Volatility estimation for Bitcoin: A comparison of GARCH ...
Bitcoin exchange launched in Sydney, amid plans to ...
Bitcoin Closes on First February Price Loss Since 2014 ...
Bitcoin Price Bitcoin Price
Bullion (CBX) | Est 2013 | Masternodes Coming Soon!
Released in late June 2013, Bullion was designed primarily for the purpose of storing wealth. Bullion is the first to employ its pioneering Proof-of-Stake-Participation (PoSP) algorithm which has taken the strength of traditional proof-of-stake implementations, extreme energy efficiency, and injected revolutionary designs to configure the algorithm for maximum security and function.
[WTS] LIBERTADS!! LIBERTADS!! QB’s, and some low premium silver & gold, some below spot
PM PLEASE. MUCH PREFERRED OVER CHAT. LIBERTAD LOT: LIBERTAD PROOF: https://imgur.com/a/Qqtz1xT I am new to Libertads. For these, the ones from 1979 appear to be clean with maybe a little dulling. There is some toning on the ones from the 80s, but in general I would say in good shape. The ones from the 90s and 2000s all appear to be in good condition. There are a few from 2014 that read one bar to the right of the brackets on the Sigma precious metal verifier. I know the silver Eagles do the same. I am 99% sure that these are legitimate, but I am attempting to seek others‘ advice who have more experience with these. As these are the first Libertads I have dealt in, they are all OBO. However, I have marked them all below the national dealers. And as we all know, these have been hard to come by. But, if my prices are high for the market, I am willing to entertain offers. 1979 x 17 (Technically, these are Onzas, not Libertads. 0.925, but with 1 troy oz ASW each) — $37/ea (14 remaining) 1982 x 6 — $38/ea (4 remaining) 1984 x 5 — $43/ea. (1 remaining, toned reverse) 1985 x 23 — $45/ea (16 remaining) 1990‘s (‘93 & ‘95) x 40 — $40/ea (26 ‘93 remaining, 4 ‘95 remaining) 2012 x 20 — $40/ea (15 remaining) 2014 x 15 — $38/ea (ALL GONE) Other Mexican Silver Lot: MEXICAN PROOF: https://imgur.com/a/W0JH02T —$17/ea: 1952-53 Mexican 5 Pesos Hidalgo, 72% silver, 0.643 troy oz silvecoin — 20 available (4 ‘52 remaining, 4 ‘53 remaining) —$17/ea: 1977-78 Mexican 100 Pesos, 72% silver, 0.643 troy oz silvecoin — 20 available (1 ‘77 remaining, 9 ‘78 remaining) —$14/ea: 1968— Mexican Olympic 25 Pesos, 72% silver, 0.521 troy oz silvecoin —40 available (22 remaining) Queen’s Beasts Lot: QUEEN’S BEASTS PROOF: https://imgur.com/a/fhEKqsM Yales x 6 — $65/ea (STILL AVAILABLE) Red Dragons x 5 — $70/ea (ALL SOLD) Falcons x 4 — $70/ea (ALL SOLD) Unicorns x 5 — $75/ea (ALL SOLD) Griffin x 6 — $80/ea (ALL SOLD) Lions x 5 — $70/ea (ALL SOLD) Bulls x 3 — $70/ea (ALL SOLD) The above were acquired from somebody who did not think they were in perfect condition. In looking them over, some may have some surface scratches, fingerprints, or faint milk spots on outer rim. I am not a coin grader, but in general they look pretty good to me. These may not be ones you send in for grading. They are priced accordingly to described condition. I am happy to send unedited photos, if desired. Please get photos if uncertain. ALSO: —10 oz Queen's Beasts Series Falcons x 3 — $300/ea (The capsules may have some cracks, but the coins are fine) (2 remaining) —2 oz Queen's Beasts Series (better condition than above): Falcons x 30 — $75/ea Yales x 40 — $70/ea Miscellaneous Silver Lot: MISC. PROOF: https://imgur.com/a/RoPTUlj 20 oz Scottsdale kit kat bar — $560 (SOLD) F**k COVID, 0.99oz — $40 Stoner Bob, 1oz — $40 (GONE) Franklin Mint 1974 Father’s Day, 1000 grains 0.925 silver—- $50 Franklin Mint 1978 Christmas, 500 grains 0.925 silver — $25 Franklin Mint 1973 Christmas, 1000 grains 0.925 silver — $50 Late addition: https://imgur.com/a/XApnAMm 9 — 1976 Montreal Olympic $10 Commemmorative, 0.925 silver, 1.4454 troy oz/ea — $38/ea 1 — 1972 $25 Cayman Island Silver Wedding Anniversary, 0.925 silver, 1.5271 troy oz — $40 BELOW SPOT LOT:https://imgur.com/a/QM9y3O3 Silver war nickels: $0.03 below melt/ea as listed on coinapps.com, 8,500+ available, price to be set while actively messaging with me. A minimum number of these per order may be applicable. Canadian junk silver. 0.925, 80%, 50%. Price is 98% of melt. Melt to be determined while actively messaging with me. Can get more specific on denominations, if needed. There are a lot of 80% quarters. ( Remaining Canadian junk silver: 50% quarters x70, 80% quarters x 256) CHEAP 1g GOLD:https://imgur.com/a/NJ3ZdWm Sterngold, 99.95%, used in making dental alloys, 1gm each x 30. This is a unique item not likely to be found in many collector’s stash. I will risky ship up to 3 of these in an envelope for $1 @ buyer’s risk. It will not be tracked and I do not like doing it. Would prefer $4 bubble mailer, but buyer’s choice— $70/ea JEWELRY LOT:https://imgur.com/a/ZrKVulj — 2014 1/10 oz American Gold Eagle in 14K eagle pendant, bezel weighs 3.487g — $400 — CRESCENT sterling silver pocket watch case, twist on bezel. Marked with CRESCENT, Sterling, serial number 4188. Amateur engraving with a marked name and 1919. Weighs over 100 grams!!! Pre-owned, with expected signs of tarnish and wear. A ding on back of case (see photo close up) — $75 COMING SOON, PERTH MINT LOT: 2014 Kookaburras, 2 rolls 2015 Kookaburras, 2 rolls 2017 Kookaburras, 4 rolls 2015 Lunar Goats, 5 rolls 2019 Swans, 2 rolls TERMS: All eligible items are verified with a sigma precious metal verifier or Kee gold tester. Prices are generally based on the underlying spot price. Large fluctuations in spot prices could affect the price of items listed. Shipping will generally be at cost. USPS first class starts @ $4, SFRB @ $8, signature @ $2.50. Will insure for 1.1% of purchase price. Shipping is at buyer’s risk. All items will be tracked unless otherwise stated. Would recommend delivery to a secure box for precious metals. Accept in order of preference: 1st — Zelle or Venmo; 2nd — Cash app; 3rd —Bitcoin, but am still learning. Be patient, but I will try to work with you if other options do not suffice. NO PAYPAL. Other forms of payment will be considered. Thank you! I am not a coin grader. The condition of any coin listed is how it was listed when I acquired it. I will be more than happy to provide any detailed, unedited photos for any coin. Unless specifically mentioned, assume coins are in generally good condition. Noticeable defects potentially affecting the value will attempt to be noted. I try to price my items substantially below the lowest price I can find online from a national dealer. If you see a legitimate cheaper price, let me know and I may very well adjust my price. FYI, I am in Eastern time zone if I do not respond, may be sleeping.
From rags to riches and back to rags. I became aware of Bitcoin in 2012, but didn't invest until 2014 @ $440. A few years prior, it had hit $1k, dropped, and much of the public lost interest except for users of Silk Road. I sold all my BTC once it hit $1k for the second time. The more I read about ETH, the more I was convinced that this shit was wild. I didn't get it at first, but given my background (product engineering) I started to recognize use cases that Ethereum could take on: Debt vehicles owned by communities (rather than..JP Morgan). Music platforms owned by users. Ethereum is/was a software engineer's economic API. Prior to Ethereum, we could write apps that fit into real-world government/economies, but now, we could write entire governments and economies -- and we all know the economy is mankind's most influential behavioral system. Once that clicked, I put all my money into Ethereum. I told my friends and family to invest a bit too. I bought some in February of 2017 and continued to buy until my ether chest became my savings. Once ETH breached $100, I was extremely confident that the world was seeing Ethereum for what I saw (an economic/government-building toolset) -- wow was I wrong. ETH grew and grew, as we all know, topping out around ~$1400. I vividly remember waking up one morning, checking how much $ my investment was worth -- almost a half million. "I'll sell some once my stake reaches $500k," I said to myself idiotically. The prior night, I had gotten into a debate with a friend (who also invested) who had doubts about how long the asset would increase. I argued that the utility of Ethereum had barely hit the market, he argued that had nothing to do with the rise -- he was right. The rise of price was fueled by people telling friends/family 'I JUST MADE THIS MUCH MONEY YOU HAVE TO INVEST!!!', and had absolutely nothing to do with Ethereum's true value to society. My friend sold all of his investment around this time. I did not. I watched my investment dwindle from some ~$450k to just a few thousand. During this time, I was funding my business, so I would sell my ETH slowly as the price dropped. My stack of crypto is almost nothing today, but one thing I took away was the value of money. When my stack had reached nearly half a million, I felt the same as I do today. I felt the same as I did before I earned the money. Nothing in my life changed -- my happiness was exactly the same, except for the fact that I didn't have any stress around money. What made me happy was using my money for good causes - I donated a decent amount to ocean relief funds and used my money to build a business which made people happy via convenience. I'm sharing this because I don't know how many other people have made half a million dollars in under a year (after being broke), then lost it all, but I'm sure it's not common. This experience taught me the value of money and its limits to happiness contributions. That said -- when you're under the poverty line, the personal value of money is way higher. It's like a maslow's hierarchy of needs situation -- once you've satisfied your basic financial needs, your increase in happiness is fueled by further endeavors outside of 'earning money'.
Summary: Everyone knows that when you give your assets to someone else, they always keep them safe. If this is true for individuals, it is certainly true for businesses. Custodians always tell the truth and manage funds properly. They won't have any interest in taking the assets as an exchange operator would. Auditors tell the truth and can't be misled. That's because organizations that are regulated are incapable of lying and don't make mistakes. First, some background. Here is a summary of how custodians make us more secure: Previously, we might give Alice our crypto assets to hold. There were risks:
Alice might take the assets and disappear.
Alice might spend the assets and pretend that she still has them (fractional model).
Alice might store the assets insecurely and they'll get stolen.
Alice might give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force.
Alice might lose access to the assets.
But "no worries", Alice has a custodian named Bob. Bob is dressed in a nice suit. He knows some politicians. And he drives a Porsche. "So you have nothing to worry about!". And look at all the benefits we get:
Alice can't take the assets and disappear (unless she asks Bob or never gives them to Bob).
Alice can't spend the assets and pretend that she still has them. (Unless she didn't give them to Bob or asks him for them.)
Alice can't store the assets insecurely so they get stolen. (After all - she doesn't have any control over the withdrawal process from any of Bob's systems, right?)
Alice can't give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force. (Bob will stop her, right Bob?)
Alice can't lose access to the funds. (She'll always be present, sane, and remember all secrets, right?)
See - all problems are solved! All we have to worry about now is:
Bob might take the assets and disappear.
Bob might spend the assets and pretend that he still has them (fractional model).
Bob might store the assets insecurely and they'll get stolen.
Bob might give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force.
Bob might lose access to the assets.
