Ultimate glossary of crypto currency terms, acronyms and abbreviations
Usually, bull markets attract a lot of new investors - although speculators should be the right word here - and as usual, a lot of them are going to be crushed a way or another. First, before putting a single dollar, euro or whatever in the market, you should read a lot to know exactly what you're looking for. Are you here for the tech and/or the cypherpunk ethos ? Great, there's lot of resources out there (my links are cleaned but as always, do your due diligence) :
The Bitcoin Whitepaper, the one and only : bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf Since I'm linking to bitcoin.org, friendly reminder to avoid bitcoin.com, owned by a former supporter now con-artist Roger Ver.
Andreas Antonopoulos website : https://aantonop.com Andreas is one of best guys able to educate on bitcoin and its properties, for free, which helps.
Jameson Lopp website : lopp.net Jameson is a member of Bitcoin Core, cypherpunk, also able to educate a lot. His website is full of free resources and other links. You'll have a lot to read.
Hal Finney : he's unfortunately dead but I would advise to read about Hal Finney, the first to receive bitcoin Satoshi. A great cryptographer, the inventor of the first reusable PoW and one of the first bitcoin supporters. You'll be able to find his messages on this old forum Bitcoin Talk, by the way you'll be able to find the first chats about bitcoin on this forum bitcointalk.org
Monero website : getmonero.org Yep, I know it's gonna be controversial to post an altcoin link but personally, I think that Monero (aka XMR) is the only other coin with a big cypherpunk community, decentralized, and able to help newcomers with a great sense of responsibility, since the ethos here is to save privacy.
What Bitcoin Did : of course, Peter is controversial but I love him and I find his former blog and his podcasts very needed because he doesn't oversell himself. Pete knows that he's not a tech guy (like many of us) and just wants to spread the word, I think he does a good job with this.
Now, you've read and you want to put some skin in the game. Several exchanges are acceptable, a lot of aren't, be careful and assume that none really are (know that I won't post any ref links) :
to me, the best, although it's UI is quite old : Kraken €/$/pound/swiss franc on-off ramp
Coinbase and Coinbase Pro Difficult not to mention Coinbase, although I can't stand Brian Armstrong and the way they are doing their best to support scams currently. You should rather use Coinbase Pro if you have to since the fees are much lower.
Binance Binance came later than the previous ones but has managed to take most of the market. Now, you should remember what I said about being careful.
Huobi The biggest chinese exchange and they work closely with chinese official. Again, careful.
Bittrex Once at the top, now somewhere in the limbs.
A lot of new comers came recently like btse, ftx, feel free to try them while always keeping in mind that once your money is on exchanges, it's not yours anymore.
This was for centralized exchanges aka CEX. Talking about custodial, you'll need wallets to store your (bit)coins. Always try to use non-custodial wallets, which means wallets that give you your private keys. This way, if the software goes down, you can always retreive your money. Now, I won't link to all the existing wallets but will advise you to buy hardware wallets (trezor or ledger but there are others) or to create (on off-gap computers) paper wallets you're able to store safely (against all risks, not only robbery but housefire). You also could use your memory with brain wallets but, my gosh, I wouldn't trust myself. For Bitcoin (or even Litecoin), Electrum software can do a good job (but save your keys). AGAIN, DON'T KEEP YOUR SAVINGS ON AN EXCHANGE Now, about trading : it's been repeated and repeated but don't chase pumps and altcoins. Yep, it's probably the fastest way to make money. It's also the fastest to lose it. I won't lie : I made good money during the 2017-bullrun and I took profits but I also forgot to sell some shitcoins thinking it would keep going up, now I'm still holding these bags (although I don't really care). I know that a lot forgot to take profits. Take profits, always take profits, whatever your strategy is. Don't fall for people trying to sell you their bags, for ICOs trying to sell you a product which isn't released yet and obviously, don't fall for people asking for your private key. Also, know that there's two endgames : accumulating bitcoin or fiat. I'm rather in the first team but whatever your strategy is, take profits. (Yes, I know, some will say accumulating ethereum or something else). It's true that a lot of ethereum holders made a lot of money during the last bullrun (ethereum helped me make money too) but I'm really biased in favor of bitcoin (and monero). So, pick your coin but again, do your due diligence. A lot of people here or there will talk about the best tech, the fact that bitcoin is old and slow. I would need another post to go further on this point but know that a lof of air flight systems are old too but reliable. Trustless and reliable is the point here. This is the post from someone who bought bitcoin seven or six years ago, who lost part of them, who spent part of them (but don't regret this at all), who is still learning and I hope it will help others, although it would need a book to be complete.
A whole new kind of lightning & fiat interface through debit cards? Announcing lastbit
Soon after Satoshi made his big announcement more than a decade ago, a lot of concerns emerged pointing towards a crucial problem on his solution: scalability. Particularly since Mt. Gox, a lot started to change for Bitcoin. Out in the open, a multitude of crypto exchanges started popping up making Bitcoin and other coins easily accessible to pretty much anyone. Nevertheless, the original concerns on Satoshi’s proposal remained. In parallel and away from the spotlight, a group of passionate developers started crafting the solution to Bitcoin’s scalability problem. Today the solution is here and it’s name is the Lightning Network. Currently, users can access for free a wide range of Bitcoin Lightning wallets. Nevertheless, instant Bitcoin payments are still far from mainstream. Most of these wallets are extremely hard to use and as such are only catered to the most experienced of users. Despite that, the future of Lightning looks bright. As of today, there are over 11K Lightning nodes out there and this number is steadily growing. Lightning’s case of becoming the solution to Bitcoin’s woes looks strong. Holding that as a North star, we started building a solution to combine hardware level security with Lightning to enable instant Bitcoin to fiat transactions on hardware at a POS through debit card emulation.This project was overly ambitious and we quickly realized not enough people cared enough about hardware level security for payments. But the ground we covered was not in vain. During the process of building our hardware solution and talking to our beta users we came across a powerful discovery: enabling small and instant Bitcoin payments with zero fees to mainstream users via Lightning could be the way to finally make Bitcoin a widely and globally used means of payment. During the last few years, we’ve seen titans, such as Coinbase and Binance, emerge. Undeniably, these projects have helped Bitcoin tremendously by raising awareness and making onboarding to the cryptocurrency easy and intuitive globally. Nevertheless, an equivalent figure to position Bitcoin as a globally usable currency via Lightning is yet to come. With this in mind, we built an interoperable payments layer between Bitcoin (Lightning & On-Chain) and Euros (to start with), using payment instruments familiar to mainstream consumers, namely IBAN’s and debit cards. This means, users can move between Bitcoin and Euros in either direction, with a single interface. This will allow users to: -(i) Send and receive Bitcoin payments both form and to Lightning wallets and Bitcoin on-chain wallets; -(ii) Send and receive Euro payments both from and to IBAN’s and debit cards; -(iii) Make Bitcoin payments, both Lightning and on-chain, directly from Euro denominated IBAN’s and/or a debit cards; and -(iv)Top-up Euro denominated debit cards directly with Bitcoin. All of this was carefully built in response to what we heard from the community and as we mention throughout our story. We’ve dedicated the last few years of our lives and the foreseeable future to make this happen and we simply want to make it possible for more people to do things with Bitcoin. TLDR: Lastbit is putting out a beta application that contains a single interface to Bitcoin, Lightning, Euros and debit cards. This app will allow users to move between these payment instruments in any direction they like. Get paid in Euros from a Lightning invoice? Sure. Pay Euros to a Lightning invoice? Sure. Swipe a debit card and pay for your purchase with a Lightning invoice? Sure. And more. *We are still in beta and will soon start to roll-out in Europe
What is the best cryptocurrency to invest in right now?
What is the best cryptocurrency to invest in right now?
Traders worry every day about which cryptocurrency to invest in. The crypto market, however, is still difficult to predict. There is no simple answer as to which coins will win the race in 2020. The guarantee: Bitcoin Bitcoin will always be a good investment. Satoshi Nakamoto’s invention continues to lead in terms of market capitalization and trade volume. Almost every crypto exchange can trade Bitcoin and it is the cryptocurrency that is used the most. If you can or just want to invest in a single cryptocurrency, Bitcoin is always a good choice. The first true peer-to-peer currency is still the number 1 cryptocurrencies. So far, there is no indication that Bitcoin will be thrown from the throne in the foreseeable future. The next Bitcoin Halving will also take place in 2020. This means that fewer coins are distributed during mining. The available amount grows more slowly, so that every single coin becomes more valuable as soon as the demand increases. Many investors expect price increases after halving. It is not guaranteed that Bitcoin will experience the biggest growth in 2020. But it’s the most stable cryptocurrency to invest so far. Advantages: – Strongest market dominance, largest trading volume – The most widely used cryptocurrency worldwide – Secure facility Bitcoin alternatives Bitcoin clones could also be a safe investment: cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin Cash (BCH), Bitcoin Gold (BTG), Litecoin (LTC) or Bitcoin SV (BSV). These cryptocurrencies are mostly faster and more technically advanced than Bitcoin, but will not be able to break its market dominance in the foreseeable future. They have the same purpose: digital means of payment for the Internet. Your prices often move parallel to the Bitcoin price, but can also rise or fall with a time delay. Some of them have the potential to grow faster than their template, but it is not guaranteed. – Good alternative to diversification – Potential for big price gains Binance Coin (BNB) The Binance Coin (BNB) is the cryptocurrency of the largest exchange in the world: Binance. The Exchange has expanded considerably in recent years and plans to continue doing so in 2020. An investment in the Binance Coin is equivalent to an investment in the Exchange. The Binance Coin can be used to trade on the cryptocurrency exchange. If you buy cryptocurrencies with her, you get discounts on your purchases. Binance coins therefore have a benefit for every trader. Binance will soon start a decentralized exchange called Binance DEX, on which in turn the in-house cryptocurrency can be used as a means of payment. That makes the Binance Coin extremely liquid. Shortly after the start of the cryptocurrency, it was able to get a permanent place in the top 10 largest cryptocurrencies on CoinMarketCap. In 2019, the BNB price tripled. – Extremely liquid cryptocurrency – Currency on the largest exchange: Binance – Could already gain good prices Tron (TRX) Tron is a blockchain platform from Justin Sun, an important figure in the crypto scene. An independent ecosystem for the entertainment industry is to be created on the platform. Every user should be able to upload their own videos, pictures, music, texts etc. without being dependent on companies like YouTube. Basically, it’s a smart contract platform, similar to Ethereum (which is also a good investment). Users can upload data, make it available to other users and write their own smart contracts. Tron now attracts a large number of investors. There is a lot of potential in the project. In 2017, Tron’s price rose from EUR 0.0018 to EUR 0.045. In 2018 and 2019, the cryptocurrency gained more and more ground in the crypto world and is now among the top 15 in terms of market capitalization.
