Blockchain Related RSS Feeds

Welcome to BlockTech’s RSS feed for the latest content related to the Blockchain and crypto-currency industry. Our decision to connect to RSS feeds from third-party websites is not an endorsement of the content or services represented by such third-party websites. We do not control these third-party websites and expressly disclaims any responsibility for the content, the accuracy of the information and any products or services available on these third-party websites. If you decide to view content or directly connect to any of these third-party websites, you do so at your own risk. You should direct any concerns regarding any third-party websites to the administrator of the applicable third-party website. You should also refer to the separate terms of use, privacy policies and other rules posted on third-party websites before you use them.

CoinDesk Leader in blockchain news.

Bitcoin Magazine Bitcoin Magazine is the original source of information, news and commentary about Bitcoin, the blockchain and digital currencies.

  • Blockchain-Based Community Currencies to Be Launched in Kenya

    Bancor has announced today it will launch a network of blockchain-based community currencies in Kenya. The new project is expected to combat poverty through the stimulation of local and regional commerce and peer-to-peer collaboration.By using the Bancor Network, disadvantaged communities in Kenya will be able to create digital currencies that can hold one or more balances in a connected way such that integrated currencies can be swapped for one another without needing a counterparty.Bancor will launch the new currencies by contributing capital from the proceeds of its $153 million token sales in 2017. In correspondence with Bitcoin Magazine, Galia Benartzi, Bancor’s co-founder, said, “Bancor will serve as one of several donors in the program providing initial capital to fund the token balances contained within each of the community currencies. In addition, Bancor will provide in-kind operational support, including technical and integrations work, marketing and hardware to get the currencies distributed and operational.”The company will partner with Kenyan nonprofit foundation Grassroots Economics, who has experience developing community currency programs in Africa. Grassroots Economics founder Will Ruddick, who is also the newly appointed director of community currencies at Bancor, will oversee the launch of the community currencies from Nairobi. The team will use Bancor Protocol to expand the current paper currency system used by local businesses to reduce poverty and create stable markets.Ruddick believes that when “communities have the same right as nations to create and manage currencies, they will unlock their full potential.”Kawangware and Kibera are the focal points for the pilot launch. These communities, which happen to be the largest slums in Kenya, will be used to circulate the currency by incentivizing customers to use it. Bancor expects that as more people in the community buy and hold the local currency, its market cap can increase, which will create more wealth and a higher purchasing power for the holders.Community members and supporters of the initiative will have the option to buy and sell the local currencies via the open-source Bancor Protocol using any of the popular cryptocurrencies or a major credit card.Before its partnership with Grassroots Economics, Bancor had launched a similar program in Israel. The pilot program, aimed at mothers, was processing over 1,000 daily transactions before activities peaked due to the difficulty of transferring wealth outside of the community. This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Op Ed: The Rise of Cryptocurrency Securities Lawsuits

    As the cryptocurrency market develops and grows, cryptocurrencies have become the subject of an increasing number of securities lawsuits. This year alone, more than 10 cryptocurrency securities lawsuits have been filed in federal district courts throughout the country. While regulations and laws governing the cryptocurrency market continue to develop, recent activity involving cryptocurrency has raised a host of questions concerning investor protections. As federal and state regulators and policymakers grapple with how to regulate digital currencies, some investors have sought protection through securities lawsuits. Based on the number of lawsuits filed to date and the recent decline in the price of cryptocurrencies, such litigation will likely increase in volume in the coming year. Investors should be aware of recent cryptocurrency case law to safeguard their rights and preserve their legal remedies. A selection of recent securities lawsuits against five cryptocurrency companies is highlighted below to illustrate some of the typical cases in which investors have found reason to pursue legal action against cryptocurrency companies.Longfin: Precipitous Drop in Stock Value After Disclosure Longfin Corp., a global cryptocurrency company, was a “pure stock scheme.” On April 9 and April 19, 2018, two classes of investors sued Longfin and its top officers for allegedly violating Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. The investors allege that Longfin misrepresented the location of its primary offices and the identity of key employees in its public statements; had numerous material weaknesses in its operations and internal financial reporting controls; and was ineligible for inclusion in certain stock indices.The investors allege that when this information was made public, Longfin’s stock value declined more than 86 percent in two weeks. The investors are attempting to recover damages associated with the decline in stock value. Takeaway: This case is an example of a cryptocurrency company’s shares plummeting after company executives disclosed financial information to the public. Prospective investors should be wary of giving too much credibility to unsubstantiated statements made by cryptocurrency companies and should be selective when determining the trustworthiness of sources.Nano: Danger of Foreign Exchanges and HacksNano, a U.S.-based blockchain developer and cryptocurrency issuer, was involved in a hack scandal. On April 6, 2018, a class action was filed against Nano and its key officials for allegedly violating federal securities laws. The complaint alleges that Nano engaged in an unregistered offering and sale of securities by issuing cryptocurrencies on BitGrail, an Italian cryptocurrency exchange, in violation of Sections 12(a) and 15(a) of the Securities Act. The complaint also alleges that Nano wrongly encouraged investors to invest assets with BitGrail, which lost $170 million worth of the cryptocurrency “XRB” due to a hack on the exchange platform. The investors are asking for, among other relief, rescission of their investments. Takeaway: This case is noteworthy because it illustrates the vulnerabilities of cryptocurrency exchanges and their susceptibility to theft. To protect cryptocurrency investments from possible hacks and cyber theft, investors should take a number of precautionary measures, including closely examining where funds are being held and inquiring about the security controls in place to prevent potential hacks.Giga Watt: Mismanagement AllegationsGiga Watt, a U.S.-based cryptocurrency startup, was a promising venture that was arguably mismanaged by its founder. On March 19, 2018, an investor sued Giga Watt for allegedly violating federal and state securities laws by selling cryptocurrency investments without registering those investments with regulatory entities. The investor alleges that he invested more than $500,000 in the Giga Watt ICO with an expectation that his investment would increase in value, but Giga Watt “pocketed for themselves large sums of money for their promotional efforts,” resulting in his not receiving “any meaningful return on his investments.” He is suing to rescind his investments and impose a constructive trust over the assets that were collected by Giga Watt. Takeaway: This case is important because it highlights how investors who find out after the fact that a cryptocurrency company founder has mismanaged funds may pursue legal action against the company. Investors may also protect themselves from potential mismanagement of their investments by researching company governance and only investing in companies whose managers have a proven business track record. Investors should exercise caution if company managers lack experience or knowledge or if an ICO fails to disclose the identity of company managers.Bitconnect: Investors Allege ScamDisgruntled investors allege that Bitconnect, a U.K.-based cryptocurrency company, implemented a classic Ponzi scheme. Three lawsuits have been filed this year against Bitconnect for allegedly violating federal securities laws by engaging in the offer and sale of unregistered securities and other unlawful conduct. Most recently, on February 7, 2018, a class action lawsuit was filed against Bitconnect and key officers for allegedly violating various provisions of the Securities Act and the Securities Exchange Act. The investors allege that Bitconnect operated a Ponzi scheme to cheat thousands of investors out of millions of dollars. The investors allege that they were scammed by Bitconnect after being guaranteed monthly returns of up to 40 percent only a month before Bitconnect collapsed. Furthermore, they allege that after the site was shut down, the cryptocurrency lost more than 90 percent of its value, and they are seeking damages and equitable relief. Takeaway: This case is significant because it serves as a cautionary tale for investors who are promised high monthly returns from companies that do not actually perform legitimate business activities. Investors evaluating an ICO should be wary of red flags for scam cryptocurrency investments, including insufficient detail on how the technology operates and the viability of the technology over time, the history of team members involved in the project, and the legitimacy of the venture itself. Paragon Coin: Aggressive Marketing ClaimsParagon Coin, a cryptocurrency startup invested in the marijuana industry, is an example of a heavily marketed cryptocurrency ICO that promised high investment returns without delivering results. Paragon Coin drew attention to its ICO with celebrity endorsements, including endorsements by rapper The Game and by its founder former Miss Iowa Jessica VerSteeg.On January 30, 2018, a class action lawsuit was filed against Paragon Coin, Inc., for allegedly violating Sections 12(a)(1) and 15(a) of the Securities Act by failing to register its ICO as a securities offering. The complaint alleges that “Defendants marketed the Paragon ICO as offering a path towards legalization of cannabis,” but in fact, “the Paragon ICO was simply a method for Defendants to raise capital in order to purchase real estate investments.” The class seeks, among other relief, rescission of investments and compensatory damages. Takeaway: This case is significant because it illustrates the lure that celebrity endorsers, social media and marketing statements can have on investors. Investors should look beyond the hype generated by celebrity endorsements and aggressive marketing campaigns and consider the risks of would-be attractive investments. The Future of Cryptocurrency Securities LawsuitsAs these cases illustrate, investors are increasingly turning to litigation to pursue their legal rights following failed cryptocurrency investments. Given the wide fluctuations in the price of cryptocurrencies and the recent precipitous drop in value, the lawsuits discussed above are only the beginning wave of securities lawsuits filed relating to cryptocurrencies. By heeding the lessons gleaned from these securities lawsuits and exercising due diligence before investing in cryptocurrency, investors may protect their investments against loss, theft, scams and other risks associated with cryptocurrency. First, investors should be wary of giving too much credibility to unsubstantiated statements made by cryptocurrency companies. Second, investors should take precautionary measures to protect their cryptocurrency investments from possible hacks and theft. Third, investors should protect themselves from potential mismanagement of their investments by researching company governance and only investing in companies whose managers have a proven track record. Fourth, investors evaluating an ICO should be wary of red flags for scam cryptocurrency investments. Fifth, investors should look beyond celebrity endorsement buzz and aggressive marketing campaigns when evaluating potential investments.Whether investors in these lawsuits will prevail remains to be seen, but, based on the allegations in these complaints, investors should always be cautious and perform their own due diligence before deciding where and how to allocate their funds. This is a guest post by Craig Weiner and Chelsea Walcker. Views expressed are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine. This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Updated Edition of Blockchain Revolution Fills In Some Big Gaps