It's pretty simple. Before we had to trust Alice. Now we only have to trust Alice, Bob, and all the ways in which they communicate. Just think of how much more secure we are! "On top of that", Bob assures us, "we're using a special wallet structure". Bob shows Alice a diagram. "We've broken the balance up and store it in lots of smaller wallets. That way", he assures her, "a thief can't take it all at once". And he points to a historic case where a large sum was taken "because it was stored in a single wallet... how stupid". "Very early on, we used to have all the crypto in one wallet", he said, "and then one Christmas a hacker came and took it all. We call him the Grinch. Now we individually wrap each crypto and stick it under a binary search tree. The Grinch has never been back since." "As well", Bob continues, "even if someone were to get in, we've got insurance. It covers all thefts and even coercion, collusion, and misplaced keys - only subject to the policy terms and conditions." And with that, he pulls out a phone-book sized contract and slams it on the desk with a thud. "Yep", he continues, "we're paying top dollar for one of the best policies in the country!" "Can I read it?' Alice asks. "Sure," Bob says, "just as soon as our legal team is done with it. They're almost through the first chapter." He pauses, then continues. "And can you believe that sales guy Mike? He has the same year Porsche as me. I mean, what are the odds?" "Do you use multi-sig?", Alice asks. "Absolutely!" Bob replies. "All our engineers are fully trained in multi-sig. Whenever we want to set up a new wallet, we generate 2 separate keys in an air-gapped process and store them in this proprietary system here. Look, it even requires the biometric signature from one of our team members to initiate any withdrawal." He demonstrates by pressing his thumb into the display. "We use a third-party cloud validation API to match the thumbprint and authorize each withdrawal. The keys are also backed up daily to an off-site third-party." "Wow that's really impressive," Alice says, "but what if we need access for a withdrawal outside of office hours?" "Well that's no issue", Bob says, "just send us an email, call, or text message and we always have someone on staff to help out. Just another part of our strong commitment to all our customers!" "What about Proof of Reserve?", Alice asks. "Of course", Bob replies, "though rather than publish any blockchain addresses or signed transaction, for privacy we just do a SHA256 refactoring of the inverse hash modulus for each UTXO nonce and combine the smart contract coefficient consensus in our hyperledger lightning node. But it's really simple to use." He pushes a button and a large green checkmark appears on a screen. "See - the algorithm ran through and reserves are proven." "Wow", Alice says, "you really know your stuff! And that is easy to use! What about fiat balances?" "Yeah, we have an auditor too", Bob replies, "Been using him for a long time so we have quite a strong relationship going! We have special books we give him every year and he's very efficient! Checks the fiat, crypto, and everything all at once!" "We used to have a nice offline multi-sig setup we've been using without issue for the past 5 years, but I think we'll move all our funds over to your facility," Alice says. "Awesome", Bob replies, "Thanks so much! This is perfect timing too - my Porsche got a dent on it this morning. We have the paperwork right over here." "Great!", Alice replies. And with that, Alice gets out her pen and Bob gets the contract. "Don't worry", he says, "you can take your crypto-assets back anytime you like - just subject to our cancellation policy. Our annual management fees are also super low and we don't adjust them often". How many holes have to exist for your funds to get stolen? Just one. Why are we taking a powerful offline multi-sig setup, widely used globally in hundreds of different/lacking regulatory environments with 0 breaches to date, and circumventing it by a demonstrably weak third party layer? And paying a great expense to do so? If you go through the list of breaches in the past 2 years to highly credible organizations, you go through the list of major corporate frauds (only the ones we know about), you go through the list of all the times platforms have lost funds, you go through the list of times and ways that people have lost their crypto from identity theft, hot wallet exploits, extortion, etc... and then you go through this custodian with a fine-tooth comb and truly believe they have value to add far beyond what you could, sticking your funds in a wallet (or set of wallets) they control exclusively is the absolute worst possible way to take advantage of that security. The best way to add security for crypto-assets is to make a stronger multi-sig. With one custodian, what you are doing is giving them your cryptocurrency and hoping they're honest, competent, and flawlessly secure. It's no different than storing it on a really secure exchange. Maybe the insurance will cover you. Didn't work for Bitpay in 2015. Didn't work for Yapizon in 2017. Insurance has never paid a claim in the entire history of cryptocurrency. But maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe your exact scenario will buck the trend and be what they're willing to cover. After the large deductible and hopefully without a long and expensive court battle. And you want to advertise this increase in risk, the lapse of judgement, an accident waiting to happen, as though it's some kind of benefit to customers ("Free institutional-grade storage for your digital assets.")? And then some people are writing to the OSC that custodians should be mandatory for all funds on every exchange platform? That this somehow will make Canadians as a whole more secure or better protected compared with standard air-gapped multi-sig? On what planet? Most of the problems in Canada stemmed from one thing - a lack of transparency. If Canadians had known what a joke Quadriga was - it wouldn't have grown to lose $400m from hard-working Canadians from coast to coast to coast. And Gerald Cotten would be in jail, not wherever he is now (at best, rotting peacefully). EZ-BTC and mister Dave Smilie would have been a tiny little scam to his friends, not a multi-million dollar fraud. Einstein would have got their act together or been shut down BEFORE losing millions and millions more in people's funds generously donated to criminals. MapleChange wouldn't have even been a thing. And maybe we'd know a little more about CoinTradeNewNote - like how much was lost in there. Almost all of the major losses with cryptocurrency exchanges involve deception with unbacked funds. So it's great to see transparency reports from BitBuy and ShakePay where someone independently verified the backing. The only thing we don't have is:
ANY CERTAINTY BALANCES WEREN'T EXCLUDED. Quadriga's largest account was $70m. 80% of funds are in 20% of accounts (Pareto principle). All it takes is excluding a few really large accounts - and nobody's the wiser. A fractional platform can easily pass any audit this way.
ANY VISIBILITY WHATSOEVER INTO THE CUSTODIANS. BitBuy put out their report before moving all the funds to their custodian and ShakePay apparently can't even tell us who the custodian is. That's pretty important considering that basically all of the funds are now stored there.
ANY IDEA ABOUT THE OTHER EXCHANGES. In order for this to be effective, it has to be the norm. It needs to be "unusual" not to know. If obscurity is the norm, then it's super easy for people like Gerald Cotten and Dave Smilie to blend right in.
It's not complicated to validate cryptocurrency assets. They need to exist, they need to be spendable, and they need to cover the total balances. There are plenty of credible people and firms across the country that have the capacity to reasonably perform this validation. Having more frequent checks by different, independent, parties who publish transparent reports is far more valuable than an annual check by a single "more credible/official" party who does the exact same basic checks and may or may not publish anything. Here's an example set of requirements that could be mandated:
First report within 1 month of launching, another within 3 months, and further reports at minimum every 6 months thereafter.
No auditor can be repeated within a 12 month period.
All reports must be public, identifying the auditor and the full methodology used.
All auditors must be independent of the firm being audited with no conflict of interest.
Reports must include the percentage of each asset backed, and how it's backed.
The auditor publishes a hash list, which lists a hash of each customer's information and balances that were included. Hash is one-way encryption so privacy is fully preserved. Every customer can use this to have 100% confidence they were included.
If we want more extensive requirements on audits, these should scale upward based on the total assets at risk on the platform, and whether the platform has loaned their assets out.
There are ways to structure audits such that neither crypto assets nor customer information are ever put at risk, and both can still be properly validated and publicly verifiable. There are also ways to structure audits such that they are completely reasonable for small platforms and don't inhibit innovation in any way. By making the process as reasonable as possible, we can completely eliminate any reason/excuse that an honest platform would have for not being audited. That is arguable far more important than any incremental improvement we might get from mandating "the best of the best" accountants. Right now we have nothing mandated and tons of Canadians using offshore exchanges with no oversight whatsoever. Transparency does not prove crypto assets are safe. CoinTradeNewNote, Flexcoin ($600k), and Canadian Bitcoins ($100k) are examples where crypto-assets were breached from platforms in Canada. All of them were online wallets and used no multi-sig as far as any records show. This is consistent with what we see globally - air-gapped multi-sig wallets have an impeccable record, while other schemes tend to suffer breach after breach. We don't actually know how much CoinTrader lost because there was no visibility. Rather than publishing details of what happened, the co-founder of CoinTrader silently moved on to found another platform - the "most trusted way to buy and sell crypto" - a site that has no information whatsoever (that I could find) on the storage practices and a FAQ advising that “[t]rading cryptocurrency is completely safe” and that having your own wallet is “entirely up to you! You can certainly keep cryptocurrency, or fiat, or both, on the app.” Doesn't sound like much was learned here, which is really sad to see. It's not that complicated or unreasonable to set up a proper hardware wallet. Multi-sig can be learned in a single course. Something the equivalent complexity of a driver's license test could prevent all the cold storage exploits we've seen to date - even globally. Platform operators have a key advantage in detecting and preventing fraud - they know their customers far better than any custodian ever would. The best job that custodians can do is to find high integrity individuals and train them to form even better wallet signatories. Rather than mandating that all platforms expose themselves to arbitrary third party risks, regulations should center around ensuring that all signatories are background-checked, properly trained, and using proper procedures. We also need to make sure that signatories are empowered with rights and responsibilities to reject and report fraud. They need to know that they can safely challenge and delay a transaction - even if it turns out they made a mistake. We need to have an environment where mistakes are brought to the surface and dealt with. Not one where firms and people feel the need to hide what happened. In addition to a knowledge-based test, an auditor can privately interview each signatory to make sure they're not in coercive situations, and we should make sure they can freely and anonymously report any issues without threat of retaliation. A proper multi-sig has each signature held by a separate person and is governed by policies and mutual decisions instead of a hierarchy. It includes at least one redundant signature. For best results, 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7. History has demonstrated over and over again the risk of hot wallets even to highly credible organizations. Nonetheless, many platforms have hot wallets for convenience. While such losses are generally compensated by platforms without issue (for example Poloniex, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Gatecoin, Coincheck, Bithumb, Zaif, CoinBene, Binance, Bitrue, Bitpoint, Upbit, VinDAX, and now KuCoin), the public tends to focus more on cases that didn't end well. Regardless of what systems are employed, there is always some level of risk. For that reason, most members of the public would prefer to see third party insurance. Rather than trying to convince third party profit-seekers to provide comprehensive insurance and then relying on an expensive and slow legal system to enforce against whatever legal loopholes they manage to find each and every time something goes wrong, insurance could be run through multiple exchange operators and regulators, with the shared interest of having a reputable industry, keeping costs down, and taking care of Canadians. For example, a 4 of 7 multi-sig insurance fund held between 5 independent exchange operators and 2 regulatory bodies. All Canadian exchanges could pay premiums at a set rate based on their needed coverage, with a higher price paid for hot wallet coverage (anything not an air-gapped multi-sig cold wallet). Such a model would be much cheaper to manage, offer better coverage, and be much more reliable to payout when needed. The kind of coverage you could have under this model is unheard of. You could even create something like the CDIC to protect Canadians who get their trading accounts hacked if they can sufficiently prove the loss is legitimate. In cases of fraud, gross negligence, or insolvency, the fund can be used to pay affected users directly (utilizing the last transparent balance report in the worst case), something which private insurance would never touch. While it's recommended to have official policies for coverage, a model where members vote would fully cover edge cases. (Could be similar to the Supreme Court where justices vote based on case law.) Such a model could fully protect all Canadians across all platforms. You can have a fiat coverage governed by legal agreements, and crypto-asset coverage governed by both multi-sig and legal agreements. It could be practical, affordable, and inclusive. Now, we are at a crossroads. We can happily give up our freedom, our innovation, and our money. We can pay hefty expenses to auditors, lawyers, and regulators year after year (and make no mistake - this cost will grow to many millions or even billions as the industry grows - and it will be borne by all Canadians on every platform because platforms are not going to eat up these costs at a loss). We can make it nearly impossible for any new platform to enter the marketplace, forcing Canadians to use the same stagnant platforms year after year. We can centralize and consolidate the entire industry into 2 or 3 big players and have everyone else fail (possibly to heavy losses of users of those platforms). And when a flawed security model doesn't work and gets breached, we can make it even more complicated with even more people in suits making big money doing the job that blockchain was supposed to do in the first place. We can build a system which is so intertwined and dependent on big government, traditional finance, and central bankers that it's future depends entirely on that of the fiat system, of fractional banking, and of government bail-outs. If we choose this path, as history has shown us over and over again, we can not go back, save for revolution. Our children and grandchildren will still be paying the consequences of what we decided today. Or, we can find solutions that work. We can maintain an open and innovative environment while making the adjustments we need to make to fully protect Canadian investors and cryptocurrency users, giving easy and affordable access to cryptocurrency for all Canadians on the platform of their choice, and creating an environment in which entrepreneurs and problem solvers can bring those solutions forward easily. None of the above precludes innovation in any way, or adds any unreasonable cost - and these three policies would demonstrably eliminate or resolve all 109 historic cases as studied here - that's every single case researched so far going back to 2011. It includes every loss that was studied so far not just in Canada but globally as well. Unfortunately, finding answers is the least challenging part. Far more challenging is to get platform operators and regulators to agree on anything. My last post got no response whatsoever, and while the OSC has told me they're happy for industry feedback, I believe my opinion alone is fairly meaningless. This takes the whole community working together to solve. So please let me know your thoughts. Please take the time to upvote and share this with people. Please - let's get this solved and not leave it up to other people to do. Facts/background/sources (skip if you like):
The inspiration for the paragraph about splitting wallets was an actual quote from a Canadian company providing custodial services in response to the OSC consultation paper: "We believe that it will be in the in best interests of investors to prohibit pooled crypto assets or ‘floats’. Most Platforms pool assets, citing reasons of practicality and expense. The recent hack of the world’s largest Platform – Binance – demonstrates the vulnerability of participants’ assets when such concessions are made. In this instance, the Platform’s entire hot wallet of Bitcoins, worth over $40 million, was stolen, facilitated in part by the pooling of client crypto assets." "the maintenance of participants (and Platform) crypto assets across multiple wallets distributes the related risk and responsibility of security - reducing the amount of insurance coverage required and making insurance coverage more readily obtainable". For the record, their reply also said nothing whatsoever about multi-sig or offline storage.
