BitcoinWiki - All About Cryptocurrency

Why did I build AmputatorBot?

Why did I build AmputatorBot?
AmputatorBot.com | Remove AMP from URLs in just one click! - More info
Open-sourced on GitHub - More info
Summon AmputatorBot by mentioning it like this: u/AmputatorBot

Why AMP is a threat to the Open Web

What is AMP?
AMP is an open-source web component framework developed by the AMP Open Source Project, first announced by Google in 2015 as a reaction to Facebook’s Instant Articles and Apple News. While it was originally aimed at accelerating mobile pages (hence AMP), it’s now a much broader project aimed at improving the UX of websites, stories, ads and mail. The AMP framework consists of three components: AMP HTML, which is standard HTML markup with web components; AMP JavaScript, which manages resource loading; and AMP caches, which serves and validates AMP pages.
In plain English: AMP is Google’s attempt at making pages (and more) faster. They did a good job, pages built with the AMP framework will normally load faster. However, as this article explains, you won’t notice much of a difference unless the AMP library is served using the AMP cache, but more on that later.
The controversies with cached AMP pages
The AMP format is itself not much of a problem. In fact, we should applaud search engines that give ranking preference to fast-loading pages like AMP, but four aspects of its implementation are flawed:
  1. Google mobile Search’s Top Stories carousel has a premium position above of all other results, which is only accessible for AMP pages. These pages have to use a technology that was build and maintained mostly by Google (of the top 10 contributors to the AMP project on GitHub, 9 are Google employees), are then served by Google from their infrastructure and placed within a Google controlled user experience. And since this carousel generates a lot of clicks and revenue, publishers are left no choice but to embrace AMP. This has the effect of further reinforcing Google’s dominance of the Web. Fortunately, Google has announced that it's working on opening up the Top Stories carousel to non-AMP pages in 2021.
  2. The biggest performance boost doesn’t come from the AMP framework, but from preloading the page. It begs the question: Should preloading really be exclusive to AMP? They could introduce a way for publishers to allow or disallow preloading and if Google sees fit, they could preload those pages too, alongside AMP.
  3. When a user navigates from Google to a piece of content Google has recommended (or when a user clicks on a shared cached AMP link), they are, unwittingly, remaining within Google’s ecosystem and the publisher’s domain is obscured by the google.com/amp prefix. To work around this Google introduced Signed HTTP Exchanges ([Draft], [1], [2]), a web-standard that allows the browser to display the original site's URL, instead of the actual one (the one with the google.com/prefix). This would solve the original issue, but while doing so it introduced new ones (e.g. it obfuscates the fact that they're delivering the AMP page you're visiting). Interestingly enough, Google's Chrome already has support for this technology, but parties not involved with AMP are not so enthusiastic: Mozilla has deemed it a harmful web standard [2], and Apple has taken a similar stance.
  4. Google’s entire business model is about collecting as much personal data as possible, AMP is just another tool to do so. As described in Google’s Support article:
“When you use the Google AMP Viewer, Google and the publisher that made the AMP page may each collect data about you.”
The controversies with non-cached AMP pages
To be clear, the above flaws are only with AMP pages cached by Google (or another party like Bing or Cloudflare) but there are also plenty of pages simply utilizing the AMP framework, recognized by URLs such as bbc.com/news/amp/. However, these are also problematic, mainly because there's only a small performance improvement when AMP pages aren't cached and AMP pages tend to be less feature-rich and less diverse than their originals. And in some edge cases, it breaks stuff.
One could argue that the more popular the AMP framework becomes, the more AMP threatens the open web. That said, it should be clear that the biggest problem lies with the cached AMP pages.
AMP is open source, but that doesn't make it holy. Or as Ferdy Christant puts it quite nicely in his blog:
Google’s main defense is that AMP is open source. Which isn’t just a weak defense, it’s no defense at all. I can open source a plan for genocide. The term “open source” is meaningless if the thing that is open source is harmful.
Just so we’re clear, I’m not claiming Google or the AMP project is evil (hell, they might even have good intentions!), but the fact is that AMP and it's implementation have some major flaws that threaten the Open Web. And as long as that's the case, AmputatorBot will be there to remove AMP from your URLs.
AmputatorBot scans for AMP pages on Reddit and replies with the canonical version
Learn more
Up next for the nerds among us:
  • AmputatorBot.com
  • Automatic working subreddits
  • Non-working subreddits
  • Changelog
  • Opt-out & opt-back-in
  • Browser extension
  • Support the project by donating, giving feedback, summoning the bot or spreading the word

