ICP 400 gigabytes

[Anonymous No.57226058]

a single ICP canister (smart contract) can now hold 400gigs of data and is expanding even more later this year. why are you still holding dinosaur tech?

[Anonymous No.57226079]

>>57226058
Newfags be careful

ICP is a vc scam.

>High inflation
>Infinite supply
>Centralized
>Nobody uses it
>VC's own most of the supply
>down -99% from ATH
>dfinity is hosted on AWS
>Sold to vcs at 3 cents a piece
>ICP etf is a meme.There's literally dozen of European crypto ETNs and no one gives a shit about any them https://www.xetra.com/xetra-en/instruments/etfs-etps/fokus-crypto-etns

It's just another so called eth killer that will fade into obscurity after a while.

[Anonymous No.57226092]

>>57226058
Newfags be careful

ICP is a vc scam.


>High inflation
>Infinite supply
>Centralized
>Nobody uses it
>VC's own most of the supply
>down -99% from ATH
>dfinity is hosted on AWS
>Sold to vcs at 3 cents a piece
>ICP etf is a meme.There's literally dozen of European crypto ETNs and no one gives a shit about any them https://www.xetra.com/xetra-en/instruments/etfs-etps/fokus-crypto-etns
It's just another so called eth killer that will fade into obscurity after a while.

[Anonymous No.57226127]

>>57226058
Where is that data stored?

[Anonymous No.57226131]

>>57226058
>>57226079
>>57226092

[Anonymous No.57226151]

>>57226079
>>57226092
underperforming $TICKER baggies

[Anonymous No.57226149]

>>57226127
on the blockchain ofcourse

[Anonymous No.57226160]

>>57226149
Is there any chance of getting a real answer to the question on here?

[Anonymous No.57226199]

>>57226160
i literally answered your questioned lmao. all data is on the blockchain. theres a reason its called alien tech. if you mean where its hosted. its hosted on node machines scattered across the globe in sovereign data centers.

[Anonymous No.57226219]

>>57226199
That's what I was asking, where the physical storage happens.
Does each node store all the data for every canister or how does that work?

[Anonymous No.57226244]

>>57226149
AWS stores PETABYTES of data and you really want to compare ICP to it? Seriously?

[Anonymous No.57226281]

>>57226219
each node in a subnet yes and subnets can communicate with each other unlike avalanche.
>>57226244
>lets compare a giga kike corporation that exists 2 decades with a technology thats 2 years old
how heavy are those avax bags?

[Anonymous No.57226291]

Based. They will need all 400Gb once TTS goes parabolic.

[Anonymous No.57226305]

>>57226291

[Anonymous No.57226315]

>>57226281
baste, good sir.

[Anonymous No.57226368]

Chart bad

[Anonymous No.57226465]

>>57226058
>400gb of data
ok but for what? why is this at all useful? name a single use case for this functionality that a simple p2p ftp connection or encrypted server can't accomplish.

oh you cant? thats interesting.

[Anonymous No.57226475]

>>57226058
damn. that's huge. Big block tier. will buy more pees.

[Anonymous No.57226508]

>>57226465
it is an internet on a computer
(posted from my windoge98 OS)

[Anonymous No.57226544]

>>57226465
hahahaha what a fucking cope. i can literally host the whole ethereum network in 1 (one) single canister and ICP wouldn't even flinch. have you ever heard of websites and games getting bigger and bigger thus needing more storage? well ICP is ready for the future. keep seething.

[Anonymous No.57226556]

>>57226544
yes ok. but it only runs in datacenters.

[Anonymous No.57226589]

>>57226556
what the fuck is this for an argument? where the fuck are you supposed to host the data? in your fridge? the data centers are sovereign meaning not owned by globohomo

[Anonymous No.57226600]

>>57226281
ah okay, thanks

[Anonymous No.57226627]

>>57226544
this response gave me cancer. jesus christ this board just gets more and more inept by the day.

HFSP.

[Anonymous No.57226633]

>>57226589
if biden calls to the american datacenter owners and says to shut down the icy pee servers. then they will shut down the icy pee servers.

[Anonymous No.57226639]

I own ICP, but I still don't know wtf a canister is.

