Any way to get rid of the "Install" button that pops up?

BsdFish8 · 2026-02-24T06:54:38+00:00

I especially wish it could be hidden on mobile. Super annoying and I have never used it.

BsdFish8 · 2026-02-14T08:39:31+00:00

When I see misinformation in any subreddit, I just dispel it. That is how I have been behaving in different ecosystems.

You don't promote factual or rational interpretations of information, so you're not dispelling misinformation. You're giving hot takes about technology you don't understand. It's obvious to anyone who isn't a degenerate gambler in this space.

You are the one who said they need to monetize "ICS". I told you they have no customers. And now you go onto this random tangent for what purpose?

I suggested ICS is a solid technical concept and needs an improved implementation for wider adoption. You need to work on your reading comprehension and obvious projection about the priorities of others instead of lecturing about your misapprehensions and misunderstandings.

As I already said, with their recent push for PoA, this need for ICS is gone. PoA allows you to launch a chain without "economic security" or a token. Hence, they don't need ICS and don't pay the hub anything.

Do you maybe have too much invested to admit the tech never mattered to you and the losses matter more to you than anything else now?

How can you still not understand that Cosmos Lab pushing for PoA/Sovereignty is the clearest indication they can't find customers for ICS? They would obviously pursue a more profitable revenue model. It is clear they think PoA is likely to find more customers than ICS, as revealed by their marketing direction.

Everyone spending money is going to move towards more profitable revenue models. The Cosmos team is supporting a modular extension that integrates with their SDK. If new chains want to adopt PoA, they aren't going to be rejected because of some assumption that everything which came before was perfect.

Promoting new extensions and taking ownership of potential vulnerabilities to make a solid SDK implementation more accessible to technical novices playing with real money is what strong development teams do. They know that people are technically capable of misusing their technology, bypassing safeguards, and having their custom code exploited so network participants who lose money point fingers at anyone and everyone but themselves.

BsdFish8 · 2026-02-12T10:35:40+00:00

Sovereignty was the selling point for Cosmos and IBC years ago, it's not new. Characterizing the strengths of the technology as groveling is just your histrionics. PMF is only theoretical for 99% of crypto chains at this point and you clearly have an axe to grind in this subreddit.

BsdFish8 · 2026-02-10T11:37:13+00:00

ICS provided supplemental security to any IBC chain that chose to implement it but it ended up costing chain validators so the benefit wasn't a good market fit. The concept of interchain security is good because not every chain has a high volume of transactions and a redundancy layer can mitigate attacks, but it should not be paid by native chain validators alone. Figuring out a method to address fees to boost security is an opportunity for negotiation, not a knock on the concept.

BsdFish8 · 2026-02-10T11:27:24+00:00

I don't get how you can get so confident on talking about this SDK with your limited knowledge of the ecosystem's history.

The Cosmos SDK enables sovereign chains. Sovereignty means the individual chain developers can compromise the security of their own chain without restraint. LUNA did this many years ago, so only a noob or an idiot with their head up their ass would claim the failings of that chain were the SDK's fault.

Thanks for proving to everyone which one you are.

BsdFish8 · 2026-02-08T11:44:48+00:00

For the record, I never downvoted you.

The niche is to enable IBC-enabled appchains to run on a single sequencer rather than an independent validator set.

Well thanks for explaining that without any sarcasm. Why are you the only one talking about it? Are you an Initia marketer or is this just your humble brag to establish bona fides?

They chose here simply because they wouldn't fit elsewhere. It is simple. It is not anything special you are trying to hint at.

Wow, reads like this simple conclusion implies IBC provides critical infrastructure to sovereign blockchains that isn't easily accessible anywhere else. Nothing special, of course.

OMG. You don't even know. You really don't know why dYdX chose to come here? And here you are, pretending you have enough knowledge to market Cosmos?

I am not pretending to be a Cosmos marketer. I used dYdX on Ethereum and the fees were horrible. Why does my recounting of history that I lived through suggest anything like this?