In addition to the fact that the $40m hack represented only one "hot wallet" of Binance, and they actually had the vast majority of assets in other wallets (including mostly cold wallets), multiple real cases have clearly demonstrated that risk is still present with multiple wallets. Bitfinex, VinDAX, Bithumb, Altsbit, BitPoint, Cryptopia, and just recently KuCoin all had multiple wallets breached all at the same time, and may represent a significantly larger impact on customers than the Binance breach which was fully covered by Binance. To represent that simply having multiple separate wallets under the same security scheme is a comprehensive way to reduce risk is just not true.
Private insurance has historically never covered a single loss in the cryptocurrency space (at least, not one that I was able to find), and there are notable cases where massive losses were not covered by insurance. Bitpay in 2015 and Yapizon in 2017 both had insurance policies that didn't pay out during the breach, even after a lengthly court process. The same insurance that ShakePay is presently using (and announced to much fanfare) was describe by their CEO himself as covering “physical theft of the media where the private keys are held,” which is something that has never historically happened. As was said with regard to the same policy in 2018 - “I don’t find it surprising that Lloyd’s is in this space,” said Johnson, adding that to his mind the challenge for everybody is figuring out how to structure these policies so that they are actually protective. “You can create an insurance policy that protects no one – you know there are so many caveats to the policy that it’s not super protective.”
The most profitable policy for a private insurance company is one with the most expensive premiums that they never have to pay a claim on. They have no inherent incentive to take care of people who lost funds. It's "cheaper" to take the reputational hit and fight the claim in court. The more money at stake, the more the insurance provider is incentivized to avoid payout. They're not going to insure the assets unless they have reasonable certainty to make a profit by doing so, and they're not going to pay out a massive sum unless it's legally forced. Private insurance is always structured to be maximally profitable to the insurance provider.
The circumvention of multi-sig was a key factor in the massive Bitfinex hack of over $60m of bitcoin, which today still sits being slowly used and is worth over $3b. While Bitfinex used a qualified custodian Bitgo, which was and still is active and one of the industry leaders of custodians, and they set up 2 of 3 multi-sig wallets, the entire system was routed through Bitfinex, such that Bitfinex customers could initiate the withdrawals in a "hot" fashion. This feature was also a hit with the hacker. The multi-sig was fully circumvented.
Bitpay in 2015 was another example of a breach that stole 5,000 bitcoins. This happened not through the exploit of any system in Bitpay, but because the CEO of a company they worked with got their computer hacked and the hackers were able to request multiple bitcoin purchases, which Bitpay honoured because they came from the customer's computer legitimately. Impersonation is a very common tactic used by fraudsters, and methods get more extreme all the time.
A notable case in Canada was the Canadian Bitcoins exploit. Funds were stored on a server in a Rogers Data Center, and the attendee was successfully convinced to reboot the server "in safe mode" with a simple phone call, thus bypassing the extensive security and enabling the theft.
The very nature of custodians circumvents multi-sig. This is because custodians are not just having to secure the assets against some sort of physical breach but against any form of social engineering, modification of orders, fraudulent withdrawal attempts, etc... If the security practices of signatories in a multi-sig arrangement are such that the breach risk of one signatory is 1 in 100, the requirement of 3 independent signatures makes the risk of theft 1 in 1,000,000. Since hackers tend to exploit the weakest link, a comparable custodian has to make the entry and exit points of their platform 10,000 times more secure than one of those signatories to provide equivalent protection. And if the signatories beef up their security by only 10x, the risk is now 1 in 1,000,000,000. The custodian has to be 1,000,000 times more secure. The larger and more complex a system is, the more potential vulnerabilities exist in it, and the fewer people can understand how the system works when performing upgrades. Even if a system is completely secure today, one has to also consider how that system might evolve over time or work with different members.
By contrast, offline multi-signature solutions have an extremely solid record, and in the entire history of cryptocurrency exchange incidents which I've studied (listed here), there has only been one incident (796 exchange in 2015) involving an offline multi-signature wallet. It happened because the customer's bitcoin address was modified by hackers, and the amount that was stolen ($230k) was immediately covered by the exchange operators. Basically, the platform operators were tricked into sending a legitimate withdrawal request to the wrong address because hackers exploited their platform to change that address. Such an issue would not be prevented in any way by the use of a custodian, as that custodian has no oversight whatsoever to the exchange platform. It's practical for all exchange operators to test large withdrawal transactions as a general policy, regardless of what model is used, and general best practice is to diagnose and fix such an exploit as soon as it occurs.
False promises on the backing of funds played a huge role in the downfall of Quadriga, and it's been exposed over and over again (MyCoin, PlusToken, Bitsane, Bitmarket, EZBTC, IDAX). Even today, customers have extremely limited certainty on whether their funds in exchanges are actually being backed or how they're being backed. While this issue is not unique to cryptocurrency exchanges, the complexity of the technology and the lack of any regulation or standards makes problems more widespread, and there is no "central bank" to come to the rescue as in the 2008 financial crisis or during the great depression when "9,000 banks failed".
In addition to fraudulent operations, the industry is full of cases where operators have suffered breaches and not reported them. Most recently, Einstein was the largest case in Canada, where ongoing breaches and fraud were perpetrated against the platform for multiple years and nobody found out until the platform collapsed completely. While fraud and breaches suck to deal with, they suck even more when not dealt with. Lack of visibility played a role in the largest downfalls of Mt. Gox, Cryptsy, and Bitgrail. In some cases, platforms are alleged to have suffered a hack and keep operating without admitting it at all, such as CoinBene.
It surprises some to learn that a cryptographic solution has already existed since 2013, and gained widespread support in 2014 after Mt. Gox. Proof of Reserves is a full cryptographic proof that allows any customer using an exchange to have complete certainty that their crypto-assets are fully backed by the platform in real-time. This is accomplished by proving that assets exist on the blockchain, are spendable, and fully cover customer deposits. It does not prove safety of assets or backing of fiat assets.
If we didn't care about privacy at all, a platform could publish their wallet addresses, sign a partial transaction, and put the full list of customer information and balances out publicly. Customers can each check that they are on the list, that the balances are accurate, that the total adds up, and that it's backed and spendable on the blockchain. Platforms who exclude any customer take a risk because that customer can easily check and see they were excluded. So together with all customers checking, this forms a full proof of backing of all crypto assets.
However, obviously customers care about their private information being published. Therefore, a hash of the information can be provided instead. Hash is one-way encryption. The hash allows the customer to validate inclusion (by hashing their own known information), while anyone looking at the list of hashes cannot determine the private information of any other user. All other parts of the scheme remain fully intact. A model like this is in use on the exchange CoinFloor in the UK.
A Merkle tree can provide even greater privacy. Instead of a list of balances, the balances are arranged into a binary tree. A customer starts from their node, and works their way to the top of the tree. For example, they know they have 5 BTC, they plus 1 other customer hold 7 BTC, they plus 2-3 other customers hold 17 BTC, etc... until they reach the root where all the BTC are represented. Thus, there is no way to find the balances of other individual customers aside from one unidentified customer in this case.
Proposals such as this had the backing of leaders in the community including Nic Carter, Greg Maxwell, and Zak Wilcox. Substantial and significant effort started back in 2013, with massive popularity in 2014. But what became of that effort? Very little. Exchange operators continue to refuse to give visibility. Despite the fact this information can often be obtained through trivial blockchain analysis, no Canadian platform has ever provided any wallet addresses publicly. As described by the CEO of Newton "For us to implement some kind of realtime Proof of Reserves solution, which I'm not opposed to, it would have to ... Preserve our users' privacy, as well as our own. Some kind of zero-knowledge proof". Kraken describes here in more detail why they haven't implemented such a scheme. According to professor Eli Ben-Sasson, when he spoke with exchanges, none were interested in implementing Proof of Reserves.
And yet, Kraken's places their reasoning on a page called "Proof of Reserves". More recently, both BitBuy and ShakePay have released reports titled "Proof of Reserves and Security Audit". Both reports contain disclaimers against being audits. Both reports trust the customer list provided by the platform, leaving the open possibility that multiple large accounts could have been excluded from the process. Proof of Reserves is a blockchain validation where customers see the wallets on the blockchain. The report from Kraken is 5 years old, but they leave it described as though it was just done a few weeks ago. And look at what they expect customers to do for validation. When firms represent something being "Proof of Reserve" when it's not, this is like a farmer growing fruit with pesticides and selling it in a farmers market as organic produce - except that these are people's hard-earned life savings at risk here. Platforms are misrepresenting the level of visibility in place and deceiving the public by their misuse of this term. They haven't proven anything.
Fraud isn't a problem that is unique to cryptocurrency. Fraud happens all the time. Enron, WorldCom, Nortel, Bear Stearns, Wells Fargo, Moser Baer, Wirecard, Bre-X, and Nicola are just some of the cases where frauds became large enough to become a big deal (and there are so many countless others). These all happened on 100% reversible assets despite regulations being in place. In many of these cases, the problems happened due to the over-complexity of the financial instruments. For example, Enron had "complex financial statements [which] were confusing to shareholders and analysts", creating "off-balance-sheet vehicles, complex financing structures, and deals so bewildering that few people could understand them". In cryptocurrency, we are often combining complex financial products with complex technologies and verification processes. We are naïve if we think problems like this won't happen. It is awkward and uncomfortable for many people to admit that they don't know how something works. If we want "money of the people" to work, the solutions have to be simple enough that "the people" can understand them, not so confusing that financial professionals and technology experts struggle to use or understand them.
For those who question the extent to which an organization can fool their way into a security consultancy role, HB Gary should be a great example to look at. Prior to trying to out anonymous, HB Gary was being actively hired by multiple US government agencies and others in the private sector (with glowing testimonials). The published articles and hosted professional security conferences. One should also look at this list of data breaches from the past 2 years. Many of them are large corporations, government entities, and technology companies. These are the ones we know about. Undoubtedly, there are many more that we do not know about. If HB Gary hadn't been "outted" by anonymous, would we have known they were insecure? If the same breach had happened outside of the public spotlight, would it even have been reported? Or would HB Gary have just deleted the Twitter posts, brought their site back up, done a couple patches, and kept on operating as though nothing had happened?
In the case of Quadriga, the facts are clear. Despite past experience with platforms such as MapleChange in Canada and others around the world, no guidance or even the most basic of a framework was put in place by regulators. By not clarifying any sort of legal framework, regulators enabled a situation where a platform could be run by former criminal Mike Dhanini/Omar Patryn, and where funds could be held fully unchecked by one person. At the same time, the lack of regulation deterred legitimate entities from running competing platforms and Quadriga was granted a money services business license for multiple years of operation, which gave the firm the appearance of legitimacy. Regulators did little to protect Canadians despite Quadriga failing to file taxes from 2016 onward. The entire administrative team had resigned and this was public knowledge. Many people had suspicions of what was going on, including Ryan Mueller, who forwarded complaints to the authorities. These were ignored, giving Gerald Cotten the opportunity to escape without justice.
There are multiple issues with the SOC II model including the prohibitive cost (you have to find a third party accounting firm and the prices are not even listed publicly on any sites), the requirement of operating for a year (impossible for new platforms), and lack of any public visibility (SOC II are private reports that aren't shared outside the people in suits).
Securities frameworks are expensive. Sarbanes-Oxley is estimated to cost $5.1 million USD/yr for the average Fortune 500 company in the United States. Since "Fortune 500" represents the top 500 companies, that means well over $2.55 billion USD (~$3.4 billion CAD) is going to people in suits. Isn't the problem of trust and verification the exact problem that the blockchain is supposed to solve?
To use Quadriga as justification for why custodians or SOC II or other advanced schemes are needed for platforms is rather silly, when any framework or visibility at all, or even the most basic of storage policies, would have prevented the whole thing. It's just an embarrassment.
We are now seeing regulators take strong action. CoinSquare in Canada with multi-million dollar fines. BitMex from the US, criminal charges and arrests. OkEx, with full disregard of withdrawals and no communication. Who's next?
