/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>23596910
I'm currently testing the ui swap. It's looking amazing. Getting closer to bug free. You guys gonna love it when it's out.

>>23597673
Dex volume is looking good.

>>23598291
Lol what's blocknets volume?

>>23598351
>5K
https://orderbook.stakenet.io/monitor/xsn_btc

>>23598291
lmao, no way has it had over 100k volume in a week. that image is false. it's a bot

imagine, you make a dex so that there's no manipulation from cex's running bots, and yet you do the same to your own dex. fuck me, you can't even trace the transactions cause it's in a channel. you seriously gonna trust them?

i'll wait for the burn amount to become live, that's gonna be the only way to tell.

>>23598771
It is stress testing volume largely, not all organic. Image isn’t false, the order book is correct

>>23598771
Pic related.

>>23598771
The Dex volume is not authentic, but to be fair they have not been trying to pass it off as such - they are using bots to stress test the system

>>23598850
so you just said the volume is looking good, then posted an image with bot volume?

>>23598824
stress testing what? that lightning channels work as lightning channels? we know this already. bit fucking shady imo to be using bots on a dex. totally undermines the reason for having a dex in the first place. when is burn function coming

>>23598945
>stress testing what? that lightning channels work as lightning channels?
Stress testing large amounts over lightning on the DEX so they can prepare for more volume when the dex is fully released.

>bit fucking shady imo to be using bots on a dex.
Nothing shady about stress testing. A usable Lightning Dex has never been done before. Link below and pic related is what xsn has done.
>https://link.medium.com/f9N6jcE067

>totally undermines the reason for having a dex in the first place.
No it doesn't look at pic related here
>, are planning to push the limits and publish our result that prove LN/L2 DEX can handle mass traffic and the integrity to compete with CEX's
>mass traffic and the integrity to compete with CEX's
>>>23598850

>when is burn function coming
Soon(tm)

>>23599189
isn't there fees on the beta? where do the fees go just now. who the fuck is running a bot and wasting money on fees? are the devs using some sort of special bot that disregards the fees?

>mass traffic and the integrity to compete with CEX's
>mass traffic
100k worth of $1 trades at a time isn't mass traffic. what is the channel size they're using. you're blindly following everything. what is the channel size. wake me up when they have completed a real (not a bot) trade of 100k in a single trade, on a lightning channel that has 500k capacity. that's how you stress test. not running bots doing dollar trades on a small lightning channel.

>>23599308
>isn't there fees on the beta? where do the fees go just now.
Lightning fees go to lightning nodes.
>who the fuck is running a bot and wasting money on fees?
People stress testing. Fees aren't that expensive on lightning atm. fees should go down as the bitcoin network gets less congested when more people use layer 2 hence the stress testing.
>100k worth of $1 trades at a time isn't mass traffic.
Pic related.
>Coingecko Top 10 DEX by VOLUME
>1 - Uniswap / $462,623,993
>2 - Compound Finance / $67,080,685
>3 - Curve Finance / $60,623,682
>4 - Ox Protocol / $37,975,810
Also look at number of coins and pairs and then look at pic related >>23597131
>2. and 3.
>what is the channel size they're using. you're blindly following everything. what is the channel size.


>wake me up when they have completed a real (not a bot) trade of 100k in a single trade,
A bot trade is still a real trade.

>you're blindly following everything
>https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/releases
>lnd v0.11.1
>Wumbo Soft Limit ---
>lnd now has a soft-limit of 10 BTC for wumbo channels,
>when they're enabled. This limit can be reduced by specifying the new --maxchansize command line flag.
>This new flag allows node operators to better control their exposure to very large channels, while still allowing channels above the prior pre-wumbo limit.
No i'm not blind. It's clear the work stakenet is doing is far ahead of everyone else.
>on a lightning channel that has 500k capacity
>10 Bitcoin = 134,286.00 USD
XSN DEX uses the latest version of lnd. lnd v0.11 supports up to 10 BTC lightning channels as per above. This is well over your suggested limit. Since this is only the start of the stress testing i'm expecting later tests to have higher volumes.

>>23598945
>>23599308
>”Jew”
Just buy a fucking masternode and stop fuding you fuckin kike

>>23600085
HOLY SHIT LMAO didn't notice it it kek.

