DDOS

Themistokles42

it is not acceptable, since stores will by definition always be in the slowest bucket since they transact the most value. A network that goes down every time some teenager decides to DDOS it for fun is not a payment network. Also PoW will always be preferable over PoS, especially a representative kind of PoS, but that's a different discussion. The only thing that sets Nano apart from other PoS networks is no fees and it is fundamentally broken for that reason.

GoodSamoSamo

that wouldn't DDOS the network, i already explained it above. but ok. glhf.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

GoodSamoSamo

This is incorrect. By design, DDOS needs to cover the physical links of 1/3+ stake weighted nodes for the network to stop confirming blocks. Targeting a single leader would only delay that leader. Your claim is wrong. Also, don't really care about Cardano. It's very clear that the market is starting to see ADA going nowhere anytime soon. ADA has been around for 8 YEARS and has nothing to show for it. 1 TPS, relatively weak TVL, virtually no DeFi activity, no NFT presence, terrible DEX volume, virtually no stablecoins (not even USDT or USDC), no institutional interest (Grayscale just removed them from their institutional product list and Coinshare Fund Flows show virtually no interest in ADA ETP products), no serious investors or influencers in crypto support it or care about it, etc. It's (incorrectly) taking an "academic" approach instead of the standard technology approach of "ship and iterate." The list goes on and on. Cardano is a garbage chain that is run by a sociopath and has a VC arm that is in charge of making ecosystem investments to attract builders - which it has failed at horribly.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

stanley_fatmax

Honestly, a lot of it is probably manipulation. When major world events occur, people (markets) are on edge. Like dominoes falling, the markets are "primed" to move during unprecedented times. When that happens, bad actors can swoop in, and any anomalous trades they make are amplified more than they'd be on a normal day by people watching closely for market movement. It's like DDOS amplification attacks. In uneasy markets, and for very little investment, you can get a huge movement. Whereas in normal markets, it takes a huge investment to get any movement.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

Revolutionary-Ebb-26

Great write up, but I quibble with the second sentence. Haven't seen evidence that Satoshi was attempting to solve that problem. The "Chancellor on the Brink" headline's inclusion in the Genesis Block is the only thing that may allude to such a thing but we have no explanation from Satoshi about it. That could have easily just been a timestamp for reference. We may never know. What Satoshi did talk about in terms of the problem he was attempting to solve were just technical things .. like the double spend problem, the Byzantine Generals problem. There was a long history of attempts at making a digital cashlike system since such a thing could protect against spam and DDOS. That said it turned out that a decentralized, permissionless and secure solution to digital cash certainly does address the fiat problem when that solution provides a finite bound like Bitcoin did.

Flex-93

Those servers are DDOS protected - the requests will not even reach the servers.....

BarrySix

I do this weekly... AWS has tools to block DDOS attacks, it has a good CDN. There is nothing stopping you putting akamai in front instead if you are extremely high scale. The instances scale horizontally to far more capacity than any site needs. The parts that brake are site bottlenecks, not AWS capacity limits.

hdrive1335

Networks have limits. You can throw as much compute, storage and routing at a problem all you want but at the end of the day user traffic on the scale of a DDOS is NOT going to be resolved simply.

PrestigiousAd9825

TBH it would be more convenient if a bad actor who stands to profit from CB losing market share waited to launch a DDOS attack on them right when BTC starts big time mooning near ATH

BMB281

Yeah, likely an issue with extremely high traffic volume, maybe a DDOS attack. Seriously seriously doubt Coinbase is attempting anything shady. Bitcoins not even at an ATH, why would they Robinhood themselves for pennies

Drunkn_Cricket

Same with their stocks. most likely its a DDOS from some elites who still want to sell off at the ATH before the pesants drive it down

cecil_X

Apparently Binance and Coinbase are going through some problems, that stopped the rally. The FED and the ECB are very likely attacking them with DDOS attacks. This escalated quickly, we're in total war against the system.

manageablemanatee

To be honest, I think people who hold that view haven't looked into Nano's transaction prioritization system. It actually has spam attacks quite regularly which are handled without issue. The ones that degrade the network do so by attacking another weakness simultaneously. The last major attack was essentially DDOS'ing the nodes to force them to desync with each other, dampening their ability to cope with the transaction backlog. The one the network is still dealing with is still being investigated but to my limited understanding it seems it focused on desyncing the nodes by spamming different sets of blocks to different nodes, taking advantage of the limited size of the backlog each node can hold. (I'm happy to be corrected on that by someone with better understanding) These attacks are not *just* spam, but spam tends to be a necessary component of them. Spam on its own doesn't really cause problems for Nano anymore.