[Anonymous No.57226687]

>>57226281
>subnets can communicate with each other unlike avalanche
avalanche implemented that subnet communication two years ago. try to keep up laggard
https://medium.com/avalancheavax/avalanche-warp-messaging-awm-launches-with-the-first-native-subnet-to-subnet-message-on-avalanche-c0ceec32144a

[Anonymous No.57226689]

>>57226600
checked
>>57226627
>typical response when you can't beat the tech
>have fun stay poor
my pee is literally up 40% today
>>57226633
checked. tell him to also shut down the european data centers. and the chinese data centers too and oh the australian too. african too?
>>57226639
literally a smart contract but it can serve full websites so not just a bunch of "if then yes/no"

[Anonymous No.57226778]

>>57226687
nice try but they are separate and do not work together as a singular network because they just can't. hurr durr lets see which subnet i have to use today to pay as little gas as possible. imagine having to choose your subnet instead of having 1 complete stack.

[Anonymous No.57227619]

>>57226600
What they're not telling you is that the data isn't stored on an actual blockchain for longer than like ~10 minutes, IC does not preserve history like BTC or ETH. They also aren't telling you that you have to apply and be accepted by dfinity to be a node provider, the node hardware requirements are huge, and no node can join the network without permissioning. So yes IC has much larger storage capabilities than other chains, but it's because it's centralized with extremely high hardware requirements. It simply is not doing what BTC, ETH, etc. are doing.
>>57226778
Absolutely braindead cope kek. It literally is a singular network, any subnet can talk to any other subnet (but don't have to) in the span of a single tx. A single dapp can have a unified frontend experience for users but the backend can span multiple subnets. There's an onchain CLOB that already uses this architecture on Avalanche. Chains with entirely different VMs, validator requirements, etc. interact seamlessly, subnets just aren't a standard uniform composition or "share security" like ICP (really ICP doesn't even share security, any subnet just implicitly trusts any other subnet, bad news if a subnet is ever compromised), which is desirable actually. Meaning an EVM chain with high security budget could talk to some custom Rust based VM on a small subnet seamlessly in the space of one message. I wouldn't expect an ICbaggie to understand this though.

[Anonymous No.57227647]

>>57227619
kill yourself

[Anonymous No.57227694]

>>57227619
Is all you roaches do at this point is just lie? Instead of the insightful conversations you have to make shit up since "hur der my chain better".

[Anonymous No.57227791]

>>57227619
ICP makes ETH and BTC better.

[Anonymous No.57227880]

>>57226058
Decentralized storage or storing anything on the block chain is the most retarded thing I have ever heard

[Anonymous No.57228090]

I don't understand ICP, it's a worse internet.

[Anonymous No.57228147]

>>57226058
Peebros... i... i'm cooming

[Anonymous No.57228178]

>>57226127
AWS

[Anonymous No.57228220]

>>57227619
This is not how it works. And no, ICP is doing and will do way more than both ShitVax and Shitherium combined

[Anonymous No.57228284]

>>57227619
based technical understander. I think I found something interesting. so you know how interchain communication is asynchronous? I was looking through ICP technical papers and just found out that not only is subnet to subnet communication asynchronous, but that fucking canister to canister messaging is asynch! I shit you not, ICP's smart contracts communicate asynchronously lmao! There is no atomicity WITHIN a subnet, not just between subnets. fucking crazy. This means canisters are just sidechains, effectively making the below subnet layer pointless. It's just extra bloat.

So now ICP is not only less composable than every other L1, but at the same time more centralized (the data centers are all permissioned and the nodes layer as well). So with ICP you are really getting the worst of both worlds. You have 2 asynchronous layers built on top of 2 permissioned layers with 2 of those layers being extraneous with no other purpose than create technical bloat for the devs to pad out their commit numbers and provide more buzzwords for the marketing team. what a joke.

[Anonymous No.57228286]

>>57226465
Because if it isn't useful then crypto itself isn't useful other than sending money from point A to point B.

But to actually answer your question. You can host a corporations earnings/expenses on icp and have no need for auditing, it's fully transparent. This is a huge boon for grant money as well as bank money where expenditure reporting is an entire business. ICP run businesses will have no worries on reporting at all.

You wish to have a search engine that doesn't sell your data to big analrape? Kinic is open source and on chain, so you can physically see that they aren't selling your data to anyone. HotorNot is literally an open source form of money for good content. Your video goes viral? You make money. Etc.

The open source and DAO aspect of ICP decisions (even how new nodes are adopted by NNS is via ICP holders votes) are what make ICP the literal future.

Want to have YouTube that doesn't analy probe you with ads n sheit? Go make an ICP equivalent and viola.

Also data is important to the NFT market. For instance imagine that all current NFTs of all the other chains simply host off chain. They sell you a blockchain path, but the asset is off chain. ICP let's you host your retard monkey on chain, and thus it's the full NFT package.