    “When Blockchain Revolution came out, bitcoin was worth around $7 billion. Today, it’s more than twenty-two times that. Bitcoin is the workhorse of the cryptocurrency world and the cryptocurrency that launched a thousand ships.”So reads part of the preface in the newly-released second edition of Blockchain Revolution by the father-and-son team of Don Tapscott, founder and executive chair of the Blockchain Research Institute (BRI), and Alex Tapscott, founder and CEO of NextBlock Global, a digital asset company. The first edition of Blockchain Revolution, published in May 2016, has been translated into 15 languages, is a bestseller in five Asian languages and remains Amazon’s number one selling book about blockchain technology.Two years in the crypto world is a lifetime, so there’s lots of catching up to do in the second edition which contains a lengthy preface with plenty of new material, including information about tokens (utility, security, natural asset and commodity), a who’s who of the crypto world, leading companies in the space, instructions for leading crypto companies and their managers, and the “leadership of nations.”Predicting a rosy future for bitcoin, the new edition notes that bitcoin’s impact on culture and the economy in the last two years has been “extraordinary” and points out that the remarkable price rise since 2016 means bitcoin has become an asset class too big for investors to ignore.The attitude on the part of banks has changed since 2016 when blockchain “good,” bitcoin “bad” was the dominant ethics. Now even Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan are getting into the cryptocurrency market.Noting bitcoin’s continuing success, the authors say:“With the launch of the Lightning Network and other scaling solutions in 2018, bitcoin may also fulfill the promise of its most ardent supporters and obliterate the need for traditional financial intermediaries.”Top 10 Crypto “Leadership” CountriesThe new second edition names 10 “leadership nations” who are best placed to lead the blockchain revolution and build the new innovation economy.Alphabetically the countries are: Australia, Canada, China, Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Estonia, Singapore, Sweden (Stockholm and the “Node Pole”), Switzerland (Zurich and Zug), United Kingdom (London) and the United States (New York City and Silicon Valley).Each country is briefly assessed with suggestions on how to move forward.Silicon Valley’s important role is noted, but the authors also say that since blockchains are decentralized by design, it may be that a cross-border collaboration is more likely in the future, rather than being dependent on one or two dominating hubs.Seven “conditions for success” in developing a blockchain hub are described: Incubators and Entrepreneurship, Corporate Leadership, Educational Institutions, Investment Climate, Government Support, Regulatory Environment and Communities of Talent.The authors also describe Ethereum’s meteoric rise since 2016, from newly created startup to platform with a market value of $70 billion today. They also examine some of the new platforms built on the Ethereum blockchain and the current work around identity DApps.ICOs and tokens were not part of the cryptocurrency landscape of two years ago, so they are explained in detail, as is the ongoing development of smart contracts._________________________________________________________________QUOTES FROM BOOK“When Blockchain Revolution came out, bitcoin was worth around $7 billion. Today it’s more than twenty-two times that. Bitcoin is the workhorse of the cryptocurrency world and the cryptocurrency that launched a thousand ships.”“Bitcoin has become a store of hundreds of billions of dollars of value on the most robust computer network ever formed…”“With the launch of the Lightning Network and other scaling solutions in 2018, bitcoin may also fulfill the promise of its most ardent supporters and obliterate the need for traditional financial intermediaries.”xxxi“We believe that this next era could be inspired by Satoshi Nakamoto’s vision, designed around a set of implicit principles, and realized by the collaborative spirit of many passionate and equally talented leaders in the community.” This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Bitcoin Magazine’s Week in Review: Looking Back to See the Way Ahead

