/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>52595401
Are we back sisters?

>>52595401
Tech on level with a World of Warcraft auction house.

>>52595448
I am glad you said that because much like world of Warcraft it also is based on a sharded system. Its funny that kadena is in fact the only chain that implements such a feature, when it's clearly the solution to most things that require a lot of bandwidth, much like an MMORPG. Or a Minecraft server.
While we have problems with ecosystem and the core devs, that does not change the fact that this chain, is likely the only network in history that is able to accommodate the entire world population. There is no other chain that can handle it, no lightning network no dag based bullshit and certainly no dht.
So the value proposition goes beyond just being a scalable layer one. It might just be that it is the only currency that can become a global currency. On top of that it is programmable which is crazy if you now think about the possibilities that this would allow for.
Alas it is just as funded as some dog coin and barely has the market cap of something like aptos that literally is just a VC scam.

>>52595525
>funded
Wanted to say fudded but that fits too

>>52595525
> I am glad you said that because much like world of Warcraft it also is based on a sharded system
Yeah that’s why I said it. And much like world of warcraft, the result is players mostly ending up confined to their servers, with shoddy hacks to work around the limitations for some specific use cases where it almost works a little bit, like cross server instance parties.

>>52595401
>Kadena thread
>babena in the OP

>>52595605
In MMOs you're confined to a shard indeed, yet in kadena I can transfer anything from one shard to another, you should seek help datafag.

>>52538134
>>52538357

>>52595651
> go spend time with kids
> crickets
I take your good advice and you mock me for it? But I’m happy to pick up the trail, thanks for keeping track.
> Other multichains also can’t
We’ve been at it for a while, but I don’t think I’ve claimed otherwise. Multi chain to me seems somewhat ill advised, unless you’re targeting completely different kinds of use cases, like serving files/NFTs or front ends.
My point is that multi-chain is a solution in search of a problem. It can scale simple payments very well, but so can BSV just by using bigger blocks. Shards become silos so in the end multi chain only leads to pretend scalability. WoW can always accept another 10,000 users by adding another server, but they can’t scale from a 10k player to a 100k player experience by adding more servers.
I’m not saying some other chain is better. I’m saying I don’t see a use case for multi chains, and Kadena is no exception.

Emily warned in whalepool another exchange is going under and we should be prepared for big dump. Take this as you will. I believe her.

>>52595651
> yet in kadena I can transfer anything from one shard to another
Presumably there’s been some work on this? What is the current state?
Let’s use the example of a WoW like auction house for NFTs. Let’s say I have the AH smart contract on server S1, the buyer’s funds on S2 and the seller’s NFT on S3.
Q1) I imagine that with current stack, I could transfer the sellers NFT from his wallet on S3 to the smart contract on S1 in one atomic/reversible transaction, then I can move the buyer’s funds from his wallet on S2 to the SC on S1 using a second atomic tx, and when the sold bit flips the buyer can move the NFT to his wallet on S2 using a third tx and the seller moves the funds to his wallet on S3 using a fourth tx? Yes?
Q2) Could I also, in one atomic tx, when the sold bit flips, let the S1 SC send the funds and the NFT to their target wallets? I think no, right? This is basically what the whole atomic tx discussion is about, and this is a good example to explain why KDA fans claim that it’s ok, because they can solve most things taking the approach in Q1 rather than the one in Q2? Would you say this is a fair characterization of the issue?

>>52595836
I wouldn't mind. I'm not in a rush and I have some funds set aside to buy more if it ever gets to 0.7 range