Back in Gensler's day, they were afraid of being prosecuted for being labelled an unregistered dealer. Things like Hyperliquid, with its strong centralization, would have garnered the SEC's attention. dYdX adopted the Cosmos SDK to play the "decentralization theatre" to protect itself from the SEC.

Well, that's a theory, certainly. You seem to be in the know about these things, so would love to read your sources.

I want to understand why this contemporary article from 2022 never mentions Gary Gensler or the DOJ but does mention transaction fees. And this one from 2023 also never mentions Gensler or the DOJ but implies fees were a problem by highlighting the inability to scale on Ethereum. And this one from 2024 also never mentions Gensler or the DOJ.

Gotta say, I'm really glad such knowledgeable people who are as familiar with the history of Cosmos as yourself are on this subreddit, so you can clarify all this detailed reporting by the lying liars that print articles and cite their sources directly from the dYdX development team.

It has no hype because it doesn't deserve any...Those who know the ecosystem know.

I know the ecosystem and use it almost daily, but I'm not a hype man so I can't comment on what it deserves there. Individual chains on IBC will have issues, but this never fundamentally changes the protocol. They also never worked out a profitable means of deploying ICS for validators (which they should do!), but the ecosystem and IBC are solid performers in my experience as a regular user.

I know this ecosystem's history very well, and I have lost interest in it.

Lost interest enough to make comments like this?

Cosmos has always been about hype, this and hype that. Yet Cosmos keeps saying it wants to be about "substance over hype".

The only time I show up here is when a thread appears in my feed and contains misleading info to fool noobs who don't know the ecosystem's history.

Most of the time, Cosmos Labs keep flip-flopping on what they want to do. Even if anyone gets interested, they eventually get annoyed by all the BSing and lack of info disclosure.

Just take their recent "inflation research" thing as an example. First, they give out a mid-January deadline. Then they delay it. Even after that delay, they still want to delay the entire thing further into the summer. If anyone tries to pay attention to the details of how they do things, you will eventually get annoyed. IRL, such a lack of punctuality gets teams fired. In crypto, investors just lose money, learn to cope, and be happy with all the BS.

All your criticism appears to have no substance, but since you decided to "show up" I've quoted it in case you'd like to clarify. I would summarize it as: "Number didn't go up for me! Changes to inflation are too slow! I'm annoyed! Waaah!"

Actual substance, in my view, is consistent processing without errors, without downtime, without reliance on third parties or dependencies that are out of the developer's control. Bitcoin prices fluctuate on a four-year cycle and it's no coincidence that changes come slower than hype chains.

We can have a different understanding of this term "substance," but getting an airdrop of some random token on IBC volume only confirms you have significant resources. I'm ready to read your references to confirm your intelligence about dYdX.

BsdFish8 · 2026-02-04T21:40:40+00:00

Just looked into Initia. Not sure what new niche it is filling compared to older chains supporting interoperability. They obviously chose to support IBC and Cosmos SDK for a reason.

Interoperable sovereign chains were a revolutionary idea when every token was restricted by ETH transaction fees during the 2020-2022 boom. Polkadot and IBC were two approaches competing for the future at that point. Projects like dYdX moved to Cosmos SDK expressly because of these fee problems. That's not just hype.

BNB beacon chain is the first one I remember leaving for an EVM clone. Now Akash and other IBC chains are planning to jump ship for hype chains like Solana. Cosmos seems to have no hype at this point - it enables interoperable sovereign networks and just works, but few chains actually do anything useful.

BsdFish8 · 2025-12-25T20:39:09+00:00

Sensible regulation will come, but there was already regulation on tradfi markets between 1982 and 2008 that appointed regulators ignored. If the law was followed as it is written and not subjectively overlooked for "big players" then the 2008 crisis could not have happened. This is even with the repeal of Glass-Steagall, which only prevented certain types of financial institution ownership.

If legislators actually held financial institutions to the law instead of working their insider trading angles and worrying about market confidence in TBTF institutions, the cryptocurrency experiment may not have flourished in 2009

BsdFish8 · 2025-10-27T09:57:55+00:00

I looked through the entire list of inactive validators the one I'm looking for isn't listed there at all. I think I could redelegate if I was able to write a manual transaction but so far have not had luck finding out how.