We have a unique window today where we can solve these problems, and not permanently destroy innovation with unreasonable expectations, but we need to act quickly. This is a unique historic time that will never come again.
Flurry of dealmaking Bayer (OTCPK:BAYRY) is paying as much as $4B for U.S. biotech firm Asklepios BioPharmaceutical, bolstering its pharmaceuticals division as it continues to reel from its acquisition of crops giant Monsanto (and cancer-related Roundup lawsuits). The latest deal, which includes upfront consideration of $2B and potential milestone payments of up to $2B, is a bet on cutting-edge gene therapy, which offers the potential to cure a wide range of often-rare diseases by editing errors in the body's instruction manual. Drugmakers including Novartis (NYSE:NVS), Roche Holding (OTCQX:RHHBY) and Bristol-Myers Squibb (NYSE:BMY) have also made big bets on the industry, snapping up gene therapy makers. Dunkin' may sell and go private Dunkin' Donuts and Baskin Robbins chains owner Dunkin' Brands (NASDAQ:DNKN) confirmed preliminary talks to be acquired by Inspire Brands after the NYT reported on the negotiations. Inspire would take Dunkin' private at $106.5 per share, valuing the company at $8.8B, or a 20% premium over DNKN's closing price of $88.79 on Friday. While Dunkin' said "there is no certainty that any agreement will be reached," if successful, Inspire would add the new assets to the Buffalo Wild Wings, Arby's Sonic, and Jimmy John's chains that it already owns. DNKN +19% premarket. More M&A: Blackstone to buy Simply Self Storage for about $1.2B. New Canada oil giant Cenovus Energy (NYSE:CVE) has agreed to buy Husky Energy (OTCPK:HUSKF) in a C$3.8B ($2.9B) all-stock deal that will combine two of the largest players in Canada's struggling oil-sands industry. The combined company will have about 750K boe/d production, making it the third-largest Canadian oil and natural gas producer. it would also be the second-largest Canadian-based refiner and upgrader with total North American upgrading and refining capacity of ~660K boe/d. Coronavirus surge, elusive stimulus deal U.S. stock index futures are starting the week on the backfoot, falling nearly 1% overnight, as the nation reported a record of more than 83,000 new COVID infections on both Friday and Saturday. "We're not going to control the pandemic. We are going to control the fact that we get vaccines, therapeutics and other mitigation areas," White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows told CNN's State of the Union program. Meadows and Nancy Pelosi also accused each other of "moving the goalposts" on stimulus legislation in back-to-back interviews, dimming chances a deal could be reached before Election Day. Vaccine trials The COVID-19 vaccine being developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca (NASDAQ:AZN) produces a robust antibody and T-cell immune response in elderly people, the group at highest risk, FT reports. While details of the finding are expected to be published shortly in a clinical journal, sources cautioned that positive immunogenicity tests do not guarantee that the vaccine will ultimately prove safe and effective in older people. AstraZeneca resumed the U.S. trial of its experimental vaccine on Friday after a pause due to safety concerns, while Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) also restarted trials, saying the first batches of its shot could be available in January. Farm purchases under China trade deal "China has purchased approximately 71% of its farm purchases target for 2020," according to an interim report on agricultural trade from the U.S. Trade Representative. "They have purchased $23.6B in agricultural products so far this year, substantially more than the base year of 2017, and should end up being our best year ever in sales to China. It is worth noting that the Phase One Agreement did not go into effect until February 14, 2020, and March is the first full month of its effect... We already are on pace to have all-time high sales to China in beef, pork, corn, and soybeans." Go Deeper: Some are questioning the figures and the timeline. California blackouts PG&E (NYSE:PCG) is pre-emptively cutting power again in northern California, affecting 386,000 homes and businesses in 38 counties, or nearly 1M people. It's the fourth times this year the state’s largest utility had to shut off electricity due to high winds and extreme wildfire danger, which could spark blazes if live wires topple into dry brush. Utilities in Southern California, like Southern California Edison (NYSE:EIX), are also warning of potential blackouts. Potential election chaos As the threat of election-related unrest escalates in the U.S., Facebook (NASDAQ:FB) said it would implement emergency measures reserved for "at-risk" countries to bring down the online temperature. The social media giant plans to limit the "spread of viral content" and lower the bar for "suppressing potentially inflammatory posts" using internal tools previously deployed in Sri Lanka and Myanmar, WSJ reports. The tools would only be used in the event of election-related violence or other serious circumstances, though some employees are concerned it could slow down viral content and unintentionally hide legitimate political discussions. Go Deeper: Facebook will ban U.S. political ads indefinitely after November 3. Samsung chairman and icon dies A chapter has closed for the Samsung conglomerate following the death of Lee Kun-hee, who transformed the South Korean appliance maker into the world's biggest producer of smartphones, TVs and memory chips. He had been incapacitated for years following a 2014 stroke, leaving day-to-day operations to his son, Lee Jae-yong, who goes by Jay Y. in the West. While Lee spends about 95% of his time focused on Samsung Electronics (OTC:SSNLF), the conglomerate's most valuable arm, he formally takes the reins with Samsung on the defensive and struggling to evolve within the tech industry. What else is happening... SAP (NYSE:SAP) tumbles 18% premarket after slashing revenue forecast. Coca-Cola (NYSE:KO) steps away from bottling in Australia. Chinese policymakers discuss new five-year development plan. Airbnb (AIRB) approves private share split ahead of IPO. American (NASDAQ:AAL) plans PR events before 737 MAX (NYSE:BA) takes to the skies. AT&T (NYSE:T) job cuts at historical levels; CNN's Zucker may be on the block. Today's Markets In Asia, Japan -0.1%. Hong Kong +0.5%. China -0.8%. India -1.3%. In Europe, at midday, London -0.2%. Paris -0.6%. Frankfurt -2.1%. Futures at 6:20, Dow -0.9%. S&P -0.9%. Nasdaq -0.9%. Crude -2.5% to $38.85. Gold -0.2% at $1902.40. Bitcoin +0.6% to $13099. Ten-year Treasury Yield -3 bps to 0.81% Today's Economic Calendar 8:30 Chicago Fed National Activity Index 10:00 New Home Sales 10:30 Dallas Fed Manufacturing Survey
There are multiple crypto exchange (bitcoin swap) services that help you covert cryptocurrencies. Most of these services are non-custodial and do not require signup. Using these services, you can convert bitcoin or altcoins. In addition, some of these services also offer to buy and sell cryptocurrencies using fiat. Let’s dive in.
How do Bitcoin Swaps work?
Let’s say you want to convert 1 BTC to ETH. Here is an overview of the exchange process step by step.
Select 1 BTC, and the service will populate the amount of ETH you will receive based on the exchange rate (This exchange rate is approximate and varies for different services)
Enter the Ethereum address in which you want to receive the ETH.
Then the service will show you a Bitcoin address, send the exact amount of BTC to that address
Enter your email for notifications (Optional)
Always save the Order Id, Transaction Id or Unique URL, in case something goes wrong
Now wait for your coins
ShapeShift is one of the oldest crypto exchange services. The company was founded in 2014 by Erik Voorhees. You don’t need to signup for crypto-asset exchange equivalent up to $50K. In addition, you can sign up and connect your wallets to exchange your crypto on Shapeshift, if you want high-value exchange. ShapeShift also has a Fox token, using which you can avoid fees. Other than a crypto exchange service, Shapeshift also built other products, such as CoinCap, a crypto market API provider, and Keepkey, a hardware wallet. ShapeShift features:
No signup (up to $50k equivalent crypto-asset exchange)
Buy crypto using fiat
You can connect crypto wallets
Supports multiple crypto assets
Automatically provides the best exchange rate
ChangeNow is one of the most reliable crypto exchange services. It doesn’t require any signup and doesn’t impose a maximum limit. In addition, you can also buy cryptocurrencies using your Master or Visa card with ChangeNow. The team has built multiple products around coin conversion. Such as NowPayments helps you accept payment in any cryptocurrencies and convert in the currency of your choice instantly. ChangeNow features:
Support fiat-to-crypto buying
Automatically provides the best exchange rate
Available on web and Android
Supports more than 50+ crypto assets including Stablecoins
Swaplab is a simple crypto exchange service using which you can convert Bitcoin and other altcoins. Like other services, It is a non-custodial and doesn’t require any signup or account creation. SwapLab features:
No signup and non-custodial
Supports 20+ assets
Automatically provides the best exchange rate
Available on web
Cryptmixer is a non-custodial coin swap service that does not require any account creation. Unlike other coin exchange services, Cryptmixer is transparent about the fee. It charges .05% as an exchange fee and has high exchange limits. Cryptmixer features:
Non-custodial and No signup
High exchange limits
Transparent .05% as transaction fee
Automatically provides the best exchange rate
Supports the top 6 cryptocurrencies
Has a mixing service built in to remove trace activity with your Bitcoin
SimpleSwap supports more than 225 cryptocurrencies. It’s non-custodial with no signup needed. In addition, anyone can integrate with SimpleSwap using its APIs and earn a commission for every conversion. SimpleSwap features:
No signup and non-custodial
Supports 200+ assets
Offers APIs for integration
Automatically provides the best exchange rate
Available on web
Swapzone is an exchange aggregator working with non-custodial instant cryptocurrency swap services. Currently, the service supports over 300 assets for swaps at best rates and operates through 10+ partnering platforms (for example, Changelly, SimpleSwap, Godex, and ChangeNOW). The aim of the platform is to provide as much information on cryptocurrency swap rates and services as possible, all in one convenient interface. Swapzone features:
No registration or account creation needed
Wide range of coins and tokens to choose from (includes Stablecoins)
Multiple exchange partners with the possibility to choose among services
Exchange offers sorted by the best rate
Cryptmixer is a crypto exchange aggregator that shows the best exchange prices by scanning multiple websites. Therefore, you would like to check it out before using the services mentioned above. In addition, many of these crypto exchange services provide APIs, widgets, affiliate links, and white label solutions. You can earn commission by integrating or advertising these services.
A Little Background India, the second-most populous country in the world, has an uneasy alliance with Bitcoin. Despite the obvious resistance of the authorities, cryptocurrency has become increasingly well known. But to understand the overall picture, it is necessary to remember that the current population of the country is more than 1.3 billion and it has a GDP of $10.51 trillion. India has a large number of highly qualified technical staff and takes the second place with the number of Internet users in the world (even more than the United States). Meanwhile, the value of the Indian rupee fell nearly 40% since the start of 2018, but according to the World Bank, the country is the global leader in international money transfers. In 2014, capital flows to India averaged $70.4 billion through private transfers, which was about 3.7% of the country’s GDP. In this context, Bitcoin has every chance to find an extremely attractive market for itself. The main problem for residents of India is a simple and affordable way to convert the digital currency into rupees. … Bitcointalk Username: PRASAD555
Flatten the Curve. #49. Let's Dig into Jade Helm. AI. The Surveillance State. Internet of Things. FISA. Pentagon Preparing for Mass Civil Breakdown. What is Mob Excess Deterrent Using Silent Audio? Stay Aware and Get Ahead of the Curve.
Flatten the Curve. Part 48. Source Here It's getting crazier day by day now, so are you following the Boy Scout motto? On this topic, Baden-Powell says: Remember your motto, "Be Prepared." Be prepared for accidents by learning beforehand what you ought to do in the different kinds that are likely to occur. Be prepared to do that thing the moment the accident does occur. In Scouting for Boys, Baden-Powell wrote that to Be Prepared means “you are always in a state of readiness in mind and body to do your duty.” Why should you be prepared? Because TPTB have been preparing, that’s why.
June 12, 2014: The Guardian • Pentagon preparing for mass civil breakdown. Social science is being militarised to develop 'operational tools' to target peaceful activists and protest movements Source Here
Pentagon preparing for mass civil breakdown. It seemed ludicrous back in 2014, didn't it? Inconceivable. Sure some preppers believed it, but they're always getting ready and nothing happened. Doomsday was always right around the corner, and then the next corner, and on and on. Televangelists have probably accused more politicians of being the antichrist than the number of politicians went to Epstein's Island. But why would they be preparing for mass civil breakdown? Could it be the same reason as why the miltary is preparing for war, droughts and famines brought about by environmental collapse?