CointestMod

#TRON Con-Arguments Below is a TRON con-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > TRON is a decentralized, open-source blockchain-based operating system with smart contract functionality, a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm, and its own cryptocurrency, Tronix (TRX). Justin Sun founded it in March 2014, and it has been overseen and supervised by the TRON Foundation, a non-profit organization in Singapore founded the same year. It began as an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token before migrating to its own blockchain in 2018. > > # CONS > > **Whitepaper Plagiarism** > > In January 2018, Tron's developers were accused of plagiarism after many sections of the Tron whitepaper appeared nearly identical to IPFS and Filecoin technical documentation. IPFS is an acronym for InterPlanetary File System. Juan Benet, CEO of Protocol Labs, which develops IFPS tools and services, revealed on Twitter in early January 2018 that Tron's whitepaper authors did not properly cite references and that the document was "mostly copied" from other projects. Even the equations and formulas mentioned in the first version of Tron's whitepaper were identical to those found in IPFS documentation. Sun claimed to have a "very detailed" reference to the most recent Chinese version of the Tron whitepaper. He also claimed that the Tron paper was translated into other languages by volunteers who may have overlooked important details. Just as Vitalik had also sarcastically said in twitter regarding the teams copy-pasting abilities, this just goes to show how un-genuine their team appears even making the most basic of mistakes. > > **Question of Vulnerability** > > A barrage of requests sent by a single PC could be used to squeeze the power of the blockchain's CPU, overload the memory, and perform a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, according to HackerOne. "Using a single machine, an attacker could send DDOS attack to all or 51 percent of the Super Representative (SR) node and render Tron network unusable or unavailable," the claim goes. While TRON is somewhat better in marketing compared to other cryptocurrencies, it falls short on one of the most important pillars for an effective one, that of which is security. To hinder a blockchain with just one computer is the polar opposite of what you want a cryptocurrency to be. > > **Un-Stablecoin** > > TRON's native stablecoin "USDD" de-pegged to the US dollar earlier this year, falling to as low as 91 cents. Its design is uncannily similar to Terra's stablecoin, UST, which lost its price peg and imploded a month ago, wiping out $40 billion in market value. If it continues to follow UST's path considering how similar they are in function and structure, one could assume they also have a ticking algorithmic time bomb in the making. > > **Final Thoughts** > > It seems that TRON has a knack for idolizing (to the point of almost copying their work) other projects both in and out of the crypto-sphere. What I do hope is that they also know what not absorb. Else, they have nothing but a mushed up bowl of their favorite things and just decided it would stick together with glue and duct tape. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron\_(cryptocurrency)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(cryptocurrency)) > > [https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/](https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/) > > [https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal](https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal) > > [https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/](https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/) > > [https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/](https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

EbonyHelicoidalRhino

It cost less to send a transaction (and have it fail) than what it cost for a node to process it. That's because there isn't a fee market. It's an intrinsic feature of the chain. It's cheap and fast thanks to that feature. By nature this opens up the network to clogging, DDOS, and performance issues, which is where the root cause of all the shutdowns happened. They have tried to put various band-aids over that fact to limit as much as possible the occurences of this becoming a problem, but it will always be there. We'll never have guarantee that more shutdowns won't happen, because this fundamental problem will always be there. The consequences of a single shutdown can be catastrophic in a live market that's supposed to track things like oracles, etc. It's enough to deter me from using it.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CockroachSeparate827

Don't evaluate strength where a system is strong. Evaluate it where it's weak. What do we call hacking bitcoin? 1. DDOS transactions 2. Prevent one wallet from transactions 3. Steal one wallet 4. Steal many wallets 1 and 2 are pretty easily done. Use the might of one or two countries to coerce the top 2 or 3 mining groups to only mine empty blocks.  3. Easily done, but not by cryptography. Rubber hose cryptography is the way. 4. Been done, just make an enticing 3rd party service to steal authentication.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

_Niwubo

Tell me why people would not just use Dark Web, if they were really so controversial that people wanted to shut the site down. Like how many sites have actually experienced this apart from DDOS attacks with that ultimately shuts down the site if no load balancers are in place.

t9b

True. Just be careful though - wallets in the ecosystem don’t run their own nodes, meaning they rely on polkadotjs end points. This is a house of cards because polkadotjs systematically removes endpoints if they cannot be reached for example because the wallets are using too much bandwidth. This is wide open to a DDOS on all the endpoints meaning wallets will just stop working. Pretty bad design.

divinesleeper

It's being solved by Kaspa I meant, nano is centralized PoS garbage that went down by DDOS last bullrun, no I don't care about whatever complex bandaids were put on. And nano doesn't even achieve Kaspas TPS even tho it's centralized.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

99Beers

Nano is a noob trap. It used to be in the top 100 and is now almost 300 by marketcap. Last cycle multiple DDOS attacks killed any momentum the coin had.

99Beers

Can't wait until the next DDOS spam attack that takes Nano down again. This shit tier level of ad is a noob trap.

PM_Me_Ur_Clues

Seems more like the page crashed due to refreshing like a mass DDOS attack.

alineali

Some kind of DDOS protection, may be?

Peach-555

Once platforms no longer have security by obscurity they are generally taken down or being blacklisted by payment processors, sites like that also can't operate without DDOS protection which has their own TOS. Even the use of BTC has increasingly been restricted over the last decade. The days of username+password+banktransfer or meeting in the street with cash from the local bitcoin page is over. BTC share of revenue in online black markets are also down. I imagine it's still possible, but no longer feasible for the person in the street. I don't disagree with the overall sentiment of your post about technological change being the driving force and not the other way around. All states has to adjust to technology even if it's just to avoid being dominated by other states in military competition. It's a literal technological arms race. I think I see my mistake from earlier, I used the wrong term. The internet has increasingly been monetized and by extension increasingly corporate. As for BTC influence on the real world. I don't personally don't see how BTC would not be shaped by the times and the world, rather than the times and the world being shaped by BTC. I think the US spot ETF is nice in that it allows for an easier access to having savings in BTC, which hopefully reduces volatility and makes sudden growth less likely.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

clash_is_a_scam

> Block space has to be scarce for security otherwise the network gets non stop ddos attacks. ORLY? Smaller blocksize makes DDOS *easier*. Denial of service works by using up all available capacity. Kinda, like, what ordinals are doing to BTC right now...