AmputatorBot.com

Remove AMP in just one click with www.AmputatorBot.com! This is a free online tool (no ads) to remove AMP from your URLs. All you have to do is to copy paste an AMP URL, click the conversion-button and that's all! For more (background) info, check out this post. Here's a quick (no but literally) demo:
A demo of the AMP-removal process over at AmputatorBot.com
Alternatively, you can do it even quicker by doing this:
https://amputatorbot.com/?https://www.google.com/amp/s/electrek.co/2018/06/19/tesla-model-3-assembly-line-inside-tent-elon-musk/amp/
It's build up like this:
https://amputatorbot.com + /? + https://www.google.com/amp/s/electrek.co/2018/06/19/tesla-model-3-assembly-line-inside-tent-elon-musk/amp/

Automatic working subreddits

u/amputatorbot currently works automatically in a select number of subreddits: Afghanistan, Africa, against5G, againstRFID, amputatorbot, anime_titties, Argentina, Assyria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bosnia, Brasil, Bulgaria, Business, CenturyClubStairs, Chile, Chodi, chrome, Colombia, conspiracy, CorpFree, cyberpunk, Cuba, DeAmazon, DebunkThis, DeFacebook, deGoogle, deMicrosoft, economy, Ecuador, entertainment, Environment, europe, Europe, europrivacy, FakeNews, Features, Fijian, firefox, France, freesoftware, gamernews, Germany, Greece, Guyana, hacking, helpmefind, hockey, HumanRights, Hungary, ID_news, indiaspeaks, initFreedom, Iranian, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kerala, Kurdistan, LeopardsAteMyFace, LevantineWar, MachineLearning, Malaysia, Mexico, MiddleEastNews, MideastPeace, Moldova, Nepal, NewsOfTheWeird, Nicaragua, NorthKoreaNews, Oceania, OnGuardForThee, Pakistan, Palestine, pcgaming, PeerTube, Philippines, Piracy, Poland, praisetheeditor, privacy, PuertoRico, robotics, Russia, Scotland, security, selfhosted, seo, Serbia, singapore, socialism, spacex, Spain, suckless, Switzerland, Syria, tech, technology, TechnologyDetox, test, TrueCrime, TrueCrimeDiscussion, TrueReddit, Turkey, Turkey, Ukraina, Ukraine, UkrainianConflict, UnresolvedMysteries, upliftingnews, Uruguay, USA, Venezuela, web_design, Westpapua, whatisthisthing, worldnews, Yemen and YemeniCrisis.
Feel free to hit me up with suggestions for subreddits to add!
You can summon the bot almost everywhere else by typing: u/AmputatorBot, more info here.

Non-working subreddits

AmputatorBot doesn't work in these subreddits android, androiddev, armenia, AskHistorians, askscience, AskScienceDiscussion, audio, australia, awfuleverything, bayarea, beer, belgium, bitcoin, books, canada, CanadaPolitics, cars, CCW, childfree, China, collapse, conservative, Cringetopia, croatia, CryptoCurrency, DataHoarder, disneyvacation, economics, ELI5, facepalm, flying, Futurology, gadgets, Games, gaming, gatesopencomeonin, geopolitics, Georgia, GlobalTalk, google, history, India, insaneparents, insanepeoplefacebook, instantkarma, iphone, iran, ireland, kitchener, korea, meme, moviedetails, movies, news, newzealand, nextfuckinglevel, nottheonion, oklahoma, pcmasterrace, Pete_Buttigieg, Philosophy, pihole, PoliticalDiscussion, politics, popheads, programming, raisedbynarcissists, rareinsults, Romania, science, SeattleWA, Sikh, SouthAfrica, space, survivor, television, Thailand, thenetherlands, TikTokCringe, TIL_Uncensored, todayilearned, trashy, tumblr, TwoXChromosomes, ukpolitics, unitedkingdom, unpopularopinion, USANews, warplaneporn, WatchPeopleDieInside, wellthatsucks, whatcouldgowrong, worldevents, worldpolitics, YouShouldKnow and almost all subreddits moderated by u/BotDefense or u/BotTerminator for diverse reasons. When you summon the bot there, you'll receive a DM with the canonical URL instead.p
If you're moderating a subreddit that is incorrectly listed here or if you would like AmputatorBot to work in your subreddit that's using u/BotDefense or u/BotTerminator please contact me.

