/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>50702171
avax runs a trusted bridge anyway.
cant wait for icp to send all these worthless bridges on the scrapheap where they belong
checkem

>>50702171
still seething about being surpassed by pajeetcoin

>>50702242
Bro he isn't seething. Dude is so smart he invented bonus blocks for his l1.

>>50702223
based icy pee shill, do you get paid or are you just shilling your bags?

>>50702171
Put money on a bridge, your wealth will get abridged.

>>50702252
>bonus blocks
The name is Bounus Buraks. Get it right. It’s not Turkish if it’s not buraks.

>>50702282
He just has a brain unlike most of this board.

>>50702171

What's wrong is that everything he warns about is usually completely correct and seeing as he's the most qualified and knowledgeable person in the space, ETH maxis fucking seethe like crazy because their secret sauce of the month whether it's optimism or arbitrum or some gay bridge inevitably turn out to be damp squibs

>>50702171
the bridge didn't fail because of its optimistic design, it failed because the devs made a mistake when updating their smart contract

>>50702171
his point was 'simple is better', a basic design principle considered heresy by L2 trannies
rollups are inherently more complex. more complex means there is more potential for what jeet apologists are waving away as "programming mistakes" aka bugs.
The truth is that most projects cannot stand on their own technological competence and instead wrap their own failed technology in flowery language and obfuscate via made up tech jargon designed to both confuse smart money and dazzle retail traders.

>>50702171
>el33th4xor

>>50702760
The point of the post was to explain how the more code and complexity you have = the more likely to make errors and not catch bugs though

>>50703443
that was his CS 1.3 gamertag
stop making fun, he's really sensitive about it

this roach and the pajeets from polygon didn't understand how blockchains worked, both retards thought that block production somehow validated the chain which is something done individually
that fact alone should tell you everything you need to know about these morons

>>50702282
Nobody shills icp. everyone knows that's a rug. He's just having fun

he built a literal dead shitcoin nobody even talks about anymore thanks to the merge

>>50703446
I guess, the auditors of the contract even pointed out the bug over a month in advance but the devs ignored them lole

>>50703553
Emin literally created a crypto currency in 2002 and knows way fucking more about it in general than 95% in the industry right now though.

>>50703626
bragging about having a 7 year advantage on bitcoin and completely failing to capitalize on it isn't bullish
especially when you then take years after ethereum to release your smart contract ethereum clone

>>50703666
That's not the point, the point is that he knows his shit in terms of technology

>>50703666
>muh EVM clone
no one even wants to implement EVM, it's a shit protocol. It's the Microsoft Windows of VMs, only reason it's still around is because everyone is familiar with it and it 'just werks' (except that constant hacks of course)
AVAX devs have literally said that their EVM subnets are just temporary, including c-chain. When devs want to start building on more solid foundations they will all start spinning up subnets with VMs that aren't based off of that garbage that Gavin and Vitalik cooked up in 2 weeks while high on adderall.

>>50703666
Even the Geth Core dev would rather work at Avalanche, you literally cannot make this shit up

https://twitter.com/peter_szilagyi/status/1506699690473099265

>>50703774
>>50703973

kek, like clockwork

back to roachland with you, shoo shoo

>>50702171
Since Nomad was hacked and it uses a similar design principle as Optimistic, why hasn't Optimistic been hacked?
Sure, zk roll ups are great, but optimistic is still good. QANplatform's XLINK is something to look at too.

>>50704476
>kek, like clockwork
>
>back to roachland with you, shoo shoo

>>50702171
lol this guy is a clown. send avax to zero.

emin vs the retarded crypto community is a tale as old as time

>>50705267
yup, just a few more $400 million hacks and they might start getting the message.
Or not. I shouldn't underestimate the midwit's power of self-deception.

>>50702171
Shit colored skin

>>50703626
no he didn't
this faggot didn't even create avalanche
it's a literal fucking geth fork
and him and bhelic or whatever the pajeet's name is, posted on twitter saying that block discovery was the validation part of the chain, babby's first blockchain mistake

>>50706015
eth2 time to finality is 6 minutes lol

>>50706015
Avalanche is VM-agnostic you goddamn retarded idiot, why the fuck do you talk about things you don't know

>>50706015
Only newfags from Reddit bought this shitskin vc scam. Oldfags know not to buy shitskin tokens

>>50702171
There's stretching the truth and then there's just being a fucking retard. Trying to argue that a coding error in a bridge contract PROVES that optimistic rollups are not secure is just embarrassing seethe from someone who clearly can't handle becoming irrelevant.
Then again, Emin has always had an excruciatingly cringe online presence, so this is pretty standard from him.

>>50706103
his point is quite simple. the coding error is BECAUSE the technology is overly complex. the space should stick to simple solutions and stay away from midwit .eth jargon

>>50702171
I've asked this in every turk roach thread and never got an answer. How are subnets a legitimate was of scaling a network when they each have a tps cap of around 4000?

