Is Nano truly a fad that will be destroyed by blockchain tech?

bought at 1,2$ faggot, enjoy typing essays in leddit

If you had any non-autistic reading comprehension skill, you'd naturally understand that in this context free = feeless

No one cares when you bought if you haven't sold yet. You'll probably hold till the bottom like ICX holders

Go ahead, look into reddit and see yourself. They actually believe it's completely free and that's why they say it's revolutionary. Fucking meme

Well it's virtually free for the end user. You don't have to host a node yourself, you just compute a measly PoW and get on with your day

Someone will articulate why exactly the excessive adoration of nano doesn't sit right with so many people who are otherwise very excited about the future of blockchain and cryptocurrency and it will absolutely tank the price. I've seen a few of these ideas expressed here but so far no one has really taken aim at it.

But you're right OP nano is a fad and I wouldn't count on DAGs being implemented in a big way other than on the retail buyer level any time soon. Look at how long it's taken financial institutions to be comfortable with blockchain despite it's very obvious advantages for them. No one with a lot of money is going to rush into something this new.

>Someone will articulate why exactly the excessive adoration of nano doesn't sit right with so many people who are otherwise very excited about the future of blockchain and cryptocurrency and it will absolutely tank the price.

Charlie Lee could've done that if he wasn't retarded

This is what I actually don't understand. Bitcoin and earlier cryptocurrencies were based on the idea that it takes an incentive to run a node. But what's the incentive to run, say, a NANO node? Sure, maybe people will run nodes nonetheless and my concerns are groundless, but will they?

they already are running nodes.

Distribution is one problem. The closest we'll ever get to a fair distribution of coins is Bitcoin and it's subsequent forks, and this will handicap nano forever no matter if you don't hear the people who aren't buying in saying why.

steem scales on chain. so hardware costs will kill it eventually

mmm okay this is actually pretty legit post. Interested.
Why buy Nano when STEEM is better?

not quite. Incentives to run the expensive calculations that made up consensus.
People forget that part.
New innovations mean we don't need ridiculously expensive calculations on every node to process transactions. Now that consensus is cheap, there's no need to pay the miners.

It's like asking what the incentive to have a computer is.

because they optimized for CPU time when hard drive space was the bottleneck.
It's why bitcoin cash never took off
CPU hasn't been a problem for any coin

And here comes PoS

IM GONNA BE RICH FAGGOT

>hard drive space was the bottleneck
Hard drive space is hardly a problem. A 4TB hard drive is $100 easy

Pseudo-philosophical

Cause steem sounds like a turd that stinks and nano has a cool name faggot

4000 tps is 82 GB a day. Can you afford a 4 TB hard drive every 50 days?

/thread

$100 every 50 days, no I'm too damn poor for that obviously

This retard believes perfect technology beats good execution. Nano has a team of product people that will give it normie adoption while other coins are stuck in the wallets of their autistic creators and likewise autistic fans.

>But what's the incentive to run, say, a NANO node?
the incentive to keep the network you use functional lol

blockchain is the fad

Fair is subjective dummy. My idea of fair distribution is to give everyone in the world the same amount of coins

not any more than it will kill nano

because nano may appreciate in value and steem may not because of hype and ignorance

Satoshi owned 10% of the supply.

they also optimised for hard drive space by allowing nodes to only host the latest block in each account-chain kind of similar to SPV

Because Nano is hyped meme. Don't tell me you actually believe in it... Nano is like Tron ride it to 25b mcap then dump.

you don't have to host a full node m8

so they did all this shit then marketed it as a shitty reddit clone?
what fucking retards

except Nano is vulnerable to precomputed PoW and will shit the bed like every other DAG lol gtfo

Until the Blockstream miners decide to fuck the entire chain up and you lose all your money

oh no i meant for nano. for steem you can just use SPV like every other blockchain i.e. host the block headers only. it doesn't really matter how steem is marketed. it matters that blockchain has the technology to roll out free instant transactions at any point, and nano is still vulnerable to precomputed PoW attack and the mining pools will destroy ddos nano whenever they want. there's only one ending for this circus, and blockchain is guaranteed to finish on top

but you'd have to have a botnet and a year.
oh and you still don't get to make any money after you waste all those resources.
Why bother?