Changelog

Check out the changelog here. Latest update: 22/08/2020

Opt out & opt back in

The bot works automatically in the subreddits mentioned above and manually using mentions.
Opt out: If you want to prevent the bot from replying to your comments and submissions, click here to opt out.
Opt back in: Did you opt-out and regret it? NP! Click here to opt back in.
Note: If you want to opt out from AmputatorBot on Twitter, please contact me or block it.

Browser-extension

Check out this browser-extension by Daniel Aleksandersen: 'Redirect AMP to HTML', it makes it that every time you click an AMP page, you will be redirected to the canonical page instead. In other words, it does the the same as u/AmputatorBot and AmputatorBot.com, but fully automatic. I can't recommend this one enough!

Support the project

.. By summoning the bot: If you've spotted an AMP URL on Reddit and u/AmputatorBot seems absent, you can summon the bot by mentioning u/AmputatorBot in a reply to the comment or submission containing the AMP URL. You'll receive a confirmation through PM. For more details, check out this post!
.. By giving feedback: Most of the new features were made after suggestions from you guys, so hit me up if you have any feedback! You can contact me on Reddit, fill an issue or make a pull request.
.. By sponsoring: The bot and website cost approximately €8.26 a month to host and while that might not seem like much, it adds up. All donations will be used ONLY to pay for hosting. You can specify any amount you want, but please keep in mind that I only want to try to cover some of the costs. Thank you so much! - https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=EU6ZFKTVT9VH2
.. By spreading the word: In the end, the only goal of AmputatorBot is to allow people to have an informed choice. You can help by spreading the word in whatever way you deem the most appropriate.

From the bottom of my heart, thank you so much for the tremendous support you've given me and AmputatorBot <3

https://preview.redd.it/fzhy8jedu6e51.png?width=3890&format=png&auto=webp&s=581561e0e267bb53ee3961a5e894633f8d6ff73f
submitted by Killed_Mufasa to AmputatorBot [link] [comments]

Australians, you need to start buying as much crypto as you can.

I’m Australian, this isn’t meant to be an alarmist or sensationalist post, but the economic situation in our country is a lot more serious than most of us think.
First off, the current economic situation.
Simply put, our economy is fucked. Our housing market is dangerously overleveraged and because of policies by our government at the time, we never experienced the correction the US and most of the rest of the world did during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. And now the chickens are coming home to roost. Australians are up to their eyeballs in debt, almost half of the housing loans are interest only, it’s the reason the Reserve Bank of Australia hasn’t raised the interest rates since 2016. Because as soon as they do, even by 0.01%, tens of thousands of Australians are going to default on their mortgages. It’s no secret that our housing market is one of the most expensive in the world, and anyone living in our country already knows this. The market value of Australian homes is 4 times the GDP of the country. Our housing market is beyond the point of saving and the bubble is about to pop. And while our mainstream media is trying to convince us that it will deflate slowly, history paints a different picture.
And that’s just the start of our problems. It’s no secret that China is our biggest trading partner. We rely on China more than any other developed country in the world. And what is currently happening on the greater global stage? Our most important military ally has engaged in a trade war with China, and the effects of that trade war are starting to be felt. Chinese stocks are in freefall, and that’s only going to be the beginning of the negative effects from Trump’s hardline approach to dealing with China. It doesn’t take a genius to see that this is going to have a devastating effect on our economy.
Our biggest trading partner is having a financial gunfight with the USA, which is going to result in them buying less of our stuff. And still that isn’t the end of it. Mining is down. Commodities prices are down. Our manufacturing sector is almost dead. The only thing we have going for us at the moment is agriculture and that can’t prop up the entire economy. You wanna turn white? Read this article from last year. Our economy is teetering on the precipice.
You think I’m being dramatic? Well even the Australian MSM can no longer ignore it. With articles like this appearing almost on the daily. Our dollar is in serious trouble, anyone who knows the slightest bit about TA go look at the graphs in that article. Our country is in serious economic trouble. And we don’t know shit about it because our media is a duopoly that makes most of its money from their real estate arms. All signs are pointing to our dollar about to be worth a hell of a lot less than it currently is.
What can we do?
Since this is the crypto subreddit the solution to this impending economic shitstorm should be painfully obvious. Buy fucking Bitcoin. Not the solution for the country, for you. The country isn’t going to do shit for anyone of us except saddle us with debt and a cooked economy that is going to take generations to get out of, if ever. So we should be diversifying. Sure buying gold probably isn’t a stupid idea either, but if you think that is proof against state intervention, read a history book. Even then, gold still needs to be converted into cash to be useful, and anyone paying attention can see that Australia is gearing up for a war on cash that borders on tyrannical. The only way for us as individuals to protect our wealth at the moment is to convert it into cryptocurrency.
But Bitcoin is low at the moment!
No shit. But if you think it’s going to stay that way you are 1. In the wrong subreddit, and 2. No paying attention to the macro factors of crypto. Wall St is gearing up to enter. The bank that runs the world is getting involved. And not just American banks. Bitcoin may be low now but if you know anything about market cycles, you know that it’ll be back. Here is a good comparison of BTC a few years ago as opposed to now. It’s almost at the point where it’s irresponsible not to be buying bitcoin, and I’m not the only one that holds this opinion. Worst case scenario, bitcoin falls to USD 3k. What do you think is going to happen after that? Bitcoin and crypto aren’t going anywhere and you’re kidding yourself if you think that the value of bitcoin isn’t going to be much higher in the years to come.
Of course the RBA is telling people that Bitcoin is dead, probably because they don’t want Australians to dump their soon to be worthless fiat currency. In fact one any given day you’ll see a bunch of anti-crypto propaganda on our MSM. The same MSM that has been telling us all to buy as many houses as we can for the last 20 years. The same MSM that up until now hasn’t said shit about the direction our economy is heading in.
The writing’s on the wall people. If we keep our wealth in AUD it’s going to be worth considerably less sooner rather than later. Our property sector is going to crash, our dollar is going to crash, our personal wealth is going to be stripped away from us. If you want to avoid this, if you want to protect your wealth, ensure a future that isn’t financial hardship, then we really only have one choice. Buy bitcoin. Personally I am converting half my pay each week into BTC and just holding it. Not putting it into alts. Just btc. I’d advise you do the same as well. I understand that this sounds super risky. But if you read the articles I’ve linked to in this post I’m sure you’ll see that the only risky move is doing nothing. This isn’t a joke or a false alarm. The notion that our economy has always been fine up until now isn’t valid anymore. If you want to protect your personal wealth and purchasing power in the next few years, you really should be buying as much btc as you can while it is this low. This is what crypto is for, avoiding the negative financial downturns of specific countries. It’s a globally traded commodity that is accessible by anyone with a computer. Our economy tanking isn’t going to affect the price one bit.
I hope some of this has been useful. Listen to me, don’t listen to me, it’s your choice. But this is the digital age, there’s no excuse for ignorance anymore.
submitted by Sendmyabar to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Useful LoL websites and software | 2017