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

-TrustyDwarf-

Algorand. Sadly it’s shutting down on January 1 2024 at 00:00 UTC thanks to oranges.meme launching its coordinated DDOS orange juicing attack.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

DesignFirst4438

Didn't eth have outages in 2016 and 2017 from DDOS attacks? Didn't it suffer network congestion in 2020? I remember the 'gas wars' well. Trading on the eth network is expensive. Fortunately it has first mover advantage.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

Dettol-tasting-menu

So you agree that bitcoin could be used as a word processor if someone is willing to pay tx fees? If someone is willing to pay off the miners it’s ok to DDOS attack the Bitcoin network because it’s a “free market”? Did you know there are a lot of spam filtering code in place in Bitcoin core, precisely to filter out spams? If your email inbox is filled with spams and none of your legitimate emails can get sent or received would it be ok with you because the spammer did pay off the service provider? You conflated “free market” and bitcoin’s purpose. What’s your answer to my hospital analogy. There is something wrong with the situation and you know it.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

ElderBlade

>Why is that? Like any other hot wallet, the private keys are on an internet connected device, so it's vulnerable to hacking. Electrum in particular is quite a popular wallet, so it's a big target for phishing scams and DDOS attacks. Here are several examples from the electrum sub: [Stolen](https://www.reddit.com/r/Electrum/comments/yyhdhi/stolen/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) [All my bitcoin was stolen from electrum wallet](https://www.reddit.com/r/Electrum/comments/pc5qn8/all_my_bitcoin_was_stolen_from_electrum_wallet_a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) [My btc was stolen from electrum](https://www.reddit.com/r/Electrum/comments/tf52ta/my_btc_02_was_stolen_from_electrum/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) [BTC was stolen from electrum wallet on Mac Os](https://www.reddit.com/r/Electrum/comments/mstt26/btc_stolen_from_electrum_wallet_on_mac_os_just/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) [Stolen bitcoin](https://www.reddit.com/r/Electrum/comments/lhli89/stolen_bitcoin/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) [0.68 BTC stolen from electrum wallet](https://www.reddit.com/r/Electrum/comments/kpl14d/068_btc_stolen_from_electrum_wallet/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) [BTC Stolen](https://www.reddit.com/r/Electrum/comments/m3cmgc/btc_stolen/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) DDOS attacks on electrum servers in [2018](https://cointelegraph.com/news/phishing-attack-on-electrum-wallet-nets-hacker-almost-1-million-in-hours-report) and [2019](https://cointelegraph.com/news/electrum-faces-another-fake-wallet-attack-users-reported-to-lose-millions-of-dollars), where users were prompted to download a malicious update that cleaned out their wallets In every single case, the funds were stolen from the hot wallet. I've never heard of someone losing their funds when it was paired with a hardware device because it requires direct access to the device to sign a transaction. The other common factor is the person was using electrum on a windows system, which is already insecure and vulnerable to malware and viruses. >How can i do that? Here's a guide for using a non-internet connected device: https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/coldstorage.html Oddly enough, there's no guide for hardware wallets except for how to get them working on linux: https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/hardware-linux.html Another great option is Sparrow Wallet.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

AmbitiousPhilosopher

It's really quite simple, test each network for yourself. Most Bitcoin UTXO are currently stalled, and have been for years. All nano accounts are currently unstalled. If we increase the demand for nano transactions beyond capacity (like Bitcoin currently has), some accounts do get temporarily stalled, but not for as long as Bitcoin suffers. Every network that experiences demand beyond capacity suffers some limitations, Bitcoin is fairly unique in that the high capacity version was DDOS attacked and killed outright very early in development history.

AmbitiousPhilosopher

It was DDOS attacked, but it did recover, unlike Bitcoin.

MachaMacMorrigan

Consider a DDOS attack on every *.gov using BTC sign/verify with spoof addresses. 'Block everything'? As Salvor Hardin said, it's a poor atom blaster that won't point both ways.

