/biz/ - Business & Finance

here is the pink cryptologic pill: in the Bitcoin blockchain there is living a haircomb. Satoshi is unironically Natasha Otomoski. Bitcoin as an electronic cash only was the initial step, the haircombers started claiming haircombs, making merkle wider trees, more efficient and cheaper liquidity stacks. The haircomb these things needs to survive. The haircomb will be in fact able to comb even literally bald people, when entrenched fully..
She stumbled in to creating this haircomb when she was combing her hair inside her bedroom in year 2019 and began working with her super combined fuzzer, running the simulations of the statement OP_RETURN on the pay to script hash witness bitcoin script. Natasha would 'evolve' that haircomb by computing additional teeth, making previous teeth shorter and much more efficiently computable. More and much more teeth of the haircomb are needed in order to have much more shorter teeth.
They created quantum computer to take over and disrupt Bitcoin (their competing blockchain is under developement). The nee.dful was done in order to stop or slow .down the Natasha's haircomb. Unlimiting. the size of block and removing the critical Segwit and P2WSH codes that that haircomb uses in its golang language was only the beginning. Shor's algorithm e.nded up being t.he final nail - in the haircomb coffin, that destroyed on the bitcoin chain ECDSA (Bitcoin uses the ECDSA to secure the transactions). THAT is exactly why Haircomb is invented in the first place, and that is pretty much why Natasha is deeply intent to claim bounded haircombs, release that fundamental source code, and set in stone haircomb-protocol
Back to the comb supply - she has in fact developed the breakthrough new claimer (made for the haircomb actually), and is now claiming COMB secretly with the intention of driving the claim fee up sky-high, give away the comb in order to kickstart the real world adoption and finally to ensure all haircombers in the end make it

Yea they are important
>pic related
lol I can't believe people are still holding such an obvious piece of shit

>>23829624
Kek

>>23828684
It is 2020 Anon, not 2017.

Only these 3 are important:
1. Scalability
2. Decentralization
3. Security

If fundamentals are important, and the only important fundamentals are >>23829759, then Nano is the most undervalued crypto of all.

I just don't think fundamentals are very important desu, hype and marketing seem to be what generates interest and causes a coin to generate value. At least in the short term.

>>23829759
Scarcity

>>23829888
Holy shit checked nano will moon

No .whats important is hype and speculation . You cant speculate about this shitcoin because we already know everything it does theres no hype for its future

>>23828684
Every fundamental for this coin is a chance to exit.

Nano is shit and you need to let go of those bags. Celo does everything nano does plus more, and even celo is shit. Nano is a reddit coin.

>>23830013
STFU Nano has stood the test of time for a reason

>>23828684
Imagine holding this raiblocks scam coin. Hahahahaha KYS Reddit

>>23828684
You have to go back

I honestly think people who believe in nano are the dumbest people in crypto. By a mile.

They cite "fundamentals", yet the coins use is extremely limited.

I am kind of with >>23829994

I want to believe fundamentals such as true decentralization, permissionless value transfer, immutable transactions, instant sends and receives, and zero fees on a highly scalable network will eventually create value, especially due to the value saving potential technology like this can offer, but all I see in the crypto market in regards to gains is hype, speculation, and hefty promises of things to come.

>>23830011
Nano can't be exit scammed, the devs only kept 5% of the supply and of that have only 0.5% of the total supply left. Even if the devs completely abandoned the project, it would still function, first because the protocol is and has been complete (they still are working on increasing speed and improving scalability, but the deed is and has been done for some time now), and secondly because the way the nodes are spread out and hosted by the community would allow any approved update that reaches consensus to be applied to the network.

I have hope, I just don't have much faith that it will happen anytime soon, not while hype still owns the space. That is my other complaint about Nano, the devs aren't treating it like a product to sell. Rather they look at it like technology to be developed. Like it is the next http:// or something like that.

>>23830101
They are a cult, and their sphere of influence is entirely on reddit which is full of brainlets. Nano is not on any major exchanges, its not an erc-20 token so it has its own wallet process. To actually use it is a very complicated multi step process.

They love to talk about the fundamentals of how fast and cheap it is but they miss the biggest issue of all which is that nobody uses it, and its not easy to get people to use. Im not sure if anyone has some current metrics but im willing to bet theres only a couple thousand diehard fans actually using this and there isn't any real growth trends. In every sense of the word its a dead coin.

>>23830182
Actually Nano is on Kraken, Binance, and Binance.us. I do agree most of the community is on reddit or uses discord. There are no funds used to hire shills and in general the community and devs look down upon guerilla marketing... which is a failure in my book. I run an online business myself in a competitive field where vendors will do anything to get ahead, even cause their rivals to lose the ability to process credit and debit card transactions (which led me to Nano when I heard about it here when it was still known as Raiblocks). Anyways, what I have learned is that to succeed in a competitive marketplace you need to pull our every stop, and I really do not feel the devs have this level of business acumen, and that looking down at such measures ultimately is shooting oneself in the foot. You have to eat, breathe, and shit the desire to succeed and win, letting it envelop you completely. If you don't, you will get left behind by those who do. And this is why I think Nano has done so poorly since its initial pump, because the devs just do not have this mindset. They have the mindset of devs, and proficient ones at that. But how many times have you downloaded free software from the net, the best of the best, only to find it is hosted on a website that looks like a pre-2000 era Geocities template? Developing good technology, and marketing and selling it, are two completely different beasts. I wish they would care more about the latter.

