/biz/ - Business & Finance

Not sure where the tps throughput comes on avax. Currently it's ath tps was 40 or something.

i reported AVAX to the SEC so you probably shouldn't buy it lol!

>>52734511
one can swallow any chain by integrating them while the other is the one being swallowed. you should have your answer. verification not required.

>>52734511
icp has frontend hosting, native ecdsa token integration, https outcalls, an internet identity system, and reverse gas model (this might be the only true con).

Isnt avax just another chain that can't be distinguished from any other l1 besides that one bridge thing.

Looking at the user end, icp is better in every way. Hell, ICP can literally sign transactions on Avax right? Isnt avax evm?

>>52734511
>So it seems this board has decided it's either ICP or AVAX as the next big thing

can't we all be frens??

>>52734511
Nobody gives a shit about avax here. If you’ve actually fallen for those shills you’re a fucking retard. They make threads all the time saying avax vs (coin) just so they can have an active thread. They literally cannot have their own 100+ reply thread on a daily basis
At least icp can and has a really user base. Avax has to piggyback on other projects threads just to get attention.
Literally nobody important gives a shit about this coin

>>52734588
Honestly, the true battle is between rose and icp. Whether that privacy ability on rose is greater than anything else people can offer is the actual debate.

>>52734597
>So it seems this board has decided it's either ICP or AVAX as the next big thing
so no.. youre wrong sirs

You don't need interoperability with other blockchains when you can build anything you ever want on Avalanche. And if you ever want it anyway, pimp it with some LayerZero shit and you're done.

Plus with the price getting rugged, you "only" need 30k to build a node, not 100k

>>52734630
Deploy Mario64 game that you can play on your browser completely on chain similar to icp. Hell you can just do Pokémon fire red game as well. I would like to see avax do this and I guarantee they cant.
Before muh Mario64 was taken down fud I’m trying to see if avax has the ability to do this

>>52734687
it does not have the ability to do that anon.

>>52734511
Nobody is shilling AVAX here except the paid pajeets. This is an ICP board in 2022, same as it was a LINK board in 2018

>>52734630
T. no frontend that can only be taken down by governance.
> Inb4 all tokens owned by vcs and dom. they just keep dumping and biz/pol incels keep slurping. One day we as a collective will have enough voting power to only keep racist women hating sites on the chain.

>>52734588
did you just say reverse gas model is a con?

>decentralization.. a non problem that will improve as the network matures
>innovative consensus
op you are a fucking ape

>>52734785
partially. An optional reverse gas model would have been better. Mainly because, even querying for block in "custom" gas on icp uses some cycles. I know its near impossible to drain a canister through these queries, but I believe it could potentially happen.... however, I know dfinity did make some kind of ip spam checker thing to prevent it. Not fully sure on the details for that tho

> what's the difference?
AVAX is a choice, ICP is a burden
every time you see a post by an ICP fag seething, just remember they bought a coin named "Internet Computer" for 400$ on launch and are now eternal bagholders
> - 99%
imagine holding that shit or even defending it
ICP holders are worse than XRP shizos or dogcoin memers, because they at least make some money, while ICP fags are probably working double shifts at mcd's cleaning shit off the floor because they - 99'd their whole life saving and then buy even more of that garbage with their minimum wage shekels
I actually feel bad for them

>>52734845
>T. doesnt post anything about tech.
Just post price = bad cause too retarded or more likely too brown and village needs feeding

>>52734845
>AVAX -92%
lmfao

>>52734511
>Avax = alpha chad
>ICP = incel nazi chink pajeet scam

Simple as

>>52734511
This comparison seems retarded to me.
Why not LTC vs HBAR?
Why not XRP vs XMR?
To me, it's obvious that the main competitors are EOS vs PAXG.

>>52734877
> 5 posts by this id
keep defending and bagholding your shitcoin
> complains about not posting about tech, says avax is just like any other L1
-99%
>>52734884
look at the pic you dumb nigger
bought pre bull and still in profit at bear bottom

>>52735002
okay then enlighten us...
>5 post by this id just cause I like to make indians seethe kek. I literally sit here posting this shit and then view a bunch of obviously no-logic arguments for why avax is better.

