/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>50210677
>Kadena tranny so butthurt he made a collage
KEK

>>50210689
I like making collages, it's fun :3

>>50210697
Kadena has 0 TVL, 0 DeFi, 0 Users so of course you have a lot of free time.

>>50210677
We know they happily pay over $70 for a txt and it won't even go through but they still shit on eth fucking roaches.

>>50210709
>you have a lot of free time.
anon this took like 3 seconds, which is also the blocktime for avax

>>50210721
Avalanche has sub second finality.

>>50210719
fees are like 10 cents now for a Swap and it has 10000x more users than Kadena or other Ghostchains.

i am not selling

>>50210726
That you can't make faster and still end up suffering from a delay caused by internet connections and other shit.
Pair that with the fact that you can't make blocks bigger (you can but you get the point)
And now you have a blockchain that you cannot scale!

>>50210742
Avalanche scales through Subnets

>>50210677
keeeek, mfs promoting this shitty fud. look at the statistics, you faggots

>>50210737
>t. ranjeet from wagmi marketing team.

>>50210765
No because subnets are not secure and those that inherent security need to settle to the P Chain which clogs it up and increases fees.

And those that don't inherent security are just random blockchains, it's like as if AAVE were to be running their own ETH fork and just hope that it doesn't get hacked, you can't call that scaling ETH.
Same way you can't call Sidechains scaling AVAX

>>50210798
>No because subnets are not secure
but they are. they are still part of the primary network and still validate the C-Chain, X-Chain and P-Chain along with the Subnet chain.
People have to Stake AVAX if they want to run Validator nodes. simple as.
>to the P Chain which clogs it up and increases fees.
the P-Chain handles the staking metadata.
it doesnt clog up.

now read up how it actually works, you seem completely clueless making really dumb assumptions and statements.

>>50210840
>but they are. they are still part of the primary network and still validate the
What, are you retarded. say the main 3 have 1000 validators, THOSE ARE NOT validating the subnets, just because the 10 subnet validators are also validating the 3 doesn't mean they get security you dumb fuck
>it doesnt clog up.
The way I understand it is that subnets can choose to settle to the P chain for security, like L2s settle to ETH. Is that not the case? I doubt you know the answer because you are braindamaged but eh

>>50210899
>THOSE ARE NOT validating the subnets
Node Operators can decide which Subnets they want to Validate and Subnet Creators can decide how big of a Validator set they want.
however all Subnet Validators still Validate the 3 main chains thus making them part of the Primary Network.
>subnets can choose to settle to the P chain for security,
that isnt what the P-Chain is for.

>The P-Chain is the metadata blockchain on Avalanche and coordinates validators, keeps track of active Subnets, and enables the creation of new Subnets.

>>50210968
>nodes can decide to validate random subnets
cool, most of the time they will not.
>all subnet validators validate the 3
cool, that's what I said.

You really thought that by validating the 3 this means that somehow you get security as if the 1k validators were security your subnet lmao.
By now you surely must have realized what a joke subnets are, right?

>coordinates validators
So all subnets need to talk to the single low bandwidth P chain do I get this right?

>>50211017
>most of the time they will not.
its incentivized. you validate their subnet and you get their token.
>as if the 1k validators were security your subnet
depends on the subnet, the security of their subnet is their problem. if they want a large validator set they have to provide good incentives.
>low bandwidth
The P-Chain implements the Snowman consensus protocol and has around 4500 tps.
>So all subnets need to talk to
thats just where you do the staking transaction.

why dont you just read up on it how it works instead of begging anons to spoonfeed you?
https://docs.avax.network/

This is what you said 1:1
"
>No because subnets are not secure
but they are. They validate the 3
"
You realize how retarded you sound?
Subnets are secure because they validate other chains

>>50211121
didn't read, see above

>>50211126
>didn't read
maybe someone smarter than you will.

>>50211154
>if they want a large validator set they have to provide good incentives.
Yeah they better provide a really good incentive lmao, getting paid in a shit 500% apy token will make them want to help, This sounds so fucking bad

>someone smarter than you
You thought because subnet validators secure the 3 it means they are secure, This is what you said.

You thought because subnet validators secure the 3 it means they are secure,
You thought because subnet validators secure the 3 it means they are secure,
You thought because subnet validators secure the 3 it means they are secure,

>>50211167
>Yeah they better provide a really good incentive
thats the Subnets problem to figure out.
>getting paid in a shit 500% apy token will make them want to help
why is it bad to get paid?

how long will you guy continue this game? every single coin you've been shilling at some point turned out to be a scam and/or completely useless shit and yet you still dump all of you money into the next scam

>>50211200
Retard

>>50211212
said the guy investing into a ghostchain.
hows the DeFi doing on Kadena?
oh wait, it doesnt exist.