CointestMod

#TRON Con-Arguments Below is a TRON con-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > TRON is a decentralized, open-source blockchain-based operating system with smart contract functionality, a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm, and its own cryptocurrency, Tronix (TRX). Justin Sun founded it in March 2014, and it has been overseen and supervised by the TRON Foundation, a non-profit organization in Singapore founded the same year. It began as an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token before migrating to its own blockchain in 2018. > > # CONS > > **Whitepaper Plagiarism** > > In January 2018, Tron's developers were accused of plagiarism after many sections of the Tron whitepaper appeared nearly identical to IPFS and Filecoin technical documentation. IPFS is an acronym for InterPlanetary File System. Juan Benet, CEO of Protocol Labs, which develops IFPS tools and services, revealed on Twitter in early January 2018 that Tron's whitepaper authors did not properly cite references and that the document was "mostly copied" from other projects. Even the equations and formulas mentioned in the first version of Tron's whitepaper were identical to those found in IPFS documentation. Sun claimed to have a "very detailed" reference to the most recent Chinese version of the Tron whitepaper. He also claimed that the Tron paper was translated into other languages by volunteers who may have overlooked important details. Just as Vitalik had also sarcastically said in twitter regarding the teams copy-pasting abilities, this just goes to show how un-genuine their team appears even making the most basic of mistakes. > > **Question of Vulnerability** > > A barrage of requests sent by a single PC could be used to squeeze the power of the blockchain's CPU, overload the memory, and perform a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, according to HackerOne. "Using a single machine, an attacker could send DDOS attack to all or 51 percent of the Super Representative (SR) node and render Tron network unusable or unavailable," the claim goes. While TRON is somewhat better in marketing compared to other cryptocurrencies, it falls short on one of the most important pillars for an effective one, that of which is security. To hinder a blockchain with just one computer is the polar opposite of what you want a cryptocurrency to be. > > **Un-Stablecoin** > > TRON's native stablecoin "USDD" de-pegged to the US dollar earlier this year, falling to as low as 91 cents. Its design is uncannily similar to Terra's stablecoin, UST, which lost its price peg and imploded a month ago, wiping out $40 billion in market value. If it continues to follow UST's path considering how similar they are in function and structure, one could assume they also have a ticking algorithmic time bomb in the making. > > **Final Thoughts** > > It seems that TRON has a knack for idolizing (to the point of almost copying their work) other projects both in and out of the crypto-sphere. What I do hope is that they also know what not absorb. Else, they have nothing but a mushed up bowl of their favorite things and just decided it would stick together with glue and duct tape. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron\_(cryptocurrency)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(cryptocurrency)) > > [https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/](https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/) > > [https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal](https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal) > > [https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/](https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/) > > [https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/](https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Con-Arguments Below is a TRON con-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > TRON is a decentralized, open-source blockchain-based operating system with smart contract functionality, a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm, and its own cryptocurrency, Tronix (TRX). Justin Sun founded it in March 2014, and it has been overseen and supervised by the TRON Foundation, a non-profit organization in Singapore founded the same year. It began as an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token before migrating to its own blockchain in 2018. > > # CONS > > **Whitepaper Plagiarism** > > In January 2018, Tron's developers were accused of plagiarism after many sections of the Tron whitepaper appeared nearly identical to IPFS and Filecoin technical documentation. IPFS is an acronym for InterPlanetary File System. Juan Benet, CEO of Protocol Labs, which develops IFPS tools and services, revealed on Twitter in early January 2018 that Tron's whitepaper authors did not properly cite references and that the document was "mostly copied" from other projects. Even the equations and formulas mentioned in the first version of Tron's whitepaper were identical to those found in IPFS documentation. Sun claimed to have a "very detailed" reference to the most recent Chinese version of the Tron whitepaper. He also claimed that the Tron paper was translated into other languages by volunteers who may have overlooked important details. Just as Vitalik had also sarcastically said in twitter regarding the teams copy-pasting abilities, this just goes to show how un-genuine their team appears even making the most basic of mistakes. > > **Question of Vulnerability** > > A barrage of requests sent by a single PC could be used to squeeze the power of the blockchain's CPU, overload the memory, and perform a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, according to HackerOne. "Using a single machine, an attacker could send DDOS attack to all or 51 percent of the Super Representative (SR) node and render Tron network unusable or unavailable," the claim goes. While TRON is somewhat better in marketing compared to other cryptocurrencies, it falls short on one of the most important pillars for an effective one, that of which is security. To hinder a blockchain with just one computer is the polar opposite of what you want a cryptocurrency to be. > > **Un-Stablecoin** > > TRON's native stablecoin "USDD" de-pegged to the US dollar earlier this year, falling to as low as 91 cents. Its design is uncannily similar to Terra's stablecoin, UST, which lost its price peg and imploded a month ago, wiping out $40 billion in market value. If it continues to follow UST's path considering how similar they are in function and structure, one could assume they also have a ticking algorithmic time bomb in the making. > > **Final Thoughts** > > It seems that TRON has a knack for idolizing (to the point of almost copying their work) other projects both in and out of the crypto-sphere. What I do hope is that they also know what not absorb. Else, they have nothing but a mushed up bowl of their favorite things and just decided it would stick together with glue and duct tape. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron\_(cryptocurrency)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(cryptocurrency)) > > [https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/](https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/) > > [https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal](https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal) > > [https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/](https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/) > > [https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/](https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Con-Arguments Below is a TRON con-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > TRON is a decentralized, open-source blockchain-based operating system with smart contract functionality, a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm, and its own cryptocurrency, Tronix (TRX). Justin Sun founded it in March 2014, and it has been overseen and supervised by the TRON Foundation, a non-profit organization in Singapore founded the same year. It began as an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token before migrating to its own blockchain in 2018. > > # CONS > > **Whitepaper Plagiarism** > > In January 2018, Tron's developers were accused of plagiarism after many sections of the Tron whitepaper appeared nearly identical to IPFS and Filecoin technical documentation. IPFS is an acronym for InterPlanetary File System. Juan Benet, CEO of Protocol Labs, which develops IFPS tools and services, revealed on Twitter in early January 2018 that Tron's whitepaper authors did not properly cite references and that the document was "mostly copied" from other projects. Even the equations and formulas mentioned in the first version of Tron's whitepaper were identical to those found in IPFS documentation. Sun claimed to have a "very detailed" reference to the most recent Chinese version of the Tron whitepaper. He also claimed that the Tron paper was translated into other languages by volunteers who may have overlooked important details. Just as Vitalik had also sarcastically said in twitter regarding the teams copy-pasting abilities, this just goes to show how un-genuine their team appears even making the most basic of mistakes. > > **Question of Vulnerability** > > A barrage of requests sent by a single PC could be used to squeeze the power of the blockchain's CPU, overload the memory, and perform a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, according to HackerOne. "Using a single machine, an attacker could send DDOS attack to all or 51 percent of the Super Representative (SR) node and render Tron network unusable or unavailable," the claim goes. While TRON is somewhat better in marketing compared to other cryptocurrencies, it falls short on one of the most important pillars for an effective one, that of which is security. To hinder a blockchain with just one computer is the polar opposite of what you want a cryptocurrency to be. > > **Un-Stablecoin** > > TRON's native stablecoin "USDD" de-pegged to the US dollar earlier this year, falling to as low as 91 cents. Its design is uncannily similar to Terra's stablecoin, UST, which lost its price peg and imploded a month ago, wiping out $40 billion in market value. If it continues to follow UST's path considering how similar they are in function and structure, one could assume they also have a ticking algorithmic time bomb in the making. > > **Final Thoughts** > > It seems that TRON has a knack for idolizing (to the point of almost copying their work) other projects both in and out of the crypto-sphere. What I do hope is that they also know what not absorb. Else, they have nothing but a mushed up bowl of their favorite things and just decided it would stick together with glue and duct tape. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron\_(cryptocurrency)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(cryptocurrency)) > > [https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/](https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/) > > [https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal](https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal) > > [https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/](https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/) > > [https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/](https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