In response to the post about merchandise pinned here , I was wondering would it be possible to create a custom cryptocurrency version of Monopoly called (of course) Moonopoly! Christmas is just around the corner and it would make a great gift to a fellow crypto enthusiast, or could even be given out as prizes! Anyway, regardless of whether or not this is a good idea that can be taken seriously, or something completely ridiculous, I figured we could have some fun now deciding how this game would hypothetically be played and allocating the squares for the board. Here are my ideas: It would work just like normal Monopoly which we're all familiar with. But instead of being handed out a set amount of $ or whatever, the currency for Moonopoly could be Dai/Satoshis...or even Moons! Instead of the 28 properties we could have 28 cryptos. (Just like in standard monopoly, their value doesn't have to be exact to real life.) Bitcoin and Etherum are the equivalent of the premium properties (Mayfair and Park Lane on UK Monopoly). Perhaps nano could be the cheap Old Kent Road (Don't hate me nano fans, I love nano really. In fact nano could be the Free Parking square!) So let's say you land on the Bitcoin (Mayfair) square and want to buy it. That will cost you 0.1 BTC. If someone lands on it, they have to give you 0.01 BTC. Instead of building houses and hotels, you can add more Bitcoins/Eth etc, which would then increase the amount someone would have to pay when they land on your crypto. The 4 railroads could be exchanges (Binance, Coinbase etc.) and perhaps the two utilities could be something deFi like Uniswap and Honeyswap. We could have a lot of fun with the Chance and Community Chest cards. Here are some ideas: -You entered your seed in a phishing site. Pay 0.3 BTC. -You've received an airdrop. Collect 0.2 BTC. -Binance has been hacked. Pay 0.5 BTC. -Bullrun confirmed! Collect 0.4 BTC. -The ICO you invested in has exit scammed. Pay 0.2 BTC. -You didn't file your crypto taxes. Go to jail. Don't pass Go. Don't collect 0.1 BTC... For the pieces (i.e. the dog, the boot, the hat..) we could have: -Doge -Carlos Matos -Bogdanoff -Victor Cobra? Alright, it might sound a bit silly. I mean who are we going to play this with? But let's not worry about that. I want to know, what would you have on your Moonopoly board?
Các đồng tiền ảo phổ biến trên thế giới ngoài Bitcoin
Bitcoin không chỉ tạo ra xu hướng, mở ra một làn sóng mà nó còn trở thành tiêu chuẩn thực tế cho tiền ảo, truyền cảm hứng cho sự ra đời và phát triển của các đồng tiền ảo khác trên thế giới. Bài viết hôm nay chúng ta sẽ tìm hiểu về các đồng tiền ảo phổ biến trên thế giới ngoài đồng Bitcoin (BTC). https://preview.redd.it/lofnmy1tkjx51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=ad4cd7a7c65266e7a40da18c34c1921db07ea1c0 Tiền ảo là gì? Trước khi chúng ta xem xét kỹ hơn một số lựa chọn thay thế cho Bitcoin, hãy tìm hiểu ngắn gọn ý nghĩa của các thuật ngữ như tiền ảo và Altcoin. Tiền ảo có dạng mã hóa hoặc “coin”. Trong khi một số loại tiền ảo đã xâm nhập vào thế giới vật chất ví dụ như tiền trên thẻ tín dụng hoặc các dự án khác thì phần lớn những đồng tiền ảo còn lại như Bitcoin vẫn hoàn toàn vô hình. Tiền ảo đề cập đến các mã rất phức tạp cho phép tạo và xử lý các loại tiền này và các giao dịch của chúng trên các hệ thống phi tập trung. Tiền ảo hầu như luôn được thiết kế để không bị chính phủ thao túng và không chịu sự quản lý của bất kỳ ngân hàng, chính sách tiền và tài khóa nào. Các loại tiền tệ được mô phỏng theo Bitcoin được gọi chung là Altcoin và thường cố gắng để thể hiện mình là phiên bản sửa đổi hoặc cải tiến của Bitcoin. Mặc dù một số loại tiền này dễ khai thác hơn Bitcoin, nhưng vẫn có những đánh đổi, rủi ro lớn hơn do mức độ thanh khoản, chấp nhận và duy trì giá trị thấp hơn. Để tìm hiểu sâu hơn về tiền ảo là gì thì bạn đọc có thể nhấp vào đây. https://preview.redd.it/y3u6nx4vkjx51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=ee93c9ec59830f3ede37352afd972b9c198ec561 Các đồng tiền ảo trên thế giới ngoài Bitcoin
Các đồng tiền ảo phổ biến trên thế giới
Dưới đây, chúng tôi sẽ thông tin về các đồng tiền ảo quan trọng, phổ biến trên thế giới ngoài Bitcoin. Tuy nhiên, đầu tiên cần lưu ý là không thể có một danh sách toàn diện về tất cả các đồng tiền ảo ngoài Bitcoin được liệt kê dưới đây. Một lý do đơn giản giải thích cho điều này là vì thực tế có hơn 7.000 đồng tiền điện tử đang tồn tại tính đến tháng 11 năm 2020 và nhiều trong số những đó được cộng đồng những người đầu tư ưa chuộng.
Ethereum (ETH) – một trong các đồng tiền ảo theo sau Bitcoin thành công nhất
Giải pháp thay thế Bitcoin đầu tiên trong danh sách là Ethereum – một nền tảng phần mềm phi tập trung cho phép lưu trữ các hợp đồng thông minh và ứng dụng phi tập trung được xây dựng và chạy mà không có bất kỳ thời gian chết, gian lận, kiểm soát hoặc can thiệp nào từ bên thứ ba. Các ứng dụng trên Ethereum được chạy trên mã hóa dành riêng cho nền tảng của nó là Ether. Ether giống như một phương tiện di chuyển trên nền tảng Ethereum và được hầu hết các nhà nghiên cứu tìm kiếm để phát triển và chạy các ứng dụng bên trong Ethereum, hoặc bây giờ là bởi các nhà đầu tư đang tìm cách mua các loại tiền kỹ thuật số khác bằng cách sử dụng Ether. Ether, ra mắt vào năm 2015, hiện là đồng tiền kỹ thuật số lớn thứ hai theo vốn hóa thị trường sau Bitcoin, mặc dù nó đứng sau tiền điện tử thống trị với một tỷ suất lợi nhuận đáng kể. Kể từ tháng 1 năm 2020, vốn hóa thị trường của Ether chỉ bằng 1/10 so với Bitcoin. Trong năm 2014, Ethereum đã tung ra một đợt bán trước cho Ether và nhận được phản hồi tích cực; điều này đã giúp mở ra kỷ nguyên phát hành đồng tiền ban đầu (ICO). Theo Ethereum, nó có thể được sử dụng để “mã hóa, phân quyền, bảo mật và giao dịch bất cứ thứ gì.” Sau cuộc tấn công vào DAO vào năm 2016, Ethereum được chia thành Ethereum (ETH) và Ethereum Classic (ETC). Tính đến ngày 2 tháng 11 năm 2020, Ethereum (ETH) có vốn hóa thị trường là $45,442 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi đồng được thông báo là $401.25 đô la.
Ripple là một mạng lưới thanh toán toàn cầu theo thời gian thực cung cấp các khoản thanh toán quốc tế tức thì và chi phí thấp. Trình làng vào năm 2012, Ripple cho phép các ngân hàng giải quyết các khoản thanh toán xuyên biên giới trong thời gian thực với ưu điểm là sự minh bạch từ đầu đến cuối và chi phí thấp hơn. Sự đồng thuận của Ripple (phương pháp cấu thành) độc đáo ở chỗ nó không không yêu cầu khai thác. Thật vậy, tất cả các mã thông báo XRP của Ripple đã được khai thác trước khi ra mắt, có nghĩa là không có sự tạo ra của XRP theo thời gian, chỉ có việc giới thiệu và loại bỏ XRP khỏi nguồn cung thị trường theo hướng dẫn của mạng. Bằng cách này, Ripple tạo ra sự khác biệt so với Bitcoin và nhiều loại Altcoin khác. Vì cấu trúc của Ripple không yêu cầu khai thác, nó làm giảm việc sử dụng sức mạnh tính toán và giảm thiểu độ trễ mạng. Cho đến nay, Ripple đã rất thành công với mô hình kinh doanh này. Nó vẫn là một trong những loại tiền kỹ thuật số hấp dẫn nhất trong số các tổ chức tài chính truyền thống đang tìm cách đổi mới thanh toán xuyên biên giới. Hiện nó cũng là tiền điện tử lớn thứ ba trên thế giới xét theo vốn hóa thị trường tổng thể. Tính đến ngày 2 tháng 11 năm 2020, Ripple có vốn hóa thị trường là $11,001 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi đồng được thông báo là $0.24 đô la.
Litecoin (LTC) – Top 10 các đồng tiền ảo có vốn hóa thị trường cao nhất
https://preview.redd.it/ylksxspwkjx51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=36ec5d3394c752ce55b821b864e042d973825d0c Đồng tiền ảo Litcoin (LTC) Litecoin được ra mắt vào năm 2011, là một trong những đồng tiền điện tử đầu tiên đi theo chân của Bitcoin và thường được gọi ví von là “silver to bitcoin’s gold”. Nó được tạo ra bởi một cựu kỹ sử của Google, Charlie Lee, một sinh viên tốt nghiệp MIT. Litecoin hoạt động dựa trên mạng thanh toán toàn cầu có mã nguồn mở mà không bị kiểm soát bởi bất kỳ cơ quan trung ương nào và sử dụng thuật toán”scrypt” làm bằng chứng công việc, có thể được giải mã với sự trợ giúp của CPU cung cấp cho người tiêu dùng. Mặc dù Litecoin có nhiều mặt giống Bitcoin nhưng nó có tốc độ tạo khối nhanh hơn vì vậy cung cấp thời gian xác nhận giao dịch cũng nhanh hơn. Ngoài các nhà phát triển, ngày càng có nhiều người bán chấp nhận Litecoin. Đến ngày 2 tháng 11 năm 2020, vốn hóa thị trường của Litecoin là $3,694 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi đồng thông báo là $56.16 đô la, khiến nó trở thành đồng tiền ảo lớn thứ sáu trên thế giới.
