/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>56016469

>>53873318
>Icp is superior and will be the next ethereum. Sorry turkroach.
These shillers are getting crazy each day.

>>53510313
There is nothing to explain or prove, you can just look by yourself at those 'partnerships' and try to find if is there any actual partnership confirming that they're collaborating with Polygon. I will make it easier for you, there is not. Most of those partnerships or integrations are in the non-crypto market so it doesn't add value or use case for Polygon. It's just marketing to gather people to their Indian cheap code.

>except that Solana devs ARE indeed moving to Polygon
Makes sense, that is why the Polygon chain can't fix their reorg issue. What is next, is the chain going to halt weekly?

>In the rare case I ever get a reply to a comment like this, its something completely unrelated and/or racist
Polygon is just a copycat filled with pajeets trying to convince you that it's good tech, supernets are just a cheap knock-off of Avalanche subnets, and Polygon Edge (used on Dogechain) has failures almost all the time.

>>53251123
>a blockchain that has a double spend history?
This is the most retard comment that I've ever seen on 4chan. A double spend happens when there is a consensus failure, so, it wasn't a double spend. AVAX had a bug in the client node where most of the nodes agreed to verify the same transaction 7 times, creating 7 outputs with only 1 output.

This happened on the VM layer, not the consensus protocol layer, so it's not a consensus failure. The same shit happened with BTC, the reason they called it an inflation bug and not a double spend is basically for the same reason. Why any large-scale governments or corps would touch BTC if it had the same 'inflation bug' before? KYS

>>52979009
I cashed out $1000 of my BTC to buy toys and donate them to toys for tots.

I only bought Transformers and Bionicles for the boys, and Barbies for the girls.

>>52865302
>Avalanche is the one that scammed with the double spend
Never happened. Also, you are a retard. A double spend happens when there is a consensus failure, AVAX had a bug in the client node. This happened on the VM layer, not the consensus protocol layer, so not a consensus failure. This is quite similar to the BTC inflation bug, try using another argument fucking jeet.

>>52647178
>HBAR will be the next last one standing. You’ve been warned.
Nice shilling thread curry nigger, no one wants your non-usable shitcoin though