/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>13792050
Community is probably the worst in crupto, pic related.

>>13792050
Community is probably the worst in crypto, pic related

>>13792050
Nano spammed the "soon on Coinbase" scam already a year ago.

>>13792050
Chu mean by pic related?

I think thats one person. Nano is a solid project.

>>13792050
Nano in a nutshell.

this thread is a buy signal - pumps hard everytime this guy comes on. Think he is an insider?

Ok guys this thread did it for me. Im buying in

>>13792093
Nano community got assraped hard by the Devs, especially Zack Shapiro, and they seemed to enjoy it. Weird. Must be some sexual fetish.

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

Nano devs and their friends moved tens of millions of dollars out of Bitgrail, while retail investors were stuck in fake KYC. Pic, this while Nano devs confirmed again and again that there was nothing wrong with Bitgrail.

Great FUD, buying more.

>>13792137
Nano dev Zack Shapiro just days before Bitgrail collapsed with a 170 million dollar loss.

>>13792050
Looks like it's finally time to dump my NANO

Zack Shapiro is not with Nano any longer

>>13792122
>>13792135
>>13792150
I started to warn about Nano when the price was 3.15 USD last summer. Thanks for displaying in such an obvious way how retarded, toxic and scammy the Nano community is.

>>13792050
Nano community lied about 7000 TPS in Dec 2017, pushed by Italian scammers, while Nano devs made outlandish claims about unlimited TPS. Reality was 75 TPS. Pic.

>>13792198
The false 7000 TPS claim was pushed hard by the Nano community and devs.

>>13792050
Nano boomer community did not help.

>>13792050
No coin has worse spam than Nano.

>>13792050
Lies about Nano and BoA.

>>13792050
Tragic.

>>13792050
Lies about Nano and PayPal

>>13792050
Lies about Nano and LitePay. Nano is Bitconnect 2.0

This dude obviously lost money on bitgrail and is salty about an awesome project. Im sorry if you lost money, but that doesnt speak to the tech, the devs who have been REMOVED from Nano or the future. This is a year and half old FUD. The owner of bitgrail was a scammer who made it appear to the devs that everything was fine. Many coins have had false rumours especially around the 2017 bullrun. Dont miss the boat, because Nano is solid. You can instead use the opportunity to get in cheap.

>>13792050
Nasty Nano community.

>believes larps
>saves them to hard drive
>posts everyday about how he got scammed

You are going to make it anon

Dude just buy in cheap. The amount of hate you have, obviously you lost a lot. But you dont need to lose hope. Just buy back in and have faith. And store your funds in a hardware wallet ;)

>>13792327
>This dude obviously lost money on bitgrail
I never trusted the Jew Zack Shapiro. I always found him slimy. His open borders whining and anti-Trump hysteria long time before BitGrail did not help. Zack was not fired. No real reason given by Nano, as always.
>but that doesnt speak to the tech
So what is the TPS for your supposed "global" currency? Your competitors are working hard on 300K and millions of TPS solutions.

>>13792354
The lies from the Nano devs and community is systematic. Second only to Bitconnect. Combine that with shady Nano devs and their friends moving tens of millions of dollars out of an exchange that has withdraws frozen for retail investors before imploding. Pic.

Nano is limited by hardware, but the software is improving substantially with version 19, which will prove very helpful.. It will eventually scale massively, its just time. No cryptocurrency has scaled to 300k tps at the moment. Nano already handles 75+TPS and had a very larger lead.

Also, the Nano dev (Zack Shapiro) has been removed from the project. He was always an asshole tweeting about politics anyway. Most of the old toxic community is gone now anyway due to losing their funds on bitgrail. Tech is solid. Fundamentals dont lie in markets.

>>13792425
>Nano is limited by hardware
Same with a bicycle. Soon you will be competing with cars and your unlimited bicycle speed claim, only limited by the muscle strength, will be exposed as a total joke. Nano has a design flaw they can not overcome. There is a reason why you would not give me the TPS numbers or any estimate for the TPS in the future. Same with the Dev that was here and had to run away. Only to have my comments flagged by the Nano community.

this shit is as fun to watch as req

You do understand the rate of hardware capacity upgrades has been exponential. Its not limited by design, thats the complete opposite. Its limited by hardware, which...see above. Also, like I said v19, v20 and beyond will continue to scale Nano. I flagged you because frankly youre being obnoxious and rehasing 1.5 year old FUD which has nothing to do with the remaining community or developers.

