[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

/biz/ - Business & Finance


View post   

File: 192 KB, 480x720, 1580198407498.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20437838 No.20437838 [Reply] [Original]

Which Layer 2 solution's coin should I buy? Loopring (LRC) or Omisego (OMG) or Matic (MATIC)

>> No.20437865

OMG

>> No.20437867

Vitalek wears omg shirts, you think he is unethical and just supporting for no serious reason?

>> No.20437907

PIECE OF SHIT
PIECE OF SHIT
PIECE OF SHIT

>> No.20437931

>>20437838
AVAX will be the L0 solution for Ethereum, fix the EVM mess and Athereum can run all the Ethereum smart contracts with very low friction.

https://youtu.be/_WxpSuZ1qg0?t=638

>> No.20437950

Matic is the worst of the three. VB shills both OMG and Loopring, and eventually one will be chosen as the de facto solution

>> No.20437957

>>20437867
Yea but he was wearing those shirts way before any other L2 solutions were being worked on.Right now Matic and Loopring both have lower market caps so I'm considering one of those two instead of OMG. Besides OMG has a shit ton of bag holders.

>> No.20438091

STAKE. One of the participants in Reddit Scaling Competition

>> No.20438116

>>20437838
xsn + raiden

>> No.20438172
File: 22 KB, 1000x1000, ava_red.71607864.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20438172

*scale your entire blockchain*
it's over, ETH layer 2 is not needed

>> No.20438358

>>20438172
>>20437931
Is Avalanche an entire new chain (like Polkadot)? If it is I'm not interested in yet another ETH killer even if they have better tech. Way too late to the game to catch up with ETH's lead.

>> No.20438417

>>20437838
Matic
I would also invest in layer 1 too, such as fantom

>> No.20438460

>>20437838
Fantom

>> No.20438600

>>20438358
It's a DAG-like protocol that supports VMs including EVM as a subnet, Ethereum smart contracts are fully compatible and run out of the box
Just watch the video on Athereum, they have a demo as well (although having issues with the playback) >>20437950

>> No.20438614

>>20438600
meant for this >>20437931

>> No.20439187

>>20438600
Nice I'll take a closer look at this then.