GENKIPOOL (GENKI)

GENKIPOOL wishes you a happy year and a lot of wealth for all. Thank you very much for supporting and trusting GENKIPOOL🙌

Every technology that achieved mass adoption did so by becoming invisible! Nobody thinks about the infrastructure of electricity, the internet, or even mobile payments. They think about what it lets them do. → Crypto will cross that threshold when the infrastructure disappears into the background.

Global DeFi requires infrastructure that supports: - Millions of users - Billions in liquidity - Continuous activity Hyperscale is the foundation for that future.

Built the scaler of the future. Never witnessed it. What tragedy. But the community proved it: 500k+ SPS sustained, 800k peaks. Real swaps, real scale. $XRD to the moon!

Una historia que merece ser leída. Algún día, alguien, escribirá un libro sobre Dan Hughes.

Amazing piece @RadBullXRD I sometimes question myself why I continue to build and support Radix, with its lack of general adoption and awareness and then I read an article like this and I'm reminded of what makes Radix so unique and such an opportunity. Eventually the world will realise you need to be able to linearly and atomically scale composability if you ever want to achieve global scale. Radix is the only network that has publicly demonstrated this ability.

🤯es alucinante ver #DLT L1 correr a 2.7M tps y 32 fragmentos!!!! el futuro no me preocupa, ya esta aquí.

😱 #solana, cuando se darán cuenta q cuando se usa un poco se cae!!! Será que de base no funciona ni funcionará?? 🤔

"Hi @axotrade ! It would be nice to know more about the security of your platform. Would it be possible for you to share information about the code audit that the Axo DEX has passed? It would be great for all users to have that transparency.

Singularitynet (AGIX/ASI) sells smoke? Show me with data.

@rickmccracken @BraveHeartStak3 Less marketing and more useful functionalities, which attract the rules so as not to be left behind in the market.

Memecoin mania is extremely demotivating to teams building real blockchain projects. Just putting this out there into the universe if anybody cares.

#AkiraToriyama me enseñó que la amistad, la determinación y el esfuerzo son los verdaderos superpoderes. Con #Goku y sus amigos, aprendí que en la vida siempre hay que mantenerse firme y luchar por lo que creemos, superando y desafiando nuestros límites. Vuela siempre arriba.

Está mañana me he despertado con esta noticia de Alfredo Muñoz...

It turns out that a property of the #radix sharding model I thought was obvious may not be the case after a conversation with @flightofthefox earlier this evening. Some of that conversation revolved around the economic security (eco-sec) of a shard (or in the case of #radix shard grouping) with regard to the amount of stake present in that shard throughout it's lifetime. After reviewing some past conversations, there appears to be a common, and gross mis-understanding of how shard security manifests when considering different safety models! In fact, what I've observed is a general hammering of shard security into the probabilistic safety model, whether that is POW, POS or some other "proof of" variant, and it is wrong! With probabilistic safety, nothing is really ever final. There always exists a risk that someone, somewhere, with enough resources can craft a competing version of history and present it as a masquerade of the truth. Probabilistic safety is reliant on eco-sec because of the possibility of roll-backs. The expenditure of resources contributes directly and accumulatively to the security of the network, as it becomes ever more prohibitive in terms of expense to craft a "fake truth". Deterministic safety is very different, there is no possibility of a rollback. That detail may seem small, but with regard to eco-sec it is huge, especially from a sharding point of view! With deterministic safety, its not how much stake is present in a shard that matters, but that no single actor in a shard controls more than 33% of the currently assigned stake to that shard! Read that statement twice, think about it, and then read it thrice! Consider a shard which has 100,000 units of stake currently distributed between the assigned validators. Providing no single actor controls validators which constitute > 33,000 units of stake, the shard is secure according to BFT consensus bounds. In the next epoch some of those validators are shuffled out and new ones are shuffled in. Now the shard has 1,000,000 units of stake assigned to it across the assigned validators, but again, providing that no single actor controls > 333,000 the shard is secure. Given the deterministic safety properties, it doesn't matter if there is 100,000,000,000 stake units assigned to that shard, and all the validators are adversarial, there is nothing, NOTHING, they can do to roll back what happened when the shard had just 100,000 stake units assigned to it. They can cause liveness and safety issues during their own epoch if they are all adversarial and the shard during that epoch is compromised, but everything that happened in the previous epochs is safe. With deterministic safety, eco-sec is ONLY relevant in the now. The eco-sec metric in previous epochs is ephemeral, it only applied to that shard during that epoch and has no bearing on the eco-sec of that shard in previous or future epochs.

🧐Revocar los accesos de #SmartContracts con los que ya no interactuamos es vital para no dejar puertas abiertas a los amigos de lo ajeno. 👇En el link tienes te da algunos tips. PD: Deberíamos exigir a las #DLT que nos protejan de las "firmas a ciegas" y si no lo hacen NO USARLAS y buscar alternativas que si han creado sistemas para que puedas garantizar tus fondos. es.cointelegraph.com/news/how-to-re…

I suppose that those who think that competition between validators does not encourage centralization do not understand how a network works. Blockchain networks compete for their database, it is as if routers compete for routes, meaningless. #Blockchain

@liberlion17 that is as if Messi will pay his coach to be a holder instead of demonstrating who is better, which means that on top of having competition is poorly raised.

@GenkipoolC Messi and Maradona couldn't play together, they would compete for the same position in the same team. It's all about the incentives.

Does competition between validators encourage centralization in the network? #Crypto

@liberlion17 but in the case that you raise, show who is better to be a holder, in blockchain could be the equivalent of who is better administrator, but in many blockchains is holder who buys more customer,

@liberlion17 I mean when they are playing the game, thus demonstrating that competition should not always be applied, it depends on the objective to be achieved.