Go ahead and refute me on the tech comparison. What does avax do that is better than ICP?
>>52734791 decentralization's about the only thing

>>52735002
oh no no no
it can go down another 99%
and it will
because i reported your roach coin to the SEC
lol!!!

>>52734630
>build anything you ever want on Avalanche
A website. I want a website on it.
Seriously you're being a retard saying this all the time.

>>52734832
yes they built in a defense mechanism. they're improving the model constantly. its actually one the main selling points imho. you can finally use the internet again that is fully hosted on chain without paying a single dime. we need this.

>>52735043
desu I don't care about your shitcoins tech after I heard that the creators allowed treasury and VC's to dump 19 million ICP on exchanges while other investors were locked in vesting
you and every other retard who invested in this garbage got rugpulled and this shitcoin will never recover from that
so hf bagholding, talking about tech and cleaning shit off the floor in mcd's while I am making money

>>52734511
algorand has better interoperability thank chart shows thanks to state proofs.
ICP though

>>52735002
>5 posts by this id
he is defending his coin. defend yours. what does avax do better than ICP?

>>52734687
>icp baggie doesn’t know how the tech actually works kek
Icp hosts the wasm on chain but the game itself doesn’t run on chain

>>52735282
Yeah I said that you can play in your fucking browser you illiterate fuck. That’s why I said that.
Can avax do this?

>>52735827
>"but muh shitty flashgames that nobody cares about!"
there is no money in that retard.
how will flashgames make your worthless shitcoin pump?

>>52735891
There’s literally a fucking guy in this thread saying avax can do anything any other blockchain can do. You guys can’t even host a website online

>>52734511
>Ethereum tx fee >$100
God smart contract infighting is so funny. None of you are honest about anything and when the rug is pulled out from under you you'll wonder what happened.

This vaporware will not be relevant in the future.

>>52735067
>because i reported your roach coin to the SEC
same lol roach coin is scummy and does NOT pass the howie test.

>>52736101
>"but muh shitty website nobody gives a shit about"
meanwhile John Wu tokenizes the trillion dollar MBS market.

>>52736941
Cope

>>52737013
post some of these ICP loser sites and flashgames and tell us why this will make your shitty token pump.

>>52734511
Image is out of date. ICP has 1236 nodes, 37 blocks per second, and the fee is ~$0.0004

>>52737051
its permissioned and centralized anyway.
Avalanche is decentralized because its permissionless. thats why Avalanche is superior.

The only thing I like about avax is the defi kingdoms subnet. Otherwise ftm is just a better version. Cheaper fees, better user experience, better performance than avax.

Icp is clearly the better choice. I'd you want to invest in a dag, go with ftm.

>>52734597
tsmt kek.

ICP does not need new a consensus mechanism, it has Bitcoin.
It's not ICP vs Avax.
It's ICP + BTC vs Avax.
Avax wants to be both store of value and computation platform in one, which is why they are desperately hoping to come up with some magical new consensus mechanism that will allow them to be everything without tradeoffs. In reality, they are not really good at either.
The correct architecture is one with a specialized SoV layer, it has to be PoW and it frankly has to be BTC, complemented by a computation layer that is able to integrate natively with the Bitcoin network.
This is what Avax, and every other "trilemma solving" shitcoin, is up against, and they are scared shitless.

>>52737066
ICP is not centralized, and is only semi-permissioned because specialized hardware is required to run nodes, and the NNS (the DAO that controls the network) has to vote to add new nodes.

>>52737125
you cant even run your own validator you dumb nigger.
its centralized.

>>52737117
the Avalanche consensus is legit and works, Ted Yin solved the Blockchain Trilemma.