February 20, 2020: History Network • Here’s Why These Six Ancient Civilizations Mysteriously Collapsed. From the Maya to Greenland’s Vikings, check out six civilizations that seemingly disappeared without a trace. Source Here
All of these civilizations vanished because of some combination of exhausting their natural resources, drought, plauge, and the little ice age. Sound familiar? Don't tell me that the Rockefeller Foundation and BlackRock became environmentally aware out of a sense of obligation to the planet. They're setting the groundwork for what's coming down the pipe. This isn't about money anymore, this is about control and survival. Throw out the rulebook because the rules no longer apply. Do you think the surveillance system is for your protection, or the protection of the state? Don't you think that an era of upcoming calamities will severely damage the communication networks, and thus the surveillance system? It might be prudent to consider that Starlink is being established to make the system redundant, so that they never lose track of the precious worker bees before they can be connected to the AI hive mind, right Elon? Neuralink, don't leave home without it. But let's not forget about the wonderful world of the Internet of Things.
March 15, 2012 • More and more personal and household devices are connecting to the internet, from your television to your car navigation systems to your light switches. CIA Director David Petraeus cannot wait to spy on you through them. Earlier this month, Petraeus mused about the emergence of an "Internet of Things" -- that is, wired devices -- at a summit for In-Q-Tel, the CIA's venture capital firm. "'Transformational' is an overused word, but I do believe it properly applies to these technologies," Petraeus enthused, "particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft." All those new online devices are a treasure trove of data if you're a "person of interest" to the spy community. Once upon a time, spies had to place a bug in your chandelier to hear your conversation. With the rise of the "smart home," you'd be sending tagged, geolocated data that a spy agency can intercept in real time when you use the lighting app on your phone to adjust your living room's ambiance. "Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters -- all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing," Petraeus said, "the latter now going to cloud computing, in many areas greater and greater supercomputing, and, ultimately, heading to quantum computing." Petraeus allowed that these household spy devices "change our notions of secrecy" and prompt a rethink of "our notions of identity and secrecy." All of which is true -- if convenient for a CIA director. The CIA has a lot of legal restrictions against spying on American citizens. But collecting ambient geolocation data from devices is a grayer area, especially after the 2008 carve-outs to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Hardware manufacturers, it turns out, store a trove of geolocation data; and some legislators have grown alarmed at how easy it is for the government to track you through your phone or PlayStation. That's not the only data exploit intriguing Petraeus. He's interested in creating new online identities for his undercover spies -- and sweeping away the "digital footprints" of agents who suddenly need to vanish. "Proud parents document the arrival and growth of their future CIA officer in all forms of social media that the world can access for decades to come," Petraeus observed. "Moreover, we have to figure out how to create the digital footprint for new identities for some officers." Source Here December 19, 2019: New York Times • THE DATA REVIEWED BY TIMES OPINION didn’t come from a telecom or giant tech company, nor did it come from a governmental surveillance operation. It originated from a location data company, one of dozens quietly collecting precise movements using software slipped onto mobile phone apps. You’ve probably never heard of most of the companies — and yet to anyone who has access to this data, your life is an open book. They can see the places you go every moment of the day, whom you meet with or spend the night with, where you pray, whether you visit a methadone clinic, a psychiatrist’s office or a massage parlor. The Times and other news organizations have reported on smartphone tracking in the past. But never with a data set so large. Even still, this file represents just a small slice of what’s collected and sold every day by the location tracking industry — surveillance so omnipresent in our digital lives that it now seems impossible for anyone to avoid. It doesn’t take much imagination to conjure the powers such always-on surveillance can provide an authoritarian regime like China’s. Within America’s own representative democracy, citizens would surely rise up in outrage if the government attempted to mandate that every person above the age of 12 carry a tracking device that revealed their location 24 hours a day. Yet, in the decade since Apple’s App Store was created, Americans have, app by app, consented to just such a system run by private companies. Now, as the decade ends, tens of millions of Americans, including many children, find themselves carrying spies in their pockets during the day and leaving them beside their beds at night — even though the corporations that control their data are far less accountable than the government would be. Source Here
The IoT should be renamed to IoTT (Internet of Tracking Things), shouldn't it. But we can't have people figure out what's really happening, can we? It's a good thing that quantum computing isn't too close, isn’t it?
April 5, 2018: Global News • (Project Maven) Over 3,000 Google employees have a signed a petition in protest against the company’s involvement with a U.S. Department of Defense artificial intelligence (AI) project that studies imagery and could eventually be used to improve drone strikes in the battlefield. Source Here
December 12, 2019 • Palantir took over Project Maven defense contract after Google backed out. Source Here
December 29, 2020: Input • Palantir exec says its work is on par with the Manhattan Project. Comparing AI to most lethal weapon in human history isn’t comforting. SourceHere
August 14, 2020: Venture: • Google researchers use quantum computing to help improve image classification. Source Here
Hmmm. Maybe Apple will be for the little guy? They have always valued privacy rights, right?
October 2, 2013: Vice News • The hacktivist group Anonymous released a video statement with an accompanying Pastebin document claiming that there are definitive links between AuthenTec, the company that developed the iPhone 5S’s fingerprint scanner, and the US government. Source Here
An apple a day helps the NSA. Or Google. Or Microsoft. Or Amazon. Take your pick from the basket, because dem Apple's are all the same. But at least we have fundamental rights, right? Foreign agent declaration not required • No mention of foreign agent status is made in the Protect America Act of 2007. Under prior FISA rules, persons targeted for surveillance must have been declared as foreign agents before a FISA warrant would be accorded by the FISC court. 'Quasi-anti-terrorism law' for all-forms of intelligence collection • Vastly marketed by U.S. federal and military agencies as a law to prevent terror attacks, the Protect America Act was actually a law focused on the 'acquisition' of desired intelligence information, of unspecified nature. The sole requirement is geolocation outside the United States at time of Directive invocation; pursuant to Authorization or Order invocation, surveillance Directives can be undertaken towards persons targeted for intelligence information gathering. Implementation of Directives can take place inside the United States or outside the United States. No criminal or terrorism investigation of the person need be in play at time of the Directive. All that need be required is that the target be related to an official desire for intelligence information gathering for actions on part of persons involved in surveillance to be granted full immunity from U.S. criminal or civil procedures, under Section 105B(l) of the Act. Removal of FISA Strictures from warrant authorization; warrants not required • But the most striking aspect of the Protect America Act was the notation that any information gathering did not comprise electronic surveillance. This wording had the effect of removing FISA-related strictures from Protect America Act 2007-related Directives, serving to remove a number of protections for persons targeted, and requirements for persons working for U.S. intelligence agencies. The acquisition does not constitute electronic surveillance • The removal of the term electronic surveillance from any Protect America Act Directive implied that the FISC court approval was no longer required, as FISA warrants were no longer required. In the place of a warrant was a certification, made by U.S. intelligence officers, which was copied to the Court. In effect, the FISC became less of a court than a registry of pre-approved certifications.Certifications (in place of FISA warrants) were able to be levied ex post facto, in writing to the Court no more than 72 hours after it was made. The Attorney General was to transmit as soon as possible to the Court a sealed copy of the certification that would remain sealed unless the certification was needed to determine the legality of the acquisition.Source Here Oh. FISA is basically a rubber stamp. And even if it the stage play wasn't pretending to follow the script, would it matter? Who could actually stop it at this point? The cat's out of the bag and Pandoras Box is open.
Controversial debates arose as the Protect America Act was published. Constitutional lawyers and civil liberties experts expressed concerns that this Act authorized massive, wide-ranging information gathering with no oversight. Whereas it placed much focus on communications, the Act allowed for information gathering of all shapes and forms. The ACLU called it the "Police America Act" – "authorized a massive surveillance dragnet", calling the blank-check oversight provisions "meaningless," and calling them a "phony court review of secret procedures."
So the surveillance state doesn't have checks and balances anymore. The state is preparing for Massive Civil Breakdown. They keep warning us about environmental collapse. Got it? Good. Let's keep on keeping on.
The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 created a single new district corporation governing the entire federal territory, called the District of Columbia, thus dissolving the three major political subdivisions of the District (Port of Georgetown, the City of Washington, and Washington County) and their governments. Source Here)
The first big leap in corporate personhood from holding mere property and contract rights to possessing more expansive rights was a claim that the Equal Protection Clause applied to corporations. One of the strangest twists in American constitutional law was the moment that corporations gained personhood under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It occurred in a case called Santa Clara County, and what was odd was that the Supreme Court did not really even decide the matter in the actual opinion. It only appeared in a footnote to the case. What we are likely to have at the conclusion of the Supreme Court term is corporations that are empowered to spend in American elections because of Bellotti and Citizens United; corporations that can make religious objections thanks to Hobby Lobby; and if Jesner turns out as badly as I predict, corporations will be able to aid and abet human rights violations abroad with impunity. Source Here
"Having a corporation would allow people to put property into a collective ownership that could be held with perpetual existence," she says. "So it wouldn't be tied to any one person's lifespan, or subject necessarily to laws regarding inheriting property." Later on, in the United States and elsewhere, the advantages of incorporation were essential to efficient and secure economic development. Unlike partnerships, the corporation continued to exist even if a partner died; there was no unanimity required to do something; shareholders could not be sued individually, only the corporation as a whole, so investors only risked as much as they put into buying shares. Source Here
The way that the Arab Bank may get away with this alleged morally troubling behavior, even though it has a New York branch, is by reasserting the basic argument that was made in Nestle USA and Kiobel II: that the federal Alien Tort Statute was not intended to apply to corporations full stop. Given other cases in this area like Mohamad v. PLO, which held the word “individual” in the Torture Victim Protection Act means a natural person and does not impose any liability against organizations, the Arab Bank’s procorporate argument may well prevail. There are multiple federal Circuit Courts which have shot down the argument that corporations are immune from suit under the Alien Tort Statute. The lone outlier is the Second Circuit, which decided in 2010 that corporations are excused from suit in Kiobel I. This is the case that was appealed to the Supreme Court and became Kiobel II. Jesner v. Arab Bank was litigated in the Second Circuit. One question in Jesner was what exactly did Kiobel II do to Kiobel I. So far in the litigation, Jesner concluded that Kiobel I and its conclusion that corporations can’t be sued in federal court using the Alien Tort Statute remained the controlling law of the Second Circuit.
There's a reason people call lawyers snakes, it's because most of them speak with forked tounges. So the corporation isn't being held liable, but the shareholders can't be held liable either. That's too insane to even be called a Catch 22. We are literally being set up to have no recourse because there isn’t anybody who can be held responsible. Why is that important when I've been talking about the surveillance state?
July 14, 2020: The Intercept • Microsoft’s police surveillance services are often opaque because the company sells little in the way of its own policing products. It instead offers an array of “general purpose” Azure cloud services, such as machine learning and predictive analytics tools like Power BI (business intelligence) and Cognitive Services, which can be used by law enforcement agencies and surveillance vendors to build their own software or solutions. A rich array of Microsoft’s cloud-based offerings is on full display with a concept called “The Connected Officer.” Microsoft situates this concept as part of the Internet of Things, or IoT, in which gadgets are connected to online servers and thus made more useful. “The Connected Officer,” Microsoft has written, will “bring IoT to policing.” With the Internet of Things, physical objects are assigned unique identifiers and transfer data over networks in an automated fashion. If a police officer draws a gun from its holster, for example, a notification can be sent over the network to alert other officers there may be danger. Real Time Crime Centers could then locate the officer on a map and monitor the situation from a command and control center. Source Here
Uhm, I guess it's really is all connected, isn’t it?
June 18, 2020: The Guardian • How Target, Google, Bank of America and Microsoft quietly fund police through private donations. More than 25 large corporations in the past three years have contributed funding to private police foundations, new report says. Source Here
Long live the Military Industrial Techno Surveillance State. If you have nothing to hide, than you have nothing to worry about. Really? Are we still believing that line? Cause it's a load of crap. If we have nothing to worry about, then why are they worried enough to be implementing surveillance systems with corresponding units on the ground? Got your attention there, didn't I?
August 19, 2019: Big Think • Though the term "Orwellian" easily applies to such a technology, Michel's illuminating reporting touches something deeper. Numerous American cities have already been surveilled using these god-like cameras, including Gorgon Stare, a camera-enabled drone that can track individuals over a 50-square kilometer radius from 20,000 feet. Here's the real rub: the feature that allows users to pinch and zoom on Instagram is similar to what WAMI allows. Anything within those 50-square kilometers is now under the microscope. If this sounds like some futuristic tech, think again: Derivations of this camera system have been tested in numerous American cities. Say there is a big public protest. With this camera you can follow thousands of protesters back to their homes. Now you have a list of the home addresses of all the people involved in a political movement. If on their way home you witness them committing some crime—breaking a traffic regulation or frequenting a location that is known to be involved in the drug trade—you can use that surveillance data against them to essentially shut them up. That's why we have laws that prevent the use of surveillance technologies because it is human instinct to abuse them. That's why we need controls. Source Here
Want to know more about the Gorgon Stare? Flatten the Curve. Part 12. Source Here Now, I'm not sure if you remember or know any Greek Mythology, but the Gorgons were three sisters, and one sister had Snakes on her head (she wasn't a lawyer) and she turned people to stone when she looked at them.
