I don't understand your response. I wasn't debating the intricacies of self-sovereignty. I was pointing out that your understanding of hardware wallets is wrong.
> good luck building a good UX for a financial system where a small OpsSec error can wipe out your family's fortune
Your concerns are valid. And you're free to commit to projects that align with your values.
To me, the immutability of an actual blockchain is non-negotiable. I've given up on Ethereum after the DAO fork out of principle.
But that's the beauty. Unlike our current financial system, you're not bound to use Ethereum. You have sovereignty and can make your own choices (and drive change).
-- (I only discuss part of your comment, don't have time for the rest)
Just FYI, the biggest problem for crypto fraud is phishing, not theft. A thief can't get your private keys from a hardware wallet. And there are many, many, MANY strategies you can use against phishing.
It's quite straightforward actually: go through the CVs of engineers working at top companies and look how their resume looks different from yours.
Chances are that they're actually selling themselves properly, using lots of jargon, using strong action verbs, and following the advice that has shown to work for the last decade.
Layoffs hit overvalued, bloated companies, and the majority of laid of people are non-technical staff, or junior employees.
None of this has ANY effect on competent software engineers. Most of my peers keep getting massive offers left and right. Nothing has changed for them.
If you can't find a job with a "proven track record" in this market, you're doing something horribly wrong. I'm willing to bet $100 that your resume is not stellar.
Many people are bad at evaluating themselves. I've seen countless posts by juniors apparently "grinding hard" to get a job, and you just take 1 look at their resume and everything makes sense. Zero research on how to write resumes, zero prep, projects are garbage, shotgunning on indeed without some creativity etc.
Algorand can process 40k TPS, with transaction finality below 4 seconds - all without forking under the consensus assumptions.
This capacity is more than enough to power the entire world's financial infrastructure. They are also working on state proofs and side chains, making it suitable for CBDCs.
> If you solved this problem, adoption would not be your concern
I disagree. Because for decentralized projects, adoption and success go hand in hand. It's a chicken and egg problem.
And even if the tech is superior, it doesn't influence decision making of normal people. They are influenced by tons of misinformation from grifters, scammers and even mainstream media.
In this space, solving the problem is not enough. We need to educate people as well, which is arguably the biggest challenge of modern society.
And also, decentralization is not achieved by technology. It's achieved by adoption.
You're never gonna find a new chain with strong decentralization. You have the wrong premise. Strong decentralization is the goal of DLTs, and we should select DLTs that have the best conditions to get us to that point.
It helps if the backing organization has integrity, which the Algorand foundation has shown many times.
ETH has the same problem as the current financial industry: too much momentum. It's crazy that even in the world of crypto, history just repeats itself.
Ethereum is a flawed chain, and just not suitable for global scale DeFi. But people continue building on it.
Even many Solidity devs refuse to move on to other chains. Maybe it's the sunk cost fallacy.
This is so funny. I watched your stream yesterday for the first time randomly.
Never heard about eBPF before. Since then I've read up on eBPF and its use in low-latency engineering, which I found fascinating. And now I see your post here.
> good luck building a good UX for a financial system where a small OpsSec error can wipe out your family's fortune
Define "small" lol