Small? Yeah, nobody really cares about NFTs lol, BUT, imagine a few NFT hacks and people start asking questions why the images themselves are hosted in a non blockchain manner. Huge retard flood to follow to ICP after that lol.

Again ckETH and ckBTC allow you to host the entire eth and btc blockchain on ICP, and thus have bridgeless transactions between each other. A ETH wallet can send directly to a ckETH wallet, and vice versa, no bridges.

The ETH integration allows ETH devs to guarantee blockchain backend for their bullshit projects that are off chain right now. Now ETH can host its entire back end cryptographically bulletproof and actually start providing a real service to the real economy

[Anonymous No.57228685]

>>57228284
Lol. You really don’t understand how ICP works. Fact check: it’s the most secure blockchain environment in existence. Icy Piss is the future, deal with it, or continue coping and seething indefinitely. Also, you really don’t know what composability means, don’t ya? Go read summin, icp is by far the most composable blockchain in production, I mean like, it’s not even close

[Anonymous No.57228724]

ICP is a waste of time. Not decentralised, not trustless, not secure. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.57228742]

>>57226058
$0.03
not 0.03btc
$0.03 (United States Currency)
It is also called unironically named ICP

[Anonymous No.57228886]

>>57228724
Lol. Cope, seethe, Incan smell the curry through my phone’s screen

[Anonymous No.57228947]

I love icy piss.

[Anonymous No.57228963]

>>57228284
Canisters are more than just sidechains. They are self-contained units that bundle their code and data (state), and they can interact with other canisters by sending messages, either within the same subnet or across different subnets. This interaction is asynchronous, meaning that when a message is sent, the sender is not blocked by this operation and can perform other computations until the response to the message is received. This is a major difference between the ICP and most other blockchains, and it's key to achieving unprecedented scalability.

As for the subnet layer, it's far from being pointless or extra bloat. Subnets are a collection of interacting replicas that run their own, separate instance of the ICP consensus mechanism, effectively creating their own blockchain on which a set of canisters can run. Each subnet can communicate with other subnets and is controlled by a root subnet. The root subnet uses chain-key cryptography to delegate its authority to the various subnets. This architecture allows the ICP to scale by simply adding more subnets.

So, while it might seem counterintuitive at first, the asynchronous nature of canister-to-canister communication and the existence of the subnet layer are actually key features that contribute to the scalability and flexibility of the Internet Computer.

[Anonymous No.57228970]

>>57228685
>far the most composable blockchain in production
no, it's obviously not if all messaging between canisters is asynchronous. just imagine a version of ETH with no atomic composability, it would be completely unusable for DeFi. contract to contract calls would be unpredictable and vulnerable to race condition bugs and exploits, totally unusable. Atomic composability is an incredibly important issue when it comes to ETH's plan sharding, but I guess Dfinity just sweeps it under the rug. And they can get away with it since no one is developing anything complex on ICP, just cute front-end webapps and WASM bing bing wahoo emulators.

[Anonymous No.57228990]

>>57228284
ICP is not less composable than other Layer 1 blockchains. In fact, its architecture allows for a high degree of composability. Canisters, which are the building blocks of dapps on the ICP, can interact with each other asynchronously, either within the same subnet or across different subnets. This allows developers to build complex applications by composing multiple canisters together

ICP is not more centralized than other blockchains. While it's true that the nodes in the ICP are run by data centers, these data centers are not centrally controlled. Instead, they are part of a permissionless network, and the decision to add or remove nodes from the network is made by the Network Nervous System (NNS), an automated governance system that operates in a decentralized manner.

>You have 2 asynchronous layers built on top of 2 permissioned layers with 2 of those layers being extraneous

This seems to be a misunderstanding of the ICP's architecture. The ICP has a layered architecture, with the canister layer at the top, the subnet layer in the middle, and the node layer at the bottom. All these layers work together to provide a scalable, secure, and decentralized platform for building and running dapps.

The claim that the layers of the ICP are "extraneous" and serve "no other purpose than create technical bloat for the devs to pad out their commit numbers" is not accurate. Each layer of the ICP serves a specific purpose and contributes to the overall functionality and performance of the system. The canister layer provides the execution environment for dapps, the subnet layer provides the consensus mechanism and inter-canister communication, and the node layer provides the physical infrastructure on which the system runs. All these layers are necessary for the ICP to function as a decentralized internet.