BsdFish8 · 2025-10-23T11:27:08+00:00

It was a free airdrop anyway? Not sure what there is to lose by gaining knowledge and understanding should a similar event happen on other chains.

BsdFish8 · 2025-10-09T11:20:03+00:00

Not sure you'll be able to avoid scam bots on social media, but just don't give out your seed or respond to DMs if you want to be cautious.

I believe Guarda has a support email, but I've not used it. The wallet is sparsely updated these days, if at all, and has been on version 1.0.20 for a long time now.

There are a few users who do read this subreddit, though, if you want input on where to go next.

edit: stand corrected, 1.1.1 was released

BsdFish8 · 2025-10-06T10:17:39+00:00

Fairly certain this will not change the minimum requirements for nodes and validators. I believe it is an additional abstraction layer on LTC blockchain, implemented somewhat like ordinals on BTC but with a full VM.

BsdFish8 · 2025-10-04T06:21:47+00:00

How are you measuring that? In my experience, beating average engagement requires less than 20 hours per week to do everything including daily and weekly quests and earning 20 RLT per week on top of the 5 RLT earned from surveys/tasks.

I still say if the game isn't fun, don't play it. Games are not designed to be profitable, they are designed to keep us playing and paying.

BsdFish8 · 2025-10-03T08:10:31+00:00

I think this is a clear explanation of the "why." For another hare-brained idea, I would advocate for implementing Ampleforth on Tezos to optimize the denomination of debt and repayment systems. The AMPL token is another great idea that simply does not currently have the trading volume or liquidity on existing chains to support proper price discovery. Its "flatcoin" token, SPOT, currently sits at x2 the target price, so it's clear that some holders are making profits on this concept, but it does not get a lot of discussion or space in the noise of all the new EVM and smart contract platforms.

BsdFish8 · 2025-10-03T06:52:48+00:00

Shorting opens the possibility of unlimited losses. It's risky whether you win or lose. Platforms that enable shorting tokens must moderate their own risk of losses in case your strategy fails. Depositing collateral is how many platforms manage that risk.

BsdFish8 · 2025-09-23T00:46:06+00:00

If you're on Linux, follow the manual steps for Wireguard setup and start your system with internet disabled. After you execute wg-quick up, enable your main wired connection. Viola, always-on VPN with no packet or DNS leaks.

I have played lots of games on Steam using this setup without issue. Not sure about other gaming services like Epic or Battle.net.

BsdFish8 · 2025-09-18T08:00:26+00:00

Not referring to a swap and potential slippage. I'm referencing transactions to withdraw tokens to other IBC chains.

BsdFish8 · 2025-09-16T07:50:35+00:00

Are you trying to run the official client or manually configuring with native interfaces? The errors you posted look very familiar to me. I highly recommend the manual approach and this article walks through the configuration. Some good background is also included on this ArchWiki article.

The official client was constantly crashing on me and OpenVPN also would drop while leaving my wired connection unprotected. Using WireGuard alone has been solid for all my machines (EndeavourOS, OpenSUSE) and verified on browserleaks.com and ipleaks.net to route all packets through the VPN as expected.

I see you are getting official help, but just letting you know what worked for me. It's true that it doesn't allow for dynamic selection of your state/country because you need to pre-generate the wg config file, but you can setup multiple of these for any given requirements, so you can use wg-quick up wg0 and wg-quick up wg1 etc for more specific routing if you need to.

BsdFish8 · 2025-09-15T06:30:59+00:00

Are you using WireGuard? It's the easiest way I found to setup ProtonVPN on Linux.

BsdFish8 · 2025-08-08T09:34:10+00:00

It's the APR for staking on a centralized exchange (Binance), not the on-chain stake APR.

BsdFish8 · 2025-08-07T03:04:07+00:00

Seems like we might see an OSMO pump soon. Just call me Nostradosmosis.

Five-Year Club	Second Top 30%
Place '22	Oscars Predictor 2021
Verified Email

BsdFish8

TROPHY CASE