>>52595880
Now let's consider some cool auction house features that smart contracts could make possible. For example, imagine an auction where the seller puts up their Mona Lisa NFT for auction with a starting price of 10 ETH and a buyout price of 20 ETH, but where the bidders don't have to send in ETH with their bids, they can send a bid using whatever currency they want. So I send a bid using an amount of LINK matching 19 ETH at current prices, you send a bid with enough GRT to match 19 LINK. The value of our bids in ETH is continuously checked using oracles and if GRT is doing really well vs ETH, your bid is suddenly worth 20 ETH and you win the auction. Very cool stuff, but it only works if you can do the swap the GRT for the ETH and flip the sold bit in the same atomic transaction, that will be rolled back if the swap failed or ended up being worth short of the buyout price due to slippage or whatever.
These features only become possible with real atomic transactions, which is why I claim that without a distributed transaction coordinator for atomic multi-chain transactions, you are confined to simple apps like the standard auction house, and won't be able to support innovative features like multi-currency bids well.
Now take one step further. Let's say that not only can the bidder send whatever (mix of) fund they want for their bid, they can also send a pointer to a smart contract that they want to invoke to convert their funds to ETH if they win (maybe including flash loans and whatever fancy techniques). This would be a very cool DeFi feature, but it is obvious that, again, that pointed to smart contract would definitely have to be executed inside the same atomic transaction as setting the sold bit, where the whole thing can be rolled back if any part fails. This is what is meant by the "composability" aspect of atomic transactions - Kadena doesn't support anything interesting along these lines, again due to lack of multi-chain ACID transactions.

>>52596223
>you send a bid with enough GRT to match 19 ETH*

…and that is why I conclude that Kadena is WoW auction house level tech, and can’t grow beyond that.
>>52595525
Still glad I said that?

h-haskell sisters…
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2509877/are-category-theory-and-set-theory-on-the-equal-foundational-footing#comment5183578_2509877

>>52595401
Redpill me on this coin

>>52595401
I’m being punished for selling
STOP THE PUMP

>>52595525
> On top of that it is programmable
So to really drive this point home, once and for all:
The value in “programmable money” comes from money * programmable, that is it becomes most valuable the more valuable the money is, and the more programmable it is.
Bitcoin is rock solid on the money part, but weak on the programmable side (*).
Ethereum is strong on the programmable side but weak on the money - in the end eth itself is just gas tokens, not “hard, digital gold” money like btc, so the value comes from “wrapped”, i.e. not trustless, btc and dollars.
Kadena is weak on the money side and on the programmable side, which is why it has no real use.

(*) ICP fixes this, bringing strong programmability to Bitcoin. This combination is, frankly, unbeatable. Ethereum may survive as a sequential block smart contract engine inside ICP, since it could now also provide programmability over real money (Bitcoin) via ICP.
Chains that are neither here nor there, however, like Kadena, don’t stand a chance.

pedophile samefag thread. shift and click

>>52595836
She thought FTX was a stablecoin, she should stick with engineering.

>>52596223
Really dumb example, nothing short of degenerate gambling.
Anyone can come up with ridiculous examples to fit their own narrative.
Applications with meme requirements like yours can build on whatever chain you're shilling, applications which require scaling will be built on Kadena.

>>52596307
>>52596341
Dumb phoneposters.

>>52596342
i love dfinity but it fits completely different purposes than kadena
it doesn’t feature equivalent inclusive accountability, transactional encapsulation / safety, permissionless consensus, or token distribution

>>52596458
>i love dfinity but it fits completely different purposes than kadena
Completely agreed, my question is what kind of purpose Kadena is a good fit for.

>>52596428
It's not dumb at all, it's the kind of thing that makes DeFi and programmable money different from TradFi.
What I described (especially the auction with custom bid scripts) are features you just can't get in TradFi systems. The features supported by Kadena all exist in TradFi, and the only distinguishing factor is trust - which is cool and all but we've had trustless platforms for a while now, so what can Kadena do that brings actual new capabilities to the programmable money game?

>>52596511
Interplanetary mineral extraction expeditions administration applications.

>>52596458
Tell me where my reasoning is wrong.
Kadena can’t transact directly on the Bitcoin chain, so it can’t provide programmability over hard value. Thus the best it can do is bringing in semi-hard value in the form of trustfully wrapped btc and usd, just as Ethereum.
So the value base is the same as Ethereum’s, but Kadena doesn’t bring more programmability than Ethereum - it brings way less!
What it does have over Ethereum is scalability. So, semi-weak money (same as Ethereum), weaker programmability than Ethereum, but stronger scalability.
So in short, Kadena seems suited for moving lots of token around fast as ruled by fairly simple smart contracts. I contend that most of the value from DeFi comes from strong programmability, not from scalability, so it seems Kadena is not a strong candidate for a DeFi platform. So what does need scalability but not so much programmability?
Payments. Again and again it’s the only use case I can see that Kadena is suited for. And again and again in the next thread everyone will pretend that’s not at all reasonable and Kadena is the future of programmable money because it scales. But where am I wrong?

