MISC Crypto Crew (MCC) Vol: XIII: Money printer goes brrrrrr, But Bitcoin doesnt

[Berts]

Proterra was supposed to merge with QELL dammit!! ACTC up 100%, FML

[FreshRollyG]

Though i will quote and highlight posts like this to say, this isn't 2017 anymore and no one is gambling their money on dogschit not even listed on coinmarketcap.

I'm not telling any of you boys this is a great project, or to invest - just giving a heads up of a new project listing. It really makes no difference if any of you get onboard. I got no idea where it will go and if it'll tank. Prolly will, but I can take the L.

Also share the same sentiment towards dogcoins and ICO's; my other holdings are all relatively established and in top 10. This is my only one (prolly the last, too).

If my memory serves right, quite a few reasonable long-standing projects weren't listed on CMC or Gecko initially - usually 48-72hrs for it to be vetted after going public.

You've been in the game longer than me, so I respect that.

I had someone giving me crap about it not being on CMC ~ a week before it was listed for trading.. how does that work? (srs question)

[Serenadium]

Do you think anyone gave a fuk about twitter,********,google or any other multi-billion dollar ad corp 4 years after its founding? I can go ahead and answer that for you. No, nobody cared. The ones who did dumped billion dollar bags into the liquidity provided by retail that they got for a couple million.

Just for reference, twitter hit 100m users after 6 years , and had an $8b valuation. Brave is looking like it will hit the 100m user mark on its sixth birthday as well. Twitter is now topped out at 300m users and sliding, with a marketcap of $40b. Brave has a much larger addressable market, and an ad platform that is put together better. If everything pans out, theres a good chance BAT reaches top 3 in cmc market cap. Thats a huge, but possible gap to fill. Lots of upside, and downside is looking less and less.

I don't have any beef with BAT and i actually think the ultimate moat is built at the UI layer which puts Brave in perhaps the best position out of any crypto project to capture. A good Brave UI can just call on smart contracts from underlying dapps (dex, options, lending etc) built on blockchain x,y,z. I don't think people will care about the underlying blockchain (Eth, solana, polkadot, cosmos etc) or even dapp (Uni, AAVE, Synth, Curve etc) at the end of the day, as long as the UI can call the smart contracts, the end users don't interact direct with the dapps.

I feel strongly the BAT token economics are poor though, and they shouldn't force people to transact in the native token (it just adds more friction, i.e. somebody has to acquire it and dispose it for the purpose of transacting on your platform). A number of high profile projects with utility tokens have failed.

Instead I think it should allow transactions in any kind of token (stablecoins, BTC or ETH) and take a fixed fee say 0.01 to 0.1% which gets used to buy and burn BAT or goes to people staking BAT.
Staked BAT nodes can even be used to determine stuff like dev funding for changes or features of the products (Brave privacy enhancements or better value accrual features).
I think BAT should also have a liquidity mining program (if they have any community funds left) where advertisers get additional BAT for advertising on the platform.

my 2c.

[juvefan]

I don't have any beef with BAT and i actually think the ultimate moat is built at the UI layer which puts Brave in perhaps the best position out of any crypto project to capture. A good Brave UI can just call on smart contracts from underlying dapps (dex, options, lending etc) built on blockchain x,y,z. I don't think people will care about the underlying blockchain (Eth, solana, polkadot, cosmos etc) or even dapp (Uni, AAVE, Synth, Curve etc) at the end of the day, as long as the UI can call the smart contracts, the end users don't interact direct with the dapps.

I feel strongly the BAT token economics are poor though, and they shouldn't force people to transact in the native token (it just adds more friction, i.e. somebody has to acquire it and dispose it for the purpose of transacting on your platform). A number of high profile projects with utility tokens have failed.

Instead I think it should allow transactions in any kind of token (stablecoins, BTC or ETH) and take a fixed fee say 0.01 to 0.1% which gets used to buy and burn BAT or goes to people staking BAT.
Staked BAT nodes can even be used to determine stuff like dev funding for changes or features of the products (Brave privacy enhancements or better value accrual features).
I think BAT should also have a liquidity mining program (if they have any community funds left) where advertisers get additional BAT for advertising on the platform.

my 2c.