MEDUSA (Mob Excess Deterrent Using Silent Audio) is a directed-energy non-lethal weapon designed by WaveBand Corporation in 2003-2004 for temporary personnel incapacitation. The weapon is based on the microwave auditory effect resulting in a strong sound sensation in the human head when it is subject to certain kinds of pulsed/modulated microwave radiation. The developers claimed that through the combination of pulse parameters and pulse power, it is possible to raise the auditory sensation to a “discomfort” level, deterring personnel from entering a protected perimeter or, if necessary, temporarily incapacitating particular individuals. In 2005, Sierra Nevada Corporation acquired WaveBand Corporation.
Ok. Get it? The Gorgon eye in the sky stares at you while the Medusa makes you immobile. Not good, but at least it'll just freeze you in your tracks.
July 6, 2008: Gizmodo • The Sierra Nevada Corporation claimed this week that it is ready to begin production on the MEDUSA, a damned scary ray gun that uses the "microwave audio effect" to implant sounds and perhaps even specific messages inside people's heads. Short for Mob Excess Deterrent Using Silent Audio, MEDUSA creates the audio effect with short microwave pulses. The pulses create a shockwave inside the skull that's detected by the ears, and basically makes you think you're going balls-to-the-wall batshit insane. Source Here
Uhm. And drive you insane.
July 26, 2008: Gizmodo • The MEDUSA crowd control ray gun we reported on earlier this month sounded like some pretty amazing-and downright scary-technology. Using the microwave auditory effect, the beam, in theory, would have put sounds and voice-like noises in your head, thereby driving you away from the area. Crowd control via voices in your head. Sounds cool. However, it turns out that the beam would actually kill you before any of that happy stuff started taking place, most likely by frying or cooking your brain inside your skull. Can you imagine if this thing made it out into the field? Awkward! Source Here
Annnnnnnndddddd it'll kill you. Guys, they're prepared. They've been prepared. They're ready. Remember the Doomsday Bunkers? The military moving into Cheyenne Mountain? Deep Underground Military Bunkers? The rapid rolling out of 5G? BITCOIN and UBI so neatly inserted into our minds over the last five years? They've directly told us to have three months of supplies in our homes. 2020 isn't going to be an anomaly? It's the start of the collapse of our natural resources. Take a look on Reddit and all the posts about crazy weather. Cyanobacteria blooms killing dogs and people. Toxic Super Pollution caused by atmospheric inversions killing people. This isn’t normal, this is New Normal. And they know it. They've known it for a while. Let me show you one last thing before I wrap it up.
From the earliest Chinese dynasties to the present, the jade deposits most used were not only those of Khotan in the Western Chinese province of Xinjiang but other parts of China as well, such as Lantian, Shaanxi.
Remember, words matter. Look at Gorgon Stare and Medusa. They don't randomly grab names out of a hat, or pick them because they think it sounds dystopian. They pick words for a reason.
July 7, 2017: The Warzone • There only appears to be one official news story on this exercise at all and it's available on the website of Air Mobility Command’s Eighteenth Air Force, situated at Joint Base Charleston. At the time of writing, a google shows that there were more than a half dozen more copies on other Air Force pages, as well as number of photographs. For some reason, someone appears to have taken these offline or otherwise broken all the links. Using Google to search the Defense Video Imagery Distribution System, which is the main U.S. military's public affairs hub, brings up more broken links. Oh, and unless there's been some sort of mistake, JADE HELM actually stands for the amazingly obtuse Joint Assistance for Deployment Execution Homeland Eradication of Local Militants. A separate web search for this phrase does not turn up any other results. Source Here
Now, using an acronym that indicates training to Eradicate Local Militants seems pretty dumb. It may be used in that manner if environmental collapse triggers riots, but i don't think they would warn everyone ahead of time, do you? So I dug a little bit more. Joint Assistant for Development and Execution (JADE) is a U.S. military system used for planning the deployment of military forces in crisis situations. The U.S. military developed this automated planning software system in order to expedite the creation of the detailed planning needed to deploy military forces for a military operation. JADE uses Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology combining user input, a knowledge base of stored plans, and suggestions by the system to provide the ability to develop large-scale and complex plans in minimal time. JADE is a knowledge-based system that uses highly structured information that takes advantage of data hierarchies. An official 2016 document approved for public release titled Human Systems Roadmap Review describes plans to create autonomous weapon systems that analyze social media and make decisions, including the use of lethal force, with minimal human involvement. This type of system is referred to as a Lethal Autonomous Weapon System (LAWS). The name "JADE" comes from the jade green color seen on the island of Oahu in Hawaii where the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) is headquartered. PACOM? Why isn't that command group responsible for the South China Sea? Formerly known as United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) since its inception, the command was renamed to U.S. Indo-Pacific Command on 30 May 2018, in recognition of the greater emphasis on South Asia, especially India. Now doesn't it look like Jade Helm is preparing for an invasion? And possibly insurrection later. Or at the same time? Or riots over WW3? Or food riots? And start thinking about why the laws are starting to exclude corporations? Then think about the mercenaries that are being contracted out by the government.
October 17, 2018: The Carolinan • In 2016, 75 percent of American forces were private contractors. In 2017, Erik Prince, former head of Blackwater, and Stephen Feinberg, head of Dyncorp, discussed plans for contractors completely taking over U.S. operations in Afghanistan. Although ultimately unsuccessful, it remains to be seen if the current administration will change its mind. Contractors are involved in almost every military task, such as intelligence analysis, logistics and training allied soldiers. Contractors are even involved in U.S. special ops missions. This is because contractors are essentially untraceable and unaccountable. Most are born in other countries; only 33 percent are registered U.S. citizens. Private military firms don’t have to report their actions to Congress, unlike the military or intelligence agencies. They also aren’t subject to the Freedom of Information Act, so private citizens and journalists aren’t allowed to access their internal documents. There are also no international laws to regulate private military firms. It’s been proven that many contractors are involved in illegal activities. The larger multinational companies sometimes hire local subcontractors. These contractors sometimes aren’t background-checked. A 2010 investigation by the Senate found that many subcontractors were linked to murders, kidnappings, bribery and anti-coalition activities. Some subcontractors even formed their own unlicensed mercenary groups after coalition forces leave. A 2010 House investigation showed evidence that the Department of Defense had hired local warlords for security services. In 2007, Blackwater contractors massacred 17 civilians. This eventually led Blackwater to being restructured and renamed as Academi. Source Here
Military Exercises. Private Defense Firms. No oversight. And it's all coming soon. Read more at Flatten the Curve. Part 20. Upcoming war and catastrophes. Source Here Nah. I'm just fear mongering and Doomscrolling again. Heads up and eyes open. Talk soon.
Effectively handle bad debts of credit institutions and enterprises
In 2019, the Vietnam Debt Trading Company Limited (DATC) directly purchased and handled nearly VND 3,000 billion of bad debts from credit institutions and enterprises. Revenue from trading and handling debts and assets was 1,785 billion VND, equal to 124% compared to 2018 ... DATC will participate in restructuring loss projects DATC auctioned the debt of over 1.1 trillion dong DATC entered the prevention and control of the Covid-19 epidemic DATC sells debts and assets at two debtor enterprises In addition, the company received debts and excluded assets in 15 enterprises with a value of 21,378 billion dong, of which, assets were 9,897 billion dong, debt was 11,481 billion dong, enterprises themselves. processing before handover is 2,803 billion dong. https://preview.redd.it/zhpxw0ypfrt51.jpg?width=948&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=522b0aa9f901fc7b11c6a4c461ea4b082728a7d8 The result of the actual value recovered from asset handling and debt collection received in 2019 is 20.2 billion VND, revenue from receiving activities is 6,057 billion VND (in which: property is 4,155 billion dong, debt recovery is 0.988 billion dong and debt collection handled by the business before handover is 0.994 billion dong), reaching 121% of the plan for 2019. Fast online transactions:bitcoin to paypal During the operation, the company also encountered many difficulties and challenges due to the inadequacies in the operating mechanism, which was not consistent with the changes of the market. Along with that, the regulations have not been promptly amended and supplemented, leading to limited performance of assigned roles and tasks, reducing the efficiency of DATC's debt settlement plan. Along with the difficult market, banks continue to promote the auction of collateral to recover debts / unsuccessfully auction debts to negotiate to sell debts to DATC; Due to the high asking price of debt (usually 100% of the principal and interest) and having to devalue many times to get closer to DATC's offer, it affects the progress, plan to buy and process structure to convert debt into capital contribution. However, the Company still achieved excellent results in 2019 with a total revenue of more than 2,000 billion VND; Profit before tax is estimated at 213 billion VND. Compared to the previous 5-year period from 2010 to 2014, accumulated in the period 2015-2019, the total revenue of DATC is 10,488 billion VND (an increase of 229% compared to the 2010-2014 period), purchasing debt and assets with total sales was 9,471 billion VND (increased by 442% compared to the period 2010-2014), contribution to State budget of DATC in the same period was over 400 billion VND. In addition, the Company continues to carry out the tasks assigned by the Government related to debt restructuring of State Groups and Corporations, thereby contributing to improving financial capacity, restoring operations. units in order to speed up the restructuring progress under the Government-approved scheme associated with the recovery of Government debts. In 2020, DATC will actively coordinate with ministries, branches, People's Committees of provinces and cities to promptly receive eliminated debts and assets in the transformed ownership enterprises. Regularly review and classify debts and assets as non-in-kind expenses, loss of assets in receiving to continue handling. Complete the proceedings in court, at the same time closely coordinate with the judgment enforcement agency to recover debt after receiving from businesses. Along with that, the company will promote debt trading, restructuring, divestment ... commensurate with its size and capacity, affirming its position and role in debt trading, restructuring enterprises in the Vietnamese debt trading market.
IPFS— The New-gen Tech Revolution, or Another Illusion?
Founded in 2014, after 6 years of R & D as well as its expansion, and after nearly a year of extensive testing and preparation, IPFS (Interplanetary File System) was officially launched on the afternoon of October 15, 2020, UTC time. 12 hours after the mainnet went online, Its token price fluctuated between 50~70 USD/FIL. However, panic and pessimism began to spread between the IPFS community and FIL token holders. Based on the total amount of FIL (2 billion) and the unit price of 50 US dollars estimation, its market value has exceeded 100 billion US dollars, second only to BTC. As such a mega valued IPFS/FIL went online, if there is no enough application to support, the selling pressure after the FIL is gradually unlocked will become huge. According to calculations, on the first day of the mainnet launch, there will be 239,000 FILs to be sold. Assuming that the unit price is 30 USD, the released circulation will be 8 million USD. Assuming the unit price remains unchanged, the market will usher in a similar value on the 10th day. With a release amount of 15 million USD, it is very likely that the corresponding token price can be supported. IPFS is a network transmission protocol designed to create persistent and distributed storage and sharing of files. In terms of its current active projects and companies, IPFS has added more than 5 billion files, involving multiple industries, and there are also many blockchain companies using this technology. When the IPFS mainnet and its Filecoin goes online, the market value will be based on the applications brought by the IPFS network. After Bitcoin and Ethereum, Filecoin is an upstart in the blockchain industry with a revolutionary technological breakthrough. The market predicts that Filecoin’s market value will surpass Bitcoin. Now let us analyze this project together that was given high hopes: IPFS major features and disadvantages The basic application of IPFS, Filecoin’s financial attributes and its incentive mechanism make it a very exciting global collaborative open source project. On this basis, the data of all mankind is stored in the IPFS network, and no one can tamper with it. This magnificent scene provides at least three values for us:
It creates a storage network service that is license-free and trust-free. This is very important. When you want to access a digital file, you don’t need to get approval or filing from any organization, and strict certification. As for non-centralized trust, it does not require user to trust the supplier that provides storage services, which significantly reduces the cost.
The successful application of IPFS will most likely enable all idle storage resources in the world to be gathered to form a network and be effectively used, and such a network is unprecedented.
Through such a model, network redundancy can be effectively reduced, and the complete separation of data can be achieved. There is no need to store files in a fixed location, only the content needs to be stored in an IPFS and Filecoin network.
However, Plentiful in ideal yet bony in reality. The design flaws of the IPFS project make it difficult to truly apply in the practical environment. Its design flaws mainly focus in the following aspects:
Cannot support hot data storage.