>>13792050
DAGs are scams my nigga. They're not blockchains and have no consensus mechanisms.

Why didn't they hardfork after BitGrail? What's the point in retaining "integrity" when in the end, people will trust you less as a project?

>>13792511
It is a design flaw. The flow of information throughout the Nano system with, say, a 100 000 TPS is insane and will not be feasible within ten years. And definitely not globally. So you flagged me again? This is what you sad nanoids always do. All major devs from the insane and dodgy handling of Bitgrail and the shameful treatment of the Bitgrail victims are there. Their sociopathic behavour then, merely a little over one year ago, is definitely price relevant today. Only a fool would think otherwise. No wonder you like flagging so much.

How is Nano compared to Fantom in regard to TPS and smart contracts?

>>13792379
>His open borders whining and anti-Trump hysteria
Yikes.

>>13792631
This.

>>13792437
This.

Its not a design flaw. Please give me the technical details.

>>13792761
It is a design flaw. Using Nano's flawed design, how much bandwidth do you need for 100 000 TPS. Do you have any idea?

How much bandwith will any currency need for 100k tps? Do you have any idea?

>>13792829
>How much bandwith will any currency need for 100k tps? Do you have any idea?
Typical Nano investor. No clue and investing only on feelz, rumours and slogans.

Fantom is not feeless either.

>>13792050
Source on the video? Please?

How much bandwith will it need? Well its switching to TCP so there are no estimates at the moment. But its going to make the network a hell of a lot stronger. Ill give you estimated when they are out, but for now I like where the development progress is headed. Definitely going in the right direction.

>>13792437
this

>>13792437
Zack Shapiro, the Jew, was not fired. No sign from the other Devs that they disgreed with Zack in his handling of the situation and they themselves were involved in moving funds from Bitgrail, while telling retail investors everything was OK, only to kick the Bitgrail victims out of the community later on.

Pre-Bitgrail, Nano had one of the best communities in the crypto space. Post Bitgrail some, if not the, worst community in crypto. The good guys left and Bitconnect moved in.

>>13792987
Bitconnect, see pic>>13792070

Because every community doesnt have assholes in it right? There are good people too. A lot of capable community members hard at work, but youre too busy being angry over bitgrail to care. Im sorry you lost on bitgrail, if I did I would be devastated too. But the biggest losers here not trying to be a dick are the ones who lost of bitgrail and refuse to see the future potential of Nano. One dumbass posting bitgrail is safe who wasnt a lead developer or an exchange hack isnt going to change that. Instead, those who were part of bitgrail should take advantage of the low prices and help build things back even stronger. If they dont and choose to be salty forever, the sting when it succeeds next bull run is not going to make them feel any better about their loss. Again, I am sorry for any loses and the pain anyone who went through bitgrail endure, but bitgrail and Zack Shapiro do not = nano fundamentals.

>>13793087
I did not trust the Nano devs pre Bitgrail, due to their false 7000 TPS claim and the slimness of open borders (((Zack Shapiro))), USA -not Israel of course, and I trust them less now after seeing how they handled the whole post Bitgrail situation. See >>13792631
(different technical solutions equivalent to a hard-fork)

If Nano get spam under control and at least 100K TPS then it would be interesting. As it is now, and no major restructuring in the Nano design, a definitely no. There are so many better projects out there.

Im tired of arguing about bitgrail and how it doesnt matter, because it really is irrelevant to nano as a project. In the future, the majority of investors wont even know what a bitgrail or a bomber is.

The devs didnt make the 7k tps claim, the old community did, which it seems you were a part of. Version 19 will have dynamic proof of work, which will severely limit the capabilities of a spammer trying to attack the network. Show me a project working right now that has 100k tps, is feeless and truly decentralized. Nano is headed that route faster than any crypto out there.

>>13793248
The 7000 TPS claim was plastered all over Railblock's reddit page daily, with no correction from the devs whatsoever.
>100k tps
Due to the design flaw in Nano, they will never have 100K for at least a decade. I am not done accumulating so I will not reveal cryptos that are far better than Nano.

Its not their job to police the community. crypto is DECENTRAMABOBALIZED. There is no design flaw.

Anyways. Good luck.

>>13793585
No.
Thank you, good luck to you too.

sauce?