Kaspa is bitcoin done right

[Anonymous No.57322327]

And you are retarded if you don't buy.
Why is a noname low volume coin on top 40 and not dropping despite being PoW.
Ask yourself that.

[Anonymous No.57322354]

>>57322327
Jewish. Pre-mined. Scam.

[Anonymous No.57322376]

>>57322327
What if I told you you could make it with even the most risk free bag?

https://twitter.com/catfish_fi/status/1747512792620400642?s=46&t=WBGYrG-qTSsMVwSiFtdymw

https://birdeye.so/token/3qi7XMxKN2BqJDu7bAGV9gKjKi3wa95vMzQEr15uqYmh?chain=solana

This will be called every day in your face and you will watch it continue to go up.

[Anonymous No.57322514]

I bought and now it just sits there, crabbing. I like the crab though so I keep buying.

[Anonymous No.57322645]

>>57322327
>Why is a noname low volume coin on top 40 and not dropping despite being PoW.
Obviously the jews are propping it up trying to lure in as many baggies as possible for their exit liquidity. Sure, it might pump some more, but it'll eventually rug like all of these premined shitcoins. Never trust the jews btw, only worth the risk if you buy in early.

[Anonymous No.57322714]

currently into the "return to normal" phase after the blowoff top

enjoy holding through your 90% drawdown

[Anonymous No.57322815]

>>57322645
>only worth the risk if you buy in early.

That's why you should buy KASPAMINING/KMN instead.
Only $1 Million marketcap and consolidating for the next pump right now.

0xbded8a4dc74a940eab68703167db89b1712b68ea

[Anonymous No.57322821]

kaspa is hodl

[Anonymous No.57324356]

>>57322327
Congrats OP, you found the one. Others will fomo in at $1

[Anonymous No.57325212]

I don't care if it's bitcoin done right or whatever gay narrative you come up with. Really gay rat behavior. It's an OK coin that recently got listed on Binance and Kraken and that shit's all that matters. I don't even use neither I'm 100% CEX driven (Rango+1inch+Curve exclusively, hard wallet) but even I can't deny how much of a big deal that is for this shit. Literal sleeper agent. Give it 2 years tops.

[Anonymous No.57325226]

>>57322327
Kaspa is just another jew scam thats pretty much it.

[Anonymous No.57325232]

>>57325212
take your meds

[Anonymous No.57325235]

>>57322327
SOMEONE TELL ME WHAT KASPA IS SUPPOSED TO BE RIGHT NOW YOU FUCKING SHILLS NEVER REPLY WHEN I ASK FOR A QUICK RUNDOWN REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.57325253]

>>57322821
>>57325226
so why is it being relentlessly spammed 24/7 here, then?

[Anonymous No.57325262]

>>57322327
>kaspa shill thread #848172
im so fucking tired of this.

[Anonymous No.57325263]

>>57322354
>Jewish
Straight into the trashcan. Go back to pol you degenerate bitch boy teenager.

[Anonymous No.57325265]

>>57325212
bump will make non-believers cry blood

[Anonymous No.57325272]

>>57325235
No quick rundowns on 4chan, take your meds

[Anonymous No.57325276]

>>57322714
why 90% dragdown tranny. do continue im honestly curious. not everything is avax, im sorry you fell for that meme.

[Anonymous No.57325278]

>>57325212
God I love this cute and funny kid so much it's unbearable...

[Anonymous No.57325282]

>>57325263
thats 80% of what you see on 4chan

[Anonymous No.57325285]

>>57325212
>I'm 100% CEX driven
>proceeds to list decentralized solutions
what did Beccaposter mean by this?

[Anonymous No.57325288]

>>57325262
>#848172
Where's the remaining 848171? Because I'd love to see Kaspa discussed seriously here more often. It's literally so above and beyond the rest of overshilled blatantly advertised wet garbage that gets shilled here on a daily basis it's not even funny.

[Anonymous No.57325292]

>>57325212
>Listed on Binance
>Listed on Kraken

That doesn't make it a good coin, retard

[Anonymous No.57325308]

>>57322327
fuck off with your jew coin

[Anonymous No.57325312]

>>57325276
Avalanche is actually good though

[Anonymous No.57325343]

>>57325288
Yet you niggers never explain why it's so "superior" when someone asks you. Curious, huh.

[Anonymous No.57325454]

>>57325312
i agree i hold both kaspa and avax

[Anonymous No.57325501]

so I looked and it has a $4b marketcap yet less than $15m volume yeah looks like a rug is incoming

[Anonymous No.57325522]

>>57325212
binance listings are always the top. you buy before the coin gets listed, sell on listing, and never look back.

enjoy being an eternal baggie community member though

[Anonymous No.57325544]

>>57325235
there is zero effort posting on nu-/biz/, it's purely a spam board for saying "buy my bags!"

if you want real alpha you need to go to twitter

[Anonymous No.57325608]

>>57322327
name sounds gay, wont buy.

[Anonymous No.57325634]

>>57325544
Very sad times

[Anonymous No.57326105]

>imagine not accumulating Kaspa

[Anonymous No.57326266]

>bitcoin but not bitcoin
not interested, I already have bitcoin

[Anonymous No.57326477]

>>57325343
Yeah we do explain what's so great about it. It scales Nakamoto consensus down to the speed of internet latency. It actually solves the trilemma and is, without a doubt, the biggest breakthrough in proof of work since the invention of Bitcoin

[Anonymous No.57326528]

>>57325522
It's not available for spot trading on any major exchange, the Binance listing was only for futures. DYOR

[Anonymous No.57326577]

Almost every top crypto project is running on Yonatan's old work

[Anonymous No.57326653]

>>57326105
"we totally dont own half of these addresses guys, and its absolutely impossible for people to split up coins to make it look like distribution is good"

everyone understands "fair launch" means the team is free to snipe as much as the supply as possible.

