Nano is, in fact, too good to be true. Please don't tell your loved ones to buy it. Blaring security flaws and other issues inside this thread.

TL;DR - Nano cannot survive nation bans like bitcoin can, the lightning network is a working product. When you tell friends and family to buy Nano, you are putting them in financial danger.

First and foremost, it is wonderful to have a product that works, right? I'm sure we can agree with that. But what if you have a product that only works and has been working so long because of security flaws that nobody has noticed enough to exploit.

I advise you to check out this short 30 second video on using a non-custodial bitcoin lightning wallet as it's much safer, much more secure, and it comes from the world's most popular crypto asset, Bitcoin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW-7XBrSqCI

Well, what is the problem with Nano? Andreas Antonopolous has said this before on his YouTube channel in this video (The timestamp is 28:08): https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1688&v=fEPW6RXMGmA&feature=emb_title

To paraphrase: He basically said that Nano hasn't been used at scale enough to compare with bitcoin. This means it's like the skinny guy at the gym who is 5'10" (178cm) and 140 pounds (63.5KG) laughing at all the guys who are muscular but have a little difficulty benchpressing their own bodyweight. The skinny guy, in this example, can be thought of as Nano / the nano community because they think the big buff muscular guys struggling is funny even though they haven't had a chance to lift anything beyond the empty bar at all.

Six months after the above video was uploaded / streamed to Aantonopolous's channel, the Nano Network was given a nearly never-ending spam attack that didn't change until the protocol at its core was changed.

Another blaring security flaw: Bitcoin survived the Chinese-government mandated mining purge. Anything and everything cryptocurrency-related in China is now illegal and that includes running a Nano node. There are less than 100 Nano node runners globally and if governments, internet service providers, or companies in general wanted to forcefully remove these individuals or entities from running a Nano node, they could do so with relative ease, however, when you take a bitcoin mining operation offline, there are always 10 people willing to rise up and take the place of that mining individual. When a nano node gets shut down, it gets shut down. There is no incentive to rise up and replace the node that was just shut down.

And then there is just systematic and uncontrollable brigading that comes from the Nano community, and it is lead on by the delusional belief that Nano is somehow superior to bitcoin. If you were to check out their subreddit, you would also quickly realize that not enough people are questioning the safety of the protocol. Oh, and let's not forget that Nano cannot work with smart contracts. So it can't do defy or swaps or anything like that.

Reaction to the delusional from the master himself on twitter: https://imgur.com/a/EPzTXYw

Finally, this trend must be discussed: price action. In the 2017 bull run Bitcoin peaked at 20k USD while Nano peaked a month later at 35 USD. Bitcoin is now at 44.6k USD while Nano is at 2 USD. This is not self-sustaining, and if this trend continues, the amount of bitcoin on the lightning network in USD will likely surpass Nano's total market cap in USD in under a year.
https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/nano
https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/bitcoin
https://1ml.com/ - bitcoin on lightning stats

EDIT: Running an optimal Nano node requires server grade hardware or renting a server and deploying a node on that server. You think an ISP or AWS or whatever cloud-hosting platform won't shut it down if someone orders them to do it?