>>52734511
Won't touch the shill chart, they are never correct or up to date. I think that's a relatively fair take though. A few things come to mind though.
>Badlands
This is not something that is actually really feasible (in the sense of preserving the computing power of ICP to run complex code) or anywhere near production, it was essentially a spitballing medium post by Dominic. Dfinity would be making a huge mistake by wasting time on this IMO, they just need to own the fact that it isn't permissionless and is more centralized than the likes of BTC/ETH et al. and just focus on executing an already extremely ambitious vision.
>Single canister subnet
That won't lower node requirements unless the nodes are custom specc'd to a lower requirement perfectly matched to a specific simpler set of code run only on that subnet. It's making a huge tradeoff and losing the whole advantage of ICP in the first place and also kind of mucks up how the NNS and subnets operate.
>Consensus innovation
This is the most difficult part and it's what avalanche has already done. I'm fairly certain avalabs have some IP protections over the protocol so dfinity would have to find an alternate route. Not to say that it's impossible to create a new consensus mechanism, but classical protocols have been around for 40 or 50 years and Nakamoto consensus over a decade ago now and snow family protocols are only the 3rd new type in the history of the field.

People think about these chains wrong though. AVAX is basically an interoperable network where any number of VMs run using some flavor of snow consensus. Avalabs is highly focused though on flow of value and financial applications. Hence stuff like KKR launching a tokenized fund on chain or Enclave Markets. ICP on the other hand is a much more monolithic entity, every subnet runs the same IC VM but it allows you to run arbitrary code with canisters. It's more of a general purpose crypto cloud, hence social media dApps and le mario 64.

>>52737585
I think avalanche will dominate high throughput financial applications but perhaps someone will create webhosting/cloud type subnets (maybe even with reverse gas). ICP will certainly appeal to certain devs and types of applications though since the cloud compute functionality is mostly there out of the box and is the core purpose of ICP. Avalanche will likely not replace ACH and ICP will almost certainly not make traditional CSPs obsolete though.
From an investor perspective I think the tokenomics surrounding ICP are dubious at best compared to Avalanche. VC stuff aside even, I think there's some strange feedback loops with the whole USD to ICP to XDR to Cycles conversions. Avalanche is simply more straight forward with a traditional token burn mechanism and a capped supply.

EGLD is better than any of these

>>52736134
i have personally paid over $100 for a swap during peak bull, its not really exaggerated

>>52737585
>>52737599
SEC is already filing a case against Emin Gun Sirer and his abuse of the American financial system. He will be deported back to Turkey where it's likely he and his family will be imprisoned for FETO connections and their role in the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt.

>>52737834
who?

No one here actually supports the roachcoin.

>>52736101
>You guys can’t even host a website online
Tbh what are the benefits of being able to do this? Genuine question

Shitvax cope lmao

>>52737849
I had one that was $180
ICP ftw btw

>>52738079
>>You guys can’t even host a website online
>Tbh what are the benefits of being able to do this? Genuine question
That the whole dApp, including front end, becomes unstoppable. You know when they take down some web site for some dApp and people say "whatever, the smart contract is still up.." and then someone rightly objects "yeah but nobody knows how to use that"? Well, this renders all that moot.

Ethereum is king and will always stay king and everyone in this thread knows this. Yall just shilling bags and thats okay

>>52739524
i would agree if it werent for the scalability issues

>>52739530
>Arbitrum
>Mantle
>Optimism
This is why L2s are a thing anon

>>52739532
L2s are a sticking plaster; if you use subnets you're essentially unlimited, without ever having to use an inelegant L2 solution. Take the training wheels off and use a chain with instant finality, low fees, and infinite scalability which is also actually decentralized; its the holy grail right beneath your nose.

Now we has come to new meta?
Wanna shill your useless shitty project? Just compare it to icypee!

>>52734511
RLC is the next big thing.

>>52735190
This

>>52734891
more like
>Avax = Turkroach kebab skin
>ICP = Chad switzerland white pure aryan man

The one and only thing why i don't buy avax is that it's turkish and now pure white. i dont buy pajeet cryptos, like matic. only western ones.

The one and only thing why i don't buy avax is that it's turkish and now pure white. i dont buy pajeet cryptos, like matic. only western ones.

>>52734511
>throughput
>unlimited, increases with demand
Jesus fucking christ, cryptofags should be gassed for believing this
Try posting this garbage on /g/ so some people with actual knowledge of networks and computing systems can have a laugh. You DO realize that your magical snake oil tech still runs on computers and networks (in this case, internet)? How and where do you think those transactions are done? They are still calculated/validated on silicon chips and the traffic is still sent through routers, same fucking shit like conventional banks. All of this has limitations of the very hardware it runs on.
>muh 1TB blocks
>muh gazillions tps
>muh everything on blockchain
It's still someone's computer/servers and routers connecting the internet you fucking lobotomized monkeys - the marketed performance numbers don't mean jackshit, when they were acquired in some isolated AWS environment. The principle of blockchain is decentralization and worldwide adoption, so it is always limited by the internet and node hardware. If you're okay with centralized garbage, yes, you can have more than 100 TPS.