KuciMane

firstly, that 7% drops to 1.5% and will stay at 1.5% from then on. Inflationary currency’s have a reason. There is a reason Bitcoin is at an ATH of wallets not moving Bitcoin. No one uses it, why? Because it’s a deflationary currency. As every country continues to inflate their currency, that *infinite* continuous inflated money continues to flow into assets that combat inflation inflation, hence people invest in stocks & now crypto. Also why people spend their money. Why would I hold cash in a savings account forever if a snickers bar that’s $3 today is going to cost $8 tomorrow? I’m going to buy that candy today, and put my extra money into something(stocks/crypto) that is going to increase with the price of the things around me, and also hope my job increases my wage at the same rate(they wont). Inflation puts pressure on people in a society to not hoard wealth. Keeps things going in circulation. Whether that’s by investing in *N* thing, or participating in consumerism. Solana has a 7% inflation now, that will drop to 1.5% indefinitely, which beats the average inflation rate everywhere. But still inflates, so still has some pressure of spending/investing/doing something. This makes Solana a pretty attractive theoretical currency to be adopted. This plus the other aspects of Solana: >insanely fast, insanely cheap, really good marketing, really great community, really great UI’s, and unbeatable UX, upgrades that addressed past problems(outtages, etc *[btw, not many people know this, but Bitcoin has gone down two times in it’s history, & Ethereum, although has not had outtages, has had DDOS attacks that may as well have been equivalent to what an outtage woulf cause, and that’s making the chain unusable, whether by finality issues, or costing boatloads of money for small transfers]*) make Solana a super attractive crypto to invest in. Visa adding it along with Ethereum to their pilot program, AWS adding it to it’s node runner app(that only Ethereum is also on), Google Cloud using it with it’s BigQuery; some people might say Solana has reached blue chip status *(I am some people)*