[Anonymous No.57326701]

>>57326653
Its launch was as fair if not more fair than bitcoin's. I spec mined a pretty decent bag back then, and I'm just a guy who found out about it from mining forums. Kaspa was pretty popular since launch just because you were busy jacking off and not paying attention doesn't make it unfair. Your shitcoins all gave massive preallocations to insiders before anyone else had a chance to get any

[Anonymous No.57326797]

>>57325235
My man, there are countless of threads over on warosu. All you need to know though is that it pretty much solves the blockchain trilemma, is a proof of work and was created by a giga IQ jew that everyone looks up to.

[Anonymous No.57326828]

ICP 120$ eoy
Kaspa 1.20$ eoy
Sell your stinky linky niggeeers

[Anonymous No.57326864]

>>57325212
Its not listed on binance nor kraken, you are trading futures lmao and own nothing.

[Anonymous No.57326996]

[Anonymous No.57327005]

>>57322327
Let me easily store on my Ledger and I'll CONSIDER putting a few k's into this. Until then, it's a no from me, dawg.

[Anonymous No.57327033]

>>57327005
I hope to see this and more exchange listings soon. It's compatible with Tangem cards, if you have one of those.

[Anonymous No.57327062]

who taught Yonatan how far back does this go

[Anonymous No.57327315]

>>57327062
Well its fucking bitcoin done right by the ones who did bitcoin.

[Anonymous No.57327404]

>>57322327
For your comedic pleasure.

[Anonymous No.57328767]

Kaspa is hodl

[Anonymous No.57328778]

>>57322354
based

[Anonymous No.57328924]

>>57327005
According to Ledger's website, they will be adding KAS support soon and are currently working with the team to make it happen. Glad to see more services adding support for KAS

[Anonymous No.57328926]

>>57327005
It's apparently in the testing phase according to their website. It's what's holding me back from picking up any more than I already have.

[Anonymous No.57329227]

>>57328778
>based
go back to /pol/

[Anonymous No.57329373]

>>57322645
>guys you should fade the yids right before a btc halving and bull run
goy really do it to themselves

[Anonymous No.57329389]

>>57322354
it wasn't premined. It was mined early by half of jerusalem though no need to premine when the rabbis tell you about their coin early. That's still not a premine you were just late.

[Anonymous No.57329417]

>>57327005
imagine still using ledger in 2024.
also imagine not knowing about tangem. you might as well be a no-coiner at this point.

[Anonymous No.57329581]

The fact is Jewish makes me very skeptical… I’ll only buy some. Don’t want to fall for a Jewish trick

[Anonymous No.57329745]

>>57329227
I'm from /pol/ and I have 300k. Give me more free money jewbros

[Anonymous No.57329887]

[Anonymous No.57329918]

>>57322327
Why isn't it on Kraken yet? I want to buy some but am too lazy to transfer.

[Anonymous No.57329935]

>Why is a noname low volume coin on top 40 and not dropping despite being PoW.
>Ask yourself that.
Because it's a pre-mined isreali scamcoin with 99.93% of the supply controlled by the devs?

[Anonymous No.57331139]

>>57329935
>GENESIS BLOCK
?

ITS HARDCODED IN THE NODE

https://github.com/kaspanet/rusty-kaspa/blob/ce3e231d0ae103557dc4c44a4dcf31265961a2e4/consensus/core/src/config/genesis.rs#L67

[Anonymous No.57331644]

>>57322327
can't make proof of ownership, can't upload custom data like in bitcoin.
still not as fast as bitcoin l2 solutions.
more complex.
very inefficient, uses as much bandwith as you can imagine. pruning raises question on the cryptography used to verify history.

[Anonymous No.57332027]

>>57331644
bitcoin l2 solutions run on exponential time complexity

[Anonymous No.57332935]

>>57332027
you don't even mention which ressource you're talking about, which bottleneck

[Anonymous No.57333413]

KASPA (dandruff): wow, another coin with NO smart contracts, ZERO privacy, and half the fucking blockchain missing. Tell me again why I should used this POS scam when there's DERO?

[Anonymous No.57333472]

>Redditors compare stack sizes

[Anonymous No.57333854]

>>57332935
>>57332935
He's talking about bandwidth. Lightning Network uses more bandwidth than Kaspa and bandwidth usage on Lightning grows with polynomial time with the number of users so it's not actually a scalable solution. not to mention the Lightning network isn't immutable like Bitcoin, you can't verify the history of Lightning, it's basically just an implementation of pruning with extra steps

[Anonymous No.57334284]

>>57322327
I will rather buy SUI and invest in projects building on its ecosystem. Project like Hydro online is doing wonders in monetization concept.

[Anonymous No.57334381]

>>57333413
Copeleaks24 is at it again. It's obvious because you're the only person in the world who will ever care about DERO, which is a failed shitcoin from 2016.
Kaspa uses a cryptographically secure pruning mechanism to keep its ledger size small while still giving nodes a way to verify the authenticity and validity of the UTXO set. Which is bad according to you, because it reduces transparency. DERO is supposedly better, because it's more transparent? Even though DERO uses cryptography to literally hide its ENTIRE blockchain history so that nobody can audit anything or verify what's going where or that there's been no inflation/premine. It's a completely opaque blockchain. Now suddenly "missing history" is a good feature that makes the coin more valuable. Give it a rest already.
>>57333472
Really puts things into perspective. It's weird to think that buying KAS at 3 cents already makes me an "early investor" compared to most. Techleaks24 (the anon in >>57333413) had a chance to buy at like $0.001 btw. That's why he's obsessed and still FUDding to this day

[Anonymous No.57335602]

>>57333854
>>57331644
ln can still handle way more transactions than kaspa, not even close. at this point even kaspa will need l2.
if that tradeoff was worth it, bitcoin would have more elaborate spv nodes and shorter block time, or something which consumes more ressource like kaspa. like I said kaspa is very inefficient. the more BPS it has, the more duplicate data is handled by its dag, just imagine the size of archival nodes if everyone used kaspa, as opposed to everyone using bitcoin + ln.

