/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>49487905
But is it true that avax holders get bitches?

>>49488018

>>49487905
sad reality

>>49488018
Far more than ETH idiots do.
t. I own neither

>>49487905
seeing how biz likes sol, hbar and ftm, I'm unfazed by this

I really doubt that AVAX will ever reach $150 again.

>>49488714
Idk I think their supply burn is better than ETHs

cute

double spend

>>49487905
>>49488176
>>49488018
>>49488643
>>49488714
>>49488922
GG INU, FOR WHEN THE MARKETS ARE GG
JUST LAUNCHED
HUGE LIQUIDITY

TG @gginubsc

0xCe25CDfB7a3647eAc4db1E794bfdC70dC1111C3a

>>49487905
because MEV compromised its consensus.

there, just one sentence

>>49490211
Elaborate.

>>49487905
How can I install the avalanche subnet? is there any source information?

>>49488714
Same thing was said back in summer 2021, Just that now Avalanche is x100 better as a project and have even weaker fud.

They said it and AVAX pumped from $9 to $60 in literally 2-3 weeks lmao

mid 4 digits per AVAX is programmer in next bullrun

>>49487905
Avax sucks because
"Eth maxis" live rent free in the heads of the their community.
that's how you know it'll never be #1 smart contract block chain.

>>49490211
elaborate x2

>>49490725
From what I’ve seen, it’s quite the opposite. ETH fans can’t cope with how revolutionary Avalanche is technologically, as their coin isn’t even on proof of stake yet. Even vitalik on Twitter every week basically has to say some negative thing about AVAX to cope. The avalanche community is always humble about their technological developments. But as soon as they suggest ETH should just be a subnet or merge and be at the whim of AVAX subnets (the superior technology, even said so by Emin himself who created the best rollup and says they’re inferior to his subnets), ETH maxis go nuts. They become furious, like apes. “How dare they suggest our massive load of transactions be put on their chain!” When AVAX is already pulling 75% of the load ETH is, without a problem.

>>49490872
Maybe, but it's completely opposite on this board.

>>49490725
ETH maxis are genuinely obsessed with AVAX tho

>>49490977
I mean, this was him just the other day. He never stops.

>>49487905
Fuck this crab dumping piece of trash coin. Going down faster than you can say double spend.

>>49490977
This board is irrelevant when it comes to top 20 coins.

The major seething and toxicity happen on twitter, The amount of non sequitur, ad-hominem and strawman they pull on Avalanche 24/7 is disgusting.

He would never, ever submit to Emin because for him, he’d rather see ETH die out completely and blame it on something else than not appear a certain way to the general population for two seconds. He can’t give up that narrative that he’s the guy with all the solutions. It’s worth more than money. When reality is, Emin has him beat on this one. If he would just build ETH around AVAX subnets, the entire space would benefit. Otherwise, why the fuck not just stay on proof of work? We don’t need a shitty ETH proof of stake that’s missing out on the scalability of AVAX.

>>49491054
Vitalik isn't the problem here, He talked more favourably about Avalanche than the opposite, The problem are usually the large "technical" dot ETH influencers, They've in aggerate millions of followers and make sure to turn them into militant subhumans when it comes to Avalanche

>>49487905
Stop advertising this scam chain please it's annoying

>>49490185
never happened

>>49491054
What the fuck does "economic finality" even mean?

>>49491054
>economic finality
>>49491308
also yes, indeed, ".eth" aspies are reddit-tier mongoloids

>>49491421
No fucking idea. Literal nothingburger jargon. This is what has me leaning more towards AVAX than ETH. And yes, AVAX is the ONLY ETH competitor. There are no other ones. AVAX is more of an ETH competitor than ETH is a bitcoin competitor. The question is just whether Rollups on a merged chain will outperform subnets on a highly scalable chain. And considering Emin mastered the arts of rollups before he even started working on subnets, and even built the fastest rollup ever made, only to say that rollups are inherently flawed and to be thrown in the trash for his subnets. I think that tells you what you need to know.

>>49487905
I hold LINK therefore all L1s suck my dick.
I don't care who "wins", I always win.

Keep up with the Kardashian, I don't give a fuck.

Thread hidden, removed from thread watch.
Enjoy yourself. Loser.

>>49491755
>Thread hidden, removed from thread watch.
Oh no... please stay babe

>>49487905
i'm buying at $3

>>49490211
you know what, don't elaborate, you just made that shit up

>>49491747
Avalanche has unique selling point as Rollup settlement layer due to instant finality tho, I can see many applications requiring the most decentralised protocol that also guarantee instant finality and Avalanche is practically unrivalled

>>49491317
your mother is a scam and she keeps advertising her boobs to me

>>49491787
It’s not going to $3. If the market dumps in September the best you can ask for is $9-15 range.