Intro: I saw the original thread back in 2015 and thought it needed some updating to the list since it's been over 2 years since that thread was posted and alot of the websites have been shutdown or closed and many new ones have came online. So I thought it would be a good time to update the list and add new websites to it. Credits for the original thread go to thepanthergaming.
Personal Stats ( Summoner Information)
Bitcoin Giveaway Discord Channel to 10 lucky winners: https://discord.gg/ZymnAAb
Champion Stats & Bans & Counters
Builds
News/LCS/Pro Scene
Guides and League Information
Replay Softwares
YouTube Guides
Official Riot
If there is any website, software or youtubers missing just put them in the comments
submitted by lolporocom to leagueoflegends [link] [comments]

Atomic Wallet Coin is SHOCKINGLY Undervalued ~750k Market Cap


Hey, /cryptomoonshots! Its my first post here (woo!)

I’ve been lucky enough to have found QNT and LTO from this subreddit. I’ve found a third project that looks extremely interesting and I’d like to share my research here. My background is in digital marketing and this project stood out to me, especially from a marketing and biz dev perspective, which I’ll share below.

Feel free to correct the record if I’ve posted anything incorrect and I will update it (I’m a human being, I make mistakes, okay!) Additionally, the CEO is constantly answering questions on Telegram!

The project is Atomic Wallet Coin. $AWC



TL;DR IS AT THE BOTTOM. ALWAYS DYOR. NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE.

WHAT IS ATOMIC WALLET?

Atomic Wallet is a non custodial crypto wallet for desktop and mobile. Users can exchange and buy 300+ cryptocurrencies from a single interface. The wallet can perform cross-chain atomic swaps.

It’s an exchange built into a wallet.

Shapeshift and Changelly are partnered with Atomic to add additional currency swap pairs + fair rates. Fiat/crypto gateway is supported directly through the app.

Atomic has over 40,000 monthly active users and boasts 150k+ downloads.

