Gee, do you think this guy has some nano?
[deleted]
Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
51–60 of 108 posts
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to invest your money in assets, you should be able to do that. If you want to hold on to your money for whatever reason, you should be able to do that too, right? Many people in the world don't have access to banking services, let alone investment services. In many cases, people with smaller net worths don't necessarily know or understand how these assets work and are easily taken advantage of by "investm…
But the people shouting about the FED debasing their currency are not poor unbanked people in 3rd world countries so I don't see how your comment is relevant.
I mean, the FED is debasing the currency, that's just a fact, it doesn't matter who is shouting about it, you don't need to be poor in 3rd world country.
I guess it comes down to: if you understand the markets well and can invest in them to generate a good return, more power to you. That's not the case for everyone, so if you want to hold on to your money for whatever reason, you should be able to protect yourself against endless money printing.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#53Nano 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.
Well, all current data-centric global consensus cryptocurrencies are vulnerable.
In the Holochain model (https://holo.host/) of distributed agent-centric consensus, a single non-fraudulent DHT node can detect any fraudulent transaction, and all other non-fraudulent nodes are informed of the self-incriminated fraudulent agent and transaction, confirm the fraud, and no longer respond to the fraudulent node.
So, only a 100% attack will succeed. And, the ill-gotten gains are permanently useless.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why are people so concerned about this whole currency depreciation thing? Only idiots keep their money under the mattress. Anyone with sense has their money invested in assets. I honestly don't get the big deal.
If you want to invest your money in assets, you should be able to do that. If you want to hold on to your money for whatever reason, you should be able to do that too, right? Many people in the world don't have access to banking services, let alone investment services. In many cases, people with smaller net worths don't necessarily know or understand how these assets work and are easily taken advantage of by "investm…
> If you want to hold on to your money for whatever reason, you should be able to do that too, right?
Why?
And what does it even mean to hold value?
Money only has value because of the constant cash flowing in the economy. So you can buy stuff for money.
If people all their money in bitcoin there would be no economy and nothing of value you can buy, do bitcoin then still hold it's value?
-----
In general, gold might be more tangible and accessible than bitcoin.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Central banks print Trillions of dollars to buy bonds right at this moment and get away with it. They live in a vacuum and can do what they want without much democratic oversight. Since all the relevant mining is happening in China nowadays the fate of bitcoin lies in the hands of the autocratic Chinese regime. If they instruct all miners to use their Chinese version of Bitcoin that e.g. dismisses all transactions an…
And considering your argument of absolute power of CBs, you still prefer central banks over bitcoin?
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#56Bitcoin'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.
Bitcoin is not capable of scaling upwards. If the price of bitcoin reaches 1 millions us dollar. How much do i need to pay for one single transaction or how many miners do i need to keep bitcoin alive?
Government tries to fight climate change and bitcoin destroys all hard earned energy reductions. The network needs more energy then a whole country (today). I don't want imaging how much energy it will consume in 10 years.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Comparing IOTA to Nano is like comparing a rock with an atomic bomb (being IOTA the bomb). For future, when comparing A1 with B1, it's nicer if the order is maintained when comparing A2 with B2 (instead of stating that you're comparing B2 with A2, and that A2 is equivalent of A1) "Comparing Nano to IOTA is like comparing a rock with an atomic bomb." Combined with your follow up sentence, describing how Nano has one…
You're the one who needs some writing advice. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33514.The_Elements_of_St...
Haha, I love that one of the top questions asked on that book is "Why is this book praised so much? At least textbooks have pictures", which mostly speaks to the absurdity of the platform that goodreads has become.
Either way, thanks for the tip, will add to the list!
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#58Bitcoin'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.
"Nano has a unique consensus mechanism called Open Representative Voting (ORV). Every account can freely choose a Representative at any time to vote on their behalf, even when the delegating account itself is offline. These Representative accounts are configured on nodes that remain online and vote on the validity of transactions they see on the network. Their voting weight is the sum of balances for accounts delegating to them, and if they have enough voting weight they become a Principal Representative. The votes these Principal Representatives send out will subsequently be rebroadcasted by other nodes.
As these votes are shared and rebroadcasted between nodes, they are tallied up and compared against the online voting weight available. Once a node sees a block get enough votes to reach quorum, that block is confirmed. Due to the lightweight nature of blocks and votes, the network is able to reach confirmation for transaction ultrafast, often in under a couple seconds. Also note that delegation of voting weight does not mean staking of any funds - the account delegating can still spend all their available funds at any time without restrictions.
Because Nano accounts can freely delegate their voting weight to representatives at any time, the users have more control over who has power with consensus and how decentralized the network is. This is a key advantage to the design of Open Representative Voting (ORV). With no direct monetary incentive for nodes, this removes emergent centralization forces for longer-term trending toward decentralization of the network."
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to invest your money in assets, you should be able to do that. If you want to hold on to your money for whatever reason, you should be able to do that too, right? Many people in the world don't have access to banking services, let alone investment services. In many cases, people with smaller net worths don't necessarily know or understand how these assets work and are easily taken advantage of by "investm…
> If you want to hold on to your money for whatever reason, you should be able to do that too, right? Why? And what does it even mean to hold value? Money only has value because of the constant cash flowing in the economy. So you can buy stuff for money. If people all their money in bitcoin there would be no economy and nothing of value you can buy, do bitcoin then still hold it's value? ----- In general, gold might…
There would be an economy where only investments that return better than Bitcoin would make sense, for example: you wouldn't have the Vancouver vacant property problem, that money would go to Bitcoin instead and leave the home for someone who has an actual use for it. People also wouldn't be hoarding gold, it's value would go down and you can use it more easily in electronics.
Gold is physical, has no place as a store of value in a digital world in my opinion. You can't transfer it as easily, securing it requires people and storage, you can't divide into very small parts to trade with, etc.
Re: Nano is what Bitcoin hoped to be
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
IOTA is centralised
It is not production ready so yes, there is still a part that is centralized and it is being worked on. It is not a secret, they are very transparent about it. You can read the white paper. https://files.iota.org/papers/20200120_Coordicide_WP.pdf
IOTA wants to ditch its most centralized component, but the timeline is still murky