l2 is working fine for now even though there might be extra challenges left. read me again to understand the tradeoffs are not worth it >>57331644

[Anonymous No.57336038]

>>57335602
>ln can still handle way more transactions than kaspa, not even close. at this point even kaspa will need l2.
Nope that's not true, you just made that up lol. Kaspa has no issues with speed or throughput whatsoever. Its transactions are instant and nearly feeless. It's just as fast as Lightning on the base layer and it's getting faster with each update.
>if that tradeoff was worth it, bitcoin would have more elaborate spv nodes and shorter block time, or something which consumes more ressource like kaspa
Yeah, that's the classic trilemma issue. The thing that Yonatan has devoted his life to solving. Kaspa solves this without making any of the traditional tradeoffs in decentralization or security. The Rusty Kaspa nodes can run comfortably run on a 10 year old laptop even while the network is being spammed with transactions. Kaspa's ability to scale has been very well demonstrated. You're just making shit up about it being resource-intensive when it's actually not. Kaspa nodes use way less resources than a typical Bitcoin node and it's not even close.
Bitcoin was made to be p2p electronic cash, not to host ordinals. These alternative use cases only cropped up because bitcoin can't scale well enough to be p2p cash, and you can't add L2s without weaking security and decentralization.
Please look into the work of Yonatan Sompolinsky and his GhostDAG algorithm. It solves these problems for real. The tech is so revolutionary that people like you can't even believe it does what it does. It will probably be years before you catch on and realize the significance of what's been built here. That's because we're still early but top minds in the crypto space are all familiar with Yonatan and have been following his work for the last decade, and they are taking notice to this.

[Anonymous No.57337297]

The assumption that the trilemma is fundamentally unsolvable has always just been an ASSUMPTION. There was never any hard proof that a real solution to the trilemma doesn't exist out there somewhere. I'm glad that people like Yonatan have still been out there showing that there is still more work to be done on this issue instead of giving up on it like so many others.
As far as I can tell, the only disavantages Kaspa has against Bitcoin, as a cryptocurrency, are:
>Kaspa didn't come first
And this second one, which I wouldn't say is even a "disadvantage", but rather an improvement:
>Kaspa is designed for the ledger to be pruned over time, so that it can remain lightweight and efficient
It does so without removing old block headers or any data that's required to validate the ledger's authenticity. Some BTC maxis will argue that being able to see every detail of every past transaction forever is essential to a cryptocurrency, which is something I simply disagree with. I care that the ledger hasn't been manipulated or tampered with. Just show me all you need to prove that nobody stole or double spent any coins. There's no reason why anyone 10 years from now will give a single fuck about how Alice bought some drugs from Bob in 2013

[Anonymous No.57337834]

>Kaspa stores appearing on Chinese tiktok (Douyin)

[Anonymous No.57337868]

[Anonymous No.57339362]

>>57334381
I am not "copeleaks" you dense donkey.

There is a difference between a missing blockchain like KAS and an encrypted one like DEROs, of course you're too fucking stupid to comprehend that. Encrypted accounts still have history all the way to the genesis block, KAS doesn't.

DERO is so technologically advanced, it makes KAS look like a grade school project.

[Anonymous No.57339994]

>>57322327
it's a scam like ADA but it'll pump.

[Anonymous No.57340352]

>>57339994
It will go to 100b marketcap
Check these digits
May this year 2024
Checkem
My name is Morton and I am an Australian austist. I have a 1,111,140 stack of kaspa.

[Anonymous No.57341016]

people are being weird acting ultra bearish and unfun

[Anonymous No.57341167]

>Japan kaspa mining facility

[Anonymous No.57341511]

>>57325282
lurk more newfaggot, or go back to /pol/ or twatter

[Anonymous No.57341556]

>>57336038
ln is not bound to on chain requirements so obviously it will be more efficient than kaspa. given the same performance, kaspa will be less efficient and less private than bitcoin + l2. I've explained why in my previous post. maybe unless kaspa does de-duplicate transactions.
don't say feeless, that's a bad argument to use. fees will have to increase to support the network.

you don't respond to the problem of bloated archival nodes. if one day kaspa allows to do more than transaction (mandatory if kaspa wants to compete) there will need to be the full history available, and if you don't want to trust someone else, you will need to validate data yourself with your own "full" node, kaspa makes it much harder. do you even know the size as of today?

I'm talking about bandwidth and storage not cpu or anything like that.
and what do we get for that increased ressource usage? more security? more decentralization? simplicity? better overall performance?
none of that.
the best thing that comes from kaspa regarding bitcoin is additional competition: if kaspa doesn't replace bitcoin (highly likely) then it will just strengthen bitcoin.

I respect the work of the devs but I simply think that if that tradeoff was worth it, bitcoin would have made it long ago.
to me the ghostdag system is just a glorified SPV system.

[Anonymous No.57341612]

>>57341556
>ln is not bound to on chain requirements so obviously it will be more efficient than kaspa. given the same performance, kaspa will be less efficient and less private than bitcoin + l2.
No you just don't understand the scope of the problem. Lightning is less efficient because the amount of bandwidth required scales quadratically with the number of nodes. Everything about Kaspa scales better.
I did respond to the thing about archival nodes: archival nodes are optional, not required for the network to run due to Kasp's design, and LN is already pruning with extra steps because LN transactions aren't stored on the blockchain, only aggregated finalized settlements.
>and what do we get for that increased ressource usage? more security? more decentralization? simplicity? better overall performance?
Yep! We actually do get ALL of those.
>more decentralization
Kaspa's high block rate makes solo mining profitable. Over half of the Kaspa network is solo miners. No pool required. It is more decentralized
>more secure
Kaspa salvages orphan blocks and uses the work contained in them to add to the security of the network, instead of discarding them
>more simplicity
Kaspa solves everything elegantly on the base layer without resorting to L2s. GhostDAG is actually a pretty simple algorithm; all it does is take a blockDAG and give it a consistent ordering in consensus so that the longest chain rule can be applied.
>I respect the work of the devs but I simply think that if that tradeoff was worth it, bitcoin would have made it long ago.
This is not like a fork of bitcoin where those old tradeoffs had to be made. This is new technology, and it's extremely promising. I love Bitcoin, but Kaspa is simply technologically superior and a more practical implementation of the original Satoshi vision

