/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>28892271
(Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>28791704
(Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>28502346
(Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>24254191
(Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>21824860
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>21761529
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>16644167
(Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>16624529
>Constant crashes? Lol
>You now resorting to straight lies in attempt to keep fooling yourself?
>Whatever suits you, ape

Inform yourself low IQ nanoid. This was written in 2018. Enjoy:
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies

[7] http://archive.is/lDoCW
[8] http://archive.fo/v2noA
[9] https://news.kucoin.com/en/nano-deposits-and-withdrawals-are-now-enabled/
[10] https://medium.com/nanocurrency/weekly-nano-update-9-17-18-834f3a493994
[11] https://www.reddit.com/r/BinanceExchange/comments/9flnx5/is_nano_deposit_broken_someone_also_having/
[12] http://archive.is/dOMVA

Rest can be found here:
http://archive.is/diUnZ#selection-1731.0-1753.28

>>12612687
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down not long time ago ago [8]. Kucoin recently [9]. Another failed update and node crash [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>12359793
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down not long time ago ago [8]. Kucoin recently [9]. Another failed update and node crash [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11950030
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down not long time ago ago [8]. Kucoin recently [9]. Another failed update and node crash [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11755237
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down not long time ago ago [8]. Kucoin recently [9]. Another failed update and node crash [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11643142
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11441862
>>11443095
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.

[8] http://archive.fo/v2noA
[9] https://news.kucoin.com/en/nano-deposits-and-withdrawals-are-now-enabled/
[10] https://medium.com/nanocurrency/weekly-nano-update-9-17-18-834f3a493994
[11] https://www.reddit.com/r/BinanceExchange/comments/9flnx5/is_nano_deposit_broken_someone_also_having/

>>11434534 (Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11430882 (Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11222270 (Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11202421 (Cont.)
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11194390
(2 of 6)

>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11194160
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. All exchanges down less than 6 weeks ago [8]. Kucoin less than 3 weeks ago [9]. Another failed update and node crash this week [10][11]. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency.
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [8] [9] [10] [11]. Coinbase will also stay away from a coin riddled with legal problems [7] [12]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, if at all, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost [13] [14]. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Having the problem highlighted to them, admitting to it, their response has been the usual -to promise and deflect -without providing any real technical solution. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. This also scares the Coinbase experts; a total crash in Nano, via spam vulnerability and insane node issues, will reflect badly on Coinbase.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography. A disaster in waiting.

>>11008406
>Nano has 756 TPS [1]. For a self-proclaimed global currency, it’s a total joke. VISA can handle over 56,000 TPS [2]. Nano’s claim to be global currency is either delusional or fraud.
>7,000 TPS was boosted and promoted in Dec 2016. Reality, a meagre 100-200 TPS [3].
>Lead Devs are jumping ship. Insiders obviously know Nano is riddled with terminal flaws and future problems.
>Millions of USD sold from the Nano Developer Wallet lately at extremely low prices. Not a good sign that Devs are dumping Nano in a fire sale [4].
>Dev fund is dangerously low, they may burn through that in a matter of 1-3 years [4]. Also; pending lawsuit against Nano foundation.
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times [5], every single month. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency. One example from yesterday [6].
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [5] [6]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. Not ready for global adoption.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography, disaster in waiting.

>Nano has 756 TPS [1]. For a self-proclaimed global currency, it’s a total joke. VISA can handle over 56,000 TPS [2]. Nano’s claim to be global currency is either delusional or fraud.
>7,000 TPS was boosted and promoted in Dec 2016. Reality, a meagre 100-200 TPS [3].
>Lead Devs are jumping ship. Insiders obviously know Nano is riddled with terminal flaws and future problems.
>Millions of USD sold from the Nano Developer Wallet lately at extremely low prices. Not a good sign that Devs are dumping Nano in a fire sale [4].
>Dev fund is dangerously low, they may burn through that in a matter of 1-3 years [4]. Also; pending lawsuit against Nano foundation.
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times [5], every single month. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency. One example from yesterday [6].
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [5] [6]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. Not ready for global adoption.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography, disaster in waiting.

>>Nano has 756 TPS [1]. For a self-proclaimed global currency, it’s a total joke.

PayPal does 200 TPS. If Nano gets as big as PayPal, we're fine.

>>Lead Devs are jumping ship.

Shapiro left, wasn't a lead dev but responsible for the wallet fuck up. Who else? Busch just became an actual employee, was part time before.

>Not a good sign that Devs are dumping Nano in fire sale

They're making sure they're able to keep the development going even if we suffer a multiple year bear market. Makes sense.

>>Dev fund is dangerously low, they may burn through that in a matter of 1-3 years [4].

You're countering your own argument here.

> Also; pending lawsuit against Nano foundation.

Joke lawsuit.

>>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month.

No issues for months.

>>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [5].

Because Coinbase always gets coins to moon, right? Like ETC.

> Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.

Because...?

>>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost.

Explain how.

>>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography, disaster in waiting.

Was Shapiro's friend, guess why he left. Not true for the non-Android wallets.

>>10899068
>Nano has 756 TPS [1]. For a self-proclaimed global currency, it’s a total joke. VISA can handle over 56,000 TPS [2]. Nano’s claim to be global currency is either delusional or fraud.
>7,000 TPS was boosted and promoted in Dec 2017. Reality, a meagre 100-200 TPS [3].
>Lead Devs are jumping ship. Insiders obviously know Nano is riddled with terminal flaws and future problems.
>Millions of USD sold from the Nano Developer Wallet lately at extremely low prices. Not a good sign that Devs are dumping Nano in fire sale [4].
>Dev fund is dangerously low, they may burn through that in a matter of 1-3 years [4]. Also; pending lawsuit against Nano foundation.
>Constant node issues. Withdrawals/deposits suspended on several exchanges due to security and stability issues, multiple times, every single month. This despite being miles behind having any sort of global currency traffic. Nano could be years away from even having the potential to be a well-functioning global currency. One example from today [5].
>Coinbase will only use coins stable for multiple months. Nano is far away from that, see above and [5]. Best case scenario is having Nano on Coinbase late 2019, leaving Nano hopelessly behind other cryptocurrencies.
>One single miner can destroy the network via DDoS with 500 GPUs at no cost. A critical attack vector never seriously addressed by the Nano dev team. Nano is wide open for a massive spam attack crippling the network for a long time. Not ready for global adoption.
>Nano team seem like tech amateurs. Don’t understand the difference between Random (not cryptographically secure) and SecureRandom. Don’t even understand basic cryptography, disaster in waiting.