    It’s been a turbulent time for the cryptocurrency markets, so now is a good time to reflect on how and why we got here in the first place. First, an op ed makes the ideological case for Bitcoin. Then, we continue to review the history of Bitcoin from its Cypherpunk days, with the latest installment of The Genesis Files, this time paying tribute to Wei Dai and his “b-money” protocol.South Korea has seen one of their cryptocurrency exchanges hacked this week, with Coinrail reporting a major theft. Meanwhile, Coinbase has added more tokens and a crypto index fund to its exchange offerings. Misconceptions about Tether and what is going on with this U.S.-dollar-backed token are explored and explained. Featured stories by Robert-Jan den Haan, Andrew Kiguel, Randolph Malone, Nick Marinoff and Aaron van Wirdum.Stay on top of the best stories in the bitcoin, blockchain and cryptocurrency industry. Subscribe to our newsletter here.Op Ed: I Think, Therefore I Bitcoin: The Case for BitcoinAndrew Kiguel, founder of Hut 8 Mining, reflects on what Bitcoin means, beyond the hype of its bumpy price charts. He argues that Bitcoin represents freedom to store wealth in an asset that is out of government’s reach; freedom to conduct transactions — peer to peer — without relying on centralized financial institutions that have eroded our trust.He acknowledges that Bitcoin is not perfect. It will evolve. Scammers will remain, as they do everywhere in the financial community. Regulation will come. Gains will be rightfully taxed. Detractors will continue to hate. Volatility will remain. However, because of the freedom it puts in the hands of individuals, Bitcoin will not disappear or pop like a bubble. Ever.The Genesis Files: If Bitcoin Had a First Draft, Wei Dai’s B-Money Was ItWei Dai is best known for an idea he casually announced in November 1998, just after graduating from university. His idea, b-money, was eventually included as the first reference in the Bitcoin white paper. “Efficient cooperation requires a medium of exchange (money) and a way to enforce contracts,” Dai explained in his initial proposal. “The protocol proposed in this article allows untraceable pseudonymous entities to cooperate with each other more efficiently, by providing them with a medium of exchange and a method of enforcing contracts. [...] I hope this is a step toward making crypto-anarchy a practical as well as theoretical possibility.”Clearing Up Misconceptions: This Is How Tether Should (and Does) Work There is substantial controversy surrounding Tether, a cryptocurrency that claims to be pegged to the U.S. dollar. According to Tether, each token is backed by one U.S. dollar, held in the full reserve of Tether. But the existence of the U.S. dollars pegging Tether has been called into question. Worries also exist that Bitfinex has been using Tether to prop up the price of bitcoin. Research shows that misconceptions exist regarding how Tether functions, which in turn may be contributing in part to the existing controversies. By better understanding how Tether functions, it may be possible to provide some clarity.South Korean Exchange Coinrail Hacked, $40 Million in Crypto ReportedExecutives at South Korean cryptocurrency exchange Coinrail reported a hack on June 10, 2018, when thieves allegedly made off with 30 percent of the tokens on the exchange, worth over $40 million and made up of altcoins and assorted tokens. An investigation is under way, and law enforcement officials are working to figure out who was behind the attack. This is the fifth major hack of 2018.New Coinbase Additions: Ethereum Classic and Crypto Index FundAmong all the other big announcements that have been coming from Coinbase recently, the company announced on Monday, June 11, via blog and Twitter, that during the coming months it intends to add support for Ethereum Classic (ETC) to its exchange platform. The currency will join bitcoin (BTC), ether (ETH), litecoin (LTE) and bitcoin cash (BCH) as the fifth digital currency supported by the largest U.S.-based crypto exchange. This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Bitcoin Price Analysis: Weak Rally Gives Bitcoin Second Chance at Support Test

    Within minutes of rumors spreading regarding the SEC’s classification of both bitcoin and ether, the entire crypto market breathed a sigh of relief as everyone enjoyed a nice bounce. Prior to the news, bitcoin saw several days when buyers began to disappear from the market. After bottoming in the low $6,100s, the SEC news spread and a modest rally on relatively low volume ensued:Figure 1: BTC-USD, 1-Hour Candles, Weak RallyAlthough the move was sudden, the overall volume behind the move was poor. You can see on the hourly candles that the volume barely made a noticeable blip on the radar. However, one noteworthy thing occurred during the rally: The price managed to break back into the macro trading range it has been bound by for the last 5-6 months:Figure 2: BTC-USD, Daily Candles, Macro Trading RangePart of our previous discussion centered around known support levels and their implications. The first line of support was outlined around the $6,450 values. As you can see, the price temporarily dipped below support on high volume and saw a short closing rally which pushed the price back into the TR. Now, at the time of this article, we are testing the support of the $6,450 range again. If we fail to hold support, we will undoubtedly test the support of the February low ($6,000).Although we are trending down for now, there is an argument to be made from a macro perspective that we are actually witnessing supply absorption within the context of a large scale Accumulation Trading Range (TR). The volume trend suggests that there is potential supply absorption and we are now heading toward a potential shakeout (sometimes referred to as a “spring”):Figure 3: BTC-USD, Daily Candles, Potential Accumulation TRThe low-volume, meandering price structure over the last several weeks is very representative of what is known as a “creek” within a TR. A creek is basically meant to grind down investors, bore them, and ultimately demoralize them prior to a shakeout. It’s designed to make the investor think “bitcoin is dead,” essentially. Granted, the aforementioned accumulation TR argument should be taken with a HUGE grain of salt as this still has several tests it must pass before any degree of confidence can be placed on it. First, we must see how support holds on the test of the $6,450 and $6,000 levels. Then, we must see how the price reacts to new lows in the event that we break to the downside of this TR. And, even then, it is still very difficult to identify a spring while you are in the middle of it. So, just use caution when attempting to trade this TR because it is fraught with bull traps, bear traps and every other kind of trap you can think of. For now, we need to just play it day by day and look at the cards as they are dealt.Summary:Rumors of SEC categorization of bitcoin and ether preceded a modest rally on low volume.The low volume indicates that sellers are still reluctant to return to the market.We are currently in the process of testing important support levels and we need to keep a skeptical eye as monitor the market and gage the reaction to these new support tests.Trading and investing in digital assets like bitcoin and ether is highly speculative and comes with many risks. This analysis is for informational purposes and should not be considered investment advice. Statements and financial information on Bitcoin Magazine and BTC Media related sites do not necessarily reflect the opinion of BTC Media and should not be construed as an endorsement or recommendation to buy, sell or hold. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Jeff Garzik on His Newest Venture and Keeping Time With an Evolving Space