>>49491755

grt says Get Really Tuckered OUT BITCH


WOOOOOOOOOOO

>>49492530
Fuck grt even ETH is better

>>49491747
Okay, tl;dr I think he means "well it's shit because Avalanche doesn't have a slashing mechanism for validators with ill intent"

>>49492993
Okay I concede that’s unironically a good point.

>>49492993
imagine getting your life savings slashed because of a power failure kek
slashing is a borderline extreme schizoid requirement

>>49493240
Yeah, I actually think that NOT having a slashing mechanism actually gives an incentive to validate

>>49492993
>>49493163
Demoralized

>>49493240
>>49493269
Remoralized

>>49492993
>let's build our protocol around 0.1% of people that have malicious intent
too much chernobyl

>>49493467
I’m telling you. ETH going to proof of stake is a mistake if it doesn’t build on top of Avalanches infrastructure. Might as way just stay on PoW. This guy has gone mad.

Isn't slashing also hurting decentralization? You HAVE to rely on third party validator services (Allnodes or AWS etc.) if you want to really make sure that some kind of hardware failure on your basement validator rapes your stake, which means that your network is only going to get more centralized as more validators join the chain

>>49492993
Yea, I had to look this up kek. Basically saying that if reverting some TX is worth $X, the chain should make it cost $Y to carry out the attack, where $Y>$X e.g. slashing. Since ETH2.0 uses committees in consensus so I semi see why they would want slashing because conceivably it's easier for an attacker to get >33% of malicious stake in just the committee vs >33% of the total network stake. So you need some way of dealing with a scenario where the byzantine stake is in those ranges. Doesn't apply to avalanche though since every validator participates in every decision and no one is going to launch an attack where they don't have enough to defeat the liveness/safety thresholds because nothing would be accomplished. Leave it to skelly boy to come up with vague crypto jargon. Also retarded because slashing could be added to snow family protocols it just doesn't currently and I'm pretty sure it could be implemented on a subnet with the help of avalabs without too much trouble.

>>49493500
nah it's better to have two different chain that optimise for the core ideals but with different small trade-offs.

I don't agree with Vitalik on the slashing part tho, I believe many ETH core devs disagree too, see:

https://twitter.com/AFDudley0/status/1534322816933404673

Rick is an OG ETH core builder and like Avalanche, It's not either or, The ideal future is where few robust protocols co-exist.

>>49493642
>every validator participates in every decision

That's the most unnoticed and underrated feature on Avalanche, Sometimes i feel like people intentionally ignore it to make their argument sound

>>49493592
Wonder what skelly would say to this

Neo of the cycle.
It's not coming back
Be happy you are not eos/sol

>>49493925
It really is, there's basically nothing else like it.

>>49493592
Yes pretty much. Slashing carries a huge opportunity cost as you mention.

>>49493592
I think centralization is the strongest argument against slashing. Small validators simply wouldn't exist if slashing were implemented. Even raising minimum of uptime to 80% caused massive butthurt amongst small validators. Slashing would be 100x worse. Not to mention the septuplemint bug would have fucked a lot of people out of their AVAX tokens instead of simply giving some random guy 470 free AVAX. Already we have a fairly good idea that slashing would not have benefitted AVAX from launch to now.

Now the best argument FOR slashing is that it solves the 'Nothing at Stake' problem where validators have an incentive to validate every uncle chain. This makes it easier to pull off doublespends and other attacks. We know BTC, a PoW, doesn't have the 'Nothing at Stake' problem since there is a strong incentive not to waste mining power on mining uncle chains that will likely be discarded, however PoS makes 'mining' essentially free so now there is an actual incentive to validate every uncle block instead of picking a single one since there is always a chance that uncle block grows to become the longest chain.

However, Avalanche is a lot different than Nakamoto and it turns out it doesn't actually have a 'Nothing at Stake' problem. It's leaderless consensus and most importantly: finality is absolute. There are no uncle chains and there is no longest chain rule, it's simply voting on blocks sequentially one block at a time. No reorgs, no 7-block-deep uncles. Now Vitalik understands that slashing is useful for Nakamoto consensus coins like ETH so he speaks generally about it. This may be intellectually dishonest since he doesn't want to admit that slashing does nothing for Avalanche consensus besides hurt decentralization. Even then it's arguable if the 'Nothing at Stake' problem needs slashing to fix it as a well designed incentive structure and blacklisting would suffice and I've heard plenty of smart ETH guys say it's not necessary, even for ETH 2.0.