[Anonymous No.57341716]

>>57341612
>Lightning is less efficient because the amount of bandwidth required scales quadratically with the number of nodes.
BTW this is because LN basically has to do the traveling salesman problem whenever it does routing

[Anonymous No.57341754]

>>57341612
Anon, what value do you believe Kaspa naturally achieves? I would like to buy it but I'm afraid that the price will never rise to great levels again. From what I understand, in the past, Kaspa knew why he climbed. Now I realize that the expectation is that the price will rise if listed on Binance, Kraken... It seems that it has become like all the others that depend on listing to rise.

[Anonymous No.57341792]

>>57341754
>Anon, what value do you believe Kaspa naturally achieves?
You're asking what I think gives Kaspa value? Well I think Bitcoin was a great idea at its core. When Bitcoin first came out, people actually believed that we might one day use it for buying groceries and coffees and other small transactions. Of course, that's completely untenable given BTC's design, so its original use case was abandoned and now its only used as a store of value. Which Bitcoin is really great for. But it means that, this whole time, there's been a vacuum to be filled by something that has all of Bitcoin's good properties but is scalable and efficient enough to be used globally with instant transactions. Kaspa is the only thing I've seen so far that even comes close to fulfilling that.
I don't know how high it will go, but I will say one thing: KAS was fair launched, most of the supply is already out, and over time, I suspect that KAS will become more rare and harder to obtain. I'm already up over 3x on KAS so the recent crabbing doesn't faze me

[Anonymous No.57341819]

4chan niggers will buy link instead of kaspa because they are stupid af

they prefer to do 10x on chainlink
but we will do 30-50x on kaspa

[Anonymous No.57341850]

>>57341754
If you're asking me about what I think the price will be:
I expect the whole market to crab and dump over the next few months, Kaspa MIGHT go down to 8-9c again for a little bit. It usually touches the 150 day MA before mooning again.
When Kaspa moons, there is no warning. I remember the pump from 5 cents to 15 cents happened literally overnight. There was no warning. You were either in before th pump or you missed out. The pump from 3c to 5c was the same way. Once you've been holding KAS long enough, you just get used to it

[Anonymous No.57341870]

>>57341612
archival nodes are absolutely required. if kaspa restricts itself to just preserving utxo it will never ever catch up with bitcoin which is more than that. furthermore, given how complex kaspa is, I'm not at all comfortable trusting its pruning algorithm. no one should have a maths degree to understand how it works. does it rely on cryptographic assumptions or is it just simple arithmetics at the core?

>Yep! We actually do get ALL of those.
more security: this is just a lie at this point. what does security even have to do with it? the subject is scaling and ressources.
more decentralization: I don't see the problem with mining pools and stratum v2
more simplicity: I'm sorry but this is a lie. kaspa is very complicated.

you didn't gave the size of the current day archival node, noted. not surprising.

[Anonymous No.57341911]

>>57341870
>archival nodes are absolutely required.
Why? It's a digital cash system. All you really need to know is that the ledger hasn't been manipulated with stolen coins, mints, and double spends, which Kaspa provides because it doesn't prune away necessary data that would be needed to validate that.
>no one should have a maths degree to understand how it works.
This is a lame argument. Laymen don't understand the cryptography of Bitcoin. Ask any random person without math education to explain sha2 or public key cryptography and they'll be completely lost. That doesn't mean it isn't trustworthy.
>more security: this is just a lie at this point.
Nope, it's the genius of the ghostDAG algorithm: all honest blocks contribute to security instead of being orphaned.
>more decentralization: I don't see the problem with mining pools and stratum v2
Okay but solo mining is still more decentralized
>more simplicity: I'm sorry but this is a lie. kaspa is very complicated.
The GhostDAG ordering protocol is just a few lines of code. It's a beautifully elegant and simple solution. That's what's so great about it.
It took over 30 years since the invention of the internet before anyone even conceptualized the idea of a blockchain for the first time. Progress and innovation happen.

[Anonymous No.57341946]

>>57341911
When it comes to the specifics of Kaspa's cryptography, I'm not an expert in cryptography so I can't personally vouch as to whether it's pruning mechanism is completely sound. I can't personlly verify BTC's cryptography either. But as time goes on, and more experts vet the project, and it becomes more battle tested, I believe this will prove to just not be an issue. The guys behind Kaspa are incredibly bright and they know what they're doing

[Anonymous No.57341966]

>>57325263
why are you so upset?

[Anonymous No.57342000]

>>57341911
I told you why archival nodes are required. 1. there needs to be more than just utxo, proof of existence matters and has legitimate uses. smart contracts also needs some space that is not utxo. those are basic uses. if you don't do that on chain, you don't have a complete monetary network and will have to rely to centralized servers for conditional payments which are basic features. there are already kaspa forks for that, which shows that it's more than a detail.
and 2. because I'm not sure I'm trusting the algo. bitcoin is simple. it's single blocks in order where transactions are written. extremely simple. dags are more complex and there is no debate even here.
why didn't you respond: does it rely on cryptographic assumptions or is it just simple arithmetics at the core?
please answer right now.

>all honest blocks contribute to security instead of being orphaned.
orphaned blocks aren't a security issue, after waiting a little bit the settlement is final. do you mean 0 transactions are unsafe? that's not an argument. the subject is scaling and efficiency not security.

>solo mining is still more decentralized
I don't see how. I've seen that you would be able to participate in a mining pool while enforcing your own rules, if that isn't already implemented it will.

but let's not digress, the subject is archival nodes and their size, and the kaspa not making better tradeoffs.
by the way I'm open to hear criticism about lightning network's bandwidth use with scaling.
let's imagine 1 million tps on bitcoin & on kaspa. someone needs to compare the bandwith uses and storage required. then you'll recognize I'm right.