    Jeff Garzik first tuned the world into his latest venture in the fall of 2017. The Bloq co-founder unveiled Metronome (MET), a cryptocurrency he founded alongside Matthew Roszak, at the Las Vegas Money 20/20 conference in late October, and the project caught the attention of Bloomberg and Fortune at the time.What makes Metronome interesting is that it promises its users cross-chain portability. It also purports to offer a consistent rate of inflation and “no undue influence from founders after launch.” These three promises — Metronome’s mantra of self-governance, reliability and portability — set lofty expectations for the new project; anyone acquainted with Bitcoin and blockchain technology is likely to watch and see if it can deliver.Garzik has stated in past interviews that he created Metronome as a new beginning, a project that embodies what he would do differently after building on Bitcoin for a number of years. Metronome’s differences seem to suggest that the search for hyper-decentralization was Garzik’s touchstone for starting over. Imagine a coin being so intrinsically opposed to centralization, for instance, that it isn’t beholden to a single blockchain.Of course, as an ERC20 token, it is fundamentally tied to Ethereum; but the team claims that via smart contracts, users can swap the coin from chain to chain. From the get-go, this transferability will only be open to Ethereum Classic, Rootstock and QTUM. From there, it will be up to community coders to free up avenues to other chains. Keeping with the team’s commitment to zero-to-no influence, Metronome will rely on the volunteer work of disparate developers to expand its offerings and improve its protocol.As for the rest, there’s little about the coin that speaks to convention. Instead of launching an initial coin offering (ICO), the project is holding a week-long descending-price auction. Unlike the more popular English-style auction, in a descending-price auction, price action descends as the auction progresses. For Metronome’s, the price of 1 MET will start at 2 ether (ETH) and decrease each minute until all of the auction’s 8,000,000 MET are sold or the sale ends.Since the coin doesn’t have — or, in the future, will separate from — a native chain, it offers no mining rewards. To circulate supply, then, Metronome will feature daily descending-price auctions after its initial token sale. According to the project’s FAQ, “MET is added to MET’s Daily Supply Lots (‘DSL’) every 24 hours, at the rate that is the greater of (i) 2,880 MET per day, or (ii) an annual rate equal to 2.0000%.”Besides the MET to be sold in the initial and daily auctions, 20 percent will be allocated to what the project calls “authors” — its team and advisors. Of these coins, 25 percent will be available immediately upon release, while the other 75 percent will be unlocked incrementally throughout a 12-quarter period.Smart contracts control coin supply and issuance, as well as coin migration between chains, and the team has pledged to keep its hands free from directing development or swaying governance. “After its launch,” one Metronome FAQ answer reads, “authors will have no more control over MET than any other member of the MET community.”We had the opportunity to interview Jeff Garzik to learn more about his latest project.Bitcoin Magazine: The first thing that stands out is the cross-blockchain portability. Namely, how will this be accomplished, and does it really mean that I’ll be able to swap my MET from Ethereum’s chain to, say, QTUM’s or Stellar’s? Jeff Garzik: Exporting one’s MET to another blockchain is a process where the owner chooses a target blockchain when initiating the export, and then receives a Merkle root receipt proving they have the MET that they are exporting. The process “burns” or destroys the MET on Blockchain A, and when the owner provides that receipt to the contracts on Blockchain B, they will have the same amount of MET minted for them on that blockchain. The burning of Blockchain A’s MET is to ensure that global supply remains constant.So, we are careful to not describe it as a “swap,” per se, because it’s actually the opposite of a swap — the asset itself is moving, just as if you were moving gold from one safe to another.BM: Metronome’s FAQ states, “As the community continues developing MET, it may be compatible with even more blockchains.” Does this mean that community developers will be able to build on the protocol to make it interoperable with other chains?JG: Regarding ongoing development, Metronome is completely open source, and there is no foundation deciding its trajectory — that responsibility is with the community. Consider Bitcoin: there was no “foundation” in the beginning. Similarly, we don’t want to create enshrined leaders of Metronome, which is what a foundation does. Creating a Metronome author-run foundation at the outset bakes in community dependence on that foundation, which is a centralizing force we wish to avoid.The community can choose a chain they wish to develop compatibility for and work toward that. In the very near term, you’ll be able to transfer from the Ethereum chain to Ethereum Classic, QTUM or another chain using the Ethereum Virtual Machine. From there? Time will tell.BM: Is coin migration done automatically through the smart contract? Or does some miner/intermediary manually execute this function for a user?JG: The answer is key to governance. The user holds and controls that “receipt” received when MET is exported from one blockchain. The user chooses when to export/import and must manually initiate that action.BM: How is the team ensuring that Metronome’s smart contracts and wallets are going to be stable? There have been so many hacks of wallets and bugs in contracts, especially with ERC20 tokens and Ethereum-based smart contracts.JG: As to the stability of Metronome’s contracts, they have been rigorously reviewed by four independent auditors. The team has gone the extra mile to ensure that those contracts will be as rock-solid as humanly possible at launch. As to the wallet, being standards-compliant with ERC20 of course means that you inherit all of that standard’s characteristics — mostly favorable in terms of compatibility and interoperability — as well as its limitations and those of the cryptocurrency category in general.BM: Where did the idea for Metronome come from? What compelled you and Matthew Roszak to migrate to new projects from your current projects?JG: Two answers: first, I have been in the cryptocurrency space for a long time as one of the first to start contributing to Bitcoin. The ensuing years have given me enough perspective to ask, “Knowing what I now know about cryptocurrencies and how the communities around them operate, how would I redesign a cryptocurrency from scratch that would be enduring and satisfy the most use cases?” With Metronome, we have built a cryptocurrency intended to serve as a store of value, method of exchange, machine-to-machine payment medium and other applications.The second answer, though, is a bit more philosophical. I’m a big fan of ideas like the Long Now Foundation, which aims to encourage civilizations to think in terms of generational scale rather than months, quarters and years. That kind of spirit inspired the cross-blockchain idea. For a currency to be truly multi-generational in scale, it cannot be tied to a single, native ledger.BM: Governance and reliability are key to the project, it seems. How will Metronome’s governance protect itself from the control of its authors/founding members?JG: Once launched, Metronome is completely autonomous. There is no foundation where the proceeds from auctions are hidden away for founders, and there is no centralized group defining Metronome post-launch. Even if the founders wanted to manipulate and control Metronome (we don’t), we simply would not be able to.Additionally, by rewarding the founding team with tokens (rather than proceeds) and slowly disbursing them according to a mechanical rule, we assure the community that the founding team is properly motivated in Metronome’s early years.BM: For issuance, what will it do differently to ensure a steady, unmanipulated inflation rate?JG: Metronome’s issuance is locked in at launch, and any new contracts must accept the issuance logic. (The rate is the greater of 2,880 MET per day or whatever amount necessary to achieve a steady 2 percent annual rate.) Issuance is based on time, not on hash or staking power, since both are subject to fluctuations that create variability over time for circulating supply.BM: It seems as if Metronome’s modus operandi is its commitment to community control. Is Metronome trying to “fix” decentralization and reintroduce it into a space that continues to grapple with centralizing forces?JG: Greater decentralization is something we have been fixated on since we started this journey in spring of 2017. The current cryptocurrency landscape (especially when considering new cryptocurrencies) is not all that decentralized. Small groups of developers and foundations largely define the course, scope and goals of a cryptocurrency.Metronome is looking to return to the original promises of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Litecoin, where updates and goals are community driven without too much customary deference to a small group. Metronome does this through a unique take on community governance through self-governance.BM: In a Medium post, Metronome’s team says that the coin is “being built to last.” What features do you think make this a coin for the long run?JG: We believe that every aspect of Metronome makes it more durable. Self-governance allows the community to define and build Metronome, not a far-off foundation. A reliable and a highly predictable issuance allows owners and purchasers to calculate supply at any point in the future with high confidence. Portability allows Metronome owners to move their MET to any compatible blockchain for whatever reason they see fit, rather than locking themselves into a set of rules and chain permanence. These characteristics make Metronome both flexible and resilient — two necessary attributes for the long haul.In sum: we are introducing a wholly new concept — a token that is not tied to a blockchain. Other tokens are tied to a single network, a single technology and a single blockchain. Metronome is something new. We’re very proud of the results and are looking forward to seeing where the crypto and fintech ecosystem takes it.   This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Till Death Do Us Fork: Planning for Cryptoasset Inheritance