Not only is the token pointless and forced, but the whole ecosystem itself is centralized as distributing tokens for ads goes through Uphold (the owners of Brave and BAT). The guy from Monero tore it apart on twitter a while back.

[LeftistGent]

Do you think anyone gave a fuk about twitter,********,google or any other multi-billion dollar ad corp 4 years after its founding? I can go ahead and answer that for you. No, nobody cared. The ones who did dumped billion dollar bags into the liquidity provided by retail that they got for a couple million.

Just for reference, twitter hit 100m users after 6 years , and had an $8b valuation. Brave is looking like it will hit the 100m user mark on its sixth birthday as well. Twitter is now topped out at 300m users and sliding, with a marketcap of $40b. Brave has a much larger addressable market, and an ad platform that is put together better. If everything pans out, theres a good chance BAT reaches top 3 in cmc market cap. Thats a huge, but possible gap to fill. Lots of upside, and downside is looking less and less.

Ex-BAT shill checking in. The tokenomics are chit tbh, and Brave is not BAT. Brave is a great browser but the BAT model isn't working. Payouts are less and less now with people averaging less than 2-3 BAT a month. Some would say this is due to increased users, which even if true simply means increases in users doesn't correlate with a subsequent increase in the price of BAT.

Brendan also kind of exposed himself with his takes on COVID, but I wont get into that.

Anyway, I know you've been shilling it since release so I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on tokenomics and how you see the price increasing other than normies just buying it on a hype run.

[Parkerscott]

Ex-BAT shill checking in. The tokenomics are chit tbh, and Brave is not BAT. Brave is a great browser but the BAT model isn't working. Payouts are less and less now with people averaging less than 2-3 BAT a month. Some would say this is due to increased users, which even if true simply means increases in users doesn't correlate with a subsequent increase in the price of BAT.

Brendan also kind of exposed himself with his takes on COVID, but I wont get into that.

Anyway, I know you've been shilling it since release so I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on tokenomics and how you see the price increasing other than normies just buying it on a hype run.

Like serenadium said above, Brave exceeds at the UI/UX layer. Brave is already sitting at 24.1m users before the big tech exodus. There is a pretty good chance it becomes the first crypto company to hit 50m users, and from there the goal is 100m and it will probably be another 5-10 years before anything else can also claim that title. Every crypto token has taken a top down approach. Decentralize first at the cost of ui/ux and users. Brave is taking a bottom up approach, and a lot of people for some reason think that Brave is finished being developed. They are rolling out an outline for the Themisv2 protocol this week which is believed to have a staking mechanism for ad attribution. So its hard to make the case that they will never be able to adjust their "tokenomics"

Really all I care about is the userbase growing, and the ad purchases increasing. Staking, and added utility is secondary because demand is more important than an "economic sink". There is also a system being built right now that will allow website owners to create a "purchase with BAT" button for things like digital or physical items so utility is increasing. Brave is not a finished product, and its clear they are still working out some issues. If they were done with most of the major work they would be marketing extremely heavy, and pushing their rewards platform a lot harder.

[mcdojo]

Do you think anyone gave a fuk about twitter,********,google or any other multi-billion dollar ad corp 4 years after its founding? I can go ahead and answer that for you. No, nobody cared. The ones who did dumped billion dollar bags into the liquidity provided by retail that they got for a couple million.

Just for reference, twitter hit 100m users after 6 years , and had an $8b valuation. Brave is looking like it will hit the 100m user mark on its sixth birthday as well. Twitter is now topped out at 300m users and sliding, with a marketcap of $40b. Brave has a much larger addressable market, and an ad platform that is put together better. If everything pans out, theres a good chance BAT reaches top 3 in cmc market cap. Thats a huge, but possible gap to fill. Lots of upside, and downside is looking less and less.

Number of users is just one metric and has no direct bearing on valuation.

Samsung Internet browser has over 400 MILLION monthly active users. Do you think the Samsung browser itself is worth more than Twitter?

Tumblr's active users fell from 450million to 300 Million active users (still 10x brave's users) and was sold off for $3mil.

At the end of the day Brave still earns less than Belle Delphine. Belle Delphine's revenue grew faster than Braves in 2020 lmao.