[Anonymous No.57229009]

>>57228970
While it's true that inter-canister communication in the ICP is asynchronous, this doesn't mean that it's unpredictable or vulnerable to race condition bugs and exploits. In fact, the ICP has mechanisms in place to handle these issues.

A canister processes its messages one-at-a-time, which prevents race conditions. This is a key feature of the actor model, which the ICP uses for inter-canister communication. In the actor model, each actor (in this case, a canister) processes its messages sequentially, ensuring that only one message is processed at a time. This eliminates the possibility of race conditions, as there's no concurrent modification of a canister's state.

ICP's approach to inter-canister communication is a deliberate design choice aimed at achieving scalability. By allowing canisters to communicate asynchronously, the ICP can execute a massive number of canisters in parallel, which is key to its ability to scale.

[Anonymous No.57229058]

>>57228990
You heard it here first folks, straight out of chatGPTs mouth. Completely trustworthy and not at all buzzword nonsense scraped from ICP's homepage.

[Anonymous No.57229073]

>>57226058
Chart bad

[Anonymous No.57229090]

>>57229058
>Not decentralised, not trustless, not secure.

Here are a few types of individuals who might make a statement like "Not decentralised, not trustless, not secure" about the Internet Computer Protocol or any similar technology:

Skeptics or Critics: Some individuals may be naturally skeptical or critical of new technologies. They might voice concerns based on their doubts about the feasibility, security, or decentralization aspects of a protocol.

Competitors: People involved in competing projects or technologies may express negative opinions about a rival system in an attempt to highlight perceived weaknesses and promote their own solutions.

Misinformed Individuals: Sometimes, individuals may not have accurate information about a technology or may have misunderstood its design principles. Their statements may be based on misinformation rather than a deliberate attempt to deceive.

Lack of Understanding: Some people might lack a comprehensive understanding of how the Internet Computer Protocol works or the broader context of blockchain and decentralized technologies. Their statements may stem from a lack of knowledge rather than ill intent.

Personal Bias or Ideology: Personal biases or ideological differences can influence opinions. Individuals with a strong preference for certain principles or technologies might express negativity toward alternatives that do not align with their views.

[Anonymous No.57229125]

>>57228963
>high degree of composability
means nothing if it's not atomically composable. you can have as many connections as you want, but if they synchronous then they are less useful for many many applications. Not saying asynchronous communication doesn't have its usecases, but they aren't very interesting and not suitable to replace what other L1s are currently doing with their atomically composable environments.

>>57229009
>A canister processes its messages one-at-a-time, which prevents race conditions.
shard processing, but then form a massive queue, lmao? then we just end up back at scaling issues. you either run parallel and scale, or you run linearly and don't. you can't have both. maybe you wiggle around and hybridize, but you hybridize the problems along with it. classical parallel/linear tradeoff. of course Dfinity thinks they can rewrite the laws of nature, stupid bastards.

everything ICP does makes me think that they do not want to be a smart contract L1 blockchain and instead want to be some kind of semi-corporate co-op webapp hosting service that has some blockchain features tacked alongside like tokens and fintech apps. I can't say it's not interesting, but it's clearly a different product which I think takes advantage of the environment that BTC and ETH created while at the same time deviating from the core philosophy of decentralization and immutability. other L1s like AVAX, DOT, ATOM, even MATIC are at least made in the spirit of BTC. Just don't see that at all with ICP. It's more like XRP in that way.

>>57229058
glad I'm not the only one who noticed. replying to it anyways lmao

[Anonymous No.57229378]

>>57226058
We can't stop winning computer bros

[Anonymous No.57229386]

I don’t know what any of this means. Should I sell my icp

[Anonymous No.57229881]

>>57229386
Maybe learn something about the asset class you're investing in? Then you wouldn't be relying on an anonymous indoor shrimp farming forum for financial advice.

[Anonymous No.57229935]

>>57228284
kek exactly, this is actually probably the biggest reason why ICP TVL is nonexistent. It's fine for hosting web shit because the web works asynchronously and it you don't care about the performance tradeoffs compared to traditional CSPs that's fine, but it's absolutely retarded architecture for running value transfer applications which is what distributed BFT ledgers are primarily designed to do. Midwit baggies cannot comprehend this though either, they just see a website and think it's stored "on-chain" because Dom told them so and that muh singularity is coming.
>>57228990
>>57229009
>>57229090
BAGGPT kek. Is the LLM you're using hosted on the IC? Or does Dom throw you a couple extra rupees for an openai subscription now too
>>57229125
>some kind of semi-corporate co-op webapp hosting service that has some blockchain features tacked alongside like tokens and fintech apps
I think this is pretty much exactly what Dfinity is going for. I'm more cynical though, I think Dfinity is basically a CSP that uses crypto ponzinomics to offload the costs of acquiring and running the actual hardware onto others while they sit and print themselves millions of ICP per year with voting rewards.

