[ 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: 35 KB, 1280x720, 1592149127508.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
29972139 No.29972139 [Reply] [Original]

Post replies to FUD here and post links to threads where fudders are running wild

Example:
Double spend? -> No it was a invalid mint. Link:https://medium.com/avalancheavax/preliminary-analysis-of-the-invalid-minting-bug-bee940cbd9e9

LETS GOOOOOOO BUMP IT AND SHARE

>> No.29972473

>>29972139
shhh let em fomo at $500

>> No.29972667

>>29972473
FUD must be destroyed with no mercy

>> No.29973555

The best anti-fud is mooning. Now start doing something!

>> No.29973740

>>29973555
BUY

>> No.29974165

>>29972667
>>29973555
Back in January there wasn't a single FUD against AVAX, nobody could find a single problem with it, only when it hit $10 that fudders showed up like vultures.

>> No.29974290

>>29974165
There's still not a single valid fud against AVAX, Fudders philosophy is quantity>quality

>> No.29975607

>>29974290
>>29974165
this

>> No.29975760

>>29972139
>>29972473
>>29972667
>>29973555
>>29973740
I'll admit, I still own some avax, but this is honestly pathetic

>> No.29976030

>>29975760
"i have avax but its bad"
bad fudder trying to make us believe

>> No.29976484

I've been looking into it and it does sound like a legit project with some actual usage of blockchain. However I feel like I missed out and I can't get over not having invested when it was shipped at like 3-5 bucks. Any advice?

>> No.29976490

>>29974165
>nobody could find a single problem with it
wrong
that white hat hacker anon told us in January the node security is weak and consensus rules may be bent by an attacker

it was even worse than that, consensus rules failed to prevent a double spend even without an attacker just by accident. just by accident somebody triggered a security vulnerability

look at Ada they have different keys for different operations on their nodes

not one staking key per node for all its operations

there should have been one key and from it derive other keys to rotate and even rotate the main key

there should have been a better coding practice than letting kids write go code as if they are making a crud webapp

the white hat told us this in January and you called him fudder

>> No.29976554

>>29976484
get over it. buying the top is actually a legit strategy in crypto

>> No.29976851

>>29976490
you mean some larping autist?
there was no double spend
no consensus fail
it was a bug in client code aka in the implementation
>look at ada
lmao what a retard
>better coding practice
do you code? point to bad code or are you repeating what some LARPer said?
>letting kids write go code
these are CS PhDs and the CEO has been in crypto over 15 years

>> No.29977624

Fudders fud and when the price drops as a result they say "see look AVAX sucks" it's all a psychological game to get you to sell and kill yourself

>> No.29977972

>>29976851
> there was no double spend

oh you son of a bitches
https://avascan.info/blockchain/c/address/0x0a99c32AFFAEc0a697D4CB4bf660Eeddcf432c21/transactions

how can anyone look at that and say not a double spend?

https://avascan.info/blockchain/c/tx/iWd83KayghBQYNERXem3nW8ifFjJsR66NwWcAR6uZavKFWthq this coin this transaction hash which is supposed to be UNIQUE was spent 7 times.
from 63avax, the above transaction was spent 7 times.

https://avascan.info/blockchain/c/tx/iWd83KayghBQYNERXem3nW8ifFjJsR66NwWcAR6uZavKFWthq see 63 goes in, 444 goes out.

even that page says "This transaction was included in multiple blocks"

now tell me again how this is not a double spend

>> No.29978215

>>29977972
I already explained it to you. Even if I went into more detail you would still ignore it cause you're a dishonest faggot.

>> No.29978263

>>29976851
> no consensus fail
yeah some guy sending the same transaction 7 times and making 444avax valid from 63, is somehow not a consensus fail. that he then spent those 444avax to buy ETH and other people also double spent is not a consensus fail. explain?

> it was a bug in client code
oh great, we can just upgrade the client code and blockchain is not double spend. oh wait, it is double spent and foundation had to burn their tokens?