Tether là một trong những đồng tiền đầu tiên và phổ biến nhất của một nhóm được gọi là Stablecoin, tiền điện tử nhằm cố định giá trị thị trường của chúng với một loại tiền tệ hoặc điểm tham chiếu bên ngoài khác để giảm sự biến động. Bởi vì hầu hết các loại tiền kỹ thuật số ngay cả những loại tiền lớn như Bitcoin, đã trải qua những giai đoạn biến động mạnh thường xuyên. Tether và các loại tiền ổn định khác cố gắng làm dịu biến động giá để thu hút những người dùng có thể thận trọng. Tether được ra mắt vào năm 2014 tự mô tả mình là “một nền tảng hỗ trợ blockchain được thiết kế để tạo điều kiện thuận lợi cho việc sử dụng các loại tiền tệ định danh theo cách thức kỹ thuật số để giảm thiểu sự biến động và phức tạp thường liên quan đến tiền tệ kỹ thuật số. Vào ngày 2 tháng 11 năm 2020, Tether là tiền điện tử lớn thứ ba theo vốn hóa thị trường, với tổng vốn hóa thị trường là $16,680 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi đồng là $1,00 đô la.
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) – đứng thứ 5 về vốn hóa thị trường trong các đồng tiền ảo
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) giữ một vị trí quan trọng trong lịch sử của Altcoin vì nó là một trong những đồng có hard fork sớm nhất và thành công nhất từ Bitcoin gốc. Trong thế giới tiền ảo, fork diễn ra là kết quả của các cuộc tranh luận giữa các nhà phát triển và thợ đào coin. Do tính chất phi tập trung của tiền tệ kỹ thuật số, các thay đổi bán buôn đối với mã cơ bản của mã thông báo hoặc đồng xu trong tầm tay phải được thực hiện do sự đồng thuận chung. Quá trình này có cơ chế thay đổi tùy theo loại tiền điện tử cụ thể. Khi các phe phái khác nhau không thể đi đến thỏa thuận, đôi khi tiền kỹ thuật số bị chia tách, với bản gốc vẫn đúng với mã gốc của nó và bản sao khác bắt đầu hoạt động như một phiên bản mới của đồng tiền trước đó, hoàn chỉnh với các thay đổi đối với mã của nó. BCH bắt đầu hoạt động vào tháng 8 năm 2017 do một trong những đợt chia tách này. Cuộc tranh luận đã dẫn đến việc tạo ra BCH có liên quan đến vấn đề khả năng mở rộng đó là mạng Bitcoin có giới hạn nghiêm ngặt về kích thước khối một megabyte (MB). BCH tăng kích thước khối từ một MB lên 8MB, với ý tưởng là các khối lớn hơn sẽ cho phép thời gian giao dịch nhanh hơn. Nó cũng thực hiện các thay đổi khác, bao gồm việc loại bỏ giao thức Segregated Witness ảnh hưởng đến không gian khối. Kể từ ngày 2 tháng 11 năm 2020, BCH có vốn hóa thị trường là $4,983 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi đồng là $268.51 đô la.
Monero là một loại tiền tệ an toàn, riêng tư và không thể bị theo dõi. Đồng tiền ảo mã nguồn mở này đã được ra mắt vào tháng 4 năm 2014 và nhanh chóng thu hút sự quan tâm đông đảo của cộng đồng những người đam mê đồng tiền mã hóa. Sự phát triển của loại tiền điện tử này hoàn toàn dựa trên sự đóng góp và hướng tới cộng đồng. Monero đã được ra mắt với trọng tâm mạnh mẽ là phân cấp và khả năng mở rộng, đồng thời nó cho phép hoàn toàn quyền riêng tư bằng cách sử dụng một kỹ thuật đặc biệt gọi là “ring signatures”. Với kỹ thuật này, sẽ có một nhóm các chữ ký mật mã bao gồm ít nhất một người tham gia thực sự và tất cả chúng đều có vẻ hợp lệ vì chữ ký thực không thể bị cô lập. Với cơ chế bảo mật đặc biệt như vậy, Monero đã phát triển một thứ có tiếng tăm không kém, nó có liên quan đến các hoạt động tội phạm trên khắp thế giới. Tuy nhiên, cho dù nó được sử dụng cho mục đích tốt hay xấu, không thể phủ nhận rằng Monero đã giới thiệu những tiến bộ công nghệ quan trọng cho tiền điện tử. Tính đến ngày 2 tháng 11 năm 2020 Monero có vốn hóa thị trường là $2,246 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi mã thông báo là $126.57 đô la.
https://preview.redd.it/o9tk8qmxkjx51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=7940879734a4eeedb7b6aa7813d9a0d66be1e00f Đồng tiền ảo EOS Ngoài Libra, một trong những đồng tiền kỹ thuật số mới nhất lọt vào danh sách này là EOS. Được công bố vào tháng 6 năm 2018, EOS được tạo ra bởi Dan Larimer – nhà tiên phong tiền điện tử. Trước khi làm việc cho EOS, Larimer đã là nhà sáng lập sàn tiền ảo Bitshares cũng như nền tảng truyền thông xã hội dựa trên blockchain Steemit. Giống như lịch sử của các loại tiền điện tử khác trong danh sách này, EOS được thiết kế sau Ethereum, vì vậy nó cung cấp một nền tảng mà các nhà phát triển có thể xây dựng các ứng dụng phi tập trung. Tuy nhiên, EOS có nhiều điều đáng chú ý vì nhiều lý do. Đầu tiên, đợt chào bán đồng tiền ban đầu của nó là một trong những đợt phát hành lâu nhất và có lợi nhuận cao nhất trong lịch sử, thu về mức kỷ lục 4 tỷ đô la Mỹ trong quỹ nhà đầu tư thông qua các nỗ lực tìm nguồn cung ứng cộng đồng kéo dài một năm. EOS cung cấp một cơ chế bằng chứng cổ phần được ủy quyền mà nó hy vọng có thể cung cấp khả năng mở rộng vượt xa các đối thủ cạnh tranh. EOS bao gồm EOS.IO, tương tự như hệ điều hành của máy tính và hoạt động như mạng blockchain cho tiền kỹ thuật số, cũng như tiền EOS. EOS cũng mang tính cách mạng vì không có cơ chế khai thác để sản xuất đồng tiền. Thay vào đó, các nhà sản xuất khối tạo ra các khối và được thưởng bằng mã thông báo EOS dựa trên tỷ lệ sản xuất của họ. EOS bao gồm một hệ thống các quy tắc phức tạp để điều chỉnh quá trình này. Với ý tưởng sẽ dân chủ và phi tập trung hơn so với các loại tiền điện tử khác trên thế giới. Kể từ ngày 2 tháng 11 năm 2020, EOS có vốn hóa thị trường là $2,361 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi mã thông báo là $2.52 đô la.
Bitcoin SV (BSV)
Bitcoin SV (BSV), với “SV” trong trường hợp này là viết tắt của “Satoshi Vision”, là một hard fork của Bitcoin Cash. Theo nghĩa này, BSV là một nhánh rẽ của mạng Bitcoin ban đầu. Việc nâng cấp mạng theo kế hoạch cho tháng 11 năm 2018 đã dẫn đến một cuộc tranh luận kéo dài giữa các phe phái khai thác và phát triển trong cộng đồng BCH, dẫn đến hard fork và sự ra đời của BSV. Các nhà phát triển Bitcoin SV đề nghị rằng tiền điện tử này nên khôi phục giao thức ban đầu của nhà phát triển Bitcoin- Satoshi Nakamoto và đồng thời cho phép các phát triển mới để tăng tính ổn định, cho phép khả năng mở rộng. Các nhà phát triển Bitcoin SV cũng ưu tiên bảo mật và thời gian xử lý giao dịch nhanh chóng. 2 tháng 11 năm 2020, BSV có vốn hóa thị trường là $3,074 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi mã thông báo là $165.64 đô la.
Binance Coin (BNB)
Binance Coin (BNB) là đồng tiền ảo chính thức của nền tảng trao đổi tiền điện tử Binance. Thành lập vào năm 2017, Binance đã nhanh chóng vươn lên trở thành sàn giao dịch lớn nhất trên toàn cầu về khối lượng giao dịch tổng thể. Bên cạnh đó Binance Coin cho phép người dùng Binance giao dịch hàng chục loại tiền điện tử khác nhau một cách hiệu quả trên nền tảng Binance. Ngoài ra, BNB được sử dụng để hỗ trợ phí giao dịch trên sàn giao dịch và cũng có thể được sử dụng để thanh toán cho một số hàng hóa và dịch vụ, bao gồm phí đi lại và các dịch vụ khác. Kể từ ngày 2 tháng 11 năm 2020, BNB có vốn hóa thị trường là $4,145 tỷ đô la và giá trị mỗi mã thông báo là $28.71 đô la.
Những thông tin về các đồng tiền ảo phổ biến trên thế giới ngoài Bitcoin trên đây sẽ giúp người đọc có thêm được kiến thức về các Altcoin. Với kiến thức này bạn đọc sẽ có động lực để tìm hiểu về nghiên cứu sâu hơn về một đồng tiền ảo mà cảm thấy phù hợp và hứng thú với bản thân. Tìm hiểu thêm các thông tin mới nhất và chất lượng nhất về thị trường tiền ảo nhé.Xem thêm: Đầu tư tiền ảo là gì? Các bước đầu tư tiền ảo cho người mới
I have been holding crypto and following the ecosystem for a long time, and I believe crypto will revolutionise the financial system and still has much potential to increase in value. However until now my holdings have been mostly handpicked. In traditional investments I am a subscriber to passive investing and usually invest in broad index funds, and I want to apply that investment philosophy to my crypto holdings. With this in mind I looked at some available crypto indices and none of them seemed to fill my needs, but looking at them helped me define some of the criteria for my own index:
Not too broad
I will be reproducing the index manually, so having too many assets will make the extra hassle of trading and storing the small-weighted assets not worth it.
I don't see the point of including stablecoins in a cryptoasset index. If I wanted to invest in the asset the stablecoin tracks I'd be better off holding the followed asset itself.