>>50706015
>no he didn't
https://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/egs/karma/
>Karma is a virtual currency for peer-to-peer systems. Its main advantage is that it is not controlled by any single entity. Its implementation, along with the means for the control of its supply and value, are entirely decentralized.
the paper is from 2003. Karma even uses PoW to stop sybil attacks. If it was released post 2008 crash instead of post 2001 WTC attacks then we wouldn't even be talking about Bitcoin, everything would have been based on Karma.

>it's a literal fucking geth fork
wrong, avalanche is a consensus method not a VM you fucking tard. Avalanche has 3 chains all running different VMs, X-chain runs a DAG, P-chain runs a simple blockchain, and C-chain runs EVM. Avalanche consensus is the underlying consensus mechanism.

>and him and bhelic or whatever the pajeet's name is, posted on twitter saying that block discovery was the validation part of the chain, babby's first blockchain mistake
what the fuck are you even talking about? are you just copy pasting some shit you heard from twitter, because it sounds like you have no clue how blockchains even work.

>>50706172
They don't have a cap retard, it depends on the VM you use

>>50706159
Oh right complexity is bad, so we should all just hold Bitcoin because it's the most static protocol with the least complexity, right?

>>50706248
resorting to dishonesty, sad.

>>50706293
What's dishonest? "Simplicity is better but only in the sense that AVAX is simpler than ETH and not in the sense that Bitcoin is simpler than AVAX".
Any particular reason to draw the line there?

>>50706248
>let's just take everything to its logical extreme
such a stupid point that doesn't address Emin's argument at all.
I'll restate it in the simplest way possible so even a dumb nigger like you can understand.
Less moving parts = less things that can go wrong
or
Less complexity = more secure

If you can build something with the least amount of complexity possible (Avalanche's native bridges) then it's inherently more secure. It's really that simple of a point. I don't know why you retards can't understand this.

>>50706334
because they are trying to achieve entirely different things. I can't believe you actually need me to explain this to you

>>50706334
>just don't build bridges
idk if dishonest is the right word. retarded maybe

>>50706172
>I've asked this in every turk roach thread and never got an answer. How are subnets a legitimate was of scaling a network when they each have a tps cap of around 4000?
They dont. Theres your answer.

>>50706172
>>50706385
it's called horizontal scaling, faggot
now tell us about your scam coin that does 6 gorillion TPS so we can laugh at you

>>50706361
>>50706380
>>50706381
It was a coding error in a bridge contract. The fact that the AVAX crowd, led by their retarded attention seeking founder, are trying to jump on this as "SEE, THIS IS WHY ROLLUPS AREN'T FEASIBLE" is retarded, desperate cope.
You've got until CCIP launches, at which point any arguments about bridge security will become redundant.

>>50706231
According to the AVAX info I've found that's not the case. They state they have been able to maximise a subnet to run a 4500 tps, that's for any use-case and both EVM + WASM. If you have an application or use-case that requires more than 4500 tps (you'll see apps in peak times in bullmarkets on SOL doing >10k tps) you have to run a subnet off a subnet (an L2 to an L2). Surely this makes atomic composability in the web of subnets that make up avax a complete nightmare and introduces a massive attack surface. Given AVAX has a record of $14 fees in periods of high usage, if we needed to make multiple jumps from subnet X to subnet Y, which required you to go through subnets of subnets to other subnets of subnets we could be seeing fees >$50.

Also if you're running a subnet as your main hub for what you're building then strap on a bunch of other subnets to scale for X usecase why wouldn't you just cut out AVAX at that point and use something with higher throughput? Or just use ETH + quicker L2 than AVAX offers?

>>50706471
Ahh so it doesn't scale then. It can scale to many applications so long as they are able to operate in the constraints 4k tps? I get you. Given that AVAX will never be able to service web3 then and is a technological dead-end as ETH 2.0 with it's scaling solution rolled out will allow for higher throughput and with a smaller attack surface.

>>50706516
SOL tps numbers are a complete scam because they include consenus messages iirc

if a subnet had the same hardware requirements for validators it would outperform SOL no question due to the superior consenus protocol

essentially you are getting trolled by marketing gimmicks here

>>50702171
imagine trusting something named after a kid's snack

>>50706470
>a coding error
it's called a bug shithead, don't try to sugarcoat it. and the design principle(note he says """design principle""", not """design""") explicitly mentioned in his tweet thread screencapped here >>50703406 boils down to 'less complex = less chance for bugs'. It's not even hard to summarize, he is very direct about exactly what his main criticism is.

>"SEE, THIS IS WHY ROLLUPS AREN'T FEASIBLE"
zero reading comprehension, let me clarify it for you stupid.
he says, quote
>Anyone can have a bug, but the chances of having a bug increase exponentially when the on-chain footprint is large and complex. And rollups are large and complex.
there you go faggot, now that I spoonfed your retarded ass you can fuck off

>>50706612
But it wasn't a rollup bug. So what does "rollups being large and complex" have to do with anything? Is he literally just saying "Code can have bugs so the more code you have, the more bugs you can have".
What an insight!