>>52734511
I can see how tech illiterate people can fall for this
it's all useless garbage when you know how server backend works and what it can do

The one and only thing why i don't buy avax is that it's turkish and not pure white. i dont buy pajeet cryptos, like matic. only western ones.

>>52734511
>avax
>4500 tps/subnet
that's kind of wrong since your subnet can have custom beefy validators allowing way more tps

>>52734725
those of us shilled avax since the beginning because we cared for the biz bros. those who listened to us made money. those who listened to icp shills lost tons of money. easy to see who the gud guys are

>>52734511

>>52740411
the only informed post in this thread. this is what happens when people learn about technology from marketing fags and YouTube influencers instead of textbooks and hands-on experimentation.
P.S. if ICP was _actually_ decentralized, it would look a lot like the deep web, with all manner of unsavory content and users. but it’s not, so it doesn’t.

>>52740945
Wait… you’re still holding AVAX? Jesus Christ. Why’s your average buy in? $90? Retard.

>>52734725
>This is an ICP board in 2022, same as it was a LINK board in 2018
that doesn't really bode well

>>52737585
Yeah. Avalanche wants to focus on finance and institutions plus tokenization, ICP wants to be a platform where people can launch websites as DAOs, so you could build a version of Facebook with a coin and tokenomics there. Having integrated storage is essential to their vision, because you can't build that on AWS, they want everything to be governed by smart contracts, with smart contracts being able to make calls to any part of the stack. I've never once heard Ava Labs say they want to build twatter, faceberg or whatever.

The only real present overlap between the two is gaymes, because Avalanche want gaming assets on blockchains - not in walled gardens, they want to start capturing that value and bring it on chain, and their fast finality is suited to games. Outside of some autism around subnets I really don't see how the two are massive rivals given their future visions.

>>52734511
SNS got my feets running madly towards ICP like dammit mehn, that aerdrap was damn needed on the space. I sold 40% of my holdings and quickly claimed my Skyjack NFT from the cloudbreakers website as shown on the discord server. Fg

>>52737585
>>52737599
Quality response. I assume you hold a significant amount of AVAX compared to ICP, if you hold the latter at all.

Agree with badlands yeah. Making the NNS responsible for on loading new NP/NM is a good solve by the team imo. It's not permissionless, but makes the community the arbiter. If the community can become more decentralized in terms of voting power. I would deem it decentralized enough.

Singe canister blockchain, not single canister subnet. Single canister subnets are already in the works/theoretically possible, but there's a topic on the dev forum where some argue for single canister blockchains, just like with AVAX. See: https://forum.dfinity.org/t/question-about-icps-subnet-design/14464/2

On financial applications, ICP is asynchronous while AVAX is synchronous. What are the benefits/downsides between these two? And can AVAX process high throughput? I know ICP includes queries in their TPS count, but update-only still reaches several thousand TPS. Has AVAX reached their desired TPS on a defi subnet?

ICP tokenomics is indeed strange, as a higher ICP price means lower cycle burn assuming same usage. I don't think it's a big problem tho, certainly not now when most inflation comes from increasing circulating supply. Also tokenomics could simply be changed through NNS vote.

I'm mostly in ICP as I think the scope is bigger than anything else in crypto, by a wide margin. Willing to take the risk.

captcha is 0t0ma(n)

>>52742756
I don’t think they’re rivals. EMIN does- shots fired with hiring faggot lawyer roach to abuse the legal system against Icp- cronyism. And emin paid for a media campaign against Icp- it’s not going to end now until AVAX is destroyed. This isn’t about the tech, it’s about making fun of AVAX faggots and watching as they lose everything- reminding them how stupid and shitty they are at every turn- starting with them as they slowly learn how useless their double spend token is

>>52740411
Check out https://internetcomputer.org/how-it-works if you want to check it out yourself. In terms of technical competence, ICP is pretty huge. I admit I'm not that technically inclined, but I plan on becoming so this coming year.