>"they'll just DDOS bitcoin hosts"
now you're just being retarded

um because you are a mining farm whose business is threatened by memecoins? same fate coiledcoin, terracoin, and worldcoin had: assassinated by btc mining pools

what?

a year long precompute POW attack would only slow down the network for a few days (and txs would still get through, slowly)
Surely no one can afford to keep all that up just to prop up their dying POS?

But you would make money. If the BTC miners all fucked Nano up what would happen to the value of their BTC holdings? Lolol rkd

bitcoin has no inherent DDOS protection over nano. that's a dumb argument.

you don't understand how much bigger bitcoin is than nano.

where did you get this year long precompute POW idea? ASICS for blake2b are developed by obelisk

destroying an alt coin would do nothing to make BTC go up...
i mean even if you were right there's ETH, STEEM, bitshares...

but they don't need to because nano doesn't have the hash power to threaten bitcoin, and those who do (farm pool colliding) have an incentive to protect the network

come on bro. btc has political power, economic power, industrial power, social power, etc. don't be naive

so btc miners are going to throw away all their razor thin profits to buy AWS attacks on one of 100 shitcoins that could replace it? lol
and how many tx/s can they pull?
bitcoin can't protect itself from competition by expending massive resources to do it.

bitcoin is a dying dinosaur. every retailer that has tried it has dropped it like the shit it is.
the only chance it has is lightning, which is shit for a dozen reasons.
idk why you'd shill BTC when even EOS sounds better at this point.

>and how many tx/s can they pull?
at the moment 816GH/s

The details on Steems dPOS are thin, but it is still limited by blocksize and blocktime as all bitcoin clones are. It has however removed the POW bottleneck which is pretty massive. This leaves me with the question of how their network is laid out and what configuration these servers have. Steem has been tested at 1000tps on a test network. Now that could be a cluster of well configured computers. We don’t know. It’s hard to say what would be needed to scale it to 10k.

The difference with Nano is that Nano can run asynchronous transactions. It doesn’t have to wait for a block timer. It’s blocks have been designed to be as small as possible allowing it to hit speeds of 7000tps on its test network. This was done on standard average pc hardware. The only limiting factor at the time were disk write speeds.

If Nano moves to the scheme that Dan Larimer proposes for EOS(ram storage with periodic batch writes), they should be able to increase this substantially.

So technically Nano is limitlessly scalable and requires no special network configuration or specialized server hardware for it to run. That part is unclear with Steem, but considering they must write to disk as well they are going to hit that wall at some point, probably well before the 10k mark.

Pruning as you mentioned is also possible with nano, which will lessen the load on nodes increasing the theoretical throughout of the network.

Overall nano tech has a hand up because of the above mentioned factors. It basically comes down to block lattice vs block chain, and block lattice is much faster because it can run asynchronously.

btc has a lot of competitors but they cant afford to try to kill off each new coin that is faster or whatever. it becomes too pricy to keep killing off every new coin. if nano does somehow end up at #2 or #3 place behind eth/btc then at that point btc may realize it has a contender and deal with it at that point.

then why didn't they attack eth or ripple?

that does sound like a problem, so devs should implement asic resistance.

idk. maybe they dont actually care then.

lol like ETH and LTC implemented asic resistance?

?

you don't need 51% to attack nano. Nano is vulnerable to small attacks because of their retarded DAG / account-chain design

asic resistance doesn't exist. litecoin used scrypt for "asic resistance" till they made asics for scrypt. every cryptographic hash function will have an asic miner if interest exists

maybe they can just update the POW algorithm every year to fuck it up. developing a new asic is expensive.

it's more complicated than that. there aren't a lot of secure hash functions and all of them are already known. if you use a new/untested hash function you'll be vulnerable (see iota) and the first ones to develop the ASIC for them will have a more centralized advantage than for general hash functions. you'll also have centralization problem and non-trustless problems where the devs know in advance the hash function (everyone will know it in advance anyway, because there are contests for new hash functions and it's not like nano will hire world class cryptography researchers for this)

pow at the moment is just broken; that's why eveyone is trying to move to pos

PoS is the only real ASIC resistance.

yeah but nano uses pow for spam prevention not for consensus