[Anonymous No.57342041]

>>57342000
>there needs to be more than just utxo, proof of existence matters and has legitimate uses. smart contracts also needs some space that is not utxo. those are basic uses. if you don't do that on chain, you don't have a complete monetary network
Bullshit. Brainwashed by modern jewish finance. Empires were built on the gold standard, it had none of these jewish modern shennanigans
>2. because I'm not sure I'm trusting the algo
because you're stupid, but that doesn't matter, the algo works with or without your understanding. Yes it is simple arithmetics at the core, the mathematical concept of clusters and a mathematical consensus on pruning. That is all that was added on top of bitcoin consensus, nothing more nothing less. DagKnight will add one extra thing on that but that's far future.

[Anonymous No.57342047]

>>57342000
>I told you why archival nodes are required. 1. there needs to be more than just utxo, proof of existence matters and has legitimate uses.
Proof of existence is not required for a digital cash system. That's an ad-hoc use case that people came up with after BTC failed at being digital cash. It took like 10 years before ANYONE even floated the idea of using BTC as a "proof of existence" engine. It's not what it was built to be, and we have the whitepaper to attest to that.
>and 2. because I'm not sure I'm trusting the algo. bitcoin is simple. it's single blocks in order where transactions are written. extremely simple. dags are more complex and there is no debate even here.
Bitcoin is simple if you have a background in CS. BlockDAGs are marginally more complex than blockchains. A little bit. It's nowhere near the level of complexity that's added by adding a whole second layer to the protocol. Lightning network adds an entirely new software stack with its own complexities and attack surfaces. Keeping things on the base layer is good for simplicity, not bad.
>orphaned blocks aren't a security issue, after waiting a little bit the settlement is final.
Orphaned hashrate is wasted and doesn't contribute to the security of the main chain.
>but let's not digress, the subject is archival nodes and their size, and the kaspa not making better tradeoffs.
That's your subject that you insist on making it about, because you simply must concede that Kaspa is better in every other area. Yes, storing every transaction that ever happens on Kaspa is untenable for a normal user. That's because it can handle more transactions to begin with. Archival nodes will have to be centralized. But every single archival node could go offline tomorrow and the Kaspa network would still run exactly the same.

[Anonymous No.57342053]

>>57342041
rude

[Anonymous No.57342057]

>>57342053
true, but this is biz so it's somewhat expected. Sorry anon >>57342000

[Anonymous No.57342080]

BTC will always be the #1 store of value in crypto. It being unscalable actually makes it a better SoV. But Satoshi's whitepaper wasn't called "Bitcoin: the peer-to-peer store of value and proof of existence system". We still need sound and robust digital cash, preferably which follows in the ethos of BTC and isn't some preallocated VC scam like 99% of projects in crypto

[Anonymous No.57342143]

>>57342041
modern jewish finance isn't transparent. what I'm advocating for is censorship resistance. as for smart contracts it allows to minimize the trust and need for trusted intermediaries. you're either a malicious parasite or a moron.

as for the algo, I'm not stupid because I don't own a math phd. did you tried reading the implementation details? it's important that the way something that important is understood by anyone. pruning requires an algorithm. if you want to help kaspa, tell the kaspa people to make that clear. how do you want people to trust you and drive adoption if you don't give clear details and instead say they're stupid. don't expect sympathy.

>>57342047
there's not just proof of existence, it also allows things like l2. with kaspa it's all or nothing. care to answer how much ressource kaspa will require to handle 1 million tps?

>Orphaned hashrate is wasted and doesn't contribute to the security of the main chain.
the hashrate used is the same whether or not there's an orphaned block.

>that's your subject that you insist on making it about
it's an important subject. and the need to understand how the pruning algo works and how it relies with archival nodes is valid. there's not as much incentive to run an archival node, I don't trust the network to keep the right utxo with zero catastrophic algorithmic issues, what if when you need it, you only have malicious archival nodes trying to change the real history. at least provide something and not just "trust them bro"

>Archival nodes will have to be centralized
how surprising

[Anonymous No.57342154]

>>57342080
money needs to be desirable. if it isn't a store of value, it's not desirable, or less desirable than a store of value. people will just want to get rid of whatever isn't a store of value. if that store of value can be used as money, then that's what will be used as money in the end.

[Anonymous No.57342178]

>>57342143
>there's not just proof of existence, it also allows things like l2. with kaspa it's all or nothing.
Is it really, though? Kaspa plans to implement smart contracts in the future. Afaik they plan on using rollups to keep the transaction size small.
>the hashrate used is the same whether or not there's an orphaned block.
The "work" that's contained in orphaned blocks is discarded and never gets stored in the main chain. BlockDAG finds a way to use this hashrate to contribute to overall security, since honest blocks point to each other and compound each other's security
>it's an important subject. and the need to understand how the pruning algo works and how it relies with archival nodes is valid.
Yeah, I get that. As more time goes on, more people will inevitably scrutinize this project and look for holes in its security. It will have to be battle-tested over time and there is a possibility that security holes will be found in the future. But that also applied during the early days of Bitcoin, too. In fact, Bitcoin was exploited in the past - an attacker found a way to mint billions of coins on the blockchain and the vulnerability had to be patched and the transaction had to be forked out. So I know there are growing pains to be overcome when building new tech like this.

[Anonymous No.57342188]

>>57342154
I find Kaspa to be pretty desirable due to its intrinsic properties, and I doubt I'll be the only one. People didn't find Bitcoin desirable in its early days either, everyone said it was a scam and that the technology was useless. Now boomers are finally figuring it out like 15 years later and acting like geniuses

[Anonymous No.57342200]

it might become the next litecoin at best, that means maybe it'll be an effective layer 2 for btc with low fees.

the killer feature of kaspa is kheavyhash but optical chips for that are still science fiction.