    For many, the experience of adding crypto coins to their financial portfolios has proven to be the thrill of a lifetime. As a new type of holding with a unique set of tools and rules, cryptocurrency is wealth with its own wow factor.But at some point, the giddiness of fiscal discovery should be followed by a sobering reality: life is short. While established roadmaps have long existed for the orderly passing on of most worldly properties, titles, debts, rights and obligations upon a person’s death, the same can’t be said for cryptoassets.Think ahead to the days right after your last days on earth. How qualified is your will’s executor to manage your balance sheet of bitcoin, ether, Ripple, ZenCash and Ada? Are your loved ones ready to receive your private keys and open your hardware wallet?Looking AheadA recent episode of The Tatiana Show podcast tackled this inconvenient question when co-hosts Tatiana Moroz and Joshua Scigala interviewed Pamela Morgan, Esq., an attorney/educator/entrepreneur/author who’s been working exclusively with Bitcoin and open blockchains since 2014. The impetus for the appearance was the publication of her new book, Cryptoasset Inheritance Planning: A Simple Guide for Owners.As is the case with most how-to tomes, the inspiration for Morgan’s came from a real-world problem she kept encountering. “I started asking annoying lawyer questions,” Morgan says of her cryptocurrency-holding clients. “Like, ‘If you have a bunch of cryptoassets, can your family access them?’ If you have people who depend on you financially, if you want to have other people in your life, or charities or political causes you like to support, to be able to take advantage of your bitcoin or your other cryptoassets, you have to do something. If you do nothing, [it’s] pretty sure that your assets will not go where you want them to go, if they end up anywhere at all.”You Can Be SUREOne of the cores to this blueprint for bitcoin-beyond-the-grave is executing what Morgan calls a SURE analysis, which stands for Security, Usability, Resilience and Efficiency. “Obviously we want your plan to be secure first,” she notes, “but not security at the expense of all of the other things there, because your plan has to be usable, and not by you. We have all this knowledge of cryptocurrency, we know how we’re holding our keys, and so there are these underlying assumptions. We don’t realize that people don’t have the same knowledge that we do. “So when people try to write it down for their heirs it becomes gibberish,” she continues, “because they don’t know what a private key is. They don’t know what a hardware wallet is — they don’t even know how to plug it in. So the worst case scenario is what do they do? They don’t just sit there. They go to the local Meetup group, Reddit, Facebook, and who’s there to help them? Who’s the greeting committee then?”One can only imagine the trolls who are already hard at work, cooking up a sinister new industry built on stealing from confused beneficiaries. “People are not going to say, ‘Yes! My loved one is gone, now is the time for me to learn all about bitcoin,’” says Morgan. It’s an eye-opening point. Currently, cryptocurrency is not like the vast majority of inherited assets for which time-honored legal expertise abounds. Although that general knowledge gap may someday close, today’s reality is that cryptoasset holders need a specific plan to ensure their beneficiaries are sufficiently educated on at least the bare mechanics of those holdings. Beyond that, it’s their additional responsibility to connect them to trusted people and organizations that will help them, not hijack their inheritance.Get It Together — TogetherMorgan suggests that the aforementioned security audit can be undertaken by the will’s creator and a trusted significant other, such as a spouse, side-by-side with that person actually writing the letter of intent for them. “That way they’re guaranteed they know how to access everything,” she says. “They’re kind of creating this project together.” As Moroz points out at the podcast’s end, “You never know when it’s time to go.” Unless your own personal deal with the Devil has a precise expiration date, that’s a simple truth to act on immediately. Having cryptoassets requires heretofore unprecedented estate planning — handle it any other way, and that high-tech portfolio is just child’s play.     This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Op Ed: From East to West: The Fiat Pairing Trend Grows in the United States