>>50706578
SOL still averages over 450tps with messages stripped from the calculations. Avax does 23. But that's not the question here. Sol has proven in even it's current form it can deal with peak time usages in the tens of thousands of tps with a theoretical maximum of near a million tps in it's current form. A messaging app/social network as popular as whatsapp/twitter leveraging a blockchain would need millions of tps in peak times. AVAX, by design could never service these types of high throughput use-cases and thus will be in a position like ETH is where things built on it must be able to operate within the constraints of bottlenecks.. SOL and NEAR have paths to where they can service these current high throughput applications and continuously scale with hardware improvements over time, AVAX does not.

>>50706578
funny fact about SOL is that the marketing gimmick of blending consensus messages and transaction messages is what causes the routine network crashes.
Basically any time there is a spike in TPS, SOL network will 'lose' the consensus messages which I assume are flooded out by transaction messages which causes unrecoverable network desync.
The only way to fix this would be to separate the two types of messages into different channels, but this would expose the fact that 9/10 of their TPS was fake. They are basically fucked one way or another which is why they haven't chosen to fix the issue yet. Luckily for them the TPS has been lower with the bear market, so less crashes.

>>50706676
proven it how? by going down once a week lmao

>>50706747
I'm glad that's settled then.

avalanche has a consenus protocol that scales better than bft. SOL and NEAR literally cannot compete when it comes to scaling. you are just falling for marketing here. what tech do they have that allows them to scale that avalanche lacks? please enlighten me

>>50706676
>SOL has more TPS
and yet AVAX has climbed above SOL in DeFi TVL. All this proves is that SOL transactions are mostly bots who love to spam any network that has artificially low gas fees. And ultimately SOL pays for that bot spam with an ever increasingly unmanageable state bloat which only further centralizes the network. if you take into account the reason for crashes stated here >>50706716 then SOL's design philosophy is pretty clear: harm the network for marketing gimmicks.

>>50706789
Dipshit, you're missing the question. Sol is just a placeholder example of X network using expansive throughput as a way to scale. The question is how can avax scale with the constraints of around 4k tps per subnet? How can the network ever service high throughput transactions with it's architecture? It seems by your replies and others that It simply cannot and will only service use-cases which can operate within those constraints or applications with a low amount of users. Also if you have information on atomic composibiltiy within avax it would be great to have for my research.

>>50706516
Require your subnet to have higher specs for validators. Problem solved. The 4500tps number was also measured in the early days before optimizations and before minimum specs were raised a bit. The 4500 number is higher now according to Emin.

>>50706172
You increase throughput by adding more subnets. Each additional subnet gives more TPS.

Kadena uses the same principle, but Kadena is a shit tranny ghostchain that people like for some reason.

>>50706846
>How can the network ever service high throughput transactions with it's architecture?
VISA only handles 1,700 TPS. If AVAX does that while being the most decentralized, secure, and reliable network in existence then it's already won. Need more payment networks? just add more subnets.
Now please tell us about your 6 gorillion TPS scamcoin that is powered by rainbows and goblin farts.

>>50706846
the answer is simple, this "X" you are talking about doesn't exist. in fact, avalanche is the best candidate for it.

you need to stop fixating on tps, it's a terrible metric for measuring the performance of blockchains in practice because all chains lie and fudge the numbers

Söylana is getting drained RIGHT NOW

>>50707419
>>50707345
See retards? Avalanche is literally the only L1 that is engineered well.

>>50703406
this
/thread
ETHtrannies currently on suicide watch

>>50703406
>The truth is that most projects cannot stand on their own technological competence and instead wrap their own failed technology in flowery language and obfuscate via made up tech jargon
Yes thank god we have avalanche consensus protocols and subnets and horizontal scaling to save us lmao

He's correct if you look at the context tho.

ETH maxis love to strawman their "enemies" in order to execute name shaming that's baked by all the dot eth on twitter which consist of roughly 50% of the whole space lmao. They do this all the time with all kind of projects or individuals, Truly the leftists of the twitter space.

>>50707582
>consensus protocols and subnets and horizontal scaling are just tech jargon
smoothbrain take, the words practically define themselves
>consensus protocol
a protocol(procedure or system of rules) that validators use to come to consensus
>subnets
subnetworks, common IT term (ever heard of subnet masks? every home network is a subnetwork of the internet network). In Avalanche subnets are networks that lie within the Avalanche primary networks since all validators validate the primary. So a network within a network, hence subnetwork.
>horizontal scaling
scaling horizontally as opposed to vertically. Also called parallel scaling. Pretty self explanatory. Should have learned this term in High School economics

>>50707818
>when they do it, it's obfuscation through made up tech jargon, but when we do it, it's the words practically defining themselves.

>>50707835
yeah I bet you think the term blockchain is jargon too, fucking retard

>>50702171