/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>30120490
>>30120502
From the archives. This is a textbook double spend.

>>28610062
>it's just a minting bug

No legit project will ever launch on AVAX after what has happened the last few days.
Network crashed because of 1 app and multiple double spends occured, all by mistake. Avax can not be seen as a secure network anymore and we don't even know if it scales since the activity caused by this 1 app crashed the whole thing.

Imagine if someone actually tried to do something malicious to the network. No legit project is going to take chances when there are so many other platform to launch on.

But one of the worst things are the team first claiming it was a UI/Explorer bug, then deleting the transaction from the official explorer while it remained on the third party explorer called avascan. They get their information from the same place so it's impossible that they would show different results without manual manipulation. However this deleted transaction was shown on the official explorer too before being deleted.
After this the AVAX team has continued to be non-transparent towards their non-technical audience claiming this was a "minting" bug. However sending 1 transaction and turning it into multiple ones with the same ID as you can see in the picture is the definition of a double spend.

I and no other devs will support or build on AVAX ever as the platform as of now can be deemed insecure and the AVAX team is both censoring information and lying.

Old thread >>28592030

>>28597543
No
>With digital currency, there is a risk that the holder could make a copy of the digital token and send it to a merchant or another party while retaining the original.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/doublespending.asp

His transaction, same ID, split into 7 different ones
https://avascan.info/blockchain/c/address/0x0a99c32AFFAEc0a697D4CB4bf660Eeddcf432c21/transactions

He then staked the original 63.45 and exchanged the 381 for 10.4 ether, that's a double spend.
>Double-spending is a potential flaw in a digital cash scheme in which the same single digital token can be spent more than once. Unlike physical cash, a digital token consists of a digital file that can be duplicated or falsified.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-spending

>Double-spending is a potential issue in a digital cash system where the same funds are spent to two recipients at the same time. Without any adequate countermeasures, a protocol that doesn’t resolve the problem is fundamentally undermined
https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/double-spending-explained

>Double-spending is a problem that arises when transacting digital currency that involves the same tender being spent multiple times. Multiple transactions sharing the same input broadcasted on the network can be problematic and is a flaw unique to digital currencies.
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/double-spending/

No legit project will ever launch on AVAX after what has happened the last few days.
Network crashed because of 1 app and multiple double spends occured, all by mistake. Avax can not be seen as a secure network anymore and we don't even know if it scales since the activity caused by this 1 app crashed the whole thing.

Imagine if someone actually tried to do something malicious to the network. No legit project is going to take chances when there are so many other platform to launch on.

But one of the worst things are the team first claiming it was a UI/Explorer bug, then deleting the transaction from the official explorer while it remained on the third party explorer called avascan. They get their information from the same place so it's impossible that they would show different results without manual manipulation. However this deleted transaction was shown on the official explorer too before being deleted.
After this the AVAX team has continued to be non-transparent towards their non-technical audience claiming this was a "minting" bug. However sending 1 transaction and turning it into multiple ones with the same ID as you can see in the picture is the definition of a double spend.

I and no other devs will support or build on AVAX ever as the platform as of now can be deemed insecure and the AVAX team is both censoring information and lying.

>>28556119
Can't be like that because it's the same transaction ID

>>28553712
>Here you see him loading up
You cant read? All those 63.523 have the same transaction ID meaning they came from the same transaction, that transaction only had 63.523 but multiplied by 7 somehow.

I'll help you see it. Look at the picture, see how each one of those transactions have the same ID? It's because they all came from one transaction, which is this one.
https://avascan.info/blockchain/c/tx/iWd83KayghBQYNERXem3nW8ifFjJsR66NwWcAR6uZavKFWthq
And this one only shows that it sent it once, but it got duplicated somehow and now there is 7 of them and anon got all of those avax coins which he later traded. He never loaded up as you said