    The recent announcement that Bittrex will allow investors to buy digital coins with the U.S. dollar is the latest in a string of crypto trading trends to move West from Asia. With Japan and Korea among the first to facilitate an open and active trading ecosystem with fiat pairing, it’s clear that the Asian region is a nexus for global crypto trends.In a part of the world where trading volume dominates and several countries have taken an “innovation first, regulation second” approach to crypto industry advancement, the impact of the region on the global crypto market — good and bad — is one that is often underestimated. Indeed, while Bittrex is one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges, currently sitting at 20th by coin market capitalization with a daily trading volume of $85 million, Asia is in fact home to nine of the top 10 exchanges, with a combined daily trading volume of more than $5 billion. Of these exchanges, two offer fiat pairing. Increased fiat pairing is an obvious cause for celebration among crypto traders, but what about the impact of widespread implementation on the global crypto economy? The growth of fiat pairing could, in fact, have far-reaching implications beyond increased trading volume and opening up the industry to new, mainstream customers who find first generation trading too confusing and time-consuming. The move could also mean a more seamless integration with the mainstream financial market, paving the way for new financial instruments to be created and made available to consumers. This could also incentivize more financial institutions to enter the market, leading to better transparency, reliability, and financial education and inclusion. While Asia’s high trading volume alone — with Japan dominating bitcoin trading and Korea driving the altcoin market — makes the global crypto community stand up and take note, fiat pairing is just one of the many ways the region can be considered a global trendsetter.Faced with regulatory uncertainty in the U.S. and parts of Europe, the blockchain industry has taken solace in Asia’s open-mindedness to technological advancement, despite the region’s latest round of judicial confusion in South Korea. Government agencies, particularly in Japan, have fostered a more liberal, business-friendly approach to test out new initiatives, incentivizing and encouraging self-policing but also allowing a more relaxed environment for ongoing education and a better understanding of this infant industry. Even with China’s blanket ban and misconception about trading regulations in South Korea, the market itself continues to flourish. Regionally, the focus has always been on targeting the best developers in each country to propel technological advancement, regardless of the latest bumps in the road from the regulatory side on trading. Moreover, Asian markets face similar barriers for growth as the U.S. market: Know Your Customer and Anti-Money Laundering (KYC/AML) processes, taxation and a lack of clear legislation. However, the region’s many champions of blockchain and distributed ledger technology continue to work toward making its potential to transform businesses and improve quality of life a reality. Lessons learned from Asia are important to acknowledge. These lessons help to assess global market movements and give us glimpses of what might be coming next. Another trend that may make its way from Asia to the U.S. and other Western markets is an increase in retail investors. Historically, the Asian stock market has been driven by this particular group of traders, while the U.S. market is almost entirely driven by institutions. The U.S. is seeing more institutions enter and dominate the crypto market; meanwhile, the increase in fiat pairing and eventual regulatory clarity, combined with increased education and new technological developments that will make trading easier and bring blockchains into our daily lives, all promise to gradually facilitate opportunities for retail investors to follow Asia and become a force to be reckoned with in the U.S. and Western crypto market. This is a guest post by Zhuling Chen, co-founder of aelf. Views expressed are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine. This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Vote Threshold Is Met: EOS Can Finally Launch Its Platform

    According to data from EOS Authority, EOS has finally acquired the minimum votes required for its network to go live.After EOS failed to launch its platform on its projected launch date of June 2, a live-stream vote was called, where users voted “Go” to launch the blockchain network. But while the network got the green light, it couldn’t go live until it was activated with the EOS tokens held by investors. Things didn’t go as planned as token owners became reluctant to weigh in with the minimum vote required to activate the blockchain. For the EOS blockchain to go live, 15 percent of the total EOS tokens in supply had to be used to elect the network’s 21 EOS block producers.VotesAlso known as supernodes, block producers operate as part of EOS’s delegated proof of stake (DPoS), where they serve a function similar to Bitcoin miners who secure proof-of-work systems. The candidates for the supernodes include local crypto enthusiasts such as EOS Canada, who is currently leading with just over 42,000,00  token votes at press time, followed by EOS Authority, the entity that started up EOS, in second place with about 39,400,000 votes. Blockchain heavyweight Bitfinex is currently eighth with a bit under 32,000,000 EOS votes, and EOS HuobiPool is in the eleventh spot with just over 30 million token votes.To vote for the supernodes, token owners have to go through a process of proving ownership, which requires using their private keys.The most noteworthy voting software is CLEOS, a command-line tool created by Block.one, the creators of EOS. This software requires a lot of programming knowledge, which left non-technical voters with crowdfunded projects like EOS Portal and other desktop tools.As much as users were eager to activate the mainnet, they were equally nervous that the process might jeopardize their holdings.EOS’s inability to get the required number of tokens staked led to the mainnet launch being stalled for days. There were also some reports that a general, widespread distrust in third-party software available to owners, coupled with the complexity of the voting process, led to voter apathy.VulnerabilitiesDespite the success of its ICO, the EOS team has not been able to find a lasting solution to the vulnerabilities that have riddled it from the start. Some weeks back, Chinese internet research firm Qihoo 360 discovered a vulnerability that could be used by hackers to remotely manage codes on nodes and attack any cryptocurrency built on the network. EOS launched a bug bounty program that rewards developers for discovering security vulnerabilities, with the most significant reward going to Dutch ethical hacker Guido Vranken, who was paid a hefty $120,000 for discovering 11 new vulnerabilities. EOS’s HackerOne profile shows that vulnerabilities are still being discovered.EOS is currently up by 14.4 percent, trading at $11.32. This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • The Genesis Files: If Bitcoin Had a First Draft, Wei Dai’s B-Money Was It