>>49494854
Astute observation, I agree. I think Vitalik knows enough about avalanche to know that there's no forks and absolute finality, like someone said earlier he seems to have started FUDing avalanche to the ETH crowd lately.

>>49494854
I dug up this tweet from Emin from a couple years ago which I thought was interesting as well.

>>49495607
Emin is just so elaborate in his speech. It’s a specifically a trait of wisdom (in blockchain technology). There’s a superb lack of wisdom in the space because it’s only a decadeish old. He seems to have this trait despite how few years the space has been around.

>>49495607
That's an interesting point. I didn't know about the performance improvements slashing could have on leader-based protocols. Although Emin is being a little too gracious here by not emphasising the 'leader-based' part because it's a pretty important distinction, but Emin knows ETH twitter is easily triggered so maybe it's best not to agitate the beehive. They can't handle blunt honesty. Or bluntness in general really.

Bros.. how many AVAX do I need to make it? What’s the suicide stack what’s the make it stack?

>>49496019
last time I checked it was 500 sui and 2000 make it

>>49496051
Holy fuck I think it’s possible for me

>>49495993
They really are the most sensitive bunch on crypto Twitter. .eth has turned into a “stay away!” red flag for me. Beehive is the perfect analogy.

>>49496059
2000 is also a validator stack. Once the permissionless subnet hype train starts there will be a gold-rush for validator subnet rewards. Peak frenzy will send AVAX into the top 5, not to mention the fat cash that can be made from selling subnet rewards. I've held all the way from from $4 to $140 and I refuse to sell until we see the subnet wave come crashing down on centralized shitcoins like BNB.

>>49496051

you have to buy 48k usd worth of avax at market bottom to make it? lmao. might as well buy ethereum

>>49495993
Isn’t AVAX no longer leaderless since snowman++? Not shitting on it, just want to keep info accurate.

>>49496333
Lmao with Ethereum you’ll make some beer money

>>49496386
That's for C-Chain and it's a soft leader mechanism. Any node can bypass the leader and propose a block, they must pay an additional block fee to do so however. So if someone tried such an attack likely the only result would be somewhat higher gas fees during the attack.

>>49496486
More AVAX permanently burned from the supply. I love AVAX burning mechanism. 720M slowly deflating.

Can you niggers talk more I’m bored.

>>49487905
What's a good sized stack for staking? I want to have passive income.

>>49497707
Well it’s about 9% APY for a full year. I’d say at least do a hundred or more. Seems the suicide stack of 500 would be best.

Please stop shitting up this board with this centralized chain.
Subnets are centralized pos and you have to
Having to buy a new gas token for every subnet is also super autistic.
The only people left holding this coin is low iq people and vc funds waiting for the next bull to exit

>>49497782
Go buy ETH then faggot fuck

>>49497782
subnets can use AVAX as a gas token if they want or even remove gas entirely by using some other anti-spam mechanism. There are no limits, they are fully customizable and allow for almost infinite experimentation which allows the market and users to decide what gets built instead of a committee of effectual ego-driven 'devs'. This is why all the real devs are fleeing to AVAX. They get to build whatever they want and aren't tied down by the bureaucratic fake-dev faggots that infest the EF. Vitalik, bless his soul, is too soft and naive and thus has surrounded himself with sycophants and self-promoters.

>>49493467
>There's another 50m exploit in crypto every day but surely that will never happen to [my bags]

>>49487905
VC Scam chain for 2021. Will end up like NEO and EOS

>condemned
weird way to spell lucky
fomo rejected, still comfily tethered, awaiting the PrecogFinance release

>>49493592
True, I ran an Avalanche node for a month at a time. Had about 3000 AVAX in there. Last month I had some trouble with the ISP and my uptime came out at 79% (the treshold is 80%). It sucked since I missed out on my validator fees. But I would never ever have staked my 3000 AVAX in the first place if there was even the tiniest risk of losing a chunk of it.

>>49490580
I'm told it's very easy, just couple lines of code

https://twitter.com/ExcelBaller/status/1533905922346651648
https://twitter.com/das_connor/status/1533852014282567681

a lot of ETH and alt-POS chain folks on twitter showing ignorance and getting redpilled by kevin and emin over the last few days

the fire rises brothers

>>49487905
i’m a buyer! going to wait for sub $20 AVAX, tho.

I have 500 AVAX. That's about all I can afford