The project is one of the first to migrate over to Binance chain. They are currently in the process of getting listed on Binance DEX. Half of their supply will remain ERC-20 and the other half migrated to BEP-2.
https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1119047237076541440
https://twitter.com/atomicwallet/status/1119242545706434560
https://github.com/Atomicwallet
http://atomicwallet.io

20 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES AND CEO WITH PREVIOUS TRACK RECORD

Konstantin Gladych self funded Atomic Wallet with his own funds. He previously was the CEO and co-founder of Changelly, a fully compliant crypto exchange service which has been around since 2013 and has serviced over 2 million users across the world.

“Changelly's trading algorithms are integrated into large and reputable trading platforms, such as Binance, Bittrex, Poloniex and HitBTC” - Wikipedia

Konstantin holds a PhD in data science/machine learning and left his CEO position at Changelly to develop Atomic Wallet full time.

The team currently consists of 20 full-time employees - 6 developers, 7 support and community managers, 6 marketing and business development, and 1 designer.

https://linkedin.com/in/gladkos
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changelly
https://www.crunchbase.com/person/konstantin-gladych
https://community.binance.org/t/proposal-for-listing-atomic-wallet-token-awc-on-binance-dex/2093

APPROVED WALLET BY NEO FOUNDATION, ZCASH, GEMINI, LISK, AND OTHERS

Atomic Wallet is trusted by many household names in crypto. This does NOT mean Atomic is “partnered” with these companies, however it adds massive credibility to AWC considering they trust it enough to add it as a recommended wallet on their websites.

Take a look for yourself:

https://neo.org/client
https://z.cash/upgrade/sapling/
https://gemini.com/dolla
https://twitter.com/LiskHQ/status/1121357080173133824

95,000+ UNIQUE VISITORS PER MONTH TO ATOMICWALLET.IO


traffic statistics for atomicwallet.io [pic]

Atomic Wallet has an A+ marketing team.

Here’s a quick snapshot of how well atomicwallet.io is performing (see above). They’ve gone from 0 to 95k unique visitors per month in well under one year. Purely from Google search traffic. This doesn’t include traffic from Twitter, Facebook, and other sources. It also was during the worst bear market in crypto history, when these search terms would be at a low.

Let’s see how Atomic Wallet measures up against some well-known sites:

myetherwallet.com 802k/mo
Ripple.com 580k/mo
Ledger.com 401k/mo
Exodus.io 172k/mo
Coinmama.com 165k/mo
Shapeshift.io 149k/mo
Electrum.org 125k/mo
Atomicwallet.io 95k/mo
Freewallet.org 70.9k/mo
Trustwallet.com (Binance owned) 24k/mo

Atomic Wallet has virtually caught up to or exceeded many of it’s competitors in terms of traffic in well under a year. Turning this traffic into downloads/new users is child’s play. It’s one of the reasons this company with 20+ employees is already profitable in just a few short months.

So, how is this site getting so many visitors?

Here are a few search terms that Atomicwallet.io ranks on page 1 for on Google.

Open up a new tab, visit Google.com and see for yourself!

“EOS wallet”
“ETH wallet”
“BNB wallet”
“Buy Bitcoin”
“Ethereum wallet”
“XRP wallet”
“Ripple wallet”
“DASH wallet”

+27,100+ additional search terms that bring in a total of 94,700 visitors per month. Purely. from. Google. Search.

traffic statistics for atomicwallet.io [pic]

$AWC TOKENOMICS

Atomic’s website does a thorough job of explaining the tokenomic details of the $AWC coin. The tokenomics mirror the standard use-cases you would expect from an exchange token (Bibox, KCS, etc.) The CEO recently expressed his interest in adding staking rewards for AWC holders. He is also exploring the idea of having IEO-type listings for Atomic Wallet users/holders in the future. New projects could theoretically debut directly on their platform and be traded against $AWC, similar to how Bitmax runs IEOs.

Currently, 90% of the circulating supply is locked up and Konstantin has announced his intention to buy back and burn tokens with company profits.

Here are a few of the use cases for $AWC:

The team is looking to make $AWC directly tradeable from the app in the future.

With thousands of new Atomic Wallet users per month, this is an incredibly exciting feature.

https://atomicwallet.io/token

FINAL THOUGHTS

Atomic Wallet will grow to an active user base in the millions. Every crypto holder needs a wallet. Atomic provides a user-friendly wallet for newbies getting their feet wet in crypto. Most newbs aren’t going out and buying a LedgeTrezor right away. Building an exchange directly into the wallet provides a safe and easy way to trade crypto assets.

The number of cryptocurrency users and addresses are growing exponentially. Atomic wallet was created during the bear market. They are perfectly positioned to take a massive share of the increasingly competitive crypto wallet market during a bull market/alt coin season.

