.@UBS's bid for @CreditSuisse falls short. I would like to propose my own offer of $1.5 billion to acquire Credit Suisse and integrate it into the Web3.0 world. Switzerland has been one of the most crypto-friendly countries in the world.
Hmmm...could there be any other big important banks that hold a lot of institutional deposits, have loaded up on "safe" long term debt, and are pretending that the value of their collateral hasn't changed in last 12 mos?
In less than a week, the cryptocurrency billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried lost most of his fortune, saw his $32 billion company plunge into bankruptcy and became the target of investigations.
"It could be worse," he said in an interview. https://t.co/JPd6xLewGO
@laurashin@emilydparker Seriously, we need more anons. Why haven't more leaders followed Satoshi's example? Imagine Adams or Jefferson ignored Washington, gave in to ego, sycophantic fans, and scoop-chasing reporters, and served 10 terms each
@TheStalwart So the real problem is that there are still way too few services that crypto can buy that are worth paying for (beyond gambling by trading crypto tokens...which has of late become a lot fun / worth paying for).
@hn_avax @CryptonoteSoci1 @kevinsekniqi Good to hear. Would be nice to see some stats on relationship between stake and stability /performance (from you all or AvaLabs). Would guess having a cloud service IP address would be far better predictor of validator stability than stake size...(raises diff issue for sure)
@hn_avax @CryptonoteSoci1 @kevinsekniqi Looks like 511 validators with more than 6500 avax staked, out of 1424. (Other criteria will only lower that number.) What effect has your service had on concentration of validator stake? Worry a bit that it might be helping the bigs get bigger...
@el33th4xor Might be helpful to upgrade Avax docs to more explicitly define "better than flaky" setup. The latest two releases of avalanchego appear to have seriously upped the network connection/hardware requirement; it's not mentioned at all...
@JFSaine@GC_of_QC@el33th4xor@Psidium_Labs Looks like they delegate based on reliability stats...but also a 6500 Avax min threshold. Would stratified random sample based on only reliability stats create real risk? Imho high stake min centralizes validation & stinks for small nodes (e.g., mine) - we work hard too!
They appear to have decided not to delegate to validators with less than 6500 AVAX? Any real concern (or evidence) that those of us investing closer to the $200k/2000 AVAX min to run our validators aren't reliable? Not a great look...