I think algorand is by far the best crypto platform out there, but the sad part is that it's the economic / behavioral issues that hold crypto back. if you could earn Algo and it was widely adopted, it would be an attractive alternative currency and smart contract platform.
but for me tech and adoption are like two out of four things needed to make crypto non-evil (literally) - the third is democratic governance. the fourth is environmental impact which Algorand checks off. But it's not democratically organized or run, which is a complete non-starter.
the foundation that runs it is probably the least corrupt org I can think of in crypto (I am not an expert) but its still a group that hold a giant percentage of the existing coins, which is a huge non-starter as well, and there is no concept of citizen ship or personhood that maps to the real world.
I dont believe in the decentralization nonsense and this pseudo anonymous thing over crypto is not good. to really run a DAO you need real people interacting in something like a co-op. kind of like the internet, actually.
what some people call decentralization I call by an old fashioned name - distributed. there is another concept which is more to the point than the term centralization and it is concentration. The Gini index of a logical dimension of a system is more important to me than whether it is centralized per se.
So voting power should not be too concentrated, wealth should not be too concentrated.
We are a long way from a workable model for crypto that fulfills these criteria. Buterin who is a frontman for libertarians (and worse) who are actually evil is the closest thing we have besides the Algo founder to a non-greedy figurehead, but we need no figurehead.
what has proven good enough for countries will prove good enough for crypto. democracy.
but for me tech and adoption are like two out of four things needed to make crypto non-evil (literally) - the third is democratic governance. the fourth is environmental impact which Algorand checks off. But it's not democratically organized or run, which is a complete non-starter.
the foundation that runs it is probably the least corrupt org I can think of in crypto (I am not an expert) but its still a group that hold a giant percentage of the existing coins, which is a huge non-starter as well, and there is no concept of citizen ship or personhood that maps to the real world.
I dont believe in the decentralization nonsense and this pseudo anonymous thing over crypto is not good. to really run a DAO you need real people interacting in something like a co-op. kind of like the internet, actually.
what some people call decentralization I call by an old fashioned name - distributed. there is another concept which is more to the point than the term centralization and it is concentration. The Gini index of a logical dimension of a system is more important to me than whether it is centralized per se.
So voting power should not be too concentrated, wealth should not be too concentrated.
We are a long way from a workable model for crypto that fulfills these criteria. Buterin who is a frontman for libertarians (and worse) who are actually evil is the closest thing we have besides the Algo founder to a non-greedy figurehead, but we need no figurehead.
what has proven good enough for countries will prove good enough for crypto. democracy.