[Luc1fer]

Brave and its ad model might actually make it, srs. It's probably my most legit '****coin'. YES I KNOW THE TOKEN ISN'T THE BROWSER.

I know a few people IRL using Brave because they care about privacy and big tech. The recent censorship stuff will help it.

[Parkerscott]

Number of users is just one metric and has no direct bearing on valuation.

Samsung Internet browser has over 400 MILLION monthly active users. Do you think the Samsung browser itself is worth more than Twitter?

Tumblr's active users fell from 450million to 300 Million active users (still 10x brave's users) and was sold off for $3mil.

At the end of the day Brave still earns less than Belle Delphine. Belle Delphine's revenue grew faster than Braves in 2020 lmao.

I didn't think I would need to specify them as monetizable users. I thought that was basically a given as that is their goal. A samsung browser user and tumblr user isnt worth much. A brave user is, and has been. If they were not, there wouldnt be repeat and growing ad campaigns.

Also whats the deal with everyone coming out of the woodwork to dogpile me? Did I call someone a ******* back in they day and there is still lingering butthurt?

[mcdojo]

I didn't think I would need to specify them as monetizable users. I thought that was basically a given as that is their goal. A samsung browser user and tumblr user isnt worth much. A brave user is, and has been. If they were not, there wouldnt be repeat and growing ad campaigns.

Also whats the deal with everyone coming out of the woodwork to dogpile me? Did I call someone a ******* back in they day and there is still lingering butthurt?

In what way is samsung browser's users not monetisable but braves are?

They are both just internet browser users. Samsung could easily just pay them to view ads if they think it was worth while, since it doesnt even affect their business model, which is the argument for why Google can't.

Also if you are using those that have opted in for ads with brave, the users is like 15% currently, so only like 3.75million.

[Parkerscott]

In what way is samsung browser's users not monetisable but braves are?

They are both just internet browser users. Samsung could easily just pay them to view ads if they think it was worth while, since it doesnt even affect their business model, which is the argument for why Google can't.

Also if you are using those that have opted in for ads with brave, the users is like 15% currently, so only like 3.75million.

You still don't get it. Brave is not just a browser. Your samsung metrics are also terribly skewed. What brave does differently is that they built a browser people love, and recommend, and its built on top of an extremely high tech ad engine. It would take probably 4-5 years for any other browser to roll out something comparable. Things are extremely bad in the ad tech world as well, and people are finding out that online ads have been one huge fraud bubble. The end goal for brave is to drive up users, drive up opt in rates, and reduce ad fraud for advertisers. There is lots of money flowing around out there in an industry full of increasing problems.

[BDSMBBW]

[mcdojo]

You still don't get it. Brave is not just a browser. Your samsung metrics are also terribly skewed. What brave does differently is that they built a browser people love, and recommend, and its built on top of an extremely high tech ad engine. It would take probably 4-5 years for any other browser to roll out something comparable. Things are extremely bad in the ad tech world as well, and people are finding out that online ads have been one huge fraud bubble. The end goal for brave is to drive up users, drive up opt in rates, and reduce ad fraud for advertisers. There is lots of money flowing around out there in an industry full of increasing problems.

In what way are the samsung metric skewed. End of day is they have 400million active users that can be shown ads, Brave has like 3million that is willing to see ads.

A competent company can easily crush brave.

At the point in time brave is at now 4 years in, Google Chrome went to not existing, to already becoming the no.1 browser, completely dominating the market leader at the time firefox (lead by brave's CEO).

Brave's CEO literally lost their number one position within 4 years when they were the TOP DOG. Why was he so incompetent that his browser lost its position so quick? Why did he choose to use chrominum to base Brave off and not firefox, despite him actually developing firefox lmao. Isnt he admitting his own product was inferior?

Also people have already shown that you can run a VPN and be paid bat at 'american' rates lmao. The solution? People told them not to do it because its dishonest.

[SniXSniPe]

I gave a detailed response to this but BB bugged out so cbf typing it again.