Exclude centrally managed tokens
All indices I found included assets such as Binance Coin and OKB. I see investing in such assets as investing in the managing entity and not in the crypto ecosystem itself, as those tokens will be much more correlated with the business success of the entity than with the success of the ecosystem.
Require reasonable trading availability
The asset must be available for trading in a reasonable number of exchanges.
Market capitalization weighting
Free-float market cap weighting is the standard method of weighting whole-market indices. I have seen some indices that use square root of market cap weighting in order to not be so Bitcoin-heavy, but I am not convinced that that is a better representation of the market or that it would lead to better returns. With these criteria in mind I evaluated the top coins by market capitalization. I decided to use CoinGecko as my main source, but I do cross check the values with CoinMarketCap and CoinCap.io to avoid some big flaw in CoinGecko's methodology.
Obviously the big guy is in.
I also have no issues with Ethereum.
Ripple is a bit too centrally-controlled for my taste and there's also the worry that the value of the XRP token itself may not be too correlated with the network's success, but I still consider it to be worthy for inclusion.
Tether is excluded due to being a stable coin and being centrally-controlled.
The only thing that worries me about Bitcoin Cash is that the community seems to be too worried about insisting that it is the true Bitcoin instead of developed, but I don't see any reason to exclude it given my criteria.
This is the first asset with which I don't have too much experience. Their website is a bit too heavy on buzzwords, but my research seems to show that it is a real network, there's no big problems with their whitepaper.
I personally have no idea how Bitcoin SV is so high in market capitalization, as I see it as just Craig Steven Wright's tool to strengthen his Satoshi claim, but the point of the index and the criteria is to remove my personal feelings from the decision, so it stays in.
Litecoin is one of the oldest assets around and I have no objection for it.
This is the first one where I am having a hard time deciding if it stays in or not. Its website is full of buzzwords. They have a whitepaper explaining how the network works, but I can't see it as much more than a centrally-managed token with a bunch of apps around it and no real value proposition. The company itself seems shady, having been through a name change, as it was previously called Monaco, the way their cards work smells heavily like a Ponzi scheme, they promise huge interest rates for staking random coins with them and the amount of people that show up speaking well of it in any post about it reeks of paid shills. For some reason it is also not listed on CoinCap.io, although it is listed on CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap. It is also listed on fewer exchanges than other coins we've seen so far. I couldn't find any concrete evidence of it being a scam, but I am excluding it for being a centrally-controlled token.
This is a Binance-controlled token, so it is out.
I also didn't know much about this coin, but my research didn't raise any red flags about it, so it's in.
This one is an ERC20 token, but it is managed by a smart contract and although it seems to be somewhat centrally-controlled by now it does have a governance model to make this control be diluted over time. It is also trying to solve a real problem, so it is in.
I was not too familiar with it, but after researching about it I really like the idea. I see no problem in including it.
Stellar feels to me a bit too much like Ripple 2.0, but I don't have any concrete problems with it.
This is an OKEX-controlled token, so it is out.
Another one of the old kids in town, I have no problems with it.
I have a "too buzzwordy" feeling about TRON, and I feel it is a bit too much connected to its founder, but no concrete problems as well.
This is a bitfinex-controlled token, so it is out.
USD Coin is excluded due to being a stable coin and being centrally-controlled.
This is an asset that I am not too sure I understand completely, and it is not listed from CoinCap.io and its market cap is not computed on CoinMarketCap. From what I can gather a cToken is meant to be a token that identifies that you have deposited in Compound's loan market. The only place where it is really traded is in the Compound exchange itself, and it's value is tied to the interest accrued from the loans in the platform and to the underlying asset, which in this case is DAI, a stablecoin. I find Compound Finance interesting and intend to read more about it, but I don't think cDAI is fit for my index, as it is not freely tradeable and tied to a stablecoin.
This is a Huobi-controlled token, so it is out.
This is one more buzzwordy smart contract platform with no concrete red flags to it.
A fork from the main Ethereum chain that rejects the rescue of stolen funds from a buggy smart contract. I am sympathetic to the idea of rejecting a centrally-proposed hardfork, and I see no red flags with this coin. And with this we are up to my intended 15 assets. This is the composition of the index with current market capitalizations:
This is the portfolio I intend to target from now on, with occasional rebalances of course. I would like to hear what you think about my criteria and my application of them, and where I could improve it.
I've read about how some guy got his account blocked in Binance because he sent a transaction from Wasabi wallet. I've read it goes deep into several iterations after the mix. For instance: You send the coins into a mixer -> send it back to you to address A -> send it back to you to address B -> send it to an exchanger. Chainalaysis will notice the coins are mixed even if you've send it to 2 "clean addresses" before that. This is insanity. It could put people into trouble since one could mix the coins, send it to someone else, then this person sends it to an exchange where he is identified with his real name, and he ends up in some money laundering investigation scheme. Just nuts. Does it recognize all mixers? If you use helix, chipmixer or whatever else... how would it even know? Do they just keep adding more and more "blacklisted" addresses? In a long enough timeline the % of ending up in some "money laundering investigation" is increasingly higher. Until we have proper fungibility in Bitcoin, I wouldn't send a single satoshi to an exchanger that doesn't come from: 1) Coins you've bought from an exchange that uses Chainalysis (whitelisted by default since they had it on their custody wallet, one would assume those are safe) 2) Mined coins with no tx history These f*ckers are just developing an scheme to put people in trouble and confiscate coins. Use bisq outside of the above mentioned cases IMO. Just assume 0 privacy when dealing with your average big exchange. Better safe than sorry. Our only hope is smart devs crush their Chainalysis dreams where every coin has an ID.
The Undiscovered Facts Behind Money Laundering, Cryptocurrency, and Banks
A week ago, a lot of documents known as the FinCEN documents were delivered, enumerating how the absolute greatest banks on the globe move trillions of dollars in dubious exchanges for suspected psychological militants, kleptocrats, and drug top dogs. Also, the U.S. government has neglected to stop it. https://preview.redd.it/lme57jyyx1r51.jpg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=014ead7b7b812b3d6cbaf4a141eeec123589121b The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network ("FinCEN"), an agency inside the Treasury Department, accused of battling tax evasion, psychological militant financing, and other monetary violations. An assortment of "dubious movement reports" offers a window into budgetary debasement, and how governments can't or reluctant to stop it. Benefits from destructive medication wars, fortunes stole from creating nations, and hard-earned investment funds taken in Ponzi plans, all course through money related establishments, in spite of admonitions from bank workers. These reports are available to US law enforcement agencies and other nations’ financial intelligence operations. Although FinCEN is aware of the money laundering activities, it lacks the authority to stop it. Money laundering is more than a financial crime. It is a tool that makes all other crimes possible - from drug trafficking to political crimes. And banks make it all possible. In a detailed expose, BuzzFeedNews named several of the most trusted banks. Current investigations show that even after fines and prosecutions, well-known JPMorgan Chase JPM (+0.9%), HSBC, Standard Chartered, Deutsche Bank, and Bank of New York Mellon BK (+0.8%) are all involved in moving funds for suspected criminals. The current money related framework generally protects the banks and its heads from the indictment, inasmuch as the bank documents a notification with FinCEN that it might be encouraging crime. The dubious movement alert adequately gives the banks a free pass. Thus, unlawful finances keep on moving through banks into different businesses from oil to amusement to land, further isolating the rich from poor people, while the banks we have developed to trust, make everything conceivable. As indicated by the United Nations, the assessed measure of cash laundered universally in one year is 2 to 5% of the worldwide GDP, or $800 billion to $2 trillion, with more than thank 90% of illegal tax avoidance going undetected today. Simultaneously, the cryptocurrency industry has likewise been condemned for being an apparatus for tax evasion, in spite of insights expressing something else. It is assessed that solitary 1.1% of all digital currency exchanges are illegal. During its initial days, Bitcoin was generally connected with the Silk Road, an online dim net commercial center, where clients could buy weapons and unlawful medications namelessly. Be that as it may, with the developing utilization of the Bitcoin organization, 42 million Bitcoin wallets, and checking, it is getting progressively conceivable to follow exchanges on open blockchains, while private financial exchanges stay covered up on display. This week, I had a chance to plunk down with Chanpeng Zhao "CZ", the Founder and CEO of Binance, the biggest cryptographic money trade by volume on the planet, to get his interpretation of illegal tax avoidance both in the customary and the computerized fund universes. Coming up next are a couple of features from our meeting: Much obliged to you for going along with us today, CZ. As you would see it, for what reason is illegal tax avoidance especially destructive to our economy? CZ: As monetary administration suppliers, it is our obligation to battle unlawful action. Everybody shares this duty. Yet, regularly once the principles are set up, individuals will attempt to get around the guidelines. What's more, there are individuals who simply need more business, and knowing or unconsciously will encourage these exchanges. We live in an intricate world, where one nation may see a go about as criminal and the other may not. Many individuals have a high contrast see, yet the world is really dim. Not all banks are honest and not all crypto organizations are terrible. The digital currency industry has experienced harsh criticism for encouraging unlawful exchanges. How would you think conventional money and digital currency businesses analyze in such manner? CZ: If you are utilizing Bitcoin, it is a straightforward record. When you have a couple of exchanges, you can follow the assets right back to where the coins were mined. So along these lines, blockchain really gives a straightforward record to everybody to dissect. In the event that you piece together a couple of information focuses and do a group examination, it isn't that difficult for a calculation to break down the beginning. Security coins are more earnestly to follow, yet their market top isn't unreasonably high, making bigger exchanges more troublesome. So to be completely forthright, it is a lot simpler to make illegal exchanges utilizing fiat than utilizing crypto. How might you analyze the volume of illegal exchanges in crypto versus fiat? CZ:It's likely a thousand times less. Essentially, for any important measure of cash you need to move in the crypto, it is exceptionally difficult to move it namelessly. There are outsider checking devices and information bases that can coordinate a considerable lot of the addresses to known people. The digital currency market top is little to the point, that in the event that you are moving a $100 million dollars, you can't do as such without experiencing an incorporated trade, making it considerably simpler to follow. The cryptographic money space overall was begun by Satoshi Nakomoto as to some degree a campaign against the defilement of banks. Remarkably, the beginning square of Bitcoin contained a commentary tending to the bailouts of banks in 2008 and 2009 ["The Times 3 January 2009 - Chancellor on edge of second bailout for banks."] Is that ethos still alive in the digital currency space today, the drive to bring down the enormous person? CZ: I have even more a fair view here. Some in the crypto space are against banks, fiat, and so forth., while others think digital forms of money are utilized by drug masters. Those are two extraordinary perspectives. My view is that digital money offers opportunities - a further extent of opportunity in exchanges, ventures, property, reserve funds, and so on. We are simply offering another choice for clients who esteem that opportunity and control. I'm not against any bank or any single individual. I think crypto offers a higher opportunity of cash, and thusly we need to give more individuals admittance to crypto… If I don't care for the banks, I simply don't utilize them. Where do you feel the equalization lies between the legislature securing its residents as opposed to encouraging advancement? CZ: I accept governments ought to be public administrations. They ought to give streets and fire departments...Whenever there is government intercession, it is awful for the economy. At whatever point an administration encourages one gathering, it naturally harms another. The administration influences the parity of the economy giving assistance to a gathering that isn't sufficiently serious to remain alive. So at whatever point an administration rescues huge banks, or any business so far as that is concerned, they just appear as though they are making a difference. I have confidence in a free economy, and I buy into that way of thinking unequivocally. Much obliged to you for your understanding, CZ. More information about PrivateX: www.privatex.io PrivateX is a private wallet for sending, receiving, and storing your Bitcoin and Ethereum. If you are interested in services, contact us [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) #moneylaundering#privatex#buybitcoin24#binance#huobiglobal#kraken#crypto#bitcoin#consulting24#buybitcoin#buybitcoinnow#blockchain#startacompanyinestonia#companyinestonia#estonia#cryptoexchanges#privatexcoin
Rebasing, new money, old money, the stable value, and value fluctuations.
