YUTA-Cardano/CPA(DMは全て詐欺)@yutazzz
I am voting "Abstain" on the proposal for "Cardano Vision 2026: Human Centred, Scalable, Post Quantum Secure - IO Research."
I believe this proposal is a mix of a waste of funds and a potentially excellent proposal for Leios and quantum resistance research, and I wanted it resubmitted and split.
However, the IOR has promised never to resubmit and has promised to close down leios and quantum-resistant research labs if the proposal is rejected.
As some members have suggested, this may be a political maneuver by the IOR, but it may not be. If not, I believe that news of a complete halt to the research will spread, and the ADA could fall by more than 50% due to the departure of holders who were involved in purchasing under the guise of peer review.
Therefore, our choice is as follows:
A. Tolerate some seemingly pointless research as a sacrifice to gain access to research on Leios and quantum resistance.
B-1. Reject the proposal, betting on a resubmission, with an X% probability of the resubmission occurring.
B-2. Reject the proposal, betting on a (1-X)% chance of a resubmission, but all labs closing and an ADA 50%+drop event occurring.
The ideal scenario is B-1, but the worst-case scenario is B-2, and the probability of this is difficult to predict as it depends on the political decisions of the IOR team. At the very least, since the IOR has promised closures, this is a high-risk gamble.
While I acknowledge that B-1 is ideal, I cannot accept the risk of the B-2 event, so I withdraw my NO. While I find this emotionally very frustrating, we need to consider it objectively, focusing on the practical gains and losses for the entire ecosystem.
On the other hand, I understand the argument that it is absurd to actively approve a budget that includes what I believe to be a waste of money. Based on this feedback, I withdraw my YES.
Therefore, my final vote is Abstain. I hope the IOR will improve its operations next year.