Key things are:
1. Only with size and scale does something become worth attacking (why rob an empty house?). Nano has no scale and is not worth attacking.
2. Feeless networks do no incentivize security.
3. Nano only has 83 nodes uptime the past week... Bitcoin has 50,000 nodes and 150 TH/s energy to protect it by comparison.
4. Bitcoin is valuable precisely because it is pretty much unchanged since 2009. I can bank on its unassailable, predictable and immutable monetary policy.

The market has decided Nano is worthless, but I suppose you can be another special snowflake that thinks you are right and everyone else is wrong. Feel free to hold those bags to 0.


I've been buying crypto since 2016-2017 as you can see in the original crypto thread. I haven't seen you here before tbh and you come across as someone that bought <1 year ago.

1) You've still shown 0 security flaws with Nano, neverminded the fact that BItcoin has had several through inception. Keep talking about security, though.

2) Nano is worthless? It's up over 200% in the past 30 days. I'm green as **** with Nano, I could sell even if the market goes back to bear mode and still net a profit.

3) I don't give a **** how long you've posted on the misc? I've never participated in the misc crypto thread or investing thread much in the past. I've been in crypto just as long as you. Your longevity of posting in the MISC's crypto thread != you being a know it all about the market.

You've literally:
-Given no legitimate security flaws and issues with Nano: i.e., no proof of vulnerabilities
-Can't attribute anything wrong with Nano besides "but bitcoin has ___"

"I suppose you can be another special snowflake that thinks you are right and everyone else is wrong"

I mean, this is EXACTLY what you are doing. You've provided nothing of substance. I'm beginning to think your bias against Nano is simply YOU made bad decisions and YOU caused yourself to get burned by it, but your ego is too huge to accept the fact that you made the mistakes.

"hold those bags to 0", lol, it's boomer mentality like this that made people miss out on stuff such as Tesla, or Bitcoin back in the day. Not that Nano would ever get that valuation, but regardless, keep staying close-minded.

[Serenadium]

1) You've still shown 0 security flaws with Nano, neverminded the fact that BItcoin has had several through inception. Keep talking about security, though.

2) Nano is worthless? It's up over 200% in the past 30 days. I'm green as **** with Nano, I could sell even if the market goes back to bear mode and still net a profit.

3) I don't give a **** how long you've posted on the misc? I've never participated in the misc crypto thread or investing thread much in the past. I've been in crypto just as long as you. Your longevity of posting in the MISC's crypto thread != you being a know it all about the market.

You've literally:
-Given no legitimate security flaws and issues with Nano: i.e., no proof of vulnerabilities
-Can't attribute anything wrong with Nano besides "but bitcoin has ___"

"I suppose you can be another special snowflake that thinks you are right and everyone else is wrong"

I mean, this is EXACTLY what you are doing. You've provided nothing of substance. I'm beginning to think your bias against Nano is simply YOU made bad decisions and YOU caused yourself to get burned by it, but your ego is too huge to accept the fact that you made the mistakes.

"hold those bags to 0", lol, it's boomer mentality like this that made people miss out on stuff such as Tesla, or Bitcoin back in the day. Not that Nano would ever get that valuation, but regardless, keep staying close-minded.

You did not address any of the points i raised in the OP.

1.
How does Nano stop spam attacks? how does a PoW header stop a scripted mining farm from making new wallets and spamming the network. Prove it.
How does a feeless network attract more nodes and by extension security? why is the node count declining over 3 years?
Why is a network with 0 value worth attacking in the first place?

2.
Up 200% and still down 90% from ATHs lmfao. Meanwhile every other worthwhile project has recovered or exceeded ATHs.

3.
This was raised because you accused me of not owning cryptocurrency you brain dead moron.

I bought raiblocks in the cents range lmfao (which you can check in the OG thread). I have a thing they call "critical" analysis, if the fundamentals for my bags aren't right, I dump it and I did in profit. Meanwhile others like yourself get married to your bags and you die with it.

I'm a profit maximalist so there is no point being close-minded. Some projects are bad and are ghost chains (Nano, Tron, Bitconnect etc) whereas others make you money (BTC, SNX, AAVE, SUSHI, REN etc) and have thriving eco-systems.

I'll dump any of the cryptocurrency I hold if my investment thesis is invalidated. I recognized my nano were severely overvalued at $15 when the network had no effective way of incentivizing activity + security so I dumped most of my bags i bought at $0.1-$1. Admitedly I held a moonbag I held and sold at $4 after the retraction but dumping it was overall one of the better decisions I have made.