CointestMod

#TRON Con-Arguments Below is a TRON con-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > TRON is a decentralized, open-source blockchain-based operating system with smart contract functionality, a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm, and its own cryptocurrency, Tronix (TRX). Justin Sun founded it in March 2014, and it has been overseen and supervised by the TRON Foundation, a non-profit organization in Singapore founded the same year. It began as an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token before migrating to its own blockchain in 2018. > > # CONS > > **Whitepaper Plagiarism** > > In January 2018, Tron's developers were accused of plagiarism after many sections of the Tron whitepaper appeared nearly identical to IPFS and Filecoin technical documentation. IPFS is an acronym for InterPlanetary File System. Juan Benet, CEO of Protocol Labs, which develops IFPS tools and services, revealed on Twitter in early January 2018 that Tron's whitepaper authors did not properly cite references and that the document was "mostly copied" from other projects. Even the equations and formulas mentioned in the first version of Tron's whitepaper were identical to those found in IPFS documentation. Sun claimed to have a "very detailed" reference to the most recent Chinese version of the Tron whitepaper. He also claimed that the Tron paper was translated into other languages by volunteers who may have overlooked important details. Just as Vitalik had also sarcastically said in twitter regarding the teams copy-pasting abilities, this just goes to show how un-genuine their team appears even making the most basic of mistakes. > > **Question of Vulnerability** > > A barrage of requests sent by a single PC could be used to squeeze the power of the blockchain's CPU, overload the memory, and perform a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, according to HackerOne. "Using a single machine, an attacker could send DDOS attack to all or 51 percent of the Super Representative (SR) node and render Tron network unusable or unavailable," the claim goes. While TRON is somewhat better in marketing compared to other cryptocurrencies, it falls short on one of the most important pillars for an effective one, that of which is security. To hinder a blockchain with just one computer is the polar opposite of what you want a cryptocurrency to be. > > **Un-Stablecoin** > > TRON's native stablecoin "USDD" de-pegged to the US dollar earlier this year, falling to as low as 91 cents. Its design is uncannily similar to Terra's stablecoin, UST, which lost its price peg and imploded a month ago, wiping out $40 billion in market value. If it continues to follow UST's path considering how similar they are in function and structure, one could assume they also have a ticking algorithmic time bomb in the making. > > **Final Thoughts** > > It seems that TRON has a knack for idolizing (to the point of almost copying their work) other projects both in and out of the crypto-sphere. What I do hope is that they also know what not absorb. Else, they have nothing but a mushed up bowl of their favorite things and just decided it would stick together with glue and duct tape. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron\_(cryptocurrency)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(cryptocurrency)) > > [https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/](https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/) > > [https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal](https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal) > > [https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/](https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/) > > [https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/](https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Con-Arguments Below is a TRON con-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > TRON is a decentralized, open-source blockchain-based operating system with smart contract functionality, a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm, and its own cryptocurrency, Tronix (TRX). Justin Sun founded it in March 2014, and it has been overseen and supervised by the TRON Foundation, a non-profit organization in Singapore founded the same year. It began as an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token before migrating to its own blockchain in 2018. > > # CONS > > **Whitepaper Plagiarism** > > In January 2018, Tron's developers were accused of plagiarism after many sections of the Tron whitepaper appeared nearly identical to IPFS and Filecoin technical documentation. IPFS is an acronym for InterPlanetary File System. Juan Benet, CEO of Protocol Labs, which develops IFPS tools and services, revealed on Twitter in early January 2018 that Tron's whitepaper authors did not properly cite references and that the document was "mostly copied" from other projects. Even the equations and formulas mentioned in the first version of Tron's whitepaper were identical to those found in IPFS documentation. Sun claimed to have a "very detailed" reference to the most recent Chinese version of the Tron whitepaper. He also claimed that the Tron paper was translated into other languages by volunteers who may have overlooked important details. Just as Vitalik had also sarcastically said in twitter regarding the teams copy-pasting abilities, this just goes to show how un-genuine their team appears even making the most basic of mistakes. > > **Question of Vulnerability** > > A barrage of requests sent by a single PC could be used to squeeze the power of the blockchain's CPU, overload the memory, and perform a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, according to HackerOne. "Using a single machine, an attacker could send DDOS attack to all or 51 percent of the Super Representative (SR) node and render Tron network unusable or unavailable," the claim goes. While TRON is somewhat better in marketing compared to other cryptocurrencies, it falls short on one of the most important pillars for an effective one, that of which is security. To hinder a blockchain with just one computer is the polar opposite of what you want a cryptocurrency to be. > > **Un-Stablecoin** > > TRON's native stablecoin "USDD" de-pegged to the US dollar earlier this year, falling to as low as 91 cents. Its design is uncannily similar to Terra's stablecoin, UST, which lost its price peg and imploded a month ago, wiping out $40 billion in market value. If it continues to follow UST's path considering how similar they are in function and structure, one could assume they also have a ticking algorithmic time bomb in the making. > > **Final Thoughts** > > It seems that TRON has a knack for idolizing (to the point of almost copying their work) other projects both in and out of the crypto-sphere. What I do hope is that they also know what not absorb. Else, they have nothing but a mushed up bowl of their favorite things and just decided it would stick together with glue and duct tape. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron\_(cryptocurrency)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(cryptocurrency)) > > [https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/](https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/) > > [https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal](https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal) > > [https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/](https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/) > > [https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/](https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by a deleted user. > #CONs > > This is the Cons section of [my analysis on Solana](https://np.reddit.com/r/MPlankton/comments/vk42tn/solana_research_june_2022/) > > There are many flaws with Solana's network and design. Retail investors should be cautious of investing in Solana until the upcoming **QUIC** and **Localized Fee Prioritizations** fix the ongoing outage and stability issues with the network. > > ##Way too many outages > > One of the biggest problems with Solana is that it has had way too many outages ever since its Mainnet launch. It's had at least [4 major outages, 3 partial outages](https://status.solana.com/uptime), and numerous congestions caused by DDoS attacks (some unintentional) in the 9 months between Sept 2021 and Jun 2022. That's way more than most of its competitors. These numerous outages have ruined its reputation in the crypto community. > > The network is very vulnerable to DoS attacks, which have brought down the network many times. In Sept 2021, a [DoS attack flooded the entire network](https://solana.com/news/9-14-network-outage-initial-overview) to the point it could not recover for almost a full day. In Jan 21-22, 2022, [bots brought down the network](https://fortune.com/2022/01/25/solana-founder-anatoly-yakovenko-crypto-crash-blockchain-instability/) with excessive duplicate transactions. A similar DDoS attack happened on Apr 30, when a [NFT minting bots took down the network](https://solana.com/news/04-30-22-solana-mainnet-beta-outage-report-mitigation) with 4M TPS of spam. > > During DDoS attacks, validators continue forwarding transactions to the leader. Since there is no mempool, the leader has to keep up with the traffic. If the leader can't keep up, the transaction drops and the user has to resubmit it. When congested and attacked by DDOS, the number of forks increases greatly, and leaders end up picking branches quickly and inaccurately, often extending empty blocks. This ends up reducing throughput of valid transactions and creating wasted forks. For example, during the Jan 21-22 attacks, the true throughput fell to 140 TPS. It's really easy for DDoS attacks to create a disruptive positive feedback loop that shuts down the whole network. > > ##Blockchain Design > > **Slower Finality** > > Due to the design of Proof of History consensus, Solana has probabilistic finality with a moderate chance of wasted forks. It takes [32 blocks before any transaction is final](https://docs.solana.com/proposals/block-confirmation). At 2.5s per block, this means 80 seconds. Users will see their transactions posted in 2.5s. If there's no congestions, they can probably wait 10s and assume it's probabilistically final. But if there's congestion, lots of skipped blocks, and people DDoS'ing the network, it's not deterministically final until they wait 80 seconds. This is much slower than many of their competitors, which have 2-10s deterministic finality. > > **Exaggerated/Useless TPS metrics** > > Solana's reported 50K TPS in ideal conditions is completely exaggerated. > > First, that number is based on a 400 ms slot time, but the current slot time is around 600-800 ms, which reduces the ideal TPS 25-50%. > > Solana also exaggerates their throughput by including non-useful transactions in their metrics. This includes vote transactions, which account for 70-90% of transactions. > > The count of valid TPS (excluding vote transactions and erroneous transactions) is much lower. About 80-85% of transactions are