[Anonymous No.57342244]

>>57342154
There's also an argument to be made that people won't use a store of value like BTC as currency, ever. Everyone knows BTC is for holding, not spending. Nobody wants to be the pizza guy all over again

[Anonymous No.57342269]

>>57325263
Someone at my job yesterday said INFRONT OF EVERYONE that I was right about the jews. We're winning and you're losing kike. No more baby blood for you to drink you fuckin sicko

[Anonymous No.57342329]

>>57337297
>Some BTC maxis will argue that being able to see every detail of every past transaction forever is essential to a cryptocurrency, which is something I simply disagree with.
Exactly. What is the point of keeping a public permanent record of transactions? That seems like a privacy issue to be honest. Isn’t the main benefit of a crypto like XMR that transactions can’t be traced?

[Anonymous No.57342359]

Luna inu is Luna done right

[Anonymous No.57342371]

>>57342329
immutable history can be important when they're trying to rewrite it.
whales who want to move giant amounts of crypto quickly because of it's liquidity advantage are forced to show their hands.
monero has its use, but you'll never be comfortable putting a significant amount of your net worth into it.

[Anonymous No.57342397]

>>57342329
I think there's certain advantages to having an immutable archive of all the past history of the network, such as facilitating proof of existence and whatnot, but it's not necessary for a digital cash system imo. And it means that all the users will have to store all that history forever. Bitcoin gets away with it because the throughput is so limited that it's impossible for the ledger to grow fast.
>>57342371
>monero has its use, but you'll never be comfortable putting a significant amount of your net worth into it.
I wouldn't put my net worth in Monero because Monero is a crab coin and my holdings would lose value. Not because I think its security is unsound. Monero's been around for like 10 years and nobody's proven a viable attack vector yet. I think it's trustworthy

[Anonymous No.57342403]

>>57342371
I suppose you’d be comfortable posting your bank statements then?

How come paper cash functions perfectly well as a money if its transaction history is untraceable?

[Anonymous No.57342445]

>>57342397
>I wouldn't put my net worth in Monero because Monero is a crab coin and my holdings would lose value
yes, i'm not talking about security either.
you know you might be screwed when you pull your money out to buy a house and they freeze it and make you prove where you got it from.
>>57342403
obviously not, but your bank statements are more akin to transactions within a centralized exchange.
you can physically transact any crypto without any blockchain trace, but you can't do it with strangers.

i want paper money and fiat to stick around forever for this reason, but inflation is a real threat even for the dollar and euro, not to mention the shitcoins the rest of the world has to put up with.

there's not one perfect money for every purpose, there doesn't need to be.
use btc for significant savings from legitimate sources.
use monero for small things online or political purposes.
use banked fiat for recurring payments, use cash for daily irl transactions.

[Anonymous No.57342509]

>>57342445
The problem with fiat is that it has a theoretically infinite supply with no backing and a centralised body (the State) with a stranglehold over it. Crypto has the potential to revolutionise the financial system and bring us back to the old system when money was a scarce commodity and could not be stolen by printing more of it.

The main problem with Kaspa, assuming the technology is as claimed and it can genuinely function as a money, is that its ethos is antithetical to the central banking system we have right now. The State and financial elites would have to give up their absolute control over money and it would be harder for them to collect taxes. Kaspa has some very powerful enemies; mass adoption would have to come bottom up in a worldwide revolution against the financiers.

[Anonymous No.57342515]

>>57342445
>you know you might be screwed when you pull your money out to buy a house and they freeze it and make you prove where you got it from.
Yes they would do something like that, but that's a problem with our shit heel tyrannical government, not Monero itself

[Anonymous No.57343423]

>>57342509
> is that its ethos is antithetical to the central banking system
How? Without privacy it’s going to be subverted by (((KYC))).

[Anonymous No.57344155]

>>57342178
>Kaspa plans to implement smart contracts in the future
yeah right. see. then what do you think will happen to nodes? smart contracts aren't just simple utxos that can be pruned and you retain the last state of the wallets. there needs to be extended history. that's what archival nodes do. and then you now have questions about the scalability of that solution and how decentralize it can be, how easy is it to validate data yourself. rollups rely on crypto assumptions which isn't very reassuring.

so now you begin to understand my point and why kaspa isn't a magical solution. investors need to see long term.

>BlockDAG finds a way to use this hashrate to contribute to overall security
I don't think I agree that hashrate used that way secures kaspa more than bitcoin. every new block, all the hashrate has an impact on the security of the network. maybe it's relevant in case someone tries to rewrite the whole blockchain. this is irrelevant without a 51% attack.


>>57342188
>I find Kaspa to be pretty desirable due to its intrinsic properties
so you're switching your point from the medium of exchange to the store of value narrative. see. and as a store of value, kaspa isn't likely to catch up with bitcoin because of the issues I raised. I'm not even accounting for the catch up that kaspa has to do to reach bitcoin's reputation. but there's that too.
people rapidly realized the desirability of bitcoin, as shown by how fast it gained value in the early days. kaspa didn't invented anything here, it's just a competitor.

>Bitcoin was exploited
the subject isn't being battle tested. bitcoin started off small too. the subject is understanding a basic thing, how the pruning algo works and how does it relate to archival node. no one could answer me itt. kaspa is more complex. fact. and that's a negative.

