/biz/ - Business & Finance

eat shit, lol

>>29614021
>Are these people retarded
yes
>Decentralization comes at the cost of having higher incentives to verify transactions on the blockchain, which means having higher fees. You can't get rid of that.
you can by letting the chinese govern it, BNB, its that simple, fees will be safu

AVAX

ETH fanboys who bitch about bitcoin tx fees and times are the worst. Like do they not remember fucking cryptokitties in 2017 bringing the entire eth network to a halt?

>>29614021
The cost of a transaction should scale inversely with the total traffic on the network. Whoever solves that wins a cookie.

Decentralisation need not be expensive.

>>29614104
It remains to be seen if people will actually run those nodes for no incentive though. The network itself is not necessarily an incentive, when the next guy could be running it for you instead.

>>29614346
https://mynano.ninja/

>>29614346
>>29614489
and https://mynano.ninja/principals

Network has been running fine for several years now, anon.

>>29614489

>>29614567
Wow, shows how little I really know.

>>29614700
Watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKt9KepQQF4

>>29614257
Fuck you. I have to pay off my graphics cards you commie faggot

>>29614741
>Cue reddit marketing post
Cringe

Hardly 1 tps on nano. Wait till this shit buckles under load. Literally a meme coin

Nano unironically solves the blockchain Trilemma, as coined by Vitalik Buterin. Iota seeks to do this as well, but still relies on a central entity. Avax is another project that has solved this issue. FTM advertises itself as doing so, but I personally view it as a scam. Same with that constellation coin shilled by the nanofudder. DAGs are the future of decentralized consensus for sheer sake of scalability and speed alone. Like the cable to the old 56k systems of old.

>The blockchain Trilemma is one of the greatest hurdles for cryptocurrencies. The Trilemma is a situation which involves the three basic concepts of blockchain technology: security, scalability, and decentralization. The Blockchain trilemma states that you can always achieve the three main attributes of scalability, security, and decentralization at the expense of others, or that you cannot maximize all three properties at the same time.

>The Trilemma concept was originally signified by Vitalik Buterin, the founder of Ethereum (ETH), who invented the name in regard to the scalability of blockchain technology.

>For example, if there are a large number of nodes, the network is secure, but then it has limited scalability because all nodes must validate the transactions. It just takes longer for many nodes to get the same status as if there were fewer nodes on the network. In addition, there are more gridlocks in blockchains with many nodes, so nodes with fewer resources, poor Internet connection paralyzes the network additionally. There are projects that claim to have solved the blockchain trilemma so that the network can maximize all three properties. However, no proof is presented.

>The Trilemma theoretically says that all blockchains can be designed to live at one exact point within a triangle, which is defined by the strength of each of three core blockchain systems. The perfect blockchain would be capable to maximize all three factors, thus resolving the Trilemma.

Once the throughput is maximized, it actually opens up the door for crypto to be used.

>>29614898
You are either ignorant, or malicious. Enjoy staying poor. Being intellectually dishonest, or rather, lacking intellect at all, will lead you to nothing but misery and ruin. You can still change.

>>29614021
damn you are stupid

>>29614930

>>29614257
>The cost of a transaction should scale inversely with the total traffic on the network.
Where did you pull this attempt at a theorem? Out of your ass?

>>29615024
NANOs TPS is irrelevant now. It's old money.

Hear me out, and btw I did really well out of XRB in 17 and was a complete fanboy. The problem with NANO is that it's solving an old problem that no one cares about anymore.
Transferring value is pointless. The future is in programmable money. Conditional payments. Real world data. NANO can't do any of that without increasing the TX size and losing their claim-to-fame which is free and fast.

It's a really elegant solution, that works... but it solves a problem no one cares about.

>>29615189
Nah, but you clearly are.
>>29614186
Exactly. People still want centralization while doing propaganda for their favorite tokens, claiming it's close to 100% decentralized.

>>29615344
Name a successful real-world network where this isn't the case.

>>29615390
I agree there are benefits to programmable money via a decentralized means, however in many cases if not most, there is no need for the added cost decentralization brings.

For day to day payments, as a form of digital cash, Nano is without a doubt the best tech with the best tokenomics in the space.

>>29614346
>>29614489
>>29614567
There's no incentive to run a node, except for seeing the token's price jump. But even if the ecosystem for NANO becomes a lot larger, there's no guarantee the yield won't decease for the big players. And there's no safeguard against them not doing something that goes against NANO's philosophy or them doing a massive sell off as you have to pay a fee to run the node anyway.

>>29615550
I'll ignore the fact that you're doing a false equivalency with crypto and say: VISA network.

>>29614021
AVAX unironically solved it.

Also, Ethereum's fees have absolutely nothing to do with "higher incentives." They scale exponentially because Vitalik never expected the network to grow so much.

Fees in BTC are used to pay miners, but in Ethereum they're used to avoid smart contracts from running infinite loops and/or spamming the network (which could bring it down at any moment.)

The idea behind smart contracts is fucked tbqh and DeFI has been a big letdown so far.

>>29614021
don worry ma fren. L2 solutions gonna handle it. keep your eyes on tokamak network for da best ethereum chain

>>29615855
The nodes don't necessarily own the nano delegated to them. In most cases it is holders from all over who give the vote weight to nodes hosted by the community. In any case, breaking the network would cost 51% of the supply, and in doing so not only would crash the price, but it would make it skyrocket when buying to try to even get close to that amount.

Aka, Game Theory.

layer 2 is solving it. Injective is L2 DEX and don't give shit to these problems. decentralized ethereum world will rid of high trx fees with that babies

>>29616194
>false equivalency
>shows an example graphing fees vs spend

Cost per TRANSACTION. Not spend. TRANSACTION.

The larger VISAs network becomes, the cheaper it is for them to deliver their services. One package per plane doesn't make a whole lot of sense for Amazon, but a plane full of them? Now you get free delivery.

In the real world, networks become more efficient as they scale. No-one in crypto has come near that yet.

>>29616761
You would need a gossip type protocol for that, something like a mesh-net where the information is bounced off of individual users internet, something like IPFS perhaps but where every user is also a participator.
I think in crypto, dags and block lattice are as close as we get.

HBAR, NANO, AVAX, IOTA

>>29615422
yes you clearly are. you do nor have the first clue how protocol design factors in. you sound like a liberal arts major larping as a person with a brain.

>>29616289
It's the same thing on both networks. You also have it on mail it's called stamps. Just a feature for the system to put a little threshold on message transmission. This threshold can be extremely small without much pain to the system. I don't know what people are thinking desu

>>29616289
avax the double spend coin with lying devs? mmkay