either vote transactions that are used for consensus or erroneous transactions. The true [non-vote TPS limit is much lower at around **400-600 TPS**](https://dashboard.chaincrunch.cc/public/dashboard/cc7a0d94-7f70-46f4-aae4-2f8810430931#theme=night) when the network isn't congested. As of June 2022, on average only 15% of total counted transactions are working transactions. > > In addition, validators routinely skip blocks, encounter bad forks, or post empty blocks. Even when there's no congestion, validator's unweighed skip rate is [10-25% of blocks](https://solanabeach.io/validators). > > ##Opaque Ledger and Block Explorer > > Solana has several explorers, and all of them are very opaque. The official explorer doesn't allow you to browse blocks and transactions, and it's practical useless. Solana Beach is probalby the best explorer, but it too shows almost no data except for the address and transaction fee. It is very confusing trying to decipher these transactions. There's almost no information on the identity of validators. Both of the main explorers are very slow and often stall when querying details. > > Another part of Solana's obscurity is the 30% of the total supply of SOL that is non-circulating but staked. It's supposedly owned by the Solana Foundation. This has been discussed several times by developers on Discord, but no one seems to understand why it's there and how they're using it. It also doesn't help that Solana's main explorer and Solana Beach explorer won't load details about its non-circulating supply. > > **Unable to Audit Smart Contracts** > > Probably the worst issue on Solana (even worse than the outages) is that you can't audit smart contracts. When you use a smart contract on Solana, you are blindly trusting that it does what it says it'll do. There's not a single Solana Explorer that currently shows smart contract code. > > Developers can publish their source code on another website, but they can also redeploy their on-chain contract at the same address. So users don't have a reliable method of trusting source code published off-chain. > > ##Poor Tokenomics > > **Transaction fees are 99% subsidized by Staking Rewards, which feed back into SOL as supply inflation** > > Like many networks, the low transaction fees are not enough to pay for the cost of running the network. > > Solana is expected to make [$12M in transaction fees in this year going by the current 30-day average]( https://tokenterminal.com/terminal/projects/solana). Staking rewards is expected to [pay out around $1.4B in SOL in 2022](https://messari.io/asset/solana/profile/supply-schedule). That means 99.1% of validator rewards are being paid by staking rewards instead of the artificially-low transaction fees. And staking rewards inflate the supply of the SOL token. > > Total supply inflation for staking started out [at 8% and gradually declines by 15% annually until it reaches 1.5%](https://docs.solana.com/inflation/inflation_schedule). Note that this is an underestimate because these calculations are based on total supply, not circulating supply, which is 30% smaller. Messari currently lists [circulating supply inflation as 7.4%](https://messari.io/screener/supply-and-marketcap-EB1755C2). > > Solana is fully-vested as of Jan 2022, though there is a 30% gap between the recorded circulating and total supply because most of the [Foundation's staked SOL](https://explorer.solana.com/supply?filter=nonCirculating) is not included in circulating supply. (Their Explorer website barely has any supply details or charts, and doesn't even loading half of the time, so it's hard to investigate.) > > ##Other Points > > **Requires insecure bridges to other networks** > > Solana is a bit isolated from other blockchains. It requires insecure bridges to connect to other networks, which is also an issue for many other networks. Bridges often get exploited, like the [Feb 2022 $320M Solana Wormhole hack](https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/320-million-stolen-from-wormhole-bridge-linking-solana-and-ethereum.html). Solana needs a safer cross-chain protocol if it wants to communicate safely with other networks. > > **High validator requirements** > > The minimum requirements for validators are 12-cores and 128GB of memory. 300 Mbit internet server is preferred. These are enterprise-server requirements, and they're expensive to maintain. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Con-Arguments Below is a TRON con-argument written by CreepToeCurrentSea. > TRON is a decentralized, open-source blockchain-based operating system with smart contract functionality, a proof-of-stake consensus algorithm, and its own cryptocurrency, Tronix (TRX). Justin Sun founded it in March 2014, and it has been overseen and supervised by the TRON Foundation, a non-profit organization in Singapore founded the same year. It began as an Ethereum-based ERC-20 token before migrating to its own blockchain in 2018. > > # CONS > > **Whitepaper Plagiarism** > > In January 2018, Tron's developers were accused of plagiarism after many sections of the Tron whitepaper appeared nearly identical to IPFS and Filecoin technical documentation. IPFS is an acronym for InterPlanetary File System. Juan Benet, CEO of Protocol Labs, which develops IFPS tools and services, revealed on Twitter in early January 2018 that Tron's whitepaper authors did not properly cite references and that the document was "mostly copied" from other projects. Even the equations and formulas mentioned in the first version of Tron's whitepaper were identical to those found in IPFS documentation. Sun claimed to have a "very detailed" reference to the most recent Chinese version of the Tron whitepaper. He also claimed that the Tron paper was translated into other languages by volunteers who may have overlooked important details. Just as Vitalik had also sarcastically said in twitter regarding the teams copy-pasting abilities, this just goes to show how un-genuine their team appears even making the most basic of mistakes. > > **Question of Vulnerability** > > A barrage of requests sent by a single PC could be used to squeeze the power of the blockchain's CPU, overload the memory, and perform a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack, according to HackerOne. "Using a single machine, an attacker could send DDOS attack to all or 51 percent of the Super Representative (SR) node and render Tron network unusable or unavailable," the claim goes. While TRON is somewhat better in marketing compared to other cryptocurrencies, it falls short on one of the most important pillars for an effective one, that of which is security. To hinder a blockchain with just one computer is the polar opposite of what you want a cryptocurrency to be. > > **Un-Stablecoin** > > TRON's native stablecoin "USDD" de-pegged to the US dollar earlier this year, falling to as low as 91 cents. Its design is uncannily similar to Terra's stablecoin, UST, which lost its price peg and imploded a month ago, wiping out $40 billion in market value. If it continues to follow UST's path considering how similar they are in function and structure, one could assume they also have a ticking algorithmic time bomb in the making. > > **Final Thoughts** > > It seems that TRON has a knack for idolizing (to the point of almost copying their work) other projects both in and out of the crypto-sphere. What I do hope is that they also know what not absorb. Else, they have nothing but a mushed up bowl of their favorite things and just decided it would stick together with glue and duct tape. > > Sources: > > [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron\_(cryptocurrency)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(cryptocurrency)) > > [https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/](https://cryptoslate.com/justin-suns-controversies-plagiarism-teslas-warren-buffett-kidney-stones-and-a-deleted-apology/) > > [https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal](https://www.inverse.com/article/40050-tron-trx-cryptocurrency-plagiarism-scandal) > > [https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/](https://www.zdnet.com/article/tron-critical-security-flaw-could-break-the-entire-blockchain/) > > [https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/](https://fortune.com/2022/06/13/algorithmic-stablecoin-usdd-loses-peg-justin-sun-tron-decentralized-usd/) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#TRON Pro-Arguments Below is a TRON pro-argument written by ExchangeEnough7821. > The cryptocurrency Tron was was created in March 2014 by Justin Sun, and is a blockchain-based operating system. In 2017, it was bought by the TRON foundation, a Singapore based non-profit organisation . > > # Transaction Fees > > The first key benefit of Tron is the extremely low transaction fees, which are often a fraction of a penny. In addition, if you have enough Tron staked or ‘frozen’, then many transactions will have no fee, depending on the amount you are sending. The Tron system has a unique way of calculating this fee, and bandwidth points are necessary for normal transactions. Users are automatically allocated 5000 of these bandwidth points for free daily, and more of these are allocated for those who stake tron (which is how transaction fees are lowered for those who stake Tron). There are 3 steps involved when gathering the bandwidth points necessary to complete a transaction, and the system will only move onto the next step if that one does not gather enough points for the transaction fee. Firsty, they will use any bandwidth points earned from staked (or ‘frozen’) Tron, then it will use free daily bandwidth points and finally Tron owned by the sender. The amount of bandwidth points needed is calculated by multiplying the number of bytes involved by 10 Sun. The reason for these fees is to prevents user carrying out DDOS attacks on the network without paying anything. > > # Partnerships > > Another positive about Tron is their partners, as Tron has partnerships with a range of high profile companies, like Samsung. This suggests that these large scale companies have faith in this coin, its infrastructure and its future, which is also a good sign for potential buyers. For example, the crypto is partnered with Sony Interactive Entertainment, and they are working with Sony in the field of blockchain based gaming to facilitate Crypto in-game payments. This leads to a larger audience for Tron, and potential for widespread use in Sony Games. > > # Transaction Speed > > \- Although there is a theoretical transaction speed of 2000 transactions per second, this claim has been disputed by researchers and users. Particularly, Huawei Li, Zhihuai Li and Na Tian published a report named “Resource Bottleneck Analysis of the Blockchain Based On Tron’s TPS”\[1\]. If this figure is accurate however, this would definitely be a positive aspect of Tron. > \- \[1\] - “\[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103\](https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-32591-6\_103) (Paid article) ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_tron) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.