Nano is absolute garbage and no one is buying it.

[Parkerscott]

In what way are the samsung metric skewed. End of day is they have 400million active users that can be shown ads, Brave has like 3million that is willing to see ads.

A competent company can easily crush brave.

At the point in time brave is at now 4 years in, Google Chrome went to not existing, to already becoming the no.1 browser, completely dominating the market leader at the time firefox (lead by brave's CEO).

Brave's CEO literally lost their number one position within 4 years when they were the TOP DOG. Why was he so incompetent that his browser lost its position so quick? Why did he choose to use chrominum to base Brave off and not firefox, despite him actually developing firefox lmao. Isnt he admitting his own product was inferior?

Also people have already shown that you can run a VPN and be paid bat at 'american' rates lmao. The solution? People told them not to do it because its dishonest.

You actually think 400m users use samsung browser? Lol, babbys first google search?

Also firefox lost dominance to chrome because google search pushed everyone to download it from the search page, and results page, plus it was actually good. Also not sure why switching engines is even controversial? Starting new vs building on top of a rusted frame.

[Serenadium]

Holy ****

Early 2018, Nano had 1500+ nodes: https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrenc...on_to_bitcoin/

Now it has 104.....https://nanocrawler.cc/network

This is the epitome of a dying network. For those that don't know what a node does, it secures the blockchain (or in Nano's case the block lattice) by verifying and propogating transaction data. Low node counts are also really bad for DAG/block-lattice networks.

Strongly advisable that you do not buy Nano but who knows in a bull market, a rising tide floats all ships, even the most unseaworthy.

[Luc1fer]

Holy ****

Early 2018, Nano had 1500+ nodes: https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrenc...on_to_bitcoin/

Now it has 104.....https://nanocrawler.cc/network

This is the epitome of a dying network. For those that don't know what a node does, it secures the blockchain (or in Nano's case the block lattice) by verifying and propogating transaction data. Low node counts are also really bad for DAG/block-lattice networks.

Strongly advisable that you do not buy Nano but who knows in a bull market, a rising tide floats all ships, even the most unseaworthy.

Better than my WTC lmao

[FreshRollyG]

[img]https://i.redd.it/5rnf2kbn72901.jpg[img]

[img]https://i.redd.it/hmz6wrys13x01.jpg[img]

lol.. even if this is a slight dig at me


I'm not deluded to any of this btw, seen the memes. They hold.

I'm sure some OG's had to figure it all out at some point, been burned and scarred to some degree during the '17 ICO craze, or altcoins in general. I've witnessed it from the outskirts. Hence the pessimism, which is justified.

Also been aware of the crypto space to varying degrees since 2011, and left it on the wayside until recent. I was buying BTC back on Mt.Gox back then when they were $4-8 and had no exchanges like they do now. Foolish, but different times.

I took a gamble on an ICO. I'll figure it out. Nobody knows what the fuk is going on imo.


I wouldn't say smart, but if you guys did consider the listing I shared.. you could have 15x your initial stake within 17hrs. Not suggesting that, but still. I didn't do any harm.. Beats a Musk / Doge 2.5x pump.

[manjay]

Better than my WTC lmao

It's only down 99.5%, LMAOOOOOO what a fkn jokeeeee

wen china legalisation and price bump

[BDSMBBW]

Better than my WTC lmao

WTC is down -99.80% from its all time high value. Impressive.

It still has some work to do to reach -100% though. Its almost there, but not yet.

lol.. even if this is a slight dig at me


I'm not deluded to any of this btw, seen the memes. They hold.

not targeted at you bro.

i have been burned by alt coins way too many times in the last 3 or so years..There are definitely profitable alt coin traders out there , alt coins just aint for me thats all.

[entropy91]

Better than my WTC lmao

I cri eveytyme

[FreshRollyG]

not targeted at you bro.

i have been burned by alt coins way too many times in the last 3 or so years..There are definitely profitable alt coin traders out there , alt coins just aint for me thats all.