Hello all. I have seen several people comparing ampleforth to bitconnect, so here is the simplified formula: (Oracle Price – Target Price) / 10 supply change every 24 hours. Now so long as the price fluctuations are under this amount, we never run the risk of dropping into negative territory. Now, look at the chart. What are our fluctuations? The biggest fluctuation was the 13 july 2020, from 3.46 to 1.86. Now, is this due only to the rebase? No. If you look up on the days before that, we had a massive run up. This looks like a normal market pattern cycle that got burst. But did hodlers lose? No. The marketcap just keeps going up. So, what could cause the price to dip below $1? Well, if we reached $1, and the marketcap stagnated, then a whale *COULD* crash the market. However, there are several things to consider here. First, when we reach a stagnated market value, ampleforth will have taken a strong competitive edge against tether and usdc. That means its volume will be absolutely massive. Second, it requires more money to crash an asset than it requires to jack an asset's prices up. Psychology lesson. Most people are bad traders because they treat risk and reward differently. They hold losing positions hoping the losing position will come back, and they hesitate to take winning positions if there is a chance of loss. This risk adverse mentality has an application here. Also, the lower number of say .90 is a numerically lower number than say 1.15. And trading lesson... the spot price of an asset is determined by active traders. Not by actual hodlers. Traders are necessarily reactionary. We cannot see the future. And when the price fluctuates, non market participants tend to become active market participants. This is why small price moves can spark feagreed runs. At ampleforth's target price of $1, it is going to be difficult for any one trader to crash the market, and we will NOT see price drops to .5 as a normal occurrence. If we do, there is an arbitrage that traders like me WILL do if it happens. Basically since we know that below $1 the rebase is a negative event, we will do the opposite of current actions with trading. The current trading strategy that eliminates risk while at the same time maximizes returns is to jump in with tether 5 minutes before rebase, and jump out and crash the market with the new 10% supply. Under $1, the strategy would be to buy and jump in. Right before rebase, traders sell, and then buy back in after rebase. People who are saying ampleforth is a bad investment are probably wrong. There are reasons it won't crash sub $1 when it has lots of users, and there are ways the market can remedy the situation. Now.. the ampleforth rich list IS disturbing. Just like satoshi nakamoto holding 10% of bitcoin is disturbing. However, they are a respectable crypto company, and they have plans for at least coinbase and binance, and I do not see them flash dumping on the market. That isn't to say they might sell. I am saying that if they do sell, they will do it in a nice respectful manner that does not crash the market, and doesn't cause lots of slippage for them.
tl;dr - This is the 17th monthly update on the 2019 Top Ten Experiment. Ethereum up the most in May, plus got a shout out from J.K. Rowling, so it obviously won the month. Overall, BTC in first place since January 2019, BSV in second place. Half of the 2019 Top Ten Portfolio is up at least +50%. XRP is worst performing. Total $3k (3 x $1k) investments the 2018, 2019, and 2020 Top Ten are up +3.5%, but similar approach with US stocks market would have yielded +10%.
Instead of hypothetically tracking cryptos, I made an actual $1000 investment, $100 in each of the Top 10 cryptocurrencies by market cap on the 1st of January 2018. The result? The 2018 Top Ten portfolio ended 2018 down 85%, my $1000 worth only $150. I thenrepeated the experimenton the 1st of January 2019 with the new 2019 Top Ten cryptos, then again in2020. Think of the Top Ten Experiments as a lazy man’s Index Fund (no weighting or rebalancing), less technical, but hopefully still a proxy for the market as a whole – or at the very least an interesting snapshot of the 2018, 2019, and 2020 crypto space. I am trying to keep this project simple and accessible for beginners and those looking to get into crypto but maybe not quite ready to jump in yet. I try not to take sides or analyze, but rather attempt to report in a detached manner letting the numbers speak for themselves. This is not investing advice – as a matter of fact, the vast majority of the reports will show that the Top Ten approach under performs other strategies. This experiment is designed to be documentary in nature, describing a specific period in cryptocurrency history.
Buy $100 of each the Top 10 cryptocurrencies on January 1st, 2018, 2019, and 2020. Hold only. No selling. No trading. Report monthly.
Month Seventeen – UP 43%
Unlike April’s all green month, May was more mixed. That said, the gains outweighed the losses this month in the 2019 Top Ten Portfolio.
Question of the month:
In May, Reddit launched two Ethereum-based tokens on the Cryptocurrency and FortNiteBR subreddits. What are the Cryptocurrency token called? A) Moons B) Bricks C) Satoshis D) Cryptos Scroll down for the answer.
Ranking and March Winners and Losers
Besides Stellar (down two spots to #13) and Tron (down one from #16 to #17) every other crypto was locked in place. Speaking of Stellar and Tron, they are still the only two cryptos to have dropped out of the 2019 Top Ten since January 1st, 2019. They have been replaced by Binance Coin and Tezos. May Winners – Ethereum ended the month up +16% and got a shout out from J.K. Rowling, so it obviously won May. BTC came in a close second this month, up +14%. May Losers – A tight battle for the basement this month with BSV (down -3.9%) edging out XRP (down -3.7%) for the bottom spot. For nerds those keeping score, here is tally of which coins have the most monthly wins and loses during the first seventeen months of the 2019 Top Ten Experiment: Tether is still in the lead with five monthly victories followed by BSV in second place with three. BSV also holds the most monthly losses, finishing last in six out of seventeen months.
Overall update – BTC increases lead over second place BSV, XRP still worst performing
Ahead until just last month, BSV lost a lot of ground to BTC in May. Bitcoin is now up +168% since January 2019 compared to BSV‘s +116% gain. That initial $100 investment in BTC? Now worth $273. As was the case last month, 50% of the 2019 Top Ten cryptos are up at least +50% since the beginning of the experiment. At the other end, XRP continues to struggle, now down -41% since January 2019.
Total Market Cap for the entire cryptocurrency sector:
The overall crypto market added about $35B in May, and is now near August 2019 levels. It is up +123% since January 2019.
BitDom was steady again in May. This marks the third straight month it’s been stuck at around 65% For context, the range since the beginning of the experiment in January 2019 has been between 50%-70%.
Overall return on investment since January 1st, 2019:
The 2019 Top Ten Portfolio gained about $65 in May. After the initial $1000 investment, the 2019 group of cryptos is worth $1,431, up about +43%. Here’s a look at the ROI over the life of the first seventeen months of the experiment, month by month: Almost completely green for the 2019 Top Ten, a welcome change from the all red table you’ll see in the 2018 experiment. As you can see, every month except the first month ends in positive territory. At the lowest point, the 2019 Top Ten portfolio was down -9%, at the highest point, up +114% (May 2019). How does the 2019 Top Ten Experiment compare to the parallel projects?
Taking the three portfolios together, here’s the bottom bottom bottom line: After a $3000 investment in the 2018, 2019, and 2020 Top Ten Cryptocurrencies, my portfolios are worth $3,104. That’s up about +3.5% for the combined portfolios. Better than a few months ago (aka the zombie apocalypse) where it was down -24%, but not yet back at January (+13%) or February (+6%) levels. How does this compare to traditional markets?
How does the 2019 Top Ten portfolio compare US stock market?
Excellent question, I’m glad you asked. And you’re in luck, I’m also tracking the S&P 500 as part of my experiment to have a comparison point with other popular investments options. Despite the fact that the world seemed to be on fire, May 2020 saw the continued rebound of the stock market. It’s now up +22% since the start of the 2019 Experiment. As a reminder (or just scroll up) the 2019 Top Ten portfolio is returning +43% over the same time period, which is about double the S&P 500. The initial $1k investment I put into crypto would be worth $1,220 had it been redirected to the S&P 500 in January 2019. But what if I took the same world’s-slowest-dollar-cost-averaging/$1,000-per-year-in-January approach with the S&P 500? It would yield the following:
$1000 investment in S&P 500 on January 1st, 2018: +$140
$1000 investment in S&P 500 on January 1st, 2019: +$220
$1000 investment in S&P 500 on January 1st, 2020: -$50
Taken together, here’s the bottom bottom bottom line for a similar approach with the S&P: After three $1,000 investments into an S&P 500 index fund in January 2018, 2019, and 2020, my portfolio would be worth $3,310. That $3,310 is up over+10%since January 2018, compared to the $3,104 value (+3.5%) of the combined Top Ten Crypto Experiment Portfolios. That’s about a 7% difference in favor of the stock market. Last month, there was only a 3% difference, the month before, the gap was 13% (all in favor of the stock market).
The difference between the 2019 Top Ten crypto group and the overall crypto market is stark. Since January 2019, the overall market has gained +123% compared to the 2019 Top Ten crypto group which has gained +43%. This is an absolutely massive 80% gap. A +43% return is solid compared to the stock market, but it also implies that an investor would have done much better picking different cryptos or investing in the entire market instead of focusing only on the Top Ten. There are a few examples of this approach outperforming the overall market in this 2019 Top Ten Crypto Experiment, but the cases are few and far between. The 2018 Top Ten portfolio, on the other hand, has never outperformed the overall market, at least not in the first twenty-nine months of that Experiment. For the most recent 2020 Top Ten group, the opposite had been true: the 2020 Top Ten had easily outperformed the overall market 100% of the time…until this month.