>>50211222
Said the guy who thought because subnet validators secure the 3 it means they are also secure.
You actually did say that, how crazy is that, I didn't even have to prove how retarded you are, you just did that for me. Pretty wild.
You really thought because subnet validators secure the 3 it means they are also secure.

>>50211256
Subnets are secure.

>>50211274
Because.

>>50211279
they can decide how big of a validator set they want and they will have to compete with other subnets for the (right now limited) validator set or buy 2000 AVAX and start up their own nodes.

>>50211328
>they can decide how big of a validator set they want
I'm sure they want it, lol.
Wanting it doesn't make it secure
>they will have to compete with other subnets
ahahahahhahahaha

>AVAX - SECURITY BY WANTING IT REALLY BADLY PLEASE SECURE OUR CHAIN

>>50211359
>I'm sure they want it
depends on the Subnet, some will want a large Validator set, some will want a small private Validator set with specific attributes.
Subnets are fully customizable.

>>50211408
They will all want a big validator set because otherwise they will get fucking rekt my guy, this is the problem with sidechains.

>>50211430
>They will all want a big validator set
depends on the usecase, but if they want a large Validator set they have to provide good incentives for Node Operators to validate their chain.

>>50211462
> they have to provide good incentives
This is the whole problem you dumb fuck. On kadena, the network you hate so much, there is no need for any of this shit since each and every chain is secure. 1000 chains 50k chains 100k chains, still secure.

Do you see the difference now? Avax is a joke.

>>50211495
>This is the whole problem you dumb fuck
there is no problem.

>since each and every chain is secure
its a centralized ghostchain. its not secure in any way and Avalanche is in every measurable metric superior.

>>50211535
>Avalanche is in every measurable metric superior.
I think we went through it pretty thoroughly, subnets need to beg for security, chainweb has no such problem.

There is no world where anyone thinks avax is better.
Also avax is centralized due to being a PoS VC scam while KDA is a PoW chain where making an node costs 0$

>>50210697
>I like making collages, it's fun :3
are you a gay tranny? you seem to be super gay

>>50211700
I am super gay

>>50211578
>subnets need to beg for security
its a market
>There is no world where anyone thinks avax is better.
in the current world everyone thinks Avalanche is better.
nobody uses Kadena, its a Ghostchain. meanwhile Avalanche is doing fine and is much bigger already.
we even have already some Subnets, what has Kadena? nothing.
>Also avax is centralized
its not, they solved the Blockchain Trilemma, they have decentralization, speed and security.

>while KDA is a PoW chain where making an node costs 0$
energy isnt free bucko.

>>50211769
>its a market
It's a bad system, this isn't hard to tell, the fact that you can't see that is fucking scary.
>in the current world everyone thinks Avalanche is better.
I think every eng will tell you that you are retarded.
>we even have already some Subnets, what has Kadena? nothing.
A scalable and secure 20 chains, all working, all scalable to an unlimted amount of chains. It's pretty cool you should check it out.
>its not, they solved the Blockchain Trilemma
decentralization is arguable, speed is not one of the trilemma points
Security
Scaling
Decentralization

Not speed lmao, fucking lmao
>energy isnt free bucko.
What is a Node... you are so dumb it's unreal

>>50211822
>It's a bad system
its not tho.
>I think
stop lying, you dont.
>A scalable and secure 20 chains
what 20 chains?
nobody uses them for anything.
>to an unlimted amount of chains.
unlimited Subnets are better.
>decentralization is arguable
has the highest Nakamoto Coefficient.
read up on it.
>speed is not one of the trilemma points
Avalanche has Sub Second finality, how long do you wait on Kadena for a TX to confirm?
30 minutes? 1 hour?
>What is a Node...
you said:
>making an node costs 0$
and thats wrong

where the Kadena Tranny go?
hello?
Kadena troon where are you?

>>50212240
I lost interest when you stopped focusing on the point.
see >>50211578 simple as

>>50210677
I personally think monolithic L1s, even when they're parallelised like AVAX, are dead in the water at this point.
I've been reading about modular blockchains and it just seems like a way more elegant solution.
>https://medium.com/momentum6/modular-blockchains-the-next-alpha-celestia-overview-456ca5bbf9b1

>>50212544
translation: "I got BTFO and tried to abandon the thread"

still waiting for those 20 chains.