>>52596723
Shitty attempts at humor won’t save you from the fact that payments (and swapping the tokens used for payments) seems to be the only use case Kadena could potentially be better than other chains for.
I mean I don’t hate the tech if it’s honest in its limitations and doesn’t pretend to be something that it isn’t - Kadena could be pretty good for payments! But I sure as hell wouldn’t want to invest in a payment platform.

>>52596787
Definitely, I'd also rather invest in a "cool auction house" where we can gamble different stacks of shitcoins and if we're lucky we win the grand prize of a funny monkey picture.

>>52596746
>transact directly on the Bitcoin chain
ICP is a glorified virtual machine that can theoretically be allowed to sign transactions. It isn't decentralised or permissionless so you lose all the advantages of BTC. The only reason anyone wants to wrap BTC is to get around the limitations of BTC so allowing an internet computer to click the send BTC button for you is pointless. You still have BTC that can't be scaled. Nobody except ICP bagholders will ever care about this.

Your value proposition is that people consuming more electricity than a small country to secure a network will then add a centralised point of failure rending the consumed electricity redundant so they can buy .jpgs more conveniently.

3c.

>>52596834
Yup, because auctions for tokenized assets won’t be a thing in DeFi, for sure. You should be able to understand these as easy-to-comprehend examples showcasing the abstract components involved in building sophisticated DeFi applications.
> Digital gold is ridiculous, DeFi is useless
The only thing that really remains is payments
> but we’re absolutely not a payment platform!

>>52596876
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XwpAt89vtME
Please watch this interview explaining how it works and then tell me that you’re not excited about the ICP bag you will just have bought.

>>52596986I
I read the transcript. It didn't contradict anything I said. He talks about how secure BTC in canisters are. I believe him that canisters are secure in the sense there is no way for me to use malicious code to steal someones BTC which is the only useful thing said in that video unless you are excited about the possibility to trade BTC IOUs on the Internet Computer. However if someone controls the nodes they can feed the canisters false information allowing the node holders to steal BTC.

3c.

>>52595805
>but I don’t think I’ve claimed otherwise.
I know.
>I don’t see a use case
Your opinion means nothing to me.

>>52596223
With ETH instead of having a few percentage points uncertainty about final conversion price, you pay more than a vinyls records worth in transaction fees, hence every transaction has to be a "Mona Lisa".

I want actual small label viny releases with the proceeds from resales automatically distributed between the label and artist

>>52596787
>as hell wouldn’t want to invest in a payment platform.
Its not a just payment platform, however let's go with that narrative. Name one currency that is like btc but can scale to worldwide demand. It seems absurd but kda is best suited to be a global reserve currency. It sounds fucking absurd but I can't think of any other alternative, maybe a coin on kda? maybe we can burn all BTC and put it on kadena? Because LN and whatever ICP nonsense you just talked about is not going to work so if you have a way to shit on (your own) payments idea then I'd like to hear a counter argument for that being not interesting.

And again your opinion about it being just payments is obviously useless anyway because it's not based in the reality of what exists and can exist. You're just screaming at clouds for not being birds. Limitations exist and that's fine.

>>52597084
>>52596876
If you make sure that _only_ an immutable program on the internet computer can click send BTC, you have make trustlessly wrapped tokens. I guess it all comes back to how trustless the protocol actually is.

>>52597415
But how does dividing up the BTC work? What if I have 1 BTC and want to buy a monkey jpg for .1 BTC? Do we share that Bitcoin private key? What if one of us wants to withdraw and the other doesn't? What if I split the BTC ten ways and then each of the ten people I send it to start mixing it up to buy more jpgs? What if gas fees get super high and BTC drops and the one person who wants to withdraw his one-tenth share but that costs more in gas than his own one-tenth?
Why aren't there in depth explanations of these things instead of videos explaining how "HUGE" this is?

>>52597415
>_only_
KADENA DEV SPOTTED

Scam weeb shit chain. Polygon is better. prove me wrong retards.

>>52597527
Is that the network with only 5 keys?

>>52595401
glad to see you babenas haven't roped yet. I was worried for a bit.