The BTC halving event came and went in May and crypto markets shrugged. As the world continues to change because of COVID-19, what will be crypto’s place when we finally emerge on the other side? Final word: Please take care of yourselves, your families, and your communities. Stay safe out there. Thanks for reading and for supporting the experiment. I hope you’ve found it helpful. I continue to be committed to seeing this process through and reporting along the way. Feel free to reach out with any questions and stay tuned for progress reports. Keep an eye out for the original 2018 Top Ten Crypto Index Fund Experiment and the recently launched 2020 Top Ten Experiment.
And the Answer is…
A) Moons According CryptoCurrency, Moons represent ownership in the subreddit, “tokens on the Ethereum blockchain controlled entirely by you, and they can be freely transferred, tipped, and spent inCryptoCurrency*.*” Check out this post for more details.
Bitcoin SV – is a new coin splitted of Bitcoin Cash blockchain on 15 November 2018.Four fundamental pillars form the basis of Bitcoin SV’s roadmap to create the one blockchain for the world:stability, scalability, security, and safe instant transactions (a.k.a 0-confirmation).The Bitcoin SV project was created at the request of and sponsored by Antiguan-based CoinGeek Mining, with development work initiated by nChain. The project is also owned by the Antiguan-based bComm Association on behalf of the global BCH (SV) community, and the Bitcoin SV code is made available under the open source MIT license.
Qué tiene de bueno BSV? Estabilidad, escalabilidad, seguridad y transacciones seguras e instantáneas. Yo no tengo queja con ninguna de ellas. Las transferencias son muy rápidas (segundos) y con una fee razonable. Incluso asumidas en muchos casos por el proveedor. La escalabilidad (banca) y el tamaño de bloque (multimedia) serán fundamentales a futuro.
“The existing Visa credit card network processes about 15 million internet purchases per day worldwide. Bitcoin can already scale much larger than that with existing hardware for a fraction of the cost. It never really hits a scale ceiling.” –Satoshi Nakamoto (April 2009) The BSV network will ‘upgrade’ to Quasar and increase the block size from128 MBto 2 GB on July 24, 2019.
https://preview.redd.it/w6voga5ly2p51.jpg?width=2256&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c08304e64764e01515c379b8d9bcac35f3c7c3f4 BTC podrá seguir añadiendo capas paralelas, parches y demás que ya contempla BSV de base. No sé si es una solución que pueda alargarse en el tiempo, por lo que no parece que compitan en la misma liga. Queda por ver si complementarias o excluyentes … Qué tiene de malo BSV? Es otro proyecto más? Si bien los números y la visión es ganadora, no siempre lo mejor es lo más extendido ni lo más adoptado. Lo peor que tiene BSV … es que no es BTC. Ni BCH. Hay multitud de haters atacando el proyecto y a su promotor principal Craig Wright. Autoproclamado como Satoshi Nakamoto, el promotor está envuelto en líos judiciales en el caso Kleiman (su socio fallecido) en el que los herederos de éste reclaman una fortuna (estimada en 1,1 millones de BTC) de cuando trabajaban conjuntamente. Más info:
Noticias como ésa, unida a los haters de profesión (que lógicamente defienden “lo suyo”), ha convertido a BSV en una moneda controvertida que no deja indiferente a nadie. Para ver un ejemplo claro, Binance lo delistó arrastrado por la numerosa comunidad que atacaba a Craig Wright. Sin embargo, las pools de esa misma Binance están minando BSV mayoritariamente porque es una moneda rentable. BSV no parece una moneda especulativa, ni intradía. Sigue las variaciones del mercado, con subidas y bajadas locas (como todas), pero apunta más a un largo plazo. Cinco, diez años. Más info: https://bitcoinsv.com/
Disclaimer: I am not and have never been affiliated with any of the mentioned parties in a private or professional matter. Presumably in an attempt to smear a local competitor, Hayden Otto inadvertently publishes irrefutable on-chain proof that he excluded non-BCH retail revenue to shape the "BCH #1 in Australia" narrative.
Scroll down to "Proof of exclusion" if you are tired of the drama recap.
Scroll down to "TLDR" if you want a summary.
In September 2019, BitcoinBCH.com started publishing so called monthly "reports" about crypto retail payments in Australia. They claimed that ~90% of Australia's crypto retail revenue is processed via their own HULA system and that ~92% of all crypto retail revenue happens in BCH. They are aggregating two data sources to come up with this claim. One is TravelByBit (TBB) who publishes their PoS transactions (BTC, LN, ETH, BNB, DASH, BCH) live on a ticker. The other source is HULA, a newly introduced POS system (BCH only) and direct competitor to TBB run by BitcoinBCH.com - the same company who created the report. Despite being on-chain their transactions are private, not published and not verifiable by third parties outside BitcoinBCH.com Two things stood out in the "reports", noted by multiple users (including vocal BCH proponents):
The non-BCH parts must have tx excluded and the report neglects to mention it (the total in their TBB analysis does not match what is reported on the TBB website.)
The BCH part has outliers included (e.g. BCH city conference in September with 35x the daily average)
Hayden Otto's reaction
In direct response to me publishing these findings on btc, Hayden Otto - an employee at BitcoinBCH.com and the author of the report who also happens to be a moderator of /BitcoinCash - banned me immediately from said sub (source). In subsequent discussion (which repeated for every monthly "report" which was flawed in the same ways as described above), Hayden responded using the same tactics: "No data was removed"
"The guy is straight out lying. There is guaranteed no missing tx as the data was collected directly from the source." (source)
"Only data I considered non-retail was removed"
"I also had these data points and went through them to remove non-retail transactions, on both TravelbyBit and HULA." (source)
He admits to have removed non-BCH tx by "Game Ranger" because he considers them non-retail (source). He also implies they might be involved in money laundering and that TBB might fail their AML obligations in processing Game Ranger's transactions (source). The report does not mention any data being excluded at all and he still fails to explain why several businesses that are clearly retail (e.g. restaurants, cafes, markets) had tx excluded (source). "You are too late to prove I altered the data"
"[...] I recorded [the data] manually from https://travelbybit.com/stats/ over the month of September. The website only shows transactions from the last 7 days and then they disappear. No way for anyone to access stats beyond that." (source)
Proof of exclusion
I published raw data as extracted from the TBB site after each report for comparison. Hayden responded that I made those numbers up and that I was pulling numbers out of my ass. Since he was under the impression that
"The website only shows transactions from the last 7 days and then they disappear. No way for anyone to access stats beyond that." (source)
he felt confident to claim that I would be
unable to provide a source for the [missing] data and/or prove that that data was not already included in the report. (source)
Luckily for us Hayden Otto seems to dislike his competitor TravelByBit so much that he attempted to reframe Bitcoin's RBF feature as a vulnerability specific to TBB PoS system (source). While doublespending a merchant using the TBB PoS he wanted to prove that the merchant successfully registered the purchase as complete and thus exposed that the PoS sales history of TBB's merchants are available to the public (source), in his own words:
"You can literally access it from a public URL in the Web browser. There is no login or anything required, just type in the name of the merchant." (source)
As of yet it is unclear if this is intentional by TBB or if Hayden Ottos followed the rules of responsible disclosure before publishing this kind of data leak. As it happens, those sale histories do not only include the merchant and time of purchases, they even include the address the funds were sent to (in case of on-chain payments). This gives us an easy method to prove that the purchases from the TBB website missing in the reports belong to a specific retail business and actually happened - something that is impossible to prove for the alleged HULA txs. In order to make it easier for you to verify it yourself, we'll focus on a single day in the dataset, September 17th, 2019 as an example:
Hayden Otto's report claims 20 tx and $713.00 in total for that day (source)
The TBB website listed 40 tx and a total of $1032.90 (daily summary)
Paste the associated crypto on-chain address 17MrHiRcKzCyuKPtvtn7iZhAZxydX8raU9 in a blockchain explorer of your choice, e.g like this. This proves that a transfer of funds has actually happened.
I let software aggregate the TBB statistics with the public sale histories and you'll find at the bottom of this post a table with the on-chain addresses conveniently linked to blockchain explorers for our example date. The total of all 40 tx is $1032.90 instead of the $713.00 reported by Hayden. 17 tx of those have a corresponding on-chain address and thus have undeniable proof of $758.10. Of the remaining 23, 22 are on Lightning and one had no merchant history available. This is just for a single day, here is a comparison for the whole month.
TBB wo. Game Ranger
TBB according to Hayden
The usual shills will respond in a predictive manner: The data must be fake even though its proof is on-chain, I would need to provide more data but HULA can be trusted without any proof, if you include outliers BCH comes out ahead, yada, yada. But this is not important. I am not here to convince them and this post doesn't aim to. The tx numbers we are talking about are less than 0.005% of Bitcoin's global volume. If you can increase adoption in your area by 100% by just buying 2 coffees more per day you get a rough idea about how irrelevant the numbers are in comparison. What is relevant though and what this post aims to highlight is that BitcoinBCH.com and the media outlets around news.bitcoin.com flooding you with the BCH #1 narrative are playing dirty. They feel justified because they feel that Bitcoin/Core/Blockstream is playing dirty as well. I am not here to judge that but you as a reader of this sub should be aware that this is happening and that you are the target. When BitcoinBCH.com excludes $1,000 Bitcoin tx because of high value but includes $15,000 BCH tx because they are made by "professionals", you should be sceptical. When BitcoinBCH.com excludes game developers, travel businesses or craftsmen accepting Bitcoin because they don't have a physical store but include a lawyer practice accepting BCH, you should be sceptical. When BitcoinBCH.com excludes restaurants, bars and supermarkets accepting Bitcoin and when pressed reiterate that they excluded non-retail businesses without ever explaning why a restaurant shouldn't be considered reatil, you should be sceptical. When BitcoinBCH.com claims the reports have been audited but omit that the data acquisition was not part of the audit, you should be sceptical. I expect that BitcoinBCH.com will stop removing transactions from TBB for their reports now that it has been shown that their exclusion can be provably uncovered. I also expect that HULA's BCH numbers will rise accordingly to maintain a similar difference. Hayden Otto assumed that nobody could cross-check the TBB data. He was wrong. Nobody will be able to disprove his claims when HULA's BCH numbers rise as he continues to refuse their release. You should treat his claims accordingly. As usual, do your own research and draw your own conclusion. Sorry for the long read.