[Anonymous No.57229941]

>>57226131

[Anonymous No.57229972]

>>57229941
Better size

[Anonymous No.57230109]

>>57226127
Pee is stored in the balls.

[Anonymous No.57230778]

>>57229935
>why ICP TVL is nonexistent
Tvl does exist for icp, it uses it's own tokens standards (not erc) so it's harder to track

[Anonymous No.57230928]

>>57229125
You still don’t get it, don’t ya? Your thick ape skull is still not capable of assimilating what the IC really does and is capable of doing. lol, so you want IC to be just another L1 that does what ETH does but better, just like Avax and all the other shitcoins trying to be the next ETH. Fud all you want, but ICP has already demonstrated that it scales better, is more secure and will eventually be more decentralized than all the other shits you’re currently shilling. Stay on the sidelines bitch, that’s why you’ll never make it out of biz kekekek

[Anonymous No.57231032]

>>57226079
>>57226092

>centralized, anyone can stake 10 ICP and vote retard.

[Anonymous No.57231050]

>>57229935
>ICP TVL is nonexistent.
$3278411000 locked on NNS.
https://nns.ic0.app/
Most liquid launchpad in the space, no KYC needed.

[Anonymous No.57231064]

>>57228970
Someday you’ll understand how all of this works. Don’t worry anon, change is hard for some people, especially when they’re carrying around really thick, ape-like skulls

[Anonymous No.57231072]

>>57227619
>IC does not preserve history like BTC or ETH.
AWS preserves history on ETH, play for pay.

[Anonymous No.57231107]

>>57226199
>>57226160

It's stored on aws

Dfinity is full of nonsense

[Anonymous No.57231110]

>>57229935
>I think Dfinity is basically a CSP that uses crypto ponzinomics to offload the costs of acquiring and running the actual hardware onto others while they sit and print themselves millions of ICP per year with voting rewards.

AWS sources their data from data-carrier hotels, then resells the data as cloud.
Dfinity sources directly from the data-carrier hotels, effectively cutting out the middle man which is AWS.

[Anonymous No.57231111]

>>57231107
Wrong
Next.

[Anonymous No.57231135]

>>57231107
No, it's not stored on AWS. ICP was unaffected by the largest DDOS attack in history, this happened two years ago, exchanges, ETH-defi, avalanche all suffered outages. Look up the archives.

[Anonymous No.57231146]

>>57226058
Does this mean I won't have to approve quite so many canisters every time I try to use a DEX?

[Anonymous No.57231530]

>>57226465
You are the same guy that was against cars because horses could do the same. Fuck off virgin wooper

Imagine telling zuckerberg that there was already a sort of facebook, called myspace. You fucking dipshit

[Anonymous No.57232396]

>>57228970
Kek ICP was never meant for DeFi.
Defi is for ethereum, EVM are coming to ICP thanks to bitfinity, we will have the ethereum chain inside a single canister.

[Anonymous No.57233845]

Icpoop

[Anonymous No.57234698]

>>57226127
in the internet computer

[Anonymous No.57234712]

Biz is not really for this talk

[Anonymous No.57234754]

>>57226058
The blocks mustn't exceed 300kb you heathen

[Anonymous No.57234839]

ok so the plan is simple, hold this hot trash until it completes a cycle then dump it.

[Anonymous No.57235717]

>>57226465
You're asking what the purpose of decentralization is? What the purpose of a compute and hosting solution that is also a blockchain and can natively integrate with other blockchains is? What the purpose of such a solution that has built-in use authentication and security? What are you even doing on this board kek

[Anonymous No.57235734]

>>57227619
>what they aren't telling you is
cool nice evidence you provided of your blatant lies. much argument very cope

[Anonymous No.57235800]

>>57228970
Async is the only solution for scalability, and defi products have built their own solutions for this issue. Vertical scaling for synchronous networks is a huge bottleneck and not a long term solution fit for hundreds of millions of users.

[Anonymous No.57235941]

>>57226244
>PedoBytes
Sorry, I don't support those AWS diddlers. I support ICP and GigachadBytes (GB)
>>57226127
In the balls

[Anonymous No.57235964]

>>57234754
Luke is so damn based