to upgrade the Governance Canister to a newer version, that would have been able to compute voting rewards without trapping and consume the backlog.
So a disaster recovery was required to get the Governance Canister out of this deadlock. (Everything else still worked, except you couldn’t make any new NNS proposals.) A disaster recovery on a subnet other than the NNS can be done via an NNS proposal, forcing the replicas to restart using a new replica binary. But a disaster recovery on the NNS requires node operators to manually deploy a new replica binary (or maybe, in this particular case, a new Governance Canister, I don’t remember).
Once two thirds of the replicas had been manually upgraded, the Governance Canister was able to consume the backlog of proposal rewards and everything went back to normal. After that, measures were taken to prevent something like this reoccurring, including having a separate limit for some types of proposals (so e.g. the Governance Canister could be upgraded even if exchange rate proposals were backlogged).
Lmao, you’re the bottom indicator. Congratulations.
You sold at the literal bottom, and tried to fud others that “its over”.
price action doesn’t change the fundamentals of a project, and the entire crypto market is up while I didn’t sell for fiat
most democracies require more than a simple majority for fundamental decisions with long-term impact. The SNS should probably account for this.
The NNS is a bit flat. There are quite a few democracies which manage complexity using a variety of well-known patterns.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.