Based on the principle of data timeliness, the higher the frequency of data access, the greater the value of the data possess. At present, IPFS only supports cold data storage scenarios. The lack of support for network transmission makes it impossible to establish a transmission network for hot data, which means the lack of the most valuable support for the network.
The disaster tolerance mechanism is missing.
Disaster tolerance means that when an IT system stops working due to an accident (such as fire, earthquake, etc.), the entire application system can be switched to another location so that the system functions can continue to work normally. IPFS / Filecoin does not provide reliable disaster recovery and recovery mechanisms for storage users. Storage miners arecentrally handling disaster recovery backup and recovery works, resulting in an increase in storage space redundancy by 2–3 times.
The storage performance is reduced by more than 60 times.
The IPFS data verification mechanism is too ideal and complex, and its storage performance is more than 60 times lower than that of a traditional centralized storage system. 1TB files usually need to be verified for more than 10 hours and cannot be stored normally and efficiently.
Centralized technology architecture.
IPFS requires pretty advanced hardware, which leads to a very high threshold for joining its storage network. At present, only specialized storage devices can join the IPFS network as storage nodes. This means that IPFS initially advertised to users that connecting ordinary idle storage and reducing storage costs, has become a flubdub. It is difficult to store the entire network in a centralized structure in a disguised form, which cannot greatly reduce the storage cost of the entire network and ensure the security of the entire network.
Due to the lack of the decentralized governance mechanism, its governance is too despotic, leading to a certain harm to the participated communities.
The above are the main obstacles currently hindering IPFS and Filecoin. The good news is that some of them can be improved and perfected, while some are design mechanism problems and cannot be fixed. Let’s take a look at another project initiated in the tech circle in 2017 — -HOP: What is HOP The HOP protocol provides a decentralized and completely anonymous traffic service for people all over the world based on block chain. HOP combines P2P network transmission and block chain technology to establish a block chain micro-payment protocol based on the block chain transmission encryption protocol between P2P network bandwidth contributors and bandwidth users, and merge it into traffic mining. In the mining pool side, the whole protocol is built on the main network, which has Micro Payment and mining functions. In addition, HOP also supports traffic mining of ERC20 in any currency. So far, HOP is the only protocol that combines the above functions and is officially available in commercial application. It can provide terminal nodes for secure access to decentralized networks. HOP features and comparison with IPFS HOP and IPFS have certain similarities. The following table is a comparison of the two projects in terms of technology and application characteristics: https://preview.redd.it/d4klovzngmt51.png?width=1178&format=png&auto=webp&s=f14f0b2290430f6861f6da27f2d1e47ed196b741 Why HOP might be a phenomenal project in the future Compared with the disadvantages of IPFS which are not supporting for hot data storage, low storage efficiency, low disaster tolerance and the high threshold of providing storage capacity, The advantages of HOP are summarized as follows:
High operating efficiency.
The smart micro-payment system runs payments with unlimited TPS, and the efficiency is 90% higher than Ethereum.
High level of open source. Supports all ERC-20 token access.
Low threshold of participation.
Any participant who has a certain fundamental knowledge of computer science and network technology can set up mining pools and miners.
It can be combined with Starlink satellites, repeaters, sim/esim cards and mobile phones in actual application scenarios to form a next-generation distributed interconnected communication network globally. At present, most of the participants of HOP are top tier tech specialists, famous investors and politicians with global vision. We believe that projects like HOP, due to the open source and far-sighted technical foundation, which can not only achieve internal self-consistent circulation, but also integrate well with external ecology. Just as water conservancy is invisible, HOP has unlimited inclusiveness and scalability, and has a strong platform-level vitality! We are looking forward to the accumulation of HOP, bringing a revolution in technology and applications to the blockchain and the practical universe!
Bitcoin has been known by many to be the most famous decentralized cryptocurrency. However, besides bitcoin there exists other altcoins that confer a great value as well. Are you interested in learning about other cryptocurrencies? Well, bitcoin is not alone. Here are others. 1. Litecoin (LTC) Statistics show that as of July 2018, Litecoin had per token value of $87.56. The coin was created by former Google engineer and MIT graduate named Charlie Lee. Just like bitcoin, Litecoin is not controlled by any central authority. It uses ''scrypt'' as proof of work. Different from bitcoin, Litecoin has got a faster block generation rate. This means that it offers a faster transaction confirmation. The coin is based on an open source global payment network. The coin is generally accepted by merchants with the number growing each day. In July 2018, it had a market cap of $5.03 billion. 2. Ethereum (ETH) It was launched in the year 2015. ETH is a decentralized software platform. It enables Distributed Applications and Smart Contracts to be built and run without downtime, fraud, control or third party interference. There exists a component called ether which acts like a vehicle within the ethereum platform. Developers seeking to develop and run applications within ethereum and investors aiming to purchases other digital currencies are the most interested parties in ether. Value per token of ethereum as of July 2018 was $474.66 and a market cap of $ 47.84. Ethereum is the second most important cryptocurrency from bitcoin. 3. Zcash (ZEC) Just like other altcoins, Zcash is an open-source and decentralized cryptocurrency. It was launched in the year 2016. This cryptocurrency is known to offer privacy and selective transparency of transactions. It's a unique feature different from other altcoins, isn't it? ZEC claims to offer extra security where all the transactions are recorded and published on a blockchain. However, finer details involving the sender and recipient, and the amount are kept private. Statistics show that as of July 2018, Zcash had per token value of $206.23. It had a market cap of $904.85 in the same month. 4. Dash It was originally known as darkcoin. Dash is a more secretive version of bitcoin. The working of Dash makes transactions almost untraceable. This because it provides anonymity since it works on a decentralized mastercode network. Dash was launched in January 2014. Since then it has experienced an increase in fan following despite the short period of time. The cryptocurrency was created by Evan Duffield. It can be mined using a GPU or a CPU. Studies indicate that in July 2018, Dash had a market cap of $2.19 billion and value per token of $266.58.
The Role of the TRON Blockchain in Powering the Success of the JSB Foundation
The JSB Foundation has been made possible by the TRON Blockchain Justin Sun, Born on July 10, 1990, is the man who founded the TRON Blockchain. He is also the current CEO of BitTorrent and a former representative at Ripple Mainland China. Additionally, he is the founder and CEO of Peiwo, a mobile social application in China. Sun has an MA from the University of Pennsylvania East Asia Studies. He also has a BA in History from Peking University. At 26, Sun was picked by Jack Ma to study at Hupan University and he was the only millennium student amongst the first graduates. In 2011, Sun was picked as the cover face of Yazhou Zhoukhan and the Davos Global Youth Leaders in 2014. Sun was named the CNTV’s most focused new entrepreneur in 2015 and he was included in the Forbes China 0 under 30 from 2015 to 2017. The JSB Foundation has been made possible by the TRON Blockchain. Today, TRON is one of the biggest blockchain-based operating systems globally. Some of the key advantages of TRON are:
High scalability is a key advantage of the TRON blockchain. Many applications are now launching on TRON because of this key advantage. On TRON, users get access to highly efficient and scalable smart contracts. Besides that, the platform is capable of supporting a large number of users and simultaneous transactions without significant lag times.
Reliability is always a key consideration for any user of a blockchain platform. The platform comes with reliable network architecture, highly reliable user assets, as well as a high level of decentralized consensus. Additionally, the reward distribution system is highly reliable and it helps to promote the growth of the platform. High Bandwidth The high throughput on TRON has been achieved by improving the Transaction per Second (TPS) speed. Today, the TPS on TRON is higher than that of Ethereum and Bitcoin. It helps to ensure that TRON is a practical blockchain platform for daily transactions. A Reliable Wallet The TRON native wallet is called TronLink. It was first launched on the official website of TRON and it is powered by the TRON platform. The TronLink wallet is the go-to wallet for most users of TRON. It comes as a Chrome Wallet Extension and as an iOS and Android app. With the wallet, users can send and receive TRX tokens and TRC10 and TRC20 tokens. Besides that, they can integrate smart contracts calls on the developer’s site. Another use case for the wallet is the ability to use DApps within the browser. Today, the TRON TRX tokens have a market cap that makes it the top 20 global blockchain platforms. The platform launched its ERC20 tokens to the TRON mainnnet on June 25, 2018, which made the TRX tokens an independent coin.
About the JustSwap Platform
JustSwap is a decentralized protocol that will be at the core of the JSB Foundation. The protocol was launched in August 2020 by TRON and is part of a push by TRON to get in on the DeFi action. It aims to create a DeFi platform that will revolve around the TRON blockchain. The launch of JustSwap was done via a live stream on Yizhibo, the Chinese version of Periscope. During the event, over 763,000 viewers were present. Sun later posted a one-minute video on his YouTube channel explaining JustSwap. Sun said that JustSwap was an alternative to Uniswap, which is based on the Ethereum blockchain. It will make it possible for traders to trade in TRC20 tokens without paying commissions to the exchange. Besides that, users will be able to earn by providing liquidity on the DEX. Uniswap, the platform on which JustSwap is based, is the largest protocol in the DeFi space by locked assets. In recent months, the DeFi sector, mainly based on Ethereum, has been growing rapidly. However, Uniswap does not support the TRON blockchain. As a result, users of Uniswap would be locked out of the potential benefits offered by TRON. When JustWap was launched, it achieved trading volumes of $10 million in the first 19 hours.
A Look at the JSBSwap Exchange
JSBSwap is an automated decentralized exchange that is powered by a constant production formula. The entire protocol is powered by smart contracts and secured using the TRON blockchain. The lack of third parties reduces security risks as well as operational costs. It will be one of the main products launched by the JSB Foundation. The JSB Foundation has collaborated with the P2PB2B exchange for an upcoming launch. The IEO is set to take place on October 15 and it will be open to everyone. Summary From the foregoing, it is clear that TRON has the technology and community needed to create a sustainable decentralized platform. It was the reason the JSB Foundation built the platform on the TRON blockchain. The use of TRON will ensure that as JSB grows, it does not face restrictions when it comes to scaling and the speed of transactions. Combined with a highly motivated team and viable products for the DeFi space, JSB should be quite a success. As the DeFi space continues to expand, more people will want to discover alternatives to existing platforms that offer them value for their funds. JSB has various protocols built to enhance decentralization and value for participants. Its value proposition could help it to become a major success within the DeFi and specifically within TRON.
This 6 month old Augur V2 video got me excited. I thought I’d share its value proposition, which I feel is currently being overlooked. If you’ve been in the space for some time, you know what Augur is: a decentralized prediction market and the biggest (in ETH)/earliest ICO on Ethereum. Prediction markets allow for better forecasting by leveraging the power of incentivized wisdom of the crowd. V2 will soon launch with a revamped UI, cheap 0x orders and stablecoin integration. It’s set to become the most accessible, fair and open betting platform out there. What you may not realize is its impact in the Defi space. Each market/prediction/question is represented by a token that can be traded in other Defi apps. This gives it incredible flexibility. Consider these possibilities:
DIY Derivative markets - You want to bet on Covid being a threat to the economy. Unfortunately JPOW’s printer is on and it’s pumping the equities markets. Why not create an Augur market that tracks the number of Covid deaths worldwide? What about betting on unemployment rates?
Sports betting - Betfair, Draftkings, Bet360? What about Augur, a provably fair betting alternative with unlimited liquidity that can’t prevent you from betting or run off with your money? More from Joey Krug here
Augur as an oracle - Understandably, everyone’s been raging about decentralized oracles lately; they’re how we merge blockchain and the real world. Need an oracle? Design your own with Augur, use it in your Dapp later.
Polling and futarchy - Incentivized polling has never been so easy. V2 is positioning itself to become a prime resource for the upcoming US elections this fall. Later versions could even be used to direct policy making by introducing conditional markets. I’ll let 2014 Vitalik explain
Bug bounties and smartcontract insurance - Easily insure yourself against smartcontract bugs or use your white hacker skills and pay yourself by designing your own bug bounties.