> do you code?
I know better than using golang for a financial application.
> has been in crypto over 15 years
obviously he needs more time, put it back in

>> No.29978416

>>29978215
> dishonest

you're the dishonest faggot.
all over avalanche official pages there should be a giant disclaimer

ILLEGAL MINTING POSSIBLE

DOUBLE SPEND HAPPENED SEVERAL TIMES

BETA SOFTWARE USE AT YOUR
OWN RISK

YOUR FUNDS MAY BE SPENT MORE THAN ONCE OR NOT AT ALL WHEN THE NETWORK IS DOWN

AVALANCHE IS NOT YET DECENTRALIZED ALL DEVELOPMENT AND MAJORITY STAKE IS OWNED BY AVA-LABS and some close friends

WARNING BETA WARNING EXPERIMENTAL SOFTWARE

>> No.29978507

>>29978263
You have no idea how decentralized blockchains work and how they achieve consensus.
The invalid minting did not happen because of a flaw in the consensus mechanism but in cross-chain communication which doesn't involve consensus mechanism.

>> No.29978520

>>29978416
>>29978263
retard priced out, go cry

>> No.29978843

>>29978507
>flaw in the consensus mechanism
right just by magic all the validator nodes approved the same invalid transactions

this is the consensus failure and consensus flaw that
validator nodes can double spend and all agree on it being valid

this is a disaster bigger than bitcoin overflow incident or the dao of ethereum

not seen even in mother fucking shitcoins like Fantom or IOTA

>>29978520
nobody wants to buy this shitcoin even Fantom is better
the right price is $0.5 anything above that is a scam

WARNING AVALANCHE CODEBASE IS worse than INTERNET EXPLORER 6

>> No.29978976

>>29976490
White hat hacker was loading his bags and told us he made that bullshit up to accumulate more.

>> No.29978998

>>29978843
stay in this thread fudder, dont mislead others

>> No.29979098

>>29978976
> told us he made that bullshit up to accumulate more.
Maybe that was Emin saying that pretending to be white hatter

>>29978998
oh look this scammer doesnt want his scam to be exposed lol as if I have time to shitpost on mongolian forum

>> No.29979285

>>29978416
Truth be told, there was a very serious spend bug, that the AVAXers just swipe under the rug. Now it is up to the market to decide if the currency is worth ignoring that issue. For the AVAXers, it clearly is not a big deal the whole network went offline for over a whole day.

>> No.29979292

>>29979098
>Maybe that was Emin saying that pretending to be white hatter
>Emin browses biz
Bullish.

>> No.29979377

>>29979285
bug was fixed it's done

>> No.29979459

>>29979285
also mint not spend

>> No.29979785

>>29979285
the network never went offline
if you schizos at least had your facts straight and could make a coherent argument based on facts maybe you wouldn't look like paranoid retards

>> No.29980037

>>29979785
As an AVAX holder myself I confirm that it went offline, since I could not send / receive any AVAX on the Avalanche network (either by metamask or the proprietary wallet). The fact is that you guys keep denying that it happened, when it did happen (even though it was corrected later).

>> No.29980158

>>29980037
that was the API. the x and p chain stayed fully operational. you were able to send transactions through your own node the entire time.

>> No.29980186

>>29980037
Wallets were purposefully turned off because thousands of people kept F5ing them iirc. Not saying you're wrong.

>> No.29981276

>>29979785
they're assblasted now that COMPLUS is king

>> No.29981499

Who decided to bug bounty the bug and burn foundation avax?

Central authority
Community was kept in dark

No better than banksters makin decisions for our own good

Who decided the fix would be to let the double spends go by as bonus blocks?
Community was kept in dark
Every validator was not informed not even one

Avalabs owns avalanche network

and avalabs owns 80% of the stake

Centralized shitcoin worse than ethereum worse than Ada

Avalabs own both all the stake
Majority of the nodes
And all the other community nodes are run in cloud by amateurs willing to delete their db and start from scratch like just trust us dumbfucks

Besides zero exchange is best exchange

Avax is centralized shitcoin under avalabs authority

>> No.29982084

>>29981499
So this is your new shitty fud? I think you should try a little harder. It sucks.

>> No.29982313

>>29972139
Why would I trust a blockchain with a confirmed double spend? Stop trying to get people to buy your bags and just take the loss.

>> No.29982372

>>29982084
Just bumping thread

Shame on you avaxers for not informing people about your experimental beta software

>> No.29982489

>>29980158
>>29980186

I am explicitly talking about the metamask on my example. I understand the native wallet got turned off by ava labs, no problem with that. But why was it impossible to make transactions on the metamask as well?