[Anonymous No.57344214]

>>57344155
>yeah right. see. then what do you think will happen to nodes? smart contracts aren't just simple utxos that can be pruned and you retain the last state of the wallets.
Go ask the Kaspa team, they're pretty open and transparent about their development and they're active on Twitter. I'm not a computer science expert who can answer all of these questions easily, and by the sound of it, neither are you, so speculating about the details of the implementation is probably not going to be fruitful right now. I don't believe you when you simply handwave it away and say that it can't be done, though. Just because YOU cannot currently imagine a way to do it does not mean that a way doesn't exist. What Kaspa already does is quite amazing and was thought to be impossible until they actually did it.
>people rapidly realized the desirability of bitcoin, as shown by how fast it gained value in the early days. kaspa didn't invented anything here, it's just a competitor.
Dude, Kaspa went up like 40,000% in a year. You couldn't have chosen a worse argument for this.
>the subject isn't being battle tested. bitcoin started off small too. the subject is understanding a basic thing, how the pruning algo works and how does it relate to archival node.
You're not ever going to fully understand it, and you don't fully understand Bitcoin, despite claiming to. Have you done a deep dive into SHA256 enough to understand its implementation? How about the public key cryptography Bitcoin is based on?
Real talk, I've never personally audited the security of Bitcoin, because I don't need to. People around the world have and are doing that.
Kaspa is open source. People are using it. People are looking for flaws in it. Over time, the amount of qualified people who understand Kaspa in detail grows, and the trust in the network and Kaspa as a whole will increase.

[Anonymous No.57344221]

>>57342244
bad argument: people don't get to chose reality. if an asset keeps appreciating, they are forced to acknowledge that. if people know that their money will gain value, they will be forced to spend wisely. now that ithe nternet is widespread, you basically only need one asset acting this way for that to be true. besides, the value of bitcoin will have to hit a plateau. price discovery cannot last forever. it may end up extremely high and be volatile for a while, but it will have to stop one day.

>>57342445
>i want paper money and fiat to stick around forever
bad take
not digital, tied to a central authority, monero is 100% better to get anonymity. bitcoin coinjoins and other privacy methods are very decent otherwise. fuck banks who refuse your coinjoins, transact with people without gay third parties.
if you want ease of use, those things can be built on bitcoin that's the point.

[Anonymous No.57344225]

>>57344155
Something can be both a store of value and a medium of exchange. It's just that Kaspa can fulfill both properties, whereas BTC only fulfills one of those, and will never be a viable medium of exchange. Ever.

[Anonymous No.57344240]

>>57344221
>bad argument: people don't get to chose reality. if an asset keeps appreciating, they are forced to acknowledge that. if people know that their money will gain value, they will be forced to spend wisely. now that ithe nternet is widespread, you basically only need one asset acting this way for that to be true. besides, the value of bitcoin will have to hit a plateau. price discovery cannot last forever. it may end up extremely high and be volatile for a while, but it will have to stop one day.
So which is it? Kaspa went up really rapidly. You said the same thing happening with Bitcoin proves it had value and people recognized its value early. The same exact thing is happening with Kaspa. It went from being worth nothing to being in the top 50 coins in the span of a year. You can't backpedal on this now.

[Anonymous No.57344303]

>>57344221
>the value of bitcoin will have to hit a plateau. price discovery cannot last forever. it may end up extremely high and be volatile for a while, but it will have to stop one day.
Why?
Bitcoin has a limited supply. As time goes on, more and more BTC will be lost forever, due to lost keys, dust getting left behind, etc. There literally is no limit to how valuable BTC can get because it will ONLY become more scarce over time, you can't print more or dig deeper to find more of it like you can with gold

[Anonymous No.57344368]

>>57344214
I'm not a computer science phd either but I still have a little knowledge enough to make me a cto in a company, and to me, the tradeoffs made by kaspa doesn't seem worth it. already explained myself, about archival nodes.

what kaspa has done wasn't impossible, it was deemed not worth it. don't you think cryptographers analyzed the pros and cons of using a dag with bitcoin, there was also this thing called "bitcoin NG".
kaspa solved (potentially as kaspa needs to really be put to the test) an issue if you only want utxos - nice and as I told you I respect the devs for the technology, but you need more than this to compete with bitcoin.

>Dude, Kaspa went up like 40,000% in a year. You couldn't have chosen a worse argument for this.
apple and oranges. you're comparing the moment of the birth of a new invention that was completely unknown, to a moment where there's a very popular and volatile market with billions $ worth of daily volume or more, ready to invest in anything that can be the next new thing to become very wealthy. of course kaspa would pump faster in this environnement.

>Have you done a deep dive into SHA256 enough to understand its implementation
I'm not asking for a deep dive. I ask for a BASIC idea of how this basic and important feature works in kaspa. the fact that no one can answer me easily is the proof that kaspa is complicated. which was one of my initial point.

[Anonymous No.57344423]

>>57344368
>what kaspa has done wasn't impossible, it was deemed not worth it. don't you think cryptographers analyzed the pros and cons of using a dag with bitcoin, there was also this thing called "bitcoin NG".
No, I think that you just misunderstand what Kaspa does. You seem to think it's just a simple fork of Bitcoin that changes the block times or the block sizes or some other superficial change like that. But it's a more fundamental architecture that allows for parallel processing of blocks. Something that's not possible with a blockchain.
Kaspa's block rate is so fast, it's even faster than that of centralized dogshit chains like Solana. What it does was IMPOSSIBLE on old architecture.


No, I don't think people instantly had everything figured out back then. Remember that it took THIRTY YEARS since the invention of the internet before the first blockchain was implemented on it. Why didn't cryptographers come up with the idea of a blockchain earlier? Why didn't they come up with the same ideas that Satoshi did?
These things seem obvious in hindsight, but it takes a visionary to come up with them for the first time.
>>57344368
Kaspa's pruning based on a research paper called "Mining in Logarithmic Space". Look it up. From what I can tell, the only assumption the proof makes is that the majority hashrate on the network is honest. Which is a reasonable one imo.

[Anonymous No.57344432]

>>57344225
>BTC only fulfills one of those, and will never be a viable medium of exchange
I disagree. see again the end of this post >>57342000

>>57344240
what do you mean which is it? you only need one asset for that to be true yes. there are many competing. what are you not understanding? bitcoin is more desirable than kaspa to me, and it seems the market agrees with me. maybe because of the issues I've raised.

>>57344303
because coins lost will be lower and lower over time. and I think older addresses that don't upgrade their addresses will eventually become brute forced in the far future. I believe bitcoin will end up very stable if it succeeds.