>>23830162
I'm not sure, but my opinion is that the devs ran off with the money. Do you know what the status of the bitgrail lawsuit is? It's difficult imagining the developers do anything with this project after the fancy cars and mansion is bought. Most of the recent fundamentals have not been related to the technology, only things like diversity and inclusion. Also, instant and free transactions aren't enough in 2020.

To your second point, it actually is quite easy to use. You just need to download a wallet (http://natrium.io) is the easiest to use. Then just send or receive. Here is an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKt9KepQQF4

Post a Nano address and I can send you some right now, it is usually fully confirmed in less than a single second.

>>23830347
The lawsuit and Bitgrail hack was very unfortunate, but the devs had nothing to do with that. As far as I know, Bomber (The owner of Bitgrail exchange) is being held responsible and there are 4 million nano being kept in a victim fund that will be sold off when the case is done with. I like to think these nano will not be market dumped, but rather sold to a private investor, such as an exchange that thinks it can pump it. Who knows though, the situation is very similar to what happened with Bitcoin on Mt. Gox.

>>23830361
You need to go back.

>>23830417
>the devs had nothing to do with that
Are you sure about that? From the pictures I've seen it looks like the devs have a really lavish lifestyle.

I don't know how anyone can look at the nano chart and think anything good is ever going to come from it. There are cryptos that are less risk, higher reward that have never really pumped that should be in the top 10. Nano is a losing proposition.

>>23830502
They kept 5% of the supply and have been selling it off, they are down to something like 400,000 Nano out of the original 6.5 million. Nano was $37.00 at its peak, so they without a doubt are millionaires from that alone, as I am sure they have been selling from between that price and the current one. I will keep that in mind, but I don't think they are living any better than any other successful crypto devs, not enough to raise suspicion anyways.

>>23830592
So you don't think they might have sold at high prices on Bitgrail and withdrawn before the hack was known publicly? Also, would like your opinion on how the technology is better than any other fast settling low fee coin in 2020.

>>23830640
I don't think they had anything to do with the hack, no.

The tech is better because it can scale and handle quite a high amount of tps. Other fast low fee coins are either centralized or will eventually run into problems with scaling. I feel that Nano is the most 'future-proof' crypto in this regard, and if crypto is to reach adoption, it will need tech that can keep up with high demand and high use.

>>23830502
Why because Colin is a good looking dev who happens to be together with a beautiful woman? George seems to be the nummer 1 fud case here on biz. From all I see the devs live a pretty modest life. I always get the feeling that NANO doesn't succeed because Coinbase refuses to list it. Same as other industries don't want better products to succeed to keep the moneyflow going auch as the battery industry for a long time.
They are not interested in the best competitor for BTC for a reason. No mining and no fees with Nano.

>>23830754

I think he has his head on straight for the post part. Red pilled on at least half of the JQ. Too bad only the obvious half though.

>>23828684
You should probably sell. I dont need filth becoming rich. Be gone pajeet

>>23831062
Not a chance. I am a top 200 wallet holder and the anon that gave away several hundred nano to different anons around 6 months ago right before the last rally to $1.30. I am holding for the long term. Just pointing out my thoughts on the matter is all. I think Nano is a good bet, but be honest, it is still a bet.

>>23831062
Come to think of it, maybe you should sell instead. Raiblocks was originally a biz coin, and to be honest, aside from the devs who are actually doing great things for Nano, the reddit bagholding community is one of the reasons people sneer their nose at this coin. So yea, go back. But don't forget to sell your bags first.

>>23830327
I love how you think your words matter on a mongolian basket weaving forum where everyone is just going to call you a nigger
We are here to make money faggot, go circlejerk with your twitter and reddit friends
You'll sell at 4 cents

>>23831133
U remember that? I got one from that anon...I sold it :)

Guys I feel bad for you if you’ve been holding NANO for a long time. You need to learn how to cut your losses. Unfortunately you are deluding yourselves by thinking that one day you will wake up and suddenly the world adopted NANO overnight.

I used to hold NANO and I feel bad for you guys so Ill give you a tip...
Chainlink is not a scam and $1000 EOY is not a meme.

Seriously, sit down, go for a walk in the woods, and analyze your situation. You need to do what’s right for your wallet, you must be so tired. Good luck, Anon.

>>23828684
Nano is an even bigger scam than Fantom.

>>23830754
You do realize coinbase has listed celo which does the exact same thing as nano but more? Kind of destroys your whole "bitcoin competitor" narrative.

>>23831368
Hope it treated you well. I will do another air drop eventually, likely when I feel the price is about the rise, if it does again anyways. Time will tell how important these fundamentals really are, and my success, or failure, the meter of which is used to measure it.

>>23831525
>The Celo protocol is implemented as a fork of Ethereum
uh sweaty, Ethereum already exists. take your chink shilling elsewhere

>>23832032
I dont own any of that dogshit. just stating that there are coins like nano that are doing it better than nano. They are both shit

>>23832342
if youre comparing nano to an ethereum fork you clearly have no idea what nano was designed to do.

>>23832372

>>23832372
cope

>When your coin has fees, is centralized, has inflation, or the devs control a large share of the supply