Acala VS polkadot

I don't see any tests for the rewards mechanism in the first place. Stack Overflow took TDD to the extreme, and look at where they're at. That guy is active in Chia, using all of the tools he built for the forums from almost a decade ago, and they all still work. I think Acala even uses his code for their forums.

The Acala code is open source: https://github.com/AcalaNetwork/Acala

Seychelles-based crypto exchange KuCoin has highlighted flaws in decentralized finance (DeFi) network Acala’s community proposal to recover billions of dollars worth of aUSD erroneously issued during a mid-August exploit, according to a Tuesday post published on KuCoin’s blog.

I'm trying to connect Polkadot.js to the acala.network and I'm a bit confused with accounts: I created 1st account for DOT, 2nd for ACA, and 3rd with "Allow use on any chain" - now I can connect my wallet and select any of them with apps.acala.network, but in the drop down with balances I can see only ACA balances. How is it possible to stake DOT?

Acala - The DeFi Hub of Polkadot

Ресурсы Acala: [Linktree] [Website] [YouTube] [Newsletter][Twitter][Github][Discord] [Wiki]

Equilibrium will integrate with Acala and Karura on the Polkadot and Kusama networks to bring the aUSD stablecoin to our ecosystem!

You can get 14.5% APY on DOT along with a bonus of its stable coin aUSD. https://acala.network/ make sure you always check links and don’t trust random ppl.

Polkadot (6400 GitHub Stars) https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot

I don't think asynchronous backing has any direct effect on the number of parachains, no (I mean, there likely is an effect, but it's not the goal and my understanding is that any effect on that would be minimal, although I'm not involved in the deep engineering here). It increases throughput, correct, by decreasing the time between blocks by not needing to do a "roundtrip" to the relay chain to build new blocks. See https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/issues/3779 for an overview.

"The 27 waiting day is unavoidable and a very important security measure to protect against certain attacks and vulnerabilities of PoS. I totally understand that it is annoying, but arguably it is for the benefit+security of the overall network, which includes you as well at the end of the day as DOT-holder." - from this GitHub discussion.

Ref: Kianenigma @ https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/issues/2418

Polkadot 0.9.37 has been released with MEDIUM upgrade priority. https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/releases/tag/v0.9.37

Specifically, it was this PR that changed it: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/pull/6230

Actually it looks like you can! It's just not recommended. This is from the official documentation: "Starting with runtime version v23 natively included in the client version 0.8.23, payouts can go to any custom address. If you'd like to redirect payments to an account that is neither the controller nor the stash account, set one up. Note that setting an exchange address as the recipient of the staking rewards is extremely unsafe.*

A particular validator sent out a LOT of dispute reports (i.e., saying that other validators did something incorrectly) last night (for reasons unknown). It looks like other nodes "choked" reading all of these disputes, and one subsystem died, stalling nodes but NOT killing the process. It's still being investigated, but you can look at the issue on Github to see it being discussed here: https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/issues/6412