Aerocryptic

DDOS attack on Cc 💀

ECOEXIT

What’s “hilarious” to me is not related to /cc/ but rather how some investors can completely disregard basic tokenomics in favour for greed and faster profits. Today 88.5% of Solana’s entire supply is contained within 3000 addresses. Solana's current situation raises concerns as over 62% of its supply is tightly controlled by a small group, and the public sale was abysmal (2%) the rest was “airdropped” hard to tell who received what. This kind of tokenomics facilitates activities like wash-trading, fake order books, restricting demand, manipulating demand and supply prompting my decision to steer clear and warn others. For those of you who remember, projects like “Bitconnect” also hit #7 on cmc back in the day, with massive % gains day by day, not to compare Solana and Bitconnect, but do not forget how easily you can manipulate marketcaps with a restricted supply. While short-term gains are possible, the risks are significant. What troubles me further is the apparent shift away from valuing decentralization and sound tokenomics. Instead, demands for high transactions per second (tps), total value locked (tvl), fast finality, and throughput take precedence, despite the lack of decentralisation and vulnerabilities such as the susceptibility to a simple DDOS attack that can disrupt the network. The entire network of Solana came to a crippling halt for over 18 hours until the validators restarted the network last year. To me this raises questions about whether this direction truly represents the “future of finance”. Or whenever it’s just a more crypto compatible banking service with web 3 integrations, nfts, and smart-contracts, managed by VC funds. My cautious approach extends to other projects too like DOT, where restricted supply poses risks. I've warned people in my circle about some of these concerns, acknowledging that while some profit can be made investing into these VC funded projects short term, others I know have lost a substantial amount of money investing these long-term. Do not even get me started on all the information and allegations released in conjunction with FTX, and the currently ongoing SBF court-case. Or FTX too holds quite a % of the supply, sooner or later they will have to pay creditors. For a more in-depth look, you can find my detailed post on liquidity/wash trading below. I made this post about marketcaps not too long ago should any of you be interested. [The Marketcap Mirage](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/179gqft/the_market_cap_mirage_the_truth_about_the_hidden/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1)

CointestMod

#Solana Con-Arguments Below is a Solana con-argument written by Far-Scholar9028. > **Solana Cons** > > **Centralization** > > An estimated 1,700 validator nodes support Solana. If a single entity or collection of entities comes to possess a sizable portion of the SOL token supply, the Solana network may become unduly concentrated. The network's decentralization may suffer because Solana requires more specialized equipment to join and is unable to draw a sizable user base. There is a high concentration of stakes among validators, with 22 validators controlling 33% of total staked SOL. Accordingly, if 22 validators conspired, the network might theoretically come to an end. > > **Network Outages** > > * September 14,2021: 15 Hours of outage as bots capitalized on an IDO on raydium > > * January 2022: The whole month faced partial outages of 6-12 per day due to high demand of NFT minting and defi usage. > > * April 30, 2022: 7 Hour outage due to a DDOS attack by bots > > **Solana, the token** > > The token distribution on Solana reveals that the top 0.04% of addresses, or around 3,000 addresses outright, hold 88.5% of the current outstanding SOL. Along with early investors and the founding team, these wallets also contain staking pools and exchanges. 11.7 million SOL are included in the biggest wallet. Less than 1% of the outstanding SOL is held by the bottom 98.6% of wallets on Solana. ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Solana) to find submissions for other topics.