icebreaker.xyz/0xen |
https://gallery.so/Oxen/galleries | https://opensea.io/collection/farcats

Head of @zksync era, venture partner @latticefund, co-founder chainstory.xyz & writer karthikoncrypto.xyz, FID 681

It's got one-nine of uptime and can be taken down at anytime. It's not censorship resistant when an ICO can take the chain down. There no fundamental difference between Solana and a replicated SQL database (And SQL databases have better uptime).

Like @0xen said; VC pump and dump.

 https://i.imgur.com/ahpVbkB.png

Do u believe this description is still accurate after the upgrades made with local fee structure and no outages over the past few months?

Based on Newton's First Law of Motion, yes.

https://decrypt.co/111486/solana-co-founder-long-term-fix-network-outages

Blockchains have one purpose — to be censorship resistant. If any counterparty can take the chain offline, it's no better than a disturbed database (and Solana is a lot slower).

There are multiple downtime events on Solana this year that directly contradict your devils advocate statement.
https://cryptoslate.com/latest-solana-outage-leave-users-liquidated/

People actually lost money because the chain was unusable (multiple times).

I'll explain the bull case for Solana. Its ONE value prop was to settle transactions for FTX using Jump Trading.

FTX — Trading (Blew up trying to replace Jump with Alameda)
Solana — Fast settlement
Jump — Liquidity (They ran for the hill)

That's the bull case, but none of that exists anymore, so why should Sola

Thanks.  To play devils advocate, uptime and censorship resistance arent the same thing.  Uptime relates to how usable a blockchain is, not if its censorship resistance (assuming all txs get processed during downtime).  Thoughts?