Do you think we can have another fast, decentralized blockchain like solana?

[Amug123]

Solana's proof of history consensus algorithm is a game changer in the blockchain space, enabling the network to process thousands of transactions per second while maintaining decentralization and security. Solana proof of history is a groundbreaking innovation that has the potential to revolutionize the blockchain space, can we a possible alternative blockchain architecture that could potentially surpass solana's capabilities. What your views on this

[rdluffy]

Nowadays there are so many networks, so many layers, that it's hard to know which ones they are, which gas tokens etc 

There are very fast networks like SUI, even faster than Solana:


Source

But something interesting to note is the Trilemma of blockchains:
The blockchain trilemma is the challenge of simultaneously achieving the three main aspects of blockchain technology: security, scalability and decentralization
Many networks emerge as ETH killers, or SOL killers, but fail to survive over time, a great example being NANO

[hugeblack]

I think the speed metric is measured by the TPS indicator, and according to some data --> https://chainspect.app/dashboard, there are blockchains that are faster than Solana. For example, ICP has a Real-time TPS of 1,222 tx/s.
Taraxa(TARA) claims to handle over 1,000 TCPs, and some layer2 solutions offer even higher speeds.

[Mia Chloe]

Solana's proof of history consensus algorithm is a game changer in the blockchain space, enabling the network to process thousands of transactions per second while maintaining decentralization and security.

Actually based on what I've on a few articles, Solana's Proof of History is kinda impressive, but it's not the only game in town. I think a hybrid consensus model that combines different mechanisms, like PoS or BFT, could potentially offer even better scalability and security.

Who knows maybe a new architecture based on DAGs or hash graphs will come along and blow everything else out of the water. The blockchain space is all about innovation, so I'm optimistic to see what the future holds though.

[KryptoBull]

Solana's proof of history consensus algorithm is a game changer in the blockchain space, enabling the network to process thousands of transactions per second while maintaining decentralization and security. Solana proof of history is a groundbreaking innovation that has the potential to revolutionize the blockchain space, can we a possible alternative blockchain architecture that could potentially surpass solana's capabilities. What your views on this

Sol's POH has many issues that need improvement, particularly in edge cases. This is why Sol faced outages in the past. Also, the market has many blockchains faster than Sol, for example, Ton, Avax Vryx, Ada Hydra, or Antelope chains.

Sol was able to revive and grow strongly thanks to VC funding, and the team was smart to capitalize on the memecoin boom. Now Sol has become a major force in the market with a solid position. Many new blockchains may be faster than Sol, but it will be difficult to take Sol's place.

[joniboini]

What's the goal, though? Is it to chase the fastest transaction speed or something else? Why not improve the existing chain? I don't see why we need a faster blockchain if the existing ones aren't even used or have some issues like stability, smart contract faults, etc. I think developers can improve existing chains like what happened in Ethereum with new scalability proposals and so on instead of starting a new chain just because it can be faster.

I do agree that we'll see new innovations here and there; it isn't like Solana is perfect or anything. But I'd love to see more improvements made on the native layer before jumping on layer 2 or making a new blockchain.

[KryptoBull]

What's the goal, though? Is it to chase the fastest transaction speed or something else? Why not improve the existing chain? I don't see why we need a faster blockchain if the existing ones aren't even used or have some issues like stability, smart contract faults, etc. I think developers can improve existing chains like what happened in Ethereum with new scalability proposals and so on instead of starting a new chain just because it can be faster.

I do agree that we'll see new innovations here and there; it isn't like Solana is perfect or anything. But I'd love to see more improvements made on the native layer before jumping on layer 2 or making a new blockchain.

You know, we've got hundreds of blockchain projects in this market. Teams behind existing blockchains are constantly upgrading their platforms for higher speed, better stability, and improved user-friendliness. Meanwhile, other teams aim to create new ecosystems to meet user demands or simply to compete and make profits.

That's why we keep seeing new L1s and L2s in this space: Sol, Near, Avax, Ftm, Ton, Sui, Apt, Arb, Op, Base, Ink... I love the competition because it drives development, and ultimately, users get the most benefits!

[gunhell16]

Solana's proof of history consensus algorithm is a game changer in the blockchain space, enabling the network to process thousands of transactions per second while maintaining decentralization and security. Solana proof of history is a groundbreaking innovation that has the potential to revolutionize the blockchain space, can we a possible alternative blockchain architecture that could potentially surpass solana's capabilities. What your views on this

I see several exchangers that I use, but I often notice that the solana network is always congested, so when that happens, I use a different network, such as Ton, Sui, Arb, Pol, Bsc, and it depends on what you trust as holders or traders.

There are many other crypto networks that will also speed up the transactions we make. SOL is just one of the blockchains that can help us, that's all.

[Z-crypt]

What's the goal, though? Is it to chase the fastest transaction speed or something else? Why not improve the existing chain? I don't see why we need a faster blockchain if the existing ones aren't even used or have some issues like stability, smart contract faults, etc. I think developers can improve existing chains like what happened in Ethereum with new scalability proposals and so on instead of starting a new chain just because it can be faster.

I do agree that we'll see new innovations here and there; it isn't like Solana is perfect or anything. But I'd love to see more improvements made on the native layer before jumping on layer 2 or making a new blockchain.

You know, we've got hundreds of blockchain projects in this market. Teams behind existing blockchains are constantly upgrading their platforms for higher speed, better stability, and improved user-friendliness. Meanwhile, other teams aim to create new ecosystems to meet user demands or simply to compete and make profits.

That's why we keep seeing new L1s and L2s in this space: Sol, Near, Avax, Ftm, Ton, Sui, Apt, Arb, Op, Base, Ink... I love the competition because it drives development, and ultimately, users get the most benefits!

You nailed it!! The competition which isn’t obvious between the existing blockchains and the new ones make room for more improvement. Personally, i switch to L2 alot to make things easier. But even though SOL blockchain has improvements to make, i don’t think it can be surpassed easily.

[ABCbits]

Solana is far from being decentralized. The main reason is extremely high cost to run Solana validator.

Snowden: Solana is centralized

Fact check: Mostly True ✅

Sol prefers 10GBit/s upload. <1% has this. It's a data center chain. Sol has 1 full client, no spec. It's more of an app than a protocol. Validators pay lots to vote. In ~2.5yr, ~$1.2M stake to break even. Centralized!