>>50212585
modular vs monolithic is a meme.
Settle L2 to any L1 now it's modular.

>>50212589
say something that matters

>>50212585
>are dead in the water at this point.
Avalanche is doing fine, certainly has more usecases and Users than literally who ghostchains like "Celestia" or "Kadena".

>>50212596
so when are you going to post these 20 kadena Blockchains?
where are they?
TVL 0?
0 users?
0 dapps?
or will you just try to deflect from this now?

>>50212628
Celestia is better than AVAX by every metric.
>where are they?
Are you retarded

>>50212660
>Celestia is better than AVAX by every metric.
just another ghostchain
>Are you retarded
so post them or are they not existing and you were just lying?

>>50212675
They don't exist, kda only has 10 chains but they will scale to 20 in Q4

>>50212675
Do youhave even a rudimentary understanding of what modular vs monolithic blockchains are?

>>50212708
He barely knows what a blockchain is

>>50212596
There's a distinction between settling an L2 (execution) to a monolithic L1 (settlement, DA, and validation) and settling it to a modular L1 where all of those components are separate.

>>50212764
Yeah the fact that at the end of the day you end up centralizing block production

>>50212701
>kda only has 10 chains
so what are they?
post them.

lets see those users, TVL and dapps

>>50212708
Avalanche isnt a monolithic Blockchain.

>>50212883
>so what are they?
>post them.
no I'm shy

>>50212887
ok got it, they dont exist, have 0 TVL, 0 Users and no dapps.
also funny how they suddenly turned from 20 chains into 10 and now into 0.

>>50212907
It's actually 3 chains right now :(

>>50212801
Doesn't that happen under more or less every framework though?
>>50212883
AVAX is a bunch of monolithic blockchains. Monolithic vs modular refers to whether the multiple roles of "traditional" L1s (execution, data availability, settlement) are all done in each instance or are split up. Avalanche subnets are all instances of monolithic blockchains.

>>50212948
so what are they? you still havent told us.
>>50213017
>Avalanche subnets
are superior to whatever garbage you are shilling and are fully customizable.

Oh look, another smart contracts platform that cannot scale properly, with a cohort of militant psychopaths bagholding who INSIST that it can scale.

>>50213835
Avalanche scales or are you referring to Kadena?
if Kadena then yes indeed it cant scale but it also has no smart contracts.

>>50210677
wait hold on, your FUD is 'Avalanche has a fee market'

lmfao

>>50210677
Thanks, just bought some more.

>>50213835
>NSIST that it can scale.
it's literally doing it right now, you just have to look it up.

>>50213835
>avax cant scale
you're not going to get very far with shit fud that doesn't make sense.

AVAX fud was and remain the biggest pile of garbage i've ever seen, Now even more than ever, Yet it's working.

A measure for how merit and quality is getting overlooked in this space overall, Quantity and circlejerk false narratives are the way to go. Ridiculous market

>>50210677
Fuck this crab dumping piece of trash coin. Going down faster than you can say double spend.

>>50213785
still waiting for Kadena shill to explain what those 3 chains are.
I guess if he doesnt show we can safely assume its just more ghostchains with 0 users.

>>50210677
MATIC nigger? I'm sorry you're low IQ and had to copy other's work

>>50215181
no its the Kadena tranny, he made a shill thread earlier about CBDCs and I corrected him mentioning that Ava Labs works with the Bank of England on a CBDC already and that Subnets are the best solution for this usecase and then he chimped out.
then a Janitor thought it would be funny to delete his thread so he ban evaded and made another thread that was deleted by the same Janny again. then he made this thread.

Kadena shills, like Matic shills are very salty because Avalanche is killing all these Ghostchains and thus their Bags.

>>50215244
I didn't get banned though, still same IP

>>50215324
so why did the janny remove the thread?
no warning? no ban? no nothing?

>>50215425
There was a post block about advertising but after the time was up a ban normally follows, this time it didn't.
I was hoping they would ban though so I could shit up their box to tell them that I would like to be banned for "this post is too low effort" and not advertising because I was not doing advertising

>>50215469
its like they try to kill any interesting discussion for some reason and obvious troll threads and other bullshit stays up forever.
hate those niggers.

>>50215557

>>50210677
avax is shit and marketed by jeets like bsc shitcoins

>>50211203
pajeet?

>>50216000
okay, but it made me 12x, so whats the problem?

>>50212883
holy fuck anon you are embarrassing yourself