>> No.29982498

>>29982313
Double mint i posted the link explaining it fudder

>> No.29982660

>>29982498
>https://avascan.info/blockchain/c/address/0x0a99c32AFFAEc0a697D4CB4bf660Eeddcf432c21/transactions

https://avascan.info/blockchain/c/tx/iWd83KayghBQYNERXem3nW8ifFjJsR66NwWcAR6uZavKFWthq see 63 goes in, 444 goes out.

Even your own explorer says
"This transaction was included in multiple blocks"
roflmao

>> No.29982705

>>29982660
mint not spend

>> No.29982737

>>29982489
Because the c chain stopped and that's what MM uses
>>29982498
don't reply to zerotranny

>> No.29983023

>>29982705
that transaction is not on the P chain where rewards are minted for validator nodes

that transaction is spending from X change to C chain. 7 times over the same 64 coins.

guy had 63avax, he spends it 7 times to buy eth.
not a double spend, ok, just 7 times spend.

absolute consensus failure due to absolute trashpile of code worse than internet explorer 6 worse than windows 98 with all the blue screens

avalanche deserves to be on the pile of shitcoins like

Digibyte
Peercoin
Nxt
SpankCoin
BitConnect
OysterPearl

>> No.29983204
File: 145 KB, 549x549, 1594935717936.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
29983204

>>29972139
Avalanche stole their idea from Zero exchange!! How is this acceptable in a crypto project. Sure, Zero is great, but being connected to something as slimy as Avalanche is not a good look. Just remember that Zero did this first.

>> No.29983273

>>29982705
>>29982737
explain to newfags

what would a double spend be on a blockchain like bitcoin or on a shitchain
like avalanche? in your own words please

>> No.29983305

>>29983023
Look, no matter how you put it, you can't just say something like this is only a client failure as if the problem was in Google Chrome browser, even though the fucking server accepted and validated the Google Chrome browser request. Google Chrome might have fucked up, but your server obviously fucked up just as bad to accepts the browser's requests.

So even if it was a client problem, it was a validator problem just as much, otherwise the client shouldn't have gotten away with it.

>> No.29983339

>>29983023
COMPLUS offers better apy than your shithole
you're done

>> No.29983489

>>29976484
It’s sub $30 right now, so down 50% from the top. It’s an excellent buying opportunity. Just DCA over the next week because it’s possible that bitcoin will wick down to 39k

>> No.29983572

>>29982737
>c-chain stopped working
That’s what people refer to, when talking about the double mint incident. Also one of the main reasons the price dropped after the pump.

>> No.29983879

>>29983572
You said the network went down when in fact only the c chain did.

>> No.29984570

>>29976490
where can I find that?

>> No.29984690

>>29978843
You're an idiot, if you had any knowledge abouy how Avalanche works and how the X and C chain communicate you'd know that you're making a fool of yourself.
But keep going please, you're making my point for me.

>> No.29984755
File: 10 KB, 316x159, 1613414351132.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
29984755

>>29983204
To author a post, and find it grow into a copypasta is the greatest honor. This is the taste of eternity and immortality.

>> No.29985228

Avax price is $0.5
Anything more, you're getting scammed

>> No.29985495

>>29983879
The c-chain is part of the network no?

>> No.29985963

I am the guy that has been fudding these AVAX threads the whole time, I started doing this because Emin fucked my wife in every hole in front of me, I have since then accepted that I am a cuckold and that I actually secretly liked it, I promise that I will never ever fud in these threads again.
I surrender to the clearly superior AVAX chads, I only hold homosexual shitcoins like FTM and ADA because I am a massive faggot AVAX fudder and buying high and selling low is my favorite pastime besides sucking nigger dick.

>> No.29986200
File: 17 KB, 320x320, IMG_20210228_205210_949.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
29986200

When can I expect to get money from this?

Bought at 11.6150

When?

>> No.29986470

lets be real guys, whats are the chances avax will get back on track and will pump again ?
it received a bad stigma due to the pangolin shit and normies on reddit dont discuss it
are there any upcoming plans/announcements ?

>> No.29986929

>>29976030
I didn't say Avax is bad. Only that the shilling is pajeet levels of lame.

>> No.29987230

>>29985495
It's only one subnet, Avalanche is a network of networks