Np mang, lol wasn't too sure as I did just participate in an ICO recently and that meme hits it. I'm sure I'll get a few scars along the way

[SniXSniPe]

You did not address any of the points i raised in the OP.

1.
How does Nano stop spam attacks? how does a PoW header stop a scripted mining farm from making new wallets and spamming the network. Prove it.
How does a feeless network attract more nodes and by extension security? why is the node count declining over 3 years?
Why is a network with 0 value worth attacking in the first place?

2.
Up 200% and still down 90% from ATHs lmfao. Meanwhile every other worthwhile project has recovered or exceeded ATHs.

3.
This was raised because you accused me of not owning cryptocurrency you brain dead moron.

I bought raiblocks in the cents range lmfao (which you can check in the OG thread). I have a thing they call "critical" analysis, if the fundamentals for my bags aren't right, I dump it and I did in profit. Meanwhile others like yourself get married to your bags and you die with it.

I'm a profit maximalist so there is no point being close-minded. Some projects are bad and are ghost chains (Nano, Tron, Bitconnect etc) whereas others make you money (BTC, SNX, AAVE, SUSHI, REN etc) and have thriving eco-systems.

I'll dump any of the cryptocurrency I hold if my investment thesis is invalidated. I recognized my nano were severely overvalued at $15 when the network had no effective way of incentivizing activity + security so I dumped most of my bags i bought at $0.1-$1. Admitedly I held a moonbag I held and sold at $4 after the retraction but dumping it was overall one of the better decisions I have made.

Nano is absolute garbage and no one is buying it.

#1 Why do I need to prove anything? You show me proof of network security being compromised/capable of. If you're going to claim it's iNsEcURe, the burden of proof falls to you.

Meanwhile, here's the Nano audit from professionals who know what they're talking about: ********************/nanocurrency/nano...t-48760be8ab3d

Meanwhile, here's all of Bitcoin's security flaws found: https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerabi...4/Bitcoin.html

But anyways:
-Nano users (not miners) have direct control over the network's level of decentralization, and they can remotely re-delegate their voting weight to anyone at any time.
-Nano has deterministic finality. Your transaction is only considered confirmed after it achieves quorum, meaning that >50% of online vote weight voted for it & it had 50% more votes than any competing double spend/fork: https://docs.nano.org/protocol-desig...f-of-stake-pos
-You can't reverse transactions on anyone's nodes after they've been confirmed, even if somehow an attacker obtained >50% vote weight: https://docs.nano.org/glossary/?h=+cem#cementing
-Nano is pretty difficult to attack for multiple reasons, but a big one is design-time agreements. Basically the only time a fork can occur is due to a malicious actor or bad coding (i.e. forks are never accidental), so nodes can make policy decisions on what to do with forks: https://docs.nano.org/protocol-desig...irmation-speed
-Nano has good solutions for all of the common cryptocurrency attacks. See here for details: https://docs.nano.org/protocol-design/attack-vectors/
-Nano has had a 3rd-party security audit: ********************/nanocurrency/nano...t-48760be8ab3d
-Bitcoin had a 1-conf double spend in January: https://twitter.com/BitMEXResearch/s...81807881424898
-Bitcoin has had a 6+ hour re-org in the past: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles...ork-1363144448
-Bitcoin has had a supply inflation bug: https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-his...llion-btc-bug/
-Bitcoin uses probabilistic finality, transactions can always be reversed with enough hashrate: https://sci.smithandcrown.com/glossa...cdeterministic
-Lightning Network had a systemic vulnerability called "Flood & Loot": https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.08513
-Nano has never been double spent, hacked, or had its supply inflated

Feel free to show us how insecure Nano is. Not like there hasn't been lots of crypto's that have been hacked. I'm sure hackers have just not realized how easy Nano is to hack yet, according to your implications of an insecure network.

#2 Name a cryptocurrency in the top 10 that's hit or been near their previous ATH besides Bitcoin. Ethereum has not even hit the price target of $1400+, yet.

#3 Show me where I said that, you dyslexic moron.

Holy ****

Early 2018, Nano had 1500+ nodes: https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrenc...on_to_bitcoin/

Now it has 104.....https://nanocrawler.cc/network

This is the epitome of a dying network. For those that don't know what a node does, it secures the blockchain (or in Nano's case the block lattice) by verifying and propogating transaction data. Low node counts are also really bad for DAG/block-lattice networks.