I'm honestly curious what /g/'s opinion is on icp, but only if they actually bother to read up on it instead of dismissing it instantly. Will jannies delete if I open a topic on the tech side of icp on /g/?
picrel, im going into cybersec wish me luck bro

>>52740411
cool, now you've waded in with your chest out and embarrassed yourself, you can read about avalanche consensus and how it can scale to much higher than 100 tps with mid range pcs as the validators

such performance wouldn't be obtained via classical consensus shitware of course and you're right that solana, icp, all the rest of that shit all attempts to scale via hardware without doing anything interesting at the consensus protocol level

>>52740411
Syntropy will enable encrypted connectivity for all web 3.0. You mad?

https://www.syntropynet.com/

>>52744853
>>52745126
>refutes nothing
>"please, learn about my shitcoin, it actually breaks the laws of computing because their marketing team said so"
Nobody technically inclined is ever reading your ponzi token buzzword salad for tech illiterates. Post your scamcoins on /g/ along with their marketed performance figures and usability claims, and get a whiff of reality for once.
Also
>actually considers 100 tps being achievable as something worth mentioning
TOP LEL, ever heard of VISA?

>>52744741
I hold both but yes (amongst other coins ofc) my chips are predominantly in the AVAX pile, to me it just has a clearer path to value accrual and PMF. But I still follow ICP somewhat to continually evaluate my thesis.
>Single canister blockchain vs Single canister subnet
These are the same thing on the IC. Each subnet = one blockchain to which transactions from every canister on that subnet posts their requests. If you extrapolate a bit, a single canister running on its own subnet is going to be the necessary solution for any dApp which is relatively popular beyond the extant crypto community.
Some slight misconceptions in that thread though. On AVAX a subnet could potentially have several different blockchains with different VMs but all on the same subset of validators, that's different to the ICP conception of subnet. Also message passing for avalanche subnets is currently being rolled out and uses BLS signatures much like ICP. The difference in philosophy is interesting though comparing Timo's response to Kurt's and I think actually sums up the two project's difference in philosophy. ICP chose subnet to convey a homogenous experience from the USER perspective. Avalanche uses the term subnet to convey a homogenous network with respect to the underlying PROTOCOL.
>Fin Apps
ICP is asynchronous true but to say AVAX is synchronous isn't really quite accurate. The C-Chain is synchronous because the EVM is synchronous, but there are Snow family protocols for both environments. The synchronous environment is just a much better environment for financial activities because it makes atomic swaps/transfers possible. It's a big barrier to ICP defi a result, the asynchronicity makes everything harder/impossible or at least more complicated. Asynchronicity conversely makes doing web apps much easier and is more akin to how the web currently works.

>>52744741

>>52746283
C-Chain is bottlenecked by virtue of the EVM, and I believe it's something like 500-800TPS. Avalabs is currently rewriting the EVM though with precompiles, JIT compilation, etc. to remove this limit. The Snow consensus protocols though are practically speaking unbounded in terms of throughput. They move consensus to be essentially last in the line of bottlenecks which are primarily VM, storage, and signature processing. Like Kurt mentioned in that thread though, an AVAX subnet could impose a hardware requirement for any node wishing to join if an application requires beefy hardware and storage to run which can alleviate some of these issues without a ton of engineering. The primary subnet though has pretty low requirements.
I don't know of any public data source on ICP that would really allow one to make an accurate comparison between the two as far as throughput goes. Really you need to look at the TPS of a single subnet and even then it's not clear from the dashboard. Their tps figure quotes queries and updates, but then within just updates there's no distinction from canister to canister or from-user update requests. The most accurate comparison would be to see how many from-user updates/second a subnet is doing. The only thing I could really find on this is a dev forum post where a dfinity employee states that internal testing shows a little over 900 tps being close to the upper limit for a single given subnet.
>Tokenomics
Fair enough, I personally just don't feel like I have a good enough grasp on all the implications of the feedback mechanisms to feel comfortable putting more into it. At least until the macro clears up more.