>>52597452
You send the BTC to an adress controlled by a smart contract and the smart contract gives you a token which you use on the network. When you're done wash trading NFTs or whatever, you send the tokens back to the machine banker and the machine banker automagically sends the equivalent amount of BTC to an address of your choosing

Like a normal wrapped token, but without a trusted custodian: the actual BTC just sits at the same address the entire time

>>52597502
I'm basically illiterate when it comes to coding.

>>52599369
the actual BTC just sits at the same address the entire time
But is this done on a one BTC wallet per subnet basis? If so do I need to make a BTC transaction to move to a different subnet? If not isn't that a huge risk with all the BTC being concentrated on popular canisters leading to a situation where nodes have too much incentive to steal them?

>>52595401
Kant
Dress
As a woman

>authoritative styles with ai
https://twitter.com/Michael_J_Black/status/1593133742033620992

if only we had algorithmic peer-review systems having the capability to handle what's coming, or something

>>52599491
Furthermore tainted BTC is bad enough but wo'nt this lead to white and blacklisted BTC? And KYC to access your BTC? Why would anyone allow a machine banker to control their funds instead of a non custodial centralised .jpg auction house. You would be saving the effort of trading your BTC to ETH to buy monkey .jpegs but instead trusting an irreplacable blacklisting bridge. If Opensea started adopting anti consumer practices you could move to any other NFT site but if the ICP BTC bridge starts doing stuff you don't like you are still stuck with no alternatives. It is closed source so there will only ever be one bridge. By using the ICP bridge you are subject to any crazy changes Dfinity introduce and since they only have a handful of data centres they could be forced to start doing all kinds of weird AML stuff. By using the bridge you are forfeiting your ability to ever break the law with those BTC. This goes against everything crypto is supposed to be.

>>52599369
>I'm basically illiterate when it comes to coding.
KADENA DEV SPOTTED

>>52600128
hidoi...

>>52600217
stop funposting and make numbers go up, or we will bully our italian hostages

>>52598274
It's the network which deploys third world minimum wage workers to post on 4channel.

>>52600128
Oh no Kadenadevsisters...

@IQBjEas9
I was going to say based, but I'm not going to give you a (You) because you didn't return one of my previous (You)'s.

kda is not 1€...?

>>52602029
Love is a magical thing but 1 (one (1)) (You) is 1 (one (1)) (You).
Love is more than (You).

>>52602221
i'm sorry

>>52597415
That’s the idea, yes. The protocol, happily, is fully trustless. This is not contradicted by initial nodes being KYC.

>>52599369
> Like a normal wrapped token, but without a trusted custodian: the actual BTC just sits at the same address the entire time
This is exactly correct. Additionally, you can use the same architecture to sign real btc transactions from your smart contracts.

>>52597084
> unless you are excited about the possibility to trade BTC IOUs on the Internet Computer.
You can trade BTC directly on ICP. You can also trade /trustless/ BTC IOUs. If that doesn’t excite you, when seeing that so far the whole crypto scene was built on trust based wrapped BTC on Ethereum, then perhaps thinking about crypto just isn’t for you.

>>52597246
> >I don’t see a use case
> Your opinion means nothing to me.
It’s not an opinion. I’m asking for a use case, but none is forthcoming. It’s very, very telling that you don’t have an answer.

>>52602988
>>52602781
>>52602681
>>52596986
>>52596949
>>52596787
>>52596746
>>52596511
>>52596342
>>52596255
>>52596229
>>52596223
>>52595880
>>52595805
>>52595605
>>52595448
3c

>>52597341
> Name one currency that is like btc but can scale to worldwide demand. It seems absurd but kda is best suited to be a global reserve currency
A global reserve currency doesn’t need many transactions per day. It’s the settlement layer, where millions of transactions in higher layers get baked into just a few settlement transactions.
So Kadena is absolutely unthinkable as a global reserve currency.
But what about being a higher layer, one of those payment layers that eventually settles millions of transactions into just a few BTC transactions?
Yes, THAT would make sense! Too bad you can’t actually access the BTC network from your chain, otherwise you might have had a future. As it is, you’re a payment platform that doesn’t have a connection to the settlement layer, i.e. practically useless.

>>52603014
> 3c
Yes please. I’ll buy more the lower the price is. That’s how accumulation in real projects works…but I guess you only know about the pump and dump parts of your scams.