In my opinion, they’re on track to be the #1 desktop/mobile multi-crypto wallet.

As someone who is experienced in search engine/digital marketing, these guys have an ace marketing team. Even beating or ranking just below Coinbase for many competitive Google search terms in just a few short months.

I have zero doubts that they will blow past every single one of their roadmap goals, especially as Bitcoin continues to climb in value and more people start buying crypto.

Despite short term fluctuations in price, Atomic will continue to onboard thousands of new users every single month. The traffic numbers don’t lie. The Google search rankings don’t lie. Atomic will need to be wise about how they monetize this traffic.

The company is already profitable. The CEO is well connected and has proved he is highly competent in creating and successfully running a crypto exchange.

I have a lot more info to share about this project if there is interest, I’ll post a part 2 or a follow-up in the comments.

A profitable company of this caliber with 20 full-time employees isn’t justified at a ~$750k market cap.

https://atomicwallet.io/roadmap-for-2019
https://medium.com/@mccannatron/12-graphs-that-show-just-how-early-the-cryptocurrency-market-is-653a4b8b2720

ADDITIONAL LINKS AND FURTHER READING

  1. https://atomicwallet.io/
  2. https://twitter.com/atomicwallet
  3. https://t.me/atomicwalletchat
  4. https://github.com/Atomicwallet
  5. https://www.coinbureau.com/review/atomic-wallet/
  6. https://community.binance.org/t/proposal-for-listing-atomic-wallet-token-awc-on-binance-dex/2093

TL;DR


Currently at 750k market cap

2.7MM market cap is a 3.6x from here.
5M market cap is a 6.6x from here.
8MM market cap is a 10.6x from here.

DYOR.

submitted by key_mnk_ to CryptoMoonShots [link] [comments]

Summary of how Wikileaks and Assange were compromised between Oct and Nov 2016 (From Endchan screenshot)

Link to image http://i.imgur.com/12sDLZA.png Link to mempool graph http://i.imgur.com/JZbFHri.jpg
Unfortunately endchan POLAK forum (unmoderated) was hacked in December and all threads were lost. I still have a lot saved from the png anon references, but a ton of info was lost in the hack and lost because archive.is is compromised and didn't save a lot of very interesting stuff. The png had an archive of a few threads with a ton of info regarding how to find the keys. I only became aware of this effort in late november, so I have no connection to any 'groups' I simply spectated.
EDIT: Here's some good info. This is all I could find for internet outage on dec 19, so something definitely did happen. This doesn't say it was very large, but still. Pretty similar to the well documented one that happened on Oct 17 though.
Also, here is a megaupload link for docs.png which contains a lot of threads that are now lost that have a lot of good info on some instructions on how to decode the blockchain to find the files.
Here is the summary of what reportedly happened to Wikileaks and Assange beginning on Oct 17 ending Dec 19. The summary was written Dec 21.
TLDR: Blockchain has backups from since 2013. It also has checksum hashes and upload proofs for all files. There is a lot of stuff in there that triggers xkeyscore or echelon and is virtually impossible to share or talk about. Three months have been spent trying to teach others how to recreate the steps. There is a noticable pattern. Group finds it, tries teaching others how to do it, then everything is deleted and everyone goes silent. Then a new group finds the breadcrumbs and starts over. It's not clear what happened yesterday or what will happen the next, but there are people from all over the world investigating. At this point there is no part of the internet where it is allowed.
Oct 17: Strange Activity is noticed at the embassy. First responders investigate, periscope is killed, twitter goes full Orwell, archive.org is changed to no longer save sites properly. Something that is instantly deleted is posted several times on plebbit, halfchan, fullchan, onion links and darkweb. It is all wiped. People regroup in several places since there is no way to post without threads getting deleted or sites going down. A lot end up here (endchan).
Oct 21: As the director of Wikileaks is dying a huge ddos takes down most sites. Blockchain is attacked. Lots of stuff gets deleted.
Oct 24: Someone finds Wikileaks backups in the blockchain and posts instructions and code to decode the data.
Oct 27: The deletions get too severe. Sites begin being flooded with illegal content or going down. People create their own private channel to discuss progress. The keys and all hidden data in the blockchain are found. The group pushes the information into a few cryptocurrencies. Blockchain is flooded. Mempool graphs have a giant spike on Oct 27. Bitcoin soft fork begins. Onion threads with the info get instantly wiped. Everyone involved go silent except a couple people. This group is called "group 1" and finding the keys is called first impact.
Late Oct: People realize that unlocking the data gets you Xkeyscore'd, cutting off your internet, attacking sites until the stuff is deleted.
Early Nov: Focus changes to teaching others how to find the information on airgapped computers to avoid detection and sacrificing public channels of communication. Threads that have progress start being flooded with illegal content every morning.
Nov 8: Wikileaks.org begins changing. Some files are deleted. Checksum hashes no longer match old backups.
At some point in Nov, the IRS asks bitcoin to give them the identities of all transactions. Copies of the blockchain start showing 'undecodable' or empty transactions not seen before.
Mid Nov: 'Group 2' doxxes the people pretending to be Wikileaks and tried to spread more detailed instructions for getting the files. Posts did not last more than a few minutes. It seems like they tried to push to blockchain but apparently the data didn't make it in. Group 2 goes silent. This day is second impact.
Nov 25: Third impact. Files are found by a third group that doesn't seem to be American. They post instructions all over the place, but nothing lasts more than a few hours. They tried to encode the data into the blockchain but it's not clear if it made it in. This day is the second spike on the mempool graph.
Some point after this, people agree to stop using the endchan thread because the admins keep having to deal with too much illegal content flooding and the site going down. It becomes clear that any channel used to discuss this is 'sacrificed', in other words, it starts going down a lot, mods are flipped, deletion, illegal spams, etc. This[endchan] thread is created for this reason. You can figure out what is special about this thread if you read the logs in the png. Most progress after this point is on logless channels on the darkweb. Most of these eventually go down. The endchan thread is eventually locked. Everyone that posted is blocked to this day. It is then deleted.
Dec: Planning for d-day begins. All holding groups spend all of december teaching others how to find the files.
Mid Dec: Someone alledgedly speaking on behaf of applebaum posts links to code he wrote to find and repair keys in memory. New teams are told to use it. Obama talks of cyber war with Russia.
Dec 18: Files are found in Japan. A meshnet using PS3s is used to spread the files, but this doesn't last long.
Dec 19: D-Day. Shit is happening all over the world. Many ISPs, torrent sites, and other sites go down. Wikileaks releases new insurance file. UK, EC, and US insurance files from before no longer show up on wikileaks.org unless you have IPs from specific countries. One of the biggest internet outages in history and I cannot find a single news site that reported it. Holding groups go silent. Some people try to regroup with their old teams.
submitted by snowmandan to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Reminder: many of the bitcoin core developers are employed by Blockstream, who is owned by AXA, whose CEO is Henri de Castries, who is also the Chairman of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group, a group of world elites with "control of the world’s resources and its money"