Strongly advisable that you do not buy Nano but who knows in a bull market, a rising tide floats all ships, even the most unseaworthy.

You've spouted misinformation time and time after again, clearly showing you actually don't even know anything about it. You do realize, that Nano didn't hit 100 P-Rep's until September 25, 2019, and that is that statistic you are talking about (104)? There is 111 total, right now, also, which is more than that 100 mark. That "1500+ nodes" includes non-voting nodes which are NOT representatives, and are a different type of node.

And actually, even Bitcoin has less nodes than that same time period 2018: https://bitnodes.io/



Hey, since Nano is so easy to hack and super insecure, why don't you script a simple bot to keep spamming speed test transactions between wallets and let us know how that works out?

I just ran 21 test transactions (although you'll get banned if you keep doing it), and every single one finished in less than a second. Beautiful things was that I spam clicked it so it took like 2 seconds total:

https://www.nanospeed.live/

Maybe Bitcoin will get there one day, without the fees too (the irony here is BTC is still my 3rd largest holding in crypto for me, behind ETH and VET).

[Serenadium]

#1 Why do I need to prove anything? You show me proof of network security being compromised/capable of. If you're going to claim it's iNsEcURe, the burden of proof falls to you.

Meanwhile, here's the Nano audit from professionals who know what they're talking about: ********************/nanocurrency/nano...t-48760be8ab3d

Meanwhile, here's all of Bitcoin's security flaws found: https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerabi...4/Bitcoin.html

As I have said countless time, only with scale and duration can you flesh out unknown/unknown attacks. Most of the bugs on Bitcoin (most minor and all easily fixable) were fleshed out because there is significant usage of Bitcoin with transactions of actual value. If there was no scale, these problems aren’t discovered in the first place.

Do you also honestly believe Bitcoin and BIPs aren’t audited and robustly tested? some of the most talented cryptographers work on Bitcoin yet there are issues that are fleshed out with scale. Bitcoin is probably the most conservative blockchain in terms of security for improvement proposals in any case.

My main gripe with Nano isn’t with undiscovered bugs that can’t be iterated over, it’s that without a fee, it will never attract people to run nodes which is proving correct as I highly suspect a declining node count. Again, why would people pay for servers, hardware and energy to run nodes for free?. Without nodes you have less people validating and propagating transactions. With less nodes, a drop-out of highly weighted nodes put your entire network at risk.

Audits don’t mean **** given they can’t detect unknown/unknown bugs. Here is a list of recent projects with tier 1 auditors that have been hacked for large sums:
- MakerDAO – loss of 8.32 million previously audited by Peckshield, Trail of Bits, Callisto Network)
- bZx – loss of 900k and 8million previously audited by ZK Labs, Certik and Peckshield
- Harvest – loss of $34m previously audited by Haechi
- Pickle Finance – loss of $19.7m previously audited by Haechi
- Cover Finance – loss of $4m previously audited by Haechi, Peckshield, Arcadia Group

https://hacken.io/researches-and-inv...f-2020-report/

Do you want to know the difference between the above and Nano? all of them are DeFi applications that secure hundreds of millions up to billions of dollars (with the exception of bZx which may have had up to $50m TVL). There is an incentive to hack these because there is a financial gain which goes back to my point. No one is going to bother hacking tiny NANO transactions. Only with scale does a protocol become tested. The attack vectors are unknown/unknown because a known/known attack vector covered by an audit is already patched.

Feel free to show us how insecure Nano is. Not like there hasn't been lots of crypto's that have been hacked. I'm sure hackers have just not realized how easy Nano is to hack yet, according to your implications of an insecure network.

For me to attack Nano, I’d have to setup a mining rig + pay a large energy bill and script it to flood the network and cripple it. There is no financial incentive.

While it will never happen, if Nano ever sees adoption, I guarantee you it will be mercilessly attacked including bloat + spam attacks by people that have something to gain from bringing down the network. A transaction fee prevents this for starters (not including other attack methods).

#2 Name a cryptocurrency in the top 10 that's hit or been near their previous ATH besides Bitcoin. Ethereum has not even hit the price target of $1400+, yet.