>>52603008
You're a boomer and if it were not for your bags you got scammed into your say crypto is a scam because it's useless. You have nothing of value to add and everything you do add is based on flawed assumption.

>>52603053
it's easy to shill dfinitly. just compare it to chainlink

>>52603603
> boomer!! seeeeeethe!!
lol you are just buttmad because even normies know more about the crypto space than you.

>>52603877
Checked. Dfinity and Chainlink are targeting completely different things though, and complement each other. Chainlink DONs will obviously run in Canisters in the future, serving IC smart contracts with reliable information to trigger automatic actions.

>>52603978
>>52601473
>>52601627
>>52599669
>>52599500
>>52596321
>>52595555
>>52595435

if i’m not posting tomorrow i’m dead

>>52595525
wow man, sounds cool, maybe you should drop your paycheck into it

>>52596307
>tfw find out Hask is not a category

>>52603960
3c
nigger you were shilling icp to babenas when it was 200
you kept on shilling when it dropped to 20
now its 3 and your retarded ass is still shilling
whats so hard to understand? nobody is buying this vc dumpfest garbage that was sold for 3 cents per token

>>52606168
>nobody is buying this vc dumpfest garbage that was sold for 3 cents per token
The sad part is that they are. They have been giving VCs liquidity to derisk the whole way down.

>>52596341
the pump was stopped, thank you guys :)

>>52606096
is that you nuwu? noooo don't go, we love you

>>52606168
Does that mean the tech doesn't work? Does it mean developers aren't flocking to it? No, all it means is you have the opportunity of a lifetime.
But nothing is ever given in business. Sometimes the best tech doesn't win. ICP may not succeed, but at least that is open. Kadena can't win, because the tech isn't there (and neither ICP nor Kadena competes in the meme coin category where tech doesn't matter). If you have technical objections to ICP I am all ears.

>>52607770
opportunity of a lifetime for another -90%
and another -90% after that
lmao
fuck off
3c
i was laughing my ass off at icy pees at 600
i was laughing my ass off at icy pees at 60
i was laughing my ass off at icy pees at 6
and i will be laughing my ass of at icy pees at 0.6 cause monkeys like you will keep on making vcs rich

>>52607834
I started this discussion with the original Kadena shill, back when he disguised them as "POW discussion threads", before he started making dedicated "Babena" threads.
It was always a tech discussion.
I have held by the same criticism since day 1: lack of atomic multi-chain transactions prevent Kadena from becoming popular for DeFi, and the same capability to handle high TPS preclude it from being a store of value. I stand by this.
When asked about alternatives, I have talked about how I think ICP is taking the right approach, from a technical standpoint. I stand by this.
The only investment related comments I have made are about how I think payment platforms are not very profitable, so investment in them ought to be equally unprofitable. I stand by that.
I have not predicted ICP prices or recommended investment. I have nothing to stand by there.

>>52606096
I could have made it if I sold, but I didn’t. Now I want to kms and feel like my bones are hollow. I have fallen into this abyss of deep despair where I’m addicted to video games because reality hurts too much. But I read this picrel post at /vr/ tonight that made me realize I should focus more on crypto instead of buying another console. If an ass of a person like that can make it then I will too. I really deserve to make it because I had a hard life yet I try my best to be a nice person. I believe there is hope for me, even if right now I am crippled from the pain. Please be okay nuwu. Death is not the answer. Even for a retard like me who holded and erased all the gains. I’m waiting for my time to come. When is time going to change? I’m ready

>>52606096
> imma kill myself
Again? You know what, maybe death just isn’t for you, perhaps you should just give up and try living instead?

>>52607885
>The only investment related comments I have made are
>I have not predicted ICP prices or recommended investment. I have nothing to stand by there.
>No, all it means is you have the opportunity of a lifetime
shut the fuck up boomer trash

>>52608026
I did say
> No, all it means is you have the opportunity of a lifetime.
And then the very next sentence
> But nothing is ever given in business. Sometimes the best tech doesn't win. ICP may not succeed
Sorry if it was not clear that it was NOT investment advice, since the very point I was making was that what seems like an opportunity (great tech, low price) might not turn out to be. But fair enough, that was sloppy of me, so thanks for this opportunity to clarify that I'm not recommending anyone invest in anything, and if it seems like I am don't listen to me - I know tech, not business. For all I know, even payment platform might somehow turn out to become a lucrative business one day.

