substrate VS polkadot

Substrate — a framework for building application-specific blockchains (written in Rust);

frame-benchmarking = { version = "4.0.0-dev", default-features = false, optional = true, git = "https://github.com/paritytech/substrate.git", branch = "polkadot-v1.0.0" }

To offer some perspective outside of the typical "all crypto is a scam", Parity is doing some cool stuff with a rust modular blockchain library called Substrate https://github.com/paritytech/substrate.

Rust takes the cake in the blockchain space: Substrate, Cosmos (CosmWasm), and Solana. All of the zero knowledge cryptography libraries used for layer 2 solutions are written in Rust, compiling to Wasm (see arkworks, Risc0). Ethereum's next version of smart contracts will even use a restricted subset of Wasm ("Ewasm") instead of EVM.

Verifying NPoS election solution graph and its score is a memory-intensive operation that needs to be performed within a single block time. Under the current runtime constraints, a solution graph with 22,500 nominators can be verified well within the block production time on Polkadot. There are plans to improve on this and implement multi-block election solution verification, after which, the NPoS system can scale to incorporate more nominators.

Fast-unstake is now available on Kusama. This allows instant unstaking if you have not participated in staking in the last 28 eras. https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12129

First, any outstanding multisig calls (ones where one signatory has signed, but not the threshold) will not be able to execute. Please either finish your multisig calls before this upgrade, or wait until after it is completed. https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12072

Github: https://github.com/paritytech/substrate

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