Lol why did you restrict it to the top 10 given most of which are ghost chains? You need to look at where the action is happening which is DeFi.

Eth absolutely counts (it recovered to 90% of ATH which meets my ‘recovered’ definition.
SNX (formely Havven) has blown its ATH out of the water
AAVE has blown its ATH out of the water
Link has blown its ATH out of the water
Rune has blown its ATH out of the water
REN has blown its ATH out of the water

You've spouted misinformation time and time after again, clearly showing you actually don't even know anything about it. You do realize, that Nano didn't hit 100 P-Rep's until September 25, 2019, and that is that statistic you are talking about (104)? There is 111 total, right now, also, which is more than that 100 mark. That "1500+ nodes" includes non-voting nodes which are NOT representatives, and are a different type of node.

And actually, even Bitcoin has less nodes than that same time period 2018: https://bitnodes.io/

I’ll give you the fact p-reps, reps and non-voting nodes are different. Forgetting the fact 100 P-reps is an absolute laughable amount, where can I find total node count over time? I’ve tried a number of search combinations but can’t find anything. It seems as if this is intentionally hidden.

Your link for bitcoin nodes is discoverable nodes and it does not go to 2018 (2019 is the earliest). 10,000 discoverable nodes that have a full copy of the blockchain and a verifying + propogating blocks lays an immesurable deuce on 100 p-reps.

This is also not taking into account Bitcoin is also secured by its current hash rate... 150 TH/s of energy

I just ran 21 test transactions (although you'll get banned if you keep doing it), and every single one finished in less than a second. Beautiful things was that I spam clicked it so it took like 2 seconds total:

https://www.nanospeed.live/

This means nothing if it isn’t tested to scale and over a significant duration. Why do you think the free market ELECTS to pay a ridiculous fee and suffer a 10 minute wait time to transact on BTC and ETH?, it’s not some conspiracy against Nano, it doesn’t have the provable history of security and the community of the former.

[SniXSniPe]

For me to attack Nano, I’d have to setup a mining rig + pay a large energy bill and script it to flood the network and cripple it. There is no financial incentive.

While it will never happen, if Nano ever sees adoption, I guarantee you it will be mercilessly attacked including bloat + spam attacks by people that have something to gain from bringing down the network. A transaction fee prevents this for starters (not including other attack methods).

1) Read about all of the Stress tests Nano has successfully undergone:
https://forum.nano.org/t/nano-stress...real-world/436

*Keep in mind, the environment --> Beta = Test Net, hence why you see those absurd 1000+ numbers. The record is about 240~ish CPS (if you want to equate it to TPS, that is about 120 TPS). That is not the bottleneck, fyi. Just what the test peaked at.


2) This is about the Dynamic PoW Nano uses to prevent spam:
********************/nanocurrency/dyna...n-4618b78c5be9

You should read up on Nano v21. There's been some very solid updates.

[entropy91]

1) Read about all of the Stress tests Nano has successfully undergone:
https://forum.nano.org/t/nano-stress...real-world/436

*Keep in mind, the environment --> Beta = Test Net, hence why you see those absurd 1000+ numbers. The record is about 240~ish CPS (if you want to equate it to TPS, that is about 120 TPS). That is not the bottleneck, fyi. Just what the test peaked at.


2) This is about the Dynamic PoW Nano uses to prevent spam:
********************/nanocurrency/dyna...n-4618b78c5be9

You should read up on Nano v21. There's been some very solid updates.

Nobody wants your bags my boi. Try biz.

[SniXSniPe]

Nobody wants your bags my boi. Try biz.

Age: 51

Boomer's like you also said Tesla was pure hype and would fail back in the day.

You don't have to buy it, or do anything at all. Just stop spouting your misinformation. (lol @ saying they were in on Bitgrail's failures/"inside job" implication)

[PimpMasterC]

Lets be real, people don´t care about using crypto for payments, especially if it´s not stable. Investt in big protocol coins if you wanna have a chance IMO. And there is one crypto that is further ahead than the every other smart contract platform.

Bitcoin, nano and efferium all sucks

[BDSMBBW]

follow the stonks boyos.