>>52608077
If you were any honest with anyone wou wouldn't say the first line. Fuck off boomer shill. Back to your scam where VCs still need to sell 90% of their stack. I'm not your exit liquidity.

>>52608088
Yeah you have a point, I went overboard with trying to prove a point, which was that the price doesn't invalidate the tech. I'm a bit tired an hoped to spare myself a lot of typing that it takes to make the generalized point. But here is what I tried to say:
If you have some tech, any tech, that YOU believe in, and that tech is currently undervalued in YOUR opinion, then you should consider the possibility that it is an investment opportunity. The more undervalued it seems, the more that might make you hesitate on your opinion that the tech is great. But if you remain convinced that the tech is great then the more undervalued, the greater the opportunity.
When I called ICP the "opportunity of a lifetime", I understand why it would then seem I tried to imply that it is currently very undervalued. But what I wanted to convey is that I remain convinced the tech is great. If it is undervalued or not is up to you to decide. I have zero idea where the bottom is. In addition to that, even great tech can fail in the market, which I did bother to point out, hoping it would be enough to signal I didn't recommend investments, but you are right, it was lazy and sloppy.
So again, don't take investment advice from me, only my tech opinions hold any water, and you can hold me to saying that.

I'll be more careful about not even seeming like I recommend anyone invest in anything

>>52608173
ICP is a useless because it doesn't allow me to send transactions to other planets and galaxies, don't come at me with the whole "we don't even have live on other planets" I heard it a thousand times.
If ICP can't do this very simple thing (light can easily do it) then it's just a toy, i.e. practically useless.

This is how you sound like.

>>52608173
>which was that the price doesn't invalidate the tech
>even great tech can fail in the market
CAN YOU STOP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF
if your tech is good but nobody gives a fuck about it, its invalid, if you want a great example look at f-22, amazing tech yet a complete fiasco
> So again, don't take investment advice from me
i sure won't

>>52608291
>look at f-22,
redpill time!

>>52608262
I see, thanks for pointing that out. I hope I’m not missing your point if I take it you mean I haven’t made clear why the features I hold Kadena couldn’t support are important?
Once the core basics like swaps and auctions are in, most of the value in DeFi, or so I believe, will come from optimizing for avoiding unnecessary locks and unnecessary transactions, because that’s how to leverage money. Auctions where bidders don’t have to send their funds into lock-ups (by proving reserves, via DECO or simple on-chain public data) will win over those where lock-up is required, because users can make more simultaneous bids, i.e. leverage their money better. Auctions where conversion of funds can be postponed means users can avoid taxable events for auctions they don’t win, rather than having to convert from your savings token to the auction token or seller’s desired token, creating a taxable event, pay fees and slippage, and then doing it all again to convert back when you don’t win the auction. The assumption is also that real values exist to transact, and since Kadena doesn’t support Bitcoin integration I tried to come up with a realistic example of real values being exchanged on the network. NFTs representing tokenized assets are an example, so these types of auctions are not to be sneezed at. But “ha ha NFTs” aside, the same principles of postponing transactions, lockups and conversions until the last possible moment are at the core of all financial optimization, which is what DeFi is about. If you were a programmer you’d immediately see how the general capability to compose contracts by asking one contact to call your contract opens up a lot of possibilities for postponing even custom tax optimized strategies until they are inevitable.
Hopefully this makes it seem less like irrelevant interplanetary communication requirements.

>>52608291
> if your tech is good but nobody gives a fuck about it, its invalid
To avoid contradiction “invalid, good tech” can’t be technically invalid. I know good tech can be invalid in the market. That was my point from the start, and if you had not overlooked that you wouldn’t be harping on.
> i sure won't (take investment advice from you)
Good, because I’m not trying to dispense it. But since we agree perhaps you can stop seething soon?

>>52606096
Just say
>see you tomorrow
like a normal person.

>>52608077
>I know tech, not business.
All you have been doing is making business propositions to validate why your tech is needed.
Do keep in mind that most startups fail because they created something nobody wants.
I'm glad you finally agree with me, even it if took you 25 posts and 2 days to realise.
Hope this clears up why nobody takes you seriously here.