[Anonymous No.57344498]

>>57344423
I understand the basic idea of kaspa. I know it uses a dag. and I know it's a special type of dag, named a "ghostdag", and that the devs made an algorithm to make sorting and pruning possible regarding integrity and performance. my points still stands and I was quite clear I believe. you can have this on kaspa only because it only remembers utxo, with a more complex architecture that goes with it, which brings some uncertainties, and make new features (like smart contracts) harder to implement. that's their tradeoffs.

[Anonymous No.57344552]

>>57344498
A lot of cryptos are based on the UTXO model.
Bitcoin was invented to solve the double spend problem and to be p2p cash. There's nothing mentioned in the whitepaper about proof of existence or ordinals. I don't think Satoshi envisioned people using the Bitcoin network like that. So in my mind, these are not important when it comes to designing an ideal digital cash system. If you want a proof of existence/ownership network, then it's best to have that be something separate, and not bog down our digital cash network with it.
People aren't ever going to spend their Bitcoin because they know it's precious digital gold, it's too scarce, and Lightning comes at the cost of decentralization and it introduces security issues such as the replacement cycling attack. There's so much room for a better solution, Bitcoin already has its place as a store of value network. We should try to design something fundamentally better instead of desperately to add more layers to Bitcoin until it works

[Anonymous No.57345091]

>>57344552
well, yes. bitcoin started off as the idea of p2p cash. few years later, it made decisions, and because of its design choices, can now handle storage of more than utxos, smart contracts, l2, and self sovereignty from full node validation.
satoshi made a scripting language for bitcoin allowing smart contract so satoshi wanted it to be more than p2p cash. p2p cash is just the main feature.

kaspa? made design choices that makes all of the above less ideal in the end.

>something separate
I disagree, because such system needs proof of work for integrity, and there can only be one sustainable proof of work system, not even talking about consumption, but about the security model, if there's no incentive such system cannot exist. the incentive is bitcoins / sats. what's the name of the system that uses proof of work and rewards with bitcoins / sats ? that's bitcoin itself. there can only be one system like this.

>People aren't ever going to spend their Bitcoin
people are still spending their bitcoin even though we know it has yet to appreciate a lot more. people need to eat, to buy things. also they want to invest to earn more. money is meant to be used. but it's nice to be very wise about how we spend money.

lightning is fine to me. bitcoin is the settlement layer, not ln. it's sufficiently decentralized and unless proof is provided, more scalable than the kaspa approach (thinking about archival nodes in a future where kaspa grows as much as current bitcoin)
in my view work would be better done improving ln than creating a competitor to bitcoin.
like I said, open to criticism and alternative to ln. investigated kaspa. no better tradeoffs hence just a cool experiment, not a replacement.

[Anonymous No.57345405]

>>57345091
It's fine if you think the technology behind Kaspa isn't useful and that it doesn't solve an important problem. People thought the same thing about Bitcoin in the beginning. I believe Kaspa will prove is usefulness because, in every single way, it's better at being digital cash than Bitcoin, and it does so while maintaining its robust security and being decentralized. The original trilemma was speed, security, decentralization. Now people are in disbelief and are adding more caveats since Kaspa has all three of these.
>people are still spending their bitcoin even though we know it has yet to appreciate a lot more.
People take profits on their investments. Nobody is using Bitcoin to buy groceries, and they never will, because it's not scalable enough. Even with Lightning, the fees are too high, and the cost of onboarding onto lightning will only grow more prohibitive. You already have to spend, what, $30 in fees? Just to use Lightning. And then lightning has
I find it incredibly dishonest to say that Kaspa NEEDS full nodes or else it loses security, when Lightning is LITERALLY pruning with extra steps. Who's keeping a full archive of lightning, huh? Oh that's right, NOBODY! This stance is so hypocritical. Lightning takes away all these properties you say makes Bitcoin great. It's not immutable. And we know that it's vulnerable to certain types of attacks, and that routing issues keep it from being able to scale. In order for Lightning to work, the network topology needs to be centralized. The number of possible routes it has to calculate grows too fast otherwise. It's a well known problem. Right now, it works fine because nobody actually uses Lightning and over 50% of nodes are hosted on Google cloud and AWS. If more people used it and ran their own nodes, then it wouldn't be able to scale.

[Anonymous No.57345610]

The more decentralized Lightning is, the more inefficient it gets. This guy goes into it more https://unboundedcapital.com/blog/why-lightning-doesnt-work

Kaspa doesn't work that way. It doesn't have NP-hard problems baked into its design like that

[Anonymous No.57346561]

>>57345405
your bet is that kaspa is better than bitcoin + ln (or any other l2 that may or may not replace ln)
it's rational to think it's unlikely now that bitcoin is launched, and considering that the ln is actively worked on.

who created that trilemma? for me bitcoin only needed a l2 for sub 10 min transactions which now exists.

>People take profits on their investments
bitcoin is not yet "the" world money

>Lightning is LITERALLY pruning with extra steps. Who's keeping a full archive of lightning
I don't think you get it. ln isn't a settlement layer. the final utxo ends up written in the main chain. you're right it looks like kaspa, but it's much more simple to understand, and it allows greater tps, privacy, smart contracts, proof of existence, etc. it doesn't require some obscure algorithm to sort and prune everything, it's just the final state which gets settled. where the kaspa database needs to be so big to match bitcoin, I don't get how you're not seing the problem ahead.

your link is from 2022 and I remember it being linked in all sort of retarded places (like bsv subreddit, bsvcash, places where people are just mentally ill in general and write nonsense for the sake of trying to win an argument)

I'll check it again, but this isn't how I'll be convinced. show me how kaspa would compare at 1 million tps and more.

[Anonymous No.57347821]

>>57345610
here's an article on ln by an engineer that says that ln scales and I see no mention of the alleged quadratic scaling issue you're mentioning : https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/lighting-network-makes-bitcoin-scalable

that was 2 years ago. a lot of work has been done and the network grown since then.