This synergetic composability gets incredibly interesting when combined with other Defi legos. How about token sets based on bets between the ratios of active addresses on Ethereum vs Bitcoin? Why not make a Uniswap pair between a Real-T token and a bet against Detroit real-estate to hedge your position and gain transaction fees on the side? Tokenomics With growing interest over new Defi tokens, REP will no doubt position itself among the top. It’s one of the few that actually benefits from using a blockchain and has a utility that isn’t just governance related. Staked REP consensus is used to validate markets and collect fees in the process. We’ve seen most successful Defi tokens pick up steam, especially in the past month, as mirrored by their sharp price increases: BNT +200%, KNC +90%, LEND + 70%, MKR +60%, LRC +140%. Augur V1 markets aren’t being used right now since the long awaited V2 is just around the corner. The repeated additional delays in V2’s launch date have kept its price comparatively low. With that in mind, if one believes in the team’s ability to deliver and for Defi to continue growing, REP seems to be an extremely strong long term play. Whether you're a token holder or not, you'll likely see its contribution in many spheres of the Defi world. The above examples only scratch the surface of what it enables. Disclaimer - I own some REP For more info: Augur V2 WhitepaperFinal pre-launch tasksThe Augur Edge by pacific_Oc3an
Price fluctuations in the bitcoin spot rate on cryptocurrency exchanges are driven by many factors. Volatility is measured in traditional markets by the Volatility Index, also known as the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX). More recently, a volatility index for bitcoin has also become available. Known as the Bitcoin Volatility Index, it aims to track the volatility of the world's leading digital currency by market cap over various periods of time. Bitcoin's value has been historically quite volatile. In a three-month span from October of 2017 to January of 2018, for instance, the volatility of the price of bitcoin reached to nearly 8%. This is more than twice the volatility of bitcoin in the 30-day period ending January 15, 2020. But why is bitcoin so volatile? Here are just a few of the many factors behind bitcoin's volatility.
Bad News Hurts Adoption Rate
News events that scare bitcoin users include geopolitical events and statements by governments that bitcoin is likely to be regulated. Bitcoin's early adopters included several bad actors, producing headline news stories that produced fear in investors. Headline-making bitcoin news over the decade or so of the cryptocurrency's existence includes the bankruptcy of Mt. Gox in early 2014 and, more recently, that of the South Korean exchange Yapian Youbit. Other news stories which shocked investors include the high-profile use of bitcoin in drug transactions via Silk Road that ended with the FBI shutdown of the marketplace in October 2013. All these incidents and the public panic that ensued drove the value of bitcoins versus fiat currencies down rapidly. However, bitcoin-friendly investors viewed those events as evidence that the market was maturing, driving the value of bitcoins versus the dollar markedly back up in the short period immediately following the news events.
Bitcoin's Perceived Value Sways
One reason why bitcoin may fluctuate against fiat currencies is the perceived store of value versus the fiat currency. Bitcoin has properties that make it similar to gold. It is governed by a design decision by the developers of the core technology to limit its production to a fixed quantity of 21 million BTC. Since that differs markedly from fiat currency, which is dynamically managed by governments who want to maintain low inflation, high employment, and satisfactory growth through investment in capital resources, as economies built with fiat currencies show signs of strength or weakness, investors may allocate more or less of their assets into bitcoin.
Uncertainty of Future Bitcoin's Value
Bitcoin volatility is also driven in large part by varying perceptions of the intrinsic value of the cryptocurrency as a store of value and method of value transfer. A store of value is the function by which an asset can be useful in the future with some predictability. A store of value can be saved and exchanged for some good or service in the future. A method of value transfer is any object or concept used to transmit property in the form of assets from one party to another. Bitcoin’s volatility at the present makes it a somewhat unclear store of value, but it promises nearly frictionless value transfer. As a result, we see that bitcoin's value can swing based on news events much as we observe with fiat currencies.
Large Currency Holder Risks
Bitcoin volatility is also to an extent driven by holders of large proportions of the total outstanding float of the currency. For bitcoin investors with current holdings above around $10M, it is not clear how they would liquidate a position that large into a fiat position without severely moving the market. Indeed, it may not be clear how they would liquidate a position of that size in a short period of time at all, as most cryptocurrency exchanges impose 24-hour withdrawal limits far below that threshold. Bitcoin has not reached the mass market adoption rates that would be necessary to provide option value to large holders of the currency.
Security Breaches Cause Volatility
Bitcoin can also become volatile when the bitcoin community exposes security vulnerabilities in an effort to produce massive open source responses in the form of security fixes. This approach to security is paradoxically one that produces great outcomes, with many valuable open source software initiatives to its credit, including Linux. Bitcoin developers must reveal security concerns to the public in order to produce robust solutions. It was a hack that drove the Yapian Youbit to bankruptcy, while many other cryptocurrencies have also made headlines for being hacked or having stashes of cryptocurrencies stolen. As an early example, in April 2014, the OpenSSL vulnerabilities attacked by the Heartbleed bug and reported by Google security's, Neel Mehta, drove Bitcoin prices down by 10% in a month. Bitcoin and open source software development are built upon the same fundamental premise that a copy of the source code is available to users to examine. This concept makes it the responsibility of the community to voice concerns about the software design, just as it is the responsibility of the community to come to consensus about modifications to that underlying source code as well. Because of the open conversation and debate regarding the Bitcoin network, security breaches tend to be highly publicized.
High-Profile Losses Raise Fear
It is worth noting that the aforementioned thefts and the ensuing news about the losses had a double effect on volatility. They reduced the overall float of bitcoin, producing a potential lift on the value of the remaining bitcoin due to increased scarcity. However, overriding this lift was the negative effect of the news cycle that followed. Notably, other bitcoin gateways looked to the massive failure at Mt. Gox as a positive for the long term prospects of bitcoin, further complicating the already complex story behind the currency’s volatility. As early adopting firms were eliminated from the market due to poor management and dysfunctional processes, later entrants learn from their errors and build stronger processes into their own operations, strengthening the infrastructure of the cryptocurrency overall.
High-Inflation Nations and Bitcoins
Bitcoin’s use case as a currency for developing countries that are currently experiencing high inflation is valuable when considering the volatility of bitcoin in these economies versus the volatility of bitcoin in USD. Bitcoin is much more volatile versus USD than the high-inflation Argentine peso versus the USD. That being said, the near frictionless transfer of bitcoins across borders makes it a potentially highly attractive borrowing instrument for Argentineans, as the high inflation rate for peso-denominated loans potentially justifies taking on some intermediate currency volatility risk in a bitcoin-denominated loan funded outside Argentina. Similarly, funders outside Argentina can earn a higher return under this scheme than they can by using other debt instruments, denominated in their home currency, potentially offsetting some of the risks of exposure to the high inflation Argentine market.
Tax Treatment Lifts Volatility
According to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), bitcoin is actually considered an asset for tax purposes. This has had a mixed impact on bitcoin's volatility. On the upside, any statement recognizing the currency has a positive effect on the market valuation of the currency. Conversely, the decision by the IRS to call it property had at least two negative effects. The first was the added complexity for users who want to use it as a form of payment. Under the new tax law, users would have to record the market value of the currency at the time of every transaction, no matter how small. This need for record keeping can understandably slow adoption as it seems to be too much trouble for what it is worth for many users. Secondly, the decision to call the currency a form of property for tax purposes may be a signal to some market participants that the IRS is preparing to enforce stronger regulations later. Very strong regulation of the currency could cause the adoption rate of the currency to slow to the point where it is not able to achieve the mass adoption that is critical for its overall utility in society. Recent moves by the IRS are not clear as to their signaling motives and therefore have mixed signals to the market for bitcoin.
https://preview.redd.it/lap9w3phkzf51.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=09d70e467007107809f6ee1430d3b4904441be61 For crypto-currency users, Dash is no stranger anymore. But people who are new to the world of digital money may wonder what Dash is. Let’s review a little Dash history. Dash was originally named Xcoin. Xcoin was launched in January 2014. Xcoin was not so popular as Bitcoin. The founder of Xcoin was Evan Duffield. Xcoin was a fork of the Bitcoin protocol. Xcoin changed its name to Darkcoin. Darkcoin was used for the black market. However, in March 2015 Darkcoin changed its name to DASH which is a portmanteau of “Digital Cash”. In 2017 Evan Duffield and Dash developers started getting support from Arizona State University. It started from this place where Dash got help with scaling, security, and other things. From the coin made only as a means of privacy, it finally become a project that has more value than other Bitcoin forks... Read more: https://www.dashnation.com/voices-of-dash-nation/why-is-the-price-of-dash-so-high/ Thanks for reading!
BTC price will be rising until the end of the year
Analyst Willie Wu thinks. He draws attention to the fact that the number of new participants in the bitcoin network has grown significantly since mid-September, and the cryptocurrency price has not reacted to this. In the last year and a half, the price of bitcoin in all cases has increased following an increase in the characteristic. Therefore, BTC is currently undervalued, the analyst points out. He also notes that in September, market participants accumulated coins while the price moved sideways. This is indicated by the On Balance Volume indicator. Another important metric of the beginning of growth is the ribbons of complexity. The indicator has left the “compression” zone, which previously always indicated an increase in the value of bitcoin. “Overall: bullish the next 3 weeks, also bullish over next 3 months,” concludes Willie Wu.
Bitcoin will rise in price to six-digit number
If one condition is met, said Michael van de Poppe, an analyst at the Amsterdam Stock Exchange. He notes that previous bullish runs of the BTC price took place amid a falling dollar index. This was the case in 2014 and 2017. Since March this year, the index has also significantly lost in value, which contributed to the rise in the price of bitcoin to $12, 400. The price of BTC may temporarily sink due to the second wave of coronavirus, but in the long term, the cryptocurrency will win as a safe-haven asset. “Of course, a potential drop by 25–35% could occur in the first stage of the crisis just like in March. But Bitcoin and gold would benefit significantly afterwards as safe havens against a weakening dollar, which is precisely what happened in December 2017 as BTC hit its all-time high of nearly $20,000,” writes van de Poppe. If the weakness of the dollar persists in 2021, then bitcoin may rise in price to six-digit numbers, the analyst said.
New US stimulus measures will strengthen bitcoin
The BTC rate will continue to rise this week amid falling dollar index, Cointelegraph analyst William Suberg writes. The index declines for the fourth day in a row as negotiations continue in Washington on new stimulus measures due to the coronavirus epidemic. The amount of support can reach $2.5 trillion. US Treasury Secretary Stephen Mnuchin confirmed that the measures will include a new round of payments in the amount of $1,200 for a number of categories of US citizens. Past payments took place this spring during the first wave of coronavirus. Then the crypto-exchanges recorded a sharp jump in deposits for exactly the amount of incentive checks. Trader Ton Weiss recommends buying bitcoin as he believes the authorities will continue to issue dollars. “No matter who wins they will keep printing, so buy bitcoin,” Weiss wrote during a debate between US presidential candidates Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
Bitcoin price and market cap (log scale) through November 2019. Early Trading: Bitcoin History . Bitcoin really started to take off in 2013. The digital currency began the year trading at around ... February 6th Bitcoin Market, the first official cryptocurrency stock exchange, is launched. May 22nd First online purchase using bitcoin. Laszlo Hanyecz (indireclty) buys Papa John's pizza for 10,000 coins (25 USD – Bitcoin value was 0.0025 cents for 1 coin). July 11th Bitcoin v0.3. is mentioned on news website Slashdot.org. The number of ... The market value of Bitcoin is currently estimated to be around $45 billion. ... (Glaser et al., 2014). The Bitcoin market in particular has recently seen huge growth. As Bitcoin is mainly used for investment purposes, examining its volatility is of high importance. This paper investigated the ability of several competing GARCH-type models to explain the Bitcoin price volatility. We found ... Bitcoin exchange launched in Sydney, amid plans to increase market value of digital currency By The Business's Ynja Bjornsson Posted 27 Oct October 2014 , updated 28 Oct October 2014 This is because like all markets the bitcoin market has a spread between the buy and sell price. This is also how bitcoin exchanges make a profit by selling bitcoins at a higher price than what they buy bitcoins for. bitcoinprice.org aims to provide a neutral position on bitcoin and simply presents the value of bitcoin in all the worlds national currencies as determined by a range of popular ...
Bitcoin's Price Follows Hashrate or Other Way Around ...
Jon Matonis (Executive Chairman, Bitcoin Foundation), Harry Yeh (Binary Financial), Arthur Hayes (BitMEX), Joe Lee (Btc.sx) MIT Bitcoin Expo was held on May 3rd, 2014, with speakers from the Bitcoin Foundation, Circle Internet Financial, Armory Technologies, and more. See more at ... What is Bitcoin? Bitcoin is a digital asset and a payment system. It is commonly called a decentralized digital currency. It was invented by Satoshi Nakamoto... Bitcoin Technical Analysis Price Today Join my Royal Coaching Program: http://scrembocoaching.com/ Collaboration: https://goo.gl/forms/9r50y5JdN08vITDo2 ICO ... Today let's look at Bitcoin's price and how it compares to the hashrate. Which follows which? And take a look at other Cryptocurrency news. Become a Cryptos...