$TAO All i said recently about Bittensor is basically a crack opening up. usually i just keep these things for myself but when the crack opens i communicate the underlying truths badly and im sorry, this is a problem ive always had. you obviously dont have time to read all i said on X around the post you checked so ill try to summarize the thing if it can be useful... my thoughts are that Bittensor is transitioning into directions that arent the best and only a few voices are heard. who takes the decision ends up being Const alone. this was fine for a while but it starts to become a serious worry for many including myself, no matter how much id like to trust him or appreciate the person. the validators problem is a big one and always has been since i joined. i understand they were created when there was only 1 subnet? Yuma made sense and then bittensor changed. many subnets become impossible to manage for hardware legit validators... weight copying become the big issue and then we introduced child hotkeys to make weight copying feel less of a problem. now we're at the point where we literally endorse Null Consensus over Yuma Consensus as a clear admission that valis have been broken all this time. what i personally consider the biggest flaws of bittensor are: 1. no true governance weighted by stake (which you'd win anyways i guess so it doesnt make you powerless), 2. the blockchain itself is not safe from human greed because theres only one block producing vali... same with the sudo key for deployments, etc. (ownership is in Const's hands) meanwhile, we try to find a usecase for the broken valis and leave the root problems in there unaddressed. in Bitcoin whats amazing is that nobody gets a free bitcoin, it is ALWAYS the byproduct of mining and deserving it. validators have the lowest value in all the bittensor ecosystem but they could have an obvious one by producing blocks. so why do we try to make them pseudo useful instead? this is what drives me insane