Is that who you want controlling the future of Bitcoin?
Links where you can verify everything in the title:
Are you a crypto-anarchist or are you a slave to the world banking elite? Doesn't anyone remember what Bitcoin was supposed to be?
Edit:
Corrections
submitted by sou-ght to btc [link] [comments]

All About Zcoin

All About Zcoin

https://preview.redd.it/hixbz9f3lxm31.jpg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=43896de84a3693d840c84057c0314af71718f0a3
What is Zcoin?
Zcoin, also referred to as XZC or Zerocoin, is an open source decentralized cryptocurrency that provides privacy and anonymity for its users when making transactions.
To achieve its privacy and anonymity, Zcoin uses zero-knowledge proofs via the Zerocoin protocol, which is at this moment in time one of the most cited cryptography papers.
According to Wikipedia, in cryptography, a zero-knowledge proof or zero-knowledge protocol is a method in which one party proves to another party (the verifier) that a given statement is actually true.
In other words, in a transaction with Bitcoin or Ethereum or something similar, your transaction history is always linked to your coins by default, leaving you vulnerable. All it takes is one link to your personal information or IP to find out the origin of the coins.
However, when you trade with Zcoin’s Zercoin feature, your transaction history is not linked to the actual coins. Only the receiver and sender know that the funds have actually been exchanged.

How Does Zcoin Work?

Zcoin works on the Zerocoin protocol by enforcing Zero-knowledge proofs. Here are the components of Zcoin to explain how it works.
Mint: When sending a private transaction with Zcoin, all you need to do is select the number of coins you want to mint. Post that your normal Zcoin balance would reduce automatically and you will be credited with new coins and no transaction history. In essence, your old coins are burned cryptographically, which prevents anyone else from using them again and being directed to your transaction history. You get credited with new coins with no history, while the total supply is maintained.
For now, you can only mint in denominations of 1, 10, 25, 50 and 100. If you choose ‘100’ coins to be minted, for instance, you will instantly be credited with 100 new Zcoins with no history attached to them.
  • Spend: When you want to make a private transaction, you will be required to use these ‘100’ newly minted coins. From this pool of funds, you can now send any amount in any denomination to anyone anonymously because no history is attached to it.
  • Repeat: You can ‘mint’ and ‘send’ Zcoins any number of times at anytime with your privacy intact.

