/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>24035665
Let me get this straight, so for you Nano homos, that your scammer devs and bikini blogger COO burns through tens of millions of USD in a short time and will go bankrupt in a few months time, is a GOOD thing? Pic related.

>>23904561
While Nano investors lost 170 million USD thanks to Nano Foundation (NF) and Italian Bitgrail scammers, George Coxon and the rest of NF couldn't care less.

Pic related, summer 2018. Why Bitgrail victims accepted the open fraud and economic crime from both NF and Bomber/Bitgrail, is hard to understand.

Nano Heading for Disaster – Dirty Deals with BitGrail
http://archive.is/GGWIG

Nano and Bitgrail leaders scammed over $100 million from Bitgrail
http://archive.is/zAtyl

>>23889612
>>23889631
>>23889667
Again, you are showing stuff from early 2018 when people didn't know that Nano devs lied through their teeth about 7000 tps, reality 75 tps, that their proof of work would be able to stop spam, something that was an obvious lie. Here:
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.

[13] https://www.reddit.com/r/nanotrade/comments/7vwl86/what_are_the_faults_of_nano/dtvpymd/
[14] https://www.reddit.com/r/nanocurrency/comments/90wu2v/what_are_the_negative_things_with_nano/e2tskr8/

Pic. Enjoy the view, Nano paypigs.