>How will xsn fudders ever recover

>>23598730
Holy kek
>>23598771
>ID Jew
Fuck off nigger.

Last bump before sleep.

>>23598945
>jeW
>totally undermines the reason for having a dex in the first place
Completely wrong. One of the main "value propositions" for the lightning dex and the arbitrage capabilities in the first place is to allow anyone to setup and use bots for large scale trading. Not having infrastructure allowing bots is seriously detrimental to adoption by big market makers, which are essential. The ability to setup arbitrage trading (including bots doing that for you) between many different cexes/dexes which has previously required large endeavors and resources will be made very much easier through Stakenet.

>>23600376
ROFL 4chan tags Stakenet fudders as jews. This is gold. Saved.

VITALIK NOTICE ME SENPAI

Reminder that another fudder got CZ a few weeks ago too. Unfortunately I didn't take a screenshot.

This bot trading and the stats site are the best things the devs have done all year. Hopefully they've realized optics matter.

>>23604910
Agreed, they are clearly working hard on their product, but their PR has been rather lackluster from what I have seen. I hope they get their shit together and realize that a grassroots community that trusts them at this stage will be critical for success later down. Many people seem to believe that as long as their product is finished they can do the PR/marketing later, but the problem isn't even the fact that they are not doing marketing, it's that they fail even at addressing their stakeholders concerns on a regular basis. It's seriously not enough to respond to individual people's fud or concerns with vague promises that the devs are working hard. And many shills seem to have the idea that the people with concerns should just sell and gtfo, which is an incredibly retarded way to reason too.

Inb4 this is fud.

>>23605632
The thing that annoys me with X9 and the Stakenet team is their unwillingness to release any information to stakeholders unless it’s in the form of an announcement or a Medium article. If they made announcements more frequently then fair but they aren’t all that regular on them sadly.

>>23606032
I completely agree. I would like them to work harder at ensuring their community knows they can trust them. As it stands they are leaving everything up to the product for their success. I don't think it's the optimal way to go. They ought to be having video conferences/meetings/more regular announcements. I mean, even regular stuff detailing parts of their day-to-day work flow and thoughts regarding the process would help a lot to calm the community down. I really don't know what they think they gain from keeping their most loyal community in the dark. Oh wait, for all I know, perhaps the whales in the whale channel already do know.

Anyway, overall I'm still comfy and very hopeful regarding the upcoming announcement.

>>23596910
this shits too low rn to not buy. Alt season is coming once bitcoin goes sideways for 2 weeks.

>>23596910
>>23598850
>>23598873
>>23599189
>>23599997
>>23600639
>>23600914
Kill yourself, fud niggers. Hope cz pays you nicely you seething copes. $100 eoy, xsn is the only project in crypto that matters.

>>23606218
If they go out of their way to build a strong, loyal and trusting community. These will be the first in line to shill and utilize the superiority of their product once it's done. Thus aiming to grow the community at this point should not be disregarded even if the product is not finished. In my opinion. But I really don't see much effort at this seemingly out of fear that there could be a backlash against them if there are hiccups/price dumps/delays/whatever. Mind you I, and probably most others have no idea what their real strategies regarding these things are, which just goes to show their ineptness at doing effective PR. "We will do marketing once the product is done" only goes so far at successfully explaining their real thoughts and ideas, seriously.

>>23606218
>>23606521
I’m 100% with you there. I can’t comment on exactly what PR/Marketing would be effective right now because I’m not them and don’t know any protected information or plans, but IMO they could do a lot of good with some real marketing plans and better communication with the community.. I can see why they try to keep it relatively quiet with communications,
It could even be the developers having poor communication with the rest of the team, who knows

>>23607133
>I can see why they try to keep it relatively quiet with communications
go ahead; explain this

>who knows
That's the thing isn't it. Right now a lot of it really boils down to "who knows" regarding much of their strategies and thought patterns. The most reasonable idea I can think of out of the blue is that they don't actually want to garner too much attention in order to not be perceived as a threat from other, larger players in the game. Considering the disruptive potential of what they are trying to build, I'm sure there are a lot of entities that could in theory go after them (regulators, competitors, governments, you name it). But eh, from an investor's perspective it still feels a bit iffy to not know more about their thought process.

Sorry, >>23607379 was meant to respond to >>23607133