>>52608473
>All you have been doing is making business propositions to validate why your tech is needed.
That's not fair. When investing in a new feature to support a new use case, you start with a business case motivating the investment. Arguing for why you believe in a use case means arguing for why you believe in the business case for it. Saying "by implementing this feature you could save $200k in admin costs per year" is honest, and the kind of thing I'm trying to do here, as opposed to "...and by doing that you can entice the investing public to pump your share to 5x" or whatever financial fallout that I don't pretend to understand. I'm not saying these use cases I describe are investable, I'm saying they could save/make money for users and thus supporting them would be important for a would-be DeFi platform.

>>52608473
Oh, and I already know the reason nobody takes me seriously here is that these threads are filled with people so gullible they think some guy called will solved the blockchain trilemma (years after his approach had been evaluated by the best minds in the business and discarded as retarded) who now have to defend their bags no matter how dishonest the tricks they resort to. This is well established. The reason I sometimes pop in is that the rest of /biz/ see right through you and take arguments that you never seem able to shoot down more seriously than you do.

>>52607885
>I have not predicted ICP prices or recommended investment. I have nothing to stand by there.
This is an absolute lie. We all remember your january prediction.

>>52608875
I don’t. What was it?

>>52608654
3c

>>52609321
If you were a bit more over the top ridiculous when you posted it I might have found it through specific memorable words, but alas my first search failed and I will move on. I know one anon in these threads has a screenshot, maybe they'll post it I'm not arguing with people anymore.

>>52606982
t-thanx kind anone. i'm still experiencing this reality it seems
>>52607934
i also didn't sell any. although my psychological issues aren't related to finance. i feel everyone deserves to be happy. everyone does what they believe to be right even if they can be wrong about it
>>52607988
i can't into consciousness
icp's tech is great. wasm canisters are very pleasant develop for, much more than pact, and may be useful in the future. at least, if it weren't directly related to financial applications. in practice i'm afraid these are a ticking time bombs waiting for fatal vulnerabilies somewhere propagating throughout the entire ecosystem, and collapse the whole thing down. motoko is great in this regard, but icp dapps are still very hard to trust for too many reasons. if using rust, it's way too trivial to put canisters in invalid states. for example they have to pay their own gas to parse low-level incoming messages which can be invalid on encoded in zip-bomb like formats. there are other absurdities which i don't rember, but i feel like dfinitly is going to learn about safety the hard way. it will only be useful afterward. they should've been using meta's move language or spent more effort on safety.
>>52608473
h-hi
>normal person
i don't even consider my self to be the second part

>>52608383
Why would I sell something on a platform where I'm not sure if the winning bid can actually pay, when the option to crypto lock the funds is right there.

We don't need more leverage in crypto. Leverage is not good or healthy and it does not create much of actual value. The entire world is a mess because everything is over-leveraged, even in the physical supply chain sense via ""Just In Time"

>>52597341
>It seems absurd but kda is best suited to be a global reserve currency.
You have to respect the tremendous power of Schelling Points. BTC is good enough to be a world reserve currency and since it's the most know one, with the most robust eco-system from a decentralization standpoint, it's the most likely to be chosen for something like settling gas payments between Russia and Europe

>>52599491
>>52599669
I have no idea how ICP actually works. I just know that a smart contract on a separate chain directly controlling a BTC wallet would be incredibly useful. Popejoy wanted to do this with Kadena, but seems to have given up on the idea due to not figuring out a way to implement it

>>52610736
FTX only collapsed because CZ launched an attack and forced them to deleverage, they would have made 100x profits on their printed out of thin air 10B fortune and become the biggest exchange. We need more leverage, not less.

>>52611080
They would have leveraged their trillion dollars profit from 100x'ing their 10B and used it to buy the federal reserve.

