I think IOTA in this case is a better project focusing on a more important problem in the future (IOT) and machine to machine transacting.
Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
11–20 of 108 posts
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#12Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#13The Bitcoin Genesis block references The Times article on 03/Jan/2009, "Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks".
It's p2p digital cash, but at the same time, you can't ignore the reason why it's created. It's meant to be a decentralized, uncontrollable currency.
When it comes to currency/store of value, you could argue that security and trustworthiness is more important than speed and fees. If you want faster and cheaper transactions, use lightning network, it's functional and growing in adoption.
If you want to use a crypto that's not volatile, you can always use stablecoins. There are both centralized and decentralized stablecoins pegged to the dollar.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#14Nano sounds interesting. Whitepaper at https://content.nano.org/whitepaper/Nano_Whitepaper_en.pdf Has there been peer review? Does it support smart contracts? How does its consensus algorithm (and the other parts) compare to Avalanche? It sounds as if Nano is still vulnerable to a 51% attack. Does it lead to a catastrophic compromise?
> It sounds as if Nano is still vulnerable to a 51% attack.
Every cryptocurrency is vulnerable to a 51% attack including Bitcoin.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#15Nano sounds interesting. Whitepaper at https://content.nano.org/whitepaper/Nano_Whitepaper_en.pdf Has there been peer review? Does it support smart contracts? How does its consensus algorithm (and the other parts) compare to Avalanche? It sounds as if Nano is still vulnerable to a 51% attack. Does it lead to a catastrophic compromise?
> It sounds as if Nano is still vulnerable to a 51% attack. Every cryptocurrency is vulnerable to a 51% attack including Bitcoin.
As much as people like to complain about Bitcoin's energy usage, it makes a 51% attack prohibitively expensive and if you were to invest all that money, you'd want to make money with it rather than cause a short term disruption to the network.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It sounds as if Nano is still vulnerable to a 51% attack. Every cryptocurrency is vulnerable to a 51% attack including Bitcoin.
As much as people like to complain about Bitcoin's energy usage, it makes a 51% attack prohibitively expensive and if you were to invest all that money, you'd want to make money with it rather than cause a short term disruption to the network.
If you are a central bank that can print money out of thin air you can use that money to buy the majority of the mining capacity and make bitcoin useless with a 51% attack. People that want to destroy bitcoin have no interest in making money "with it". They invest that money to destroy it.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
As much as people like to complain about Bitcoin's energy usage, it makes a 51% attack prohibitively expensive and if you were to invest all that money, you'd want to make money with it rather than cause a short term disruption to the network.
If you are a central bank that can print money out of thin air you can use that money to buy the majority of the mining capacity and make bitcoin useless with a 51% attack. People that want to destroy bitcoin have no interest in making money "with it". They invest that money to destroy it.
Except central banks don't live in a vacuum. If they print tons of money to buy it, that would push the price even higher, incentivizing even more miners.
And I don't think central banks would want to destroy it. In many ways, many useful transactions in crypto occur in stablecoins pegged to the dollar. If anything, central bank might want to participate and innovate with everyone rather than try to destroy Bitcoin.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, Nano is useless as a currency.
Do you guys think cutting pizza into more slices feeds more people too? For the record, Nano is the most useful and currency-like of the many crypto coins that I have seen.
What feeds people is fair access to food. If all Nano supply is controlled by people who happened to chance on the right corners of the internet in 2017, then this is not about feeding people but about rent seeking.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#19I think IOTA in this case is a better project focusing on a more important problem in the future (IOT) and machine to machine transacting.
With Nano you have fast transactions. With IOTA you have fast and fee-less transactions and a whole ecosystem to build things on top of.
Franfurt Airport has been using IOTA to track COVID results[1]
IoT hardware that works through the Tangle (IOTA's network)[2]
And other nice things like fognet[3]
[1]https://cointelegraph.com/news/iota-blockchain-used-to-track...
[2]https://theindependentrepublic.com/boschs-new-iot-adaptor-xd...
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#20Bitcoin's big invention is that miners are economically incentivized to work in the best interest of the network.
Nano throws that away and says people will invest to protect the network just because.
Genius? Nah, it's just dumb.