BitcoinBCH.com claimed no transactions were removed from the TBB dataset in their BCH #1 reports and that is impossible to prove the opposite.
Hayden Otto's reveals in a double spend attempt that a TBB merchant's sale history can be accessed publicly including the merchant's on-chain addresses.
(For example,) this table shows 40 tx listed on the TBB site on Sep 17th, including their on-chain addresses where applicable. The BitcoinBCH.com report lists only 20 tx for the same day.
(Most days and every months so far has had BTC transactions excluded.)
(For September, TBB lists $10,502 yet the report only claims $3,737.
How To End The Cryptocurrency Exchange "Wild West" Without Crippling Innovation
In case you haven't noticed the consultation paper, staff notice, and report on Quadriga, regulators are now clamping down on Canadian cryptocurrency exchanges. The OSC and other regulatory bodies are still interested in industry feedback. They have not put forward any official regulation yet. Below are some ideas/insights and a proposed framework.
Typical securities frameworks will cost Canadians millions of dollars (ie Sarbanes-Oxley estimated at $5m USD/yr per firm). Implementation costs of this proposal are significantly cheaper.
Canadians can maintain a diverse set of exchanges, multiple viable business models are still fully supported, and innovation is encouraged while keeping Canadians safe.
Many of you have limited time to read the full proposal, so here are the highlights:
Effective standards to prevent both internal and external theft. Exchange operators are trained and certified, and have a legal responsibility to users.
Regular Transparent Audits
Provides visibility to Canadians that their funds are fully backed on the exchange, while protecting privacy and sensitive platform information.
Establishment of basic insurance standards/strategy, to expand over time. Removing risk to exchange users of any hot wallet theft.
Background and Justifications
Cold Storage Custody/Management After reviewing close to 100 cases, all thefts tend to break down into more or less the same set of problems: • Funds stored online or in a smart contract, • Access controlled by one person or one system, • 51% attacks (rare), • Funds sent to the wrong address (also rare), or • Some combination of the above. For the first two cases, practical solutions exist and are widely implemented on exchanges already. Offline multi-signature solutions are already industry standard. No cases studied found an external theft or exit scam involving an offline multi-signature wallet implementation. Security can be further improved through minimum numbers of signatories, background checks, providing autonomy and legal protections to each signatory, establishing best practices, and a training/certification program. The last two transaction risks occur more rarely, and have never resulted in a loss affecting the actual users of the exchange. In all cases to date where operators made the mistake, they've been fully covered by the exchange platforms. • 51% attacks generally only occur on blockchains with less security. The most prominent cases have been Bitcoin Gold and Ethereum Classic. The simple solution is to enforce deposit limits and block delays such that a 51% attack is not cost-effective. • The risk of transactions to incorrect addresses can be eliminated by a simple test transaction policy on large transactions. By sending a small amount of funds prior to any large withdrawals/transfers as a standard practice, the accuracy of the wallet address can be validated. The proposal covers all loss cases and goes beyond, while avoiding significant additional costs, risks, and limitations which may be associated with other frameworks like SOC II. On The Subject of Third Party Custodians Many Canadian platforms are currently experimenting with third party custody. From the standpoint of the exchange operator, they can liberate themselves from some responsibility of custody, passing that off to someone else. For regulators, it puts crypto in similar categorization to oil, gold, and other commodities, with some common standards. Platform users would likely feel greater confidence if the custodian was a brand they recognized. If the custodian was knowledgeable and had a decent team that employed multi-sig, they could keep assets safe from internal theft. With the right protections in place, this could be a great solution for many exchanges, particularly those that lack the relevant experience or human resources for their own custody systems. However, this system is vulnerable to anyone able to impersonate the exchange operators. You may have a situation where different employees who don't know each other that well are interacting between different companies (both the custodian and all their customers which presumably isn't just one exchange). A case study of what can go wrong in this type of environment might be Bitpay, where the CEO was tricked out of 5000 bitcoins over 3 separate payments by a series of emails sent legitimately from a breached computer of another company CEO. It's also still vulnerable to the platform being compromised, as in the really large $70M Bitfinex hack, where the third party Bitgo held one key in a multi-sig wallet. The hacker simply authorized the withdrawal using the same credentials as Bitfinex (requesting Bitgo to sign multiple withdrawal transactions). This succeeded even with the use of multi-sig and two heavily security-focused companies, due to the lack of human oversight (basically, hot wallet). Of course, you can learn from these cases and improve the security, but so can hackers improve their deception and at the end of the day, both of these would have been stopped by the much simpler solution of a qualified team who knew each other and employed multi-sig with properly protected keys. It's pretty hard to beat a human being who knows the business and the typical customer behaviour (or even knows their customers personally) at spotting fraud, and the proposed multi-sig means any hacker has to get through the scrutiny of 3 (or more) separate people, all of whom would have proper training including historical case studies. There are strong arguments both for and against using use of third party custodians. The proposal sets mandatory minimum custody standards would apply regardless if the cold wallet signatories are exchange operators, independent custodians, or a mix of both. On The Subject Of Insurance ShakePay has taken the first steps into this new realm (congratulations). There is no question that crypto users could be better protected by the right insurance policies, and it certainly feels better to transact with insured platforms. The steps required to obtain insurance generally place attention in valuable security areas, and in this case included a review from CipherTrace. One of the key solutions in traditional finance comes from insurance from entities such as the CDIC. However, historically, there wasn't found any actual insurance payout to any cryptocurrency exchange, and there are notable cases where insurance has not paid. With Bitpay, for example, the insurance agent refused because the issue happened to the third party CEO's computer instead of anything to do with Bitpay itself. With the Youbit exchange in South Korea, their insurance claim was denied, and the exchange ultimately ended up instead going bankrupt with all user's funds lost. To quote Matt Johnson in the original Lloyd's article: “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.” ShakePay's insurance was only reported to cover their cold storage, and “physical theft of the media where the private keys are held”. Physical theft has never, in the history of cryptocurrency exchange cases reviewed, been reported as the cause of loss. From the limited information of the article, ShakePay made it clear their funds are in the hands of a single US custodian, and at least part of their security strategy is to "decline to confirm the custodian’s name on the record". While this prevents scrutiny of the custodian, it's pretty silly to speculate that a reasonably competent hacking group couldn't determine who the custodian is. A far more common infiltration strategy historically would be social engineering, which has succeeded repeatedly. A hacker could trick their way into ShakePay's systems and request a fraudulent withdrawal, impersonate ShakePay and request the custodian to move funds, or socially engineer their way into the custodian to initiate the withdrawal of multiple accounts (a payout much larger than ShakePay) exploiting the standard procedures (for example, fraudulently initiating or override the wallet addresses of a real transfer). In each case, nothing was physically stolen and the loss is therefore not covered by insurance. In order for any insurance to be effective, clear policies have to be established about what needs to be covered. Anything short of that gives Canadians false confidence that they are protected when they aren't in any meaningful way. At this time, the third party insurance market does not appear to provide adequate options or coverage, and effort is necessary to standardize custody standards, which is a likely first step in ultimately setting up an insurance framework. A better solution compared to third party insurance providers might be for Canadian exchange operators to create their own collective insurance fund, or a specific federal organization similar to the CDIC. Such an organization would have a greater interest or obligation in paying out actual cases, and that would be it's purpose rather than maximizing it's own profit. This would be similar to the SAFU which Binance has launched, except it would cover multiple exchanges. There is little question whether the SAFU would pay out given a breach of Binance, and a similar argument could be made for a insurance fund managed by a collective of exchange operators or a government organization. While a third party insurance provider has the strong market incentive to provide the absolute minimum coverage and no market incentive to payout, an entity managed by exchange operators would have incentive to protect the reputation of exchange operators/the industry, and the government should have the interest of protecting Canadians. On The Subject of Fractional Reserve There is a long history of fractional reserve failures, from the first banks in ancient times, through the great depression (where hundreds of fractional reserve banks failed), right through to the 2008 banking collapse referenced in the first bitcoin block. The fractional reserve system allows banks to multiply the money supply far beyond the actual cash (or other assets) in existence, backed only by a system of debt obligations of others. Safely supporting a fractional reserve system is a topic of far greater complexity than can be addressed by a simple policy, and when it comes to cryptocurrency, there is presently no entity reasonably able to bail anyone out in the event of failure. Therefore, this framework is addressed around entities that aim to maintain 100% backing of funds. There may be some firms that desire but have failed to maintain 100% backing. In this case, there are multiple solutions, including outside investment, merging with other exchanges, or enforcing a gradual restoration plan. All of these solutions are typically far better than shutting down the exchange, and there are multiple cases where they've been used successfully in the past. Proof of Reserves/Transparency/Accountability Canadians need to have visibility into the backing on an ongoing basis. The best solution for crypto-assets is a Proof of Reserve. Such ideas go back all the way to 2013, before even Mt. Gox. However, no Canadian exchange has yet implemented such a system, and only a few international exchanges (CoinFloor in the UK being an example) have. Many firms like Kraken, BitBuy, and now ShakePay use the Proof of Reserve term to refer to lesser proofs which do not actually cryptographically prove the full backing of all user assets on the blockchain. In order for a Proof of Reserve to be effective, it must actually be a complete proof, and it needs to be understood by the public that is expected to use it. Many firms have expressed reservations about the level of transparency required in a complete Proof of Reserve (for example Kraken here). While a complete Proof of Reserves should be encouraged, and there are some solutions in the works (ie TxQuick), this is unlikely to be suitable universally for all exchange operators and users. Given the limitations, and that firms also manage fiat assets, a more traditional audit process makes more sense. Some Canadian exchanges (CoinSquare, CoinBerry) have already subjected themselves to annual audits. However, these results are not presently shared publicly, and there is no guarantee over the process including all user assets or the integrity and independence of the auditor. The auditor has been typically not known, and in some cases, the identity of the auditor is protected by a NDA. Only in one case (BitBuy) was an actual report generated and publicly shared. There has been no attempt made to validate that user accounts provided during these audits have been complete or accurate. A fraudulent fractional exchange, or one which had suffered a breach they were unwilling to publicly accept (see CoinBene), could easily maintain a second set of books for auditors or simply exclude key accounts to pass an individual audit. The proposed solution would see a reporting standard which includes at a minimum - percentage of backing for each asset relative to account balances and the nature of how those assets are stored, with ownership proven by the auditor. The auditor would also publicly provide a "hash list", which they independently generate from the accounts provided by the exchange. Every exchange user can then check their information against this public "hash list". A hash is a one-way form of encryption, which fully protects the private information, yet allows anyone who knows that information already to validate that it was included. Less experienced users can take advantage of public tools to calculate the hash from their information (provided by the exchange), and thus have certainty that the auditor received their full balance information. Easy instructions can be provided. Auditors should be impartial, their identities and process public, and they should be rotated so that the same auditor is never used twice in a row. Balancing the cost of auditing against the needs for regular updates, a 6 month cycle likely makes the most sense. Hot Wallet Management The best solution for hot wallets is not to use them. CoinBerry reportedly uses multi-sig on all withdrawals, and Bitmex is an international example known for their structure devoid of hot wallets. However, many platforms and customers desire fast withdrawal processes, and human validation has a cost of time and delay in this process. A model of self-insurance or separate funds for hot wallets may be used in these cases. Under this model, a platform still has 100% of their client balance in cold storage and holds additional funds in hot wallets for quick withdrawal. Thus, the risk of those hot wallets is 100% on exchange operators and not affecting the exchange users. Since most platforms typically only have 1%-5% in hot wallets at any given time, it shouldn't be unreasonable to build/maintain these additional reserves over time using exchange fees or additional investment. Larger withdrawals would still be handled at regular intervals from the cold storage. Hot wallet risks have historically posed a large risk and there is no established standard to guarantee secure hot wallets. When the government of South Korea dispatched security inspections to multiple exchanges, the results were still that 3 of them got hacked after the inspections. If standards develop such that an organization in the market is willing to insure the hot wallets, this could provide an acceptable alternative. Another option may be for multiple exchange operators to pool funds aside for a hot wallet insurance fund. Comprehensive coverage standards must be established and maintained for all hot wallet balances to make sure Canadians are adequately protected.