Since we're talking utility and potential use cases, I'm gonne repost something I wrote a while back

(1/2)

I firmly believe that decentralized utilities are what will power the next crypto cycle. A decentralized utility is characterized by a network of independent nodes that provide some sort of service, all powered by a trustless economic system

You could potentially do this with a centralized economic system, but that would introduce a single point of failure and a strong need for confidence in that particular part of the system. You would also need to act through a large payment processor, with their sometimes whimsical implementation of ToS

Depending on design, the decentralized utility itself can have many benefits:
1: Lowered/distributed startup costs
2: Redundancy
3: Enable trustless interaction between users

An example of how to achieve trustless interaction is what OriginTrail (TRAC) does: When someone uploads a dataset to their "decentralized knowledge graph", a hash signature of that data is printed to a blockchain. This makes the data tamper-proof, allowing people to share things like certificates, audit data, product origins etc in a system much more powerful than the blockchain itself

There's also more straight-forward hosting and storage services like Flux, Opacity and certainly many others

Render Network lets people rent eachothers GPU power to do heavy 3D renders. Quite interesting since ETH went PoS and there should now be a relative surplus of GPUs on the market

>>52611410
(2/2)
One thing I find heartening is that these are also starting to pop up on the barely existent Kadena ecosystem:

-Docushield are building a secure document storage service
-Crankk wants to build a "Proof of Service" network
-Timpi has some centralizing aspects and basically only fundraised on Kadena, but they're building a network of web crawlers and another network of data hosts in order to take on Google Search, building a whole new index.

For a decentralized economic model to really compete with a centralized one, it needs cheap and abundant blockspace, which Kadena has and will continue to have in perpetuity. Though I suspect blockspace will become cheap everywhere when most of the DeFi nonsense finally burns itself out

>>52611434
>-Timpi has some centralizing aspects and basically only fundraised on Kadena
Uh about that, 5% of the IDO was allocated to Kadena, 20% was Ethereum. Lots of other shitcoins.

>>52611653
To mee it really seems like a waste to build a separate blockchain, running separate validation, when Kadena already exists

>>52611410
>>52611434
decentralized utility is vague, it's hard to understand what you mean by this exactly.
i don't know what's the next cycle going to be about, but i feel too many projects underestimate the potential of dilutive tokenomics. most dapps are run like traditional corporations, with a hierarchical inflexible sense of ownership and equivalent critical mass of growth. docushield / timpi / etc are affected by this, which defeats the purpose of using decentralized L1s in the first place.

>>52612144
I'm not a native english speaker, but I'm thinking of "utilities" as in your ISP or electric grid provider. Basically a bunch of computer machines around the world that perform a specific task, but with a single interface for the end user who just pays to use "the network"

Could you expand on the benefits of "dilutive tokenomics"?

>>52612144
>defeats the purpose of using decentralized L1s in the first place.
No it doesn't. It doesn't take advantage of every single possibility but that doesn't mean they are using the technology wrong.

>>52612034
Business idea: build FLUX, but on Kadena. Specialize in hosting fediverse instances

>>52612461
You're saying someone should deploy a certain dapp with many nifty functions and mathematically complex features for others to use as a bootstrap framework?
Sounds very interesting.

>>52612539
DO IT

>>52609321
as a pee holder myself, im curious as to your opinion on kaspa

>>52608654
couldnt find anything but one article that came close to referencing a proposal of bitcoin multi-chain, you got any others? you're gay if not

business idea: online doctor that offers blood test and full hrt medication and virtual office hours all paid with babena

>>52613100
Invest in Theranos.
Alternative business idea: Buy a high quality professional grade automatic pill manufacturing machine and create counterfeit Novo Nordisk Estrofem 2mg, the demand and profit margin is insane and the market is global and you won't have to seek permission from regulators. Unfortunately everyone just fakes drugs instead, but there's a lower risk selling estradiol.

>>52613145
> there's a lower risk selling estradiol.
depends on a country you live in

>>52613558
Many countries that strictly criminalize T also have death punishment for drug manufacturing/smuggle crimes. I'd be interested in hearing about a country that punishes exporting estradiol products, but is lenient towards similar crimes of narcotics.

>>52613587
Russia.

>>52613587
counterfeit E is basically worse than heroin cause not only you gonna be taken for distributing illegal drugs but you're also gonna serve time for promoting lgbt

>>52612648
I'm not smart and cute enough for that, maybe someone else in this thread is.

>>52613595
>>52613610
They're probably more lenient on export since you're effectively "attacking the west". Most suppliers refuse domestic selling anyways. Russia isn't a real country anyways. The EU said it's a terrorist state.

>>52613688
post tummy for assessing cuteness in decentralized way, then delete picture to be inline with zk

I really like you all
Kinda make me wish I was a tranny too

>>52613957
not all of us are trannies, anon