rust VS polkadot

You can use Tensorflow for Rust to simplify that task and avoid pain with regex. Just have the right mindset.

What is the benefit of this compared to using bindings/a wrapper to Tensorflow, or other ML libraries written in C/C++, such as this community hosted project on tensorflow's github. If it's just for fun that is a valid enough reason imo, just curious since you describe it as a better Tensorflow because of the typing vs using the python wrapper, when there already exist ways to interact with tensorflow with both Rust and other statically typed languages, also including C++ (officially supported), C#, Haskell and Scala, as well as probably having bindings not mentioned on the documentation for more niche languages.

(3) You could use TensorFlow as your executor: https://github.com/tensorflow/rust

TensorFlow has language support for TypeScript well as Rust.

Thank you for the restponse! With tensorflow I am probably better of with something like; [tensorflow rust bindings](https://github.com/tensorflow/rust/tree/master/src). But I believe some useful extensions are still written in python for example; [TFDV](https://github.com/tensorflow/data-validation).. and how about scikit-learn or even something that is simpler like fb-prophet that is entirely written in python?

Tensorflow bindings exist, technically, but they're in a pretty rough state AFAIK.

tensorflow/rust (Rust): Rust language bindings for TensorFlow

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