Cardano Founder Claims Network Complete, Community Disagrees

Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson sparked a debate within the community when he claimed that the Cardano network had been completed. Hoskinson, who heads Input Output Global (IOG), stated that the network had fulfilled its original contractual obligations set out upon its launch in 2015. He also mentioned that he had been working on the project without financial compensation since 2020, adding that scaling as per the original roadmap is done and has transcended into a moving target.

Hoskinson's remarks stemmed from the expiration of IOG’s original contract, which began with the Genesis Block Distribution in 2015. He explained that the IOG is currently working on advanced scaling solutions, such as Leios and Hydra. However, these projects may be “at risk” without guaranteed funding. According to Hoskinson, failure to receive funding could lead to their departure for other opportunities. This statement raised eyebrows and drew sharp criticism from longtime community members.

One user challenged Hoskinson's claim, asking how the contract could be completed if scaling wasn’t fully delivered as per the roadmap. The original roadmap, which Hoskinson claims concluded in 2020, promised scalability to rival top blockchains. Hydra, in particular, aims to enable parallel transaction processing, which could elevate Cardano’s throughput to rival Solana’s theoretical 65,000 transactions per second (TPS), a stark contrast to its current TPS.

Community members argue that Cardano still falls short of its third-generation blockchain vision for mass adoption. They pointed out that projects like Basho, Leois, and Hydra, which were talked about, haven’t been implemented on the mainnet. Therefore, they questioned how Cardano could be fully completed as per the original roadmap when these features are clearly missing.

This controversy extends to broader concerns about Cardano’s governance and funding model. Hoskinson articulated that IOG would not work at a loss or for free. He also challenged the community’s push for decentralized decision-making, particularly the idea of “competitive bids” for development work. According to Hoskinson, this disadvantages Western developers in high-cost regions. He believes advocating for such a model could compel the IOG to either lay off staff or establish development centers in lower-cost areas like India or Eastern Europe.

Hoskinson previously criticized the Cardano Foundation’s governance structure, arguing that it sidelines the ADA community and advocated for a membership-based organization (MBO) transition. Other previous disputes have included budget allocation debates and differing views on the recently introduced Cardano constitution. While the foundation has expressed a willingness to support the new constitution, it has signaled caution regarding budget approvals, citing a need for further review.

In summary, the Cardano community is divided over Charles Hoskinson's claim that the network has been completed. While Hoskinson maintains that the original contractual obligations have been met, community members argue that key features promised in the original roadmap are still missing. The debate highlights broader concerns about Cardano’s governance and funding model, with Hoskinson expressing reservations about decentralized decision-making and the potential impact on development costs.