Current Draft Proposal
(1) Proper multi-signature cold wallet storage. (a) Each private key is the personal and legal responsibility of one person - the “signatory”. Signatories have special rights and responsibilities to protect user assets. Signatories are trained and certified through a course covering (1) past hacking and fraud cases, (2) proper and secure key generation, and (3) proper safekeeping of private keys. All private keys must be generated and stored 100% offline by the signatory. If even one private keys is ever breached or suspected to be breached, the wallet must be regenerated and all funds relocated to a new wallet. (b) All signatories must be separate background-checked individuals free of past criminal conviction. Canadians should have a right to know who holds their funds. All signing of transactions must take place with all signatories on Canadian soil or on the soil of a country with a solid legal system which agrees to uphold and support these rules (from an established white-list of countries which expands over time). (c) 3-5 independent signatures are required for any withdrawal. There must be 1-3 spare signatories, and a maximum of 7 total signatories. The following are all valid combinations: 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7. (d) A security audit should be conducted to validate the cold wallet is set up correctly and provide any additional pertinent information. The primary purpose is to ensure that all signatories are acting independently and using best practices for private key storage. A report summarizing all steps taken and who did the audit will be made public. Canadians must be able to validate the right measures are in place to protect their funds. (e) There is a simple approval process if signatories wish to visit any country outside Canada, with a potential whitelist of exempt countries. At most 2 signatories can be outside of aligned jurisdiction at any given time. All exchanges would be required to keep a compliant cold wallet for Canadian funds and have a Canadian office if they wish to serve Canadian customers. (2) Regular and transparent solvency audits. (a) An audit must be conducted at founding, after 3 months of operation, and at least once every 6 months to compare customer balances against all stored cryptocurrency and fiat balances. The auditor must be known, independent, and never the same twice in a row. (b) An audit report will be published featuring the steps conducted in a readable format. This should be made available to all Canadians on the exchange website and on a government website. The report must include what percentage of each customer asset is backed on the exchange, and how those funds are stored. (c) The auditor will independently produce a hash of each customer's identifying information and balance as they perform the audit. This will be made publicly available on the exchange and government website, along with simplified instructions that each customer can use to verify that their balance was included in the audit process. (d) The audit needs to include a proof of ownership for any cryptocurrency wallets included. A satoshi test (spending a small amount) or partially signed transaction both qualify. (e) Any platform without 100% reserves should be assessed on a regular basis by a government or industry watchdog. This entity should work to prevent any further drop, support any private investor to come in, or facilitate a merger so that 100% backing can be obtained as soon as possible. (3) Protections for hot wallets and transactions. (a) A standardized list of approved coins and procedures will be established to constitute valid cold storage wallets. Where a multi-sig process is not natively available, efforts will be undertaken to establish a suitable and stable smart contract standard. This list will be expanded and improved over time. Coins and procedures not on the list are considered hot wallets. (b) Hot wallets can be backed by additional funds in cold storage or an acceptable third-party insurance provider with a comprehensive coverage policy. (c) Exchanges are required to cover the full balance of all user funds as denominated in the same currency, or double the balance as denominated in bitcoin or CAD using an established trading rate. If the balance is ever insufficient due to market movements, the firm must rectify this within 24 hours by moving assets to cold storage or increasing insurance coverage. (d) Any large transactions (above a set threshold) from cold storage to any new wallet addresses (not previously transacted with) must be tested with a smaller transaction first. Deposits of cryptocurrency must be limited to prevent economic 51% attacks. Any issues are to be covered by the exchange. (e) Exchange platforms must provide suitable authentication for users, including making available approved forms of two-factor authentication. SMS-based authentication is not to be supported. Withdrawals must be blocked for 48 hours in the event of any account password change. Disputes on the negligence of exchanges should be governed by case law.
Continued review of existing OSC feedback is still underway. More feedback and opinions on the framework and ideas as presented here are extremely valuable. The above is a draft and not finalized. The process of further developing and bringing a suitable framework to protect Canadians will require the support of exchange operators, legal experts, and many others in the community. The costs of not doing such are tremendous. A large and convoluted framework, one based on flawed ideas or implementation, or one which fails to properly safeguard Canadians is not just extremely expensive and risky for all Canadians, severely limiting to the credibility and reputation of the industry, but an existential risk to many exchanges. The responsibility falls to all of us to provide our insight and make our opinions heard on this critical matter. Please take the time to give your thoughts.
Before we sign off, it is also noted in Nakamoto’s email with Hearn that Satoshi envisioned a world where 0.001 BTC was equal to that of 1 euro, writing “ For example, if 0.001 is worth 1 euro, then it might be easier to change where the decimal point is displayed, so if you had 1 bitcoin it’s now displayed as 1000, and 0.001 is displayed ... Each bitcoin (1 BTC) can have a fractional part of up to 8 digits so 1 bitcoin can be divided into 100 000 000 units. Each of these bitcoin units (0.00000001 BTC) is called a satoshi. A satoshi is the smallest unit in a bitcoin. This unit is named after Satoshi Nakamoto – the alias of the bitcoin creator. There are also intermediate measurement units (microbitcoins, millibitcoins, bitcents ... Findings estimate that Bitcoin’s creator used a single computer to mine an estimated 1 million bitcoin minted in the early days. Y Bitcoin cash sv binance resultó fácil bitcoin foreign exchange / bitcoin plus500 de esfuerzo : los que las formas típicias y reinvierta el fundador para público en volúmenes que ellos les avisas. Del marco, probablemente escuchaste hablar de bitcoin code no te preocupes por completo tu comentario, cercanía y que los robots de preferencia incluso las características de cualquier ... 1 satoshi = 0.00000001 BTC. It’s necessary for a currency to be able to be divided into smaller subdivisions if it aims to act as a global medium of exchange. Fiat currencies can be divided into smaller denominations, such as the penny for the British pound or the cent for the US dollar. Bitcoin, as a digital currency, can also be divided into smaller denominations. As defined by the Bitcoin ... 1 satoshi = 0.00000001 BTC. It’s necessary for a currency to be able to be divided into smaller subdivisions if it aims to act as a global medium of exchange. Fiat currencies can be divided into smaller denominations, such as the penny for the British pound or the cent for the US dollar. Bitcoin, as a digital currency, can also be divided into smaller denominations. As defined by the Bitcoin ... 1 BTC entspricht 1.000 mBTC (Milli-Bitcoin) 1 mBTC entspricht 1.000 bits 1 bit entspricht 100 satoshi (kleinste Einheit) Dieser Bitcoin-Rechner soll die häufige Frage “Wie viel ist das in Euro?” möglichst bequem beantworten. Tipp: Diese Seite lässt sich auch direkt mit einem bestimmten Betrag aufrufen:
OPEN AN ACCOUNT: Binance: https://www.binance.com/en/register?ref=13583390 Coinsquare : coinsquare.com/register?r=5VqRt In this video I will guide you STEP B... Binance website https://bit.ly/3cB0MNu Faucetpay link https://bit.ly/39BJXQO Crytpo faucet every 5 mins https://bit.ly/3bGSqE7 Bitearns website faucet https:... bitcoinclix website https://bit.ly/3bq4gS8 Binance website https://bit.ly/3cB0MNu Faucetpay link https://bit.ly/39BJXQO Crytpo faucet every 5 mins https://bit.ly/3bGSqE7 https://coinmarketcap.com/ Craig Wright Claims to Be Satoshi in Critical Response to CFTC on Ethereum https://bit.ly/2ts8vcw Binance STILL havent enabled Seg... Nesse vídeo você aprenderá a realizar depósitos e saques na binance , acho que era isso , pronto falei . https://www.binance.com/?ref=10273283 Bei uns auf diesen Kanal findet Ihr " 6 Tage " in der Woche Informationen über Aktuelle News zu Kryptowährungen gerne beantworten wir Euch Eure fragen zu die... Binance Tutorial deutsch In diesem Video erfährst du wie man auf der Plattform Binance Kryptowährungen handeln kann und gegen Bitcoins kaufen und verkaufen k... Website https://bit.ly/3a5PnDO Faucet pay link https://bit.ly/39BJXQO Binance link https://bit.ly/34Bh46B Giottus link https://bit.ly/2xigr5t CoinDCX link ht... Binance website https://bit.ly/3cB0MNu bitcoin faucet website https://bit.ly/2xF52Nt Auto faucet Earning Website https://bit.ly/2RY9jlO Bitcoinvigil earning website