[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 5 KB, 231x250, 1611292174100.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
29678637 No.29678637 [Reply] [Original]

>FTM centralized node failure
>BSC is CeDeFi
>ADA is vaporware supreme
>DOT is just inferior
>COSMOS is even more inferior

>> No.29678804

you didnt mention avax with a double spend

>> No.29679705

>>29678804
They fixed it and burned AVAX, better that it happened early on.

>> No.29680313
File: 148 KB, 713x664, 65465465465456465.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
29680313

>>29678637
AVAX facts:
>Double spend upon first use
>chain collapses
>devs lie about it for days
>devs try to cover it up by deleting explorer pages which show the double spend
>devs restore the deleted page when they get caught lying and trying to cover it up
>devs lie again, this time to spin a new narrative on why the page was accidentally down
>double spend is bad so the devs create a new narrative that aims to redefine what the term double-spend does
>not the first time that this project has attempted to redefine terms such as "validators" to create a new definition that favors them
>incompetent lead developer invents "bonus Blocks"
>dev team spent more money on hiring turkish social media shills than they spent auditing their code
imagine thinking this project has a future - top fucking KEK

>> No.29680391
File: 34 KB, 680x695, 6546546546546546.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
29680391

>>29679705
>better that it happened early on
better that a double spend happened

>> No.29680447

What do you think about Rubic doing an AVAX bridge?

>> No.29680515

Rubic is planning an ETH-AVAX bridge in the near future. Hope to see us working together against pajeet fudding niggers.

>> No.29680675

>>29678804
>>29680313
>>29680391
kek. where is your ftm general ?

>> No.29680719

Bonus Blocks

>> No.29680888

>>29680447
Glad that rubic cubic chads are joining the fiesta

>> No.29680936
File: 33 KB, 480x360, xwTnAD0k1CSQU3vnBontGJXRdlTyW8aYr3Hl9y5Q-OU.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
29680936

>>29680675
wrong team

>> No.29681066

>>29680313
You do realize that it was an invalid mint, not a double spend, right? If it was a double spend the supply wouldn't have increased, dummy.

>> No.29681329

>>29681066
>muh semantics "invalid mint"
and that makes it okay I guess

>> No.29681609

>>29681329
The difference is huge. If it was a double spend that would mean there was a flaw in the consensus.