    All Cypherpunks value privacy; it’s basically the founding principle of the collective of cryptographers, academics, developers and activists grouped around the 1990s mailing list by the same name. But few put it in practice like Wei Dai does. Once described as an “intensely private computer engineer” by the New York Times, not many personal details are known about the man who, two decades ago, dreamed up an electronic cash system intriguingly similar to Bitcoin.This lack of personal details is made up for by Wei Dai’s work and proliferation of ideas. A talented cryptographer, Dai created and still maintains Crypto++: a C++ library for cryptographic algorithms. Dai is also, to this day, active on rationality forums like LessWrong, where he philosophizes on such topics as artificial intelligence, ethics, epistemology and more. His insights earned him the praise of well-known AI researcher Eliezer Yudkowsky and repeated invitations to speak at his Machine Intelligence Research Institute (MIRI; previously known as the Singularity Institute).Dai’s interest in philosophy and politics is nothing new. Back in the 1990s, as a young bachelor student in computer science at Washington University, his curiosity led him to the writings of Timothy May, one of the “founding fathers” of the Cypherpunk movement. Dai was inspired by the crypto-anarchy May advocated; the brand-new ideology prevalent amongst Cypherpunks based on the conviction that cryptography and software could provide and safeguard political and economic freedom better than any system of government would.“I am fascinated by Tim May's crypto-anarchy,” Dai wrote in 1998. “Unlike the communities traditionally associated with the word ‘anarchy’, in a crypto-anarchy the government is not temporarily destroyed but permanently forbidden and permanently unnecessary. It's a community where the threat of violence is impotent because violence is impossible, and violence is impossible because its participants cannot be linked to their true names or physical locations.”By the mid-1990s, Dai engaged in discussions on various topics on the Cypherpunks mailing list such as digital reputation systems, game theory, privacy and anonymity in digital cash systems. Perhaps more importantly, Dai made a number of proposals to further the Cypherpunk cause, including trusted timestamping, an encrypted TCP tunneler, a secure file sharing system and more. It garnered him a reputation as a prolific contributor to the Cypherpunk community — though, even back then, no one knew much about him personally. (Not even whether Dai was male or female, Timothy May recently said.)But Dai would become best known for an idea he casually announced in November 1998, just after graduating from university. “Efficient cooperation requires a medium of exchange (money) and a way to enforce contracts,” Dai explained. “The protocol proposed in this article allows untraceable pseudonymous entities to cooperate with each other more efficiently, by providing them with a medium of exchange and a method of enforcing contracts. [...] I hope this is a step toward making crypto-anarchy a practical as well as theoretical possibility.”He called his proposal “b-money”.B-moneyTypical digital money systems use a central ledger to keep track of account balances. Whether it’s a central bank, a commercial bank, VISA or any other payment provider, a centrally-controlled database somewhere tracks who owns what.The problem with this solution, from Dai’s and the crypto-anarchist perspective, is that it ultimately lets governments control the flow of money through regulation, while participants in the system are usually required to identify themselves. “My motivation for b-money was to enable online economies that are purely voluntary … ones that couldn’t be taxed or regulated through the threat of force,” he later explained.So, Dai came up with an alternative solution. Or really, two alternative solutions.In the first solution, instead of a central entity controlling the ledger, all participants maintain separate copies of the same ledger. Any time a new transaction is made, everyone updates their records. These ledgers, furthermore, would consist of public keys, with amounts attached to them — no real names. This decentralized approach would prevent any single entity from blocking transactions, while offering a level of privacy to all users.As a quick example, let’s say Alice and Bob are b-money users. They both have a public key: Alice has public key “A” and Bob has public key “B”, for which they both control their unique private keys. And, as recorded in the ledgers maintained by all users, both their public keys hold b-money units; let’s say three units each.If Bob wants to receive two b-money units from Alice (because he’s selling her a product), he sends her his public key: B. Assuming Alice wants to buy the product, she then creates a transaction in the form of a message: “2 b-money from A to B.” Next, she signs this message, with her private key corresponding to A. The message and the cryptographic signature is then sent to all b-money users.The signed message proves to all b-money users that the rightful owner of A wants to send two b-money units to B. Everyone, therefore, updates their ledgers, now attributing a total of one b-money unit to A and a total of five b-money units to B — without learning that Alice or Bob control either.If this solution sounds familiar, it should: It’s roughly how, 10 years later, Satoshi Nakamoto designed Bitcoin.B-money, Version 2Dai considered his first b-money solution impractical, however, “because it makes heavy use of a synchronous and unjammable anonymous broadcast channel,” he explained in his proposal.Put differently, the first b-money proposal didn’t solve the double-spending problem. Alice could send two b-money units to both Bob’s B and to Carol’s C at the same time, transmitting these transactions to different parts of the network. Both Bob and Carol would give Alice a product in return … only to later find out that half of the network won’t acknowledge their new balances.That’s why Dai came up with a second b-money solution, all in the same proposal.In this version, not everyone maintains a version of the ledger. Instead, the system would consist of two types of users: regular users and “servers.” Only the servers, linked through a Usenet-style broadcast network, would maintain the b-money ledgers. To verify that a transaction went through like it should, regular users — like Bob and Carol — would have to verify it with a random subset of these servers. (In case of a conflict, Bob and Carol would presumably reject the transaction from Alice and not sell her anything.)While not detailed in the proposal, anyone would probably have been able to become a server, but “each server is required to deposit a certain amount of money in a special account to be used as potential fines or rewards for proof of misconduct,” Dai proposed. The servers should also periodically publish and cryptographically commit to ownership databases.“Each participant should verify that his own account balances are correct and that the sum of the account balances is not greater than the total amount of money created,” Dai envisioned. “This prevents the servers, even in total collusion, from permanently and costlessly expanding the money supply.”If this sounds somewhat familiar as well, that’s no wonder either: Dai’s second b-money proposal loosely resembles what would today be called a proof-of-stake system.To boot, Dai added an early version of a smart contract solution to his proposal(s). These types of smart contracts most closely resemble a mixture of a proof-of-stake system and an arbitration system, where both parties to a contract and an arbitrator must all deposit funds in a special account. Curiously for modern standards, however, these contracts did not have a dispute resolution system encoded: Instead it was possible that, in case of disputes, different users (or servers) would adjust their own ledgers differently, in effect leaving the state of ledgers on the network out of consensus. (Presumably, the potential penalties would make the cost of cheating too high to risk it.)Monetary PolicyYet, where b-money would have perhaps differed most sharply from Bitcoin was Dai’s proposed monetary policy.Bitcoin’s monetary policy is of course very straightforward. To bring coins in circulation, it initially issued 50 new bitcoins per block, a number which has since dropped to 12.5. This number will continue to decrease over time until, some hundred years from now, the total amount of bitcoin issued caps out at slightly below 21 million. Whether or not such a monetary policy is ideal has been a subject of debate, but one thing is clear: So far it has not produced a stable coin value.In contrast, a stable coin value was explicitly part of Dai’s vision. To achieve this, the value of b-money was to be coupled to the value of a (theoretical) basket of goods. For example, 100 b-money units would be worth one basket of goods. This should give b-money a stable value, at least in relation to this basket of goods: the same 100 b-money units would buy the same basket of goods in the past, in the present and in the future.To issue new coins, users were to determine what a basket of goods would cost relative to a solution to a computational problem: a “proof of work.” If, for example, a basket of goods should cost $80 at specific point in time, it would have to be matched by a proof of work that would on average cost $80 to produce. If, 10 years later, the same basket of goods were to cost $120, the same 100 units would have to be matched with a proof of work that’d cost $120 to produce.Using this indicator, the first person to produce a valid proof of work would be credited 100 new b-money by all users or the servers. Therefore, no one would be particularly incentivized to produce proofs of work unless they intended to use b-money, limiting inflation to the growth of the “b-money economy.”Alternatively, in an appendix to his proposal, Dai suggested that money creation could be realized through an auction. Either all users (first protocol) or the servers (second protocol) would first have to determine an optimal increase of the monetary base. Then, if this ideal increase were to be established at 500 b-money units, for example, an auction would determine who should create these 500 units: whoever was willing and able to provide the most proof of work for it.BitcoinB-money was never implemented. It couldn’t have been: “b-money wasn't a complete practical design yet,” Dai acknowledged in a LessWrong forum thread a couple of years ago. What’s more, Dai did not expect b-money to take off in a big way, even if it was implemented. “I think b-money will at most be a niche currency/contract enforcement mechanism, serving those who don't want to or can't use government sponsored ones,” he explained in an email following his announcement on the Cypherpunks mailing list.Indeed, several of b-money’s problems remained unsolved or at least under-specified. Perhaps, most importantly, its consensus model was not very robust, as best shown by Dai’s proposed smart contract solution. It has since also been found that proof-of-stake systems introduce new challenges that Dai may not have foreseen; for example, it’s not clear how “misconduct” can be objectively established. And that doesn’t even get into the more nuanced problems of the proposal, such as a lack of privacy due to traceability of funds or potential coin issuance (“mining”) centralization. Indeed, some of these problems are still not solved for Bitcoin today.Dai — who after proposing b-money went on to work for TerraSciences and Microsoft, and may have retired early on since then — would not stick around to solve these problems.“I didn't continue to work on the design because I had actually grown somewhat disillusioned with crypto-anarchy by the time I finished writing up b-money,” Dai later explained on LessWrong. He reiterated, “I didn't foresee that a system like it, once implemented, could attract so much attention and use beyond a small group of hardcore Cypherpunks.”Yet, Dai’s proposal was not forgotten: b-money ended up as the first reference in the Bitcoin white paper. Still, as similar as b-money and Bitcoin’s designs may be, it’s possible that Satoshi Nakamoto was not inspired by Dai’s idea at all. Dai himself believes that Bitcoin’s inventor came up with the idea independently. Shortly before publishing the Bitcoin white paper, Hashcash inventor Dr. Adam Back directed Satoshi Nakamoto to Dai’s work, making Dai one of few people Bitcoin’s inventor personally reached out to before publishing his white paper. But Dai did not respond to Satoshi’s email. In retrospect, he wished he had. Unsurprisingly, Dai questions Bitcoin’s coin generation model.“I would consider Bitcoin to have failed with regard to its monetary policy (because the policy causes high price volatility which imposes a heavy cost on its users, who have to either take undesirable risks or engage in costly hedging in order to use the currency),” he wrote on LessWrong. “[O]ne possible impact of Bitcoin might be that due to its deficient monetary policy and associated price volatility it can't grow to very large scales, and by taking over the cryptocurrency niche, it has precluded a future where a cryptocurrency does grow to very large scales.”He added, “This may have been partially my fault because when Satoshi wrote to me asking for comments on his draft paper, I never got back to him. Otherwise perhaps I could have dissuaded him (or them) from the ‘fixed supply of money’ idea.”This is the third installment in Bitcoin Magazine’s The Genesis Files series. The first two articles covered Dr. David Chaum’s eCash and Dr. Adam Back’s Hashcash. For more from Wei Dai, visit weidai.com. This article originally appeared on Bitcoin Magazine. […]

  • Why Does the New Economy of Knowledge Sharing Matter?

    “In today’s environment, hoarding knowledge ultimately erodes your power. If you know something very important, the way to get power is by actually sharing it.” — Joseph Badaracco The Fourth Industrial Revolution Historically, our society has undergone paramount technological changes in three industrial revolutions: 1st Industrial revolution – 1765: mechanization; 2nd Industrial revolution – 1870: mass production; 3rd Industrial revolution – 1969: automation Today, technology is already changing our lives. Drones deliver goods, Siri helps Read More The post Why Does the New Economy of Knowledge Sharing Matter? appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]

  • Bitfinex Enables Voting for EOS Block Producers

    After more than 15 percent of the EOS community has already voted, Bitfinex — one of the leading candidates — has deployed an open-source voting tool which affords users the ability to vote directly from the trading platform while, at the same time, being able to trade. Bitfinex Ballot, as the tool is dubbed, is already available for voting and for deployment on other exchange platforms.  To the Bitfinex Ballot Box The world’s sixth largest Read More The post Bitfinex Enables Voting for EOS Block Producers appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]

  • Netflix And Shill? Hollywood Films Its Cryptocurrency Premiere

    Hollywood has announced it will film its first high-profile feature centered on cryptocurrency – and its alleged connection with money laundering in the art world. ‘Crypto,’ Art And Money Laundering ‘Crypto,’ an unlikely blockbuster which will see actors from some of the most popular current US serials play major roles, will begin filming later this year, local industry magazine Hollywood Reporter revealed last week. The story of a corruption network in upstate New York, the Read More The post Netflix And Shill? Hollywood Films Its Cryptocurrency Premiere appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]

  • Let’s Break the Internet

    Cardano is by far the most philosophical of all the blockchains in the crypto-space. Its protocol has been described as more of a batch of computer science principles, than a product with a roadmap. Like Ethereum, NEO, and EOS, Cardano is a platform for creating decentralized applications. It has some really smart people backing its development too, which is one of the reasons this brand new product was able to find it’s way into the Read More The post Let’s Break the Internet appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]

  • Blockchain in the Music Industry: Art and Technology Connection

    We are happy to congratulate you on the French Music Day on June 21. Due to the celebration, we decided to show that art, music, and blockchain are connected. DLT is not only applied to the financial sphere – it is used in the music industry as well. How can technology and art be connected? How Blockchain Improves Music Industry 1. Direct Interaction With decentralized technology, musicians can interact with their audience directly and sell Read More The post Blockchain in the Music Industry: Art and Technology Connection appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]

  • Everything You Need to Know Before the ICON (ICX) Token Swap

    After various delays, the ICON (ICX) token swap is almost upon us. Here’s everything you need to know before the platform switches out its ERC20 ICX tokens for mainnet ICX tokens!  In the coming days, ERC20 ICX tokens will be swapped out for mainnet ICX coins. The exchange rate will be pegged to a ratio of 1:1, and mainnet ICX coins will not be backward convertible into ERC20 tokens. I just published “ICX Token swap Read More The post Everything You Need to Know Before the ICON (ICX) Token Swap appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]

  • The Central Banks’ Bank (BIS) Hates Bitcoin — Which is Reassuring

    The Bank for International Settlements (BIS), a global “bank for central banks” based in Basel, Switzerland, has once more declared that cryptocurrencies are not only “not ready for prime time,” but could also “bring the Internet to a halt.” [Note: This is an op-ed] BIS: Bitcoin, You Scary On Sunday, BIS released a new 24-page document outlining why it believes cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin cannot become a bona fide financial instrument for the global economy. The Read More The post The Central Banks’ Bank (BIS) Hates Bitcoin — Which is Reassuring appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]

  • Investing In Cryptocurrency Likened To Investing In The Internet 10 Years Ago

    Many of those invested and interested in the cryptocurrency markets were around for the rise and fall of the Dot-com era and birth of the widespread public internet. The Dot-com bubble burst is constantly being used in arguments that cryptocurrency will suffer the same fate, bringing the markets to a crashing close. Are we early to the party, or just in line for disappointment? Boom And Bust It is safe to say that anyone who has Read More The post Investing In Cryptocurrency Likened To Investing In The Internet 10 Years Ago appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]

  • The Great Ripple Debate: FinCEN Ruling Labels XRP a Currency, Not a Security

    The US SEC has decided Bitcoin and Ethereum will not be regulated as securities but the debate continues to rage over Ripple, the third-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization. Some argue US FinCen has already set a precedent for Ripple’s definition, which will mean the SEC must eventually follow suit. June has seen the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) make clear that Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) are not securities and will not be regulated Read More The post The Great Ripple Debate: FinCEN Ruling Labels XRP a Currency, Not a Security appeared first on Bitcoinist.com. […]