Zcoin’s Vision

Zcoin seeks to improve things that Bitcoin hasn’t been able to so far, some of which include fungibility, privacy and miner’s centralization.
Users of Zcoin can enjoy full fungibility and privacy along with demolishing miner’s centralization by implementing a better proof of work algorithm called MTP.
Total Zcoin supply
Only 21 million units of Zcoin will ever be produced. Currently, there are about 3.4 million units in circulation, with the rest yet to be mined.
But the total supply has increased by 388450 XZC units after a Zcoin code bug, which the team refused to roll back due to economic reasons, which is why the total supply stands at approximately 21.4 million.
Every 10 minutes, a Zcoin block is mined and 50 coins are generated, making 72,000 Zcoins per day.
Market cap of Zcoin
According to CoinMarketCap, the total circulating supply of Zcoin is 5,757,841 XZC and the current unit price is $9.6. That makes the market cap approximately $55 million*.*
https://preview.redd.it/qw2igvupoxm31.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=cfaa195d5d75ba8f20e5894d0351b2eabf76825a

How To Buy Zcoin Cryptocurrency

If you are looking to get some Zcoin, here is a list of resources where it can be bought from.
  • Atomars – Supported pairs are XZC/BTC, XZC/ETH, XZC/USDT
  • Binance - Supported pairs are XZC/BTC, XZC/ETH, XZC/BNB
  • Huobi - Supported pairs are XZC/BTC, XZC/ETH
  • Bittrex - Supported pairs are XZC/BTC
  • Cryptopia - Supported pairs are XZC/BTC, XZC/LTC, XZC/DOGE
  • CoinExchange - Supported pairs are XZC/BTC
  • LiteBit.eu - Supported pairs are XZC/EUR
Note: At the moment, buying XZC in fiat currencies such as USD, EUR, or GBP is quite difficult.
https://preview.redd.it/rrwao97woxm31.png?width=1460&format=png&auto=webp&s=442bf152f86a63300c5c4a029bb07369a69e6f70
Zcash:
Zcash is a decentralized and open-source peer-to-peer cryptocurrency that provides strong privacy protections. It was created as a fork of Bitcoin and, like bitcoin, it also has a hard limit of 21 million coins. Unlike bitcoin, however, Zcash offers total privacy for its users maintaining the absolute anonymity behind each transaction along with the parties and the amounts involved in it.
PIVX:
PIVX, which stands for Private Instant Verified Transaction, is an open-source, decentralized form of digital online money that uses blockchain technology. This makes it easy to transfer all around the world in an instant with low transaction fees with market leading security & privacy. PIVX focuses on privacy, security, anonymity, and instant transactions.
Monero:
Monero is a fast, private, secure and untraceable digital currency system that uses a special kind of cryptography to keep all its transactions 100% unlinkable and untraceable. With Monero, you are your own bank. You can spend safely, knowing that others cannot see your balances or track your activity.
Some Zcoin misconceptions
There are some misconceptions regarding Zcoin:
  • Some believe that, since Zcoin has a trusted setup that allows indefinite minting of coins, it is not safe. This is untrue. Of course, to start with they had to use a trusted setup because they have an auditable total coin supply that prevents any form of cheating. This downside however, is being taken care of by removing this trusted setup in the near future and when that happens, Zcoin will be one of the serious coins to count on for privacy.
  • Zcoin has been considered as Zcash’s fork but that is also not true because Zcash is based on the Zerocash protocol whereas Zcoin was started from scratch by applying Zerocoin tech.
Now that some of the Zcoin’s misconceptions have been cleared, here’s a look into its future.

Zcoin’s Future & Roadmap

Zcoin’s future is quite promising and worth watching based on these interesting milestones on their roadmap:
  • Zcoin is the first coin to implement MTP proof of work, which makes it possible for general masses to mine Zcoin with GPUs and CPUs. MTP doesn’t allow costly ASIC-like miners to mine XZC coins.
  • Zcoin is also implementing Znodes to make their cryptocurrency more decentralized and anonymous. These Znodes will be like masternodes and facilitate anonymous transactions as making an anonymous transaction single-handedly is quite computational.
  • Znodes will be incentivized by reducing some portion of the founder’s reward. Also, the surplus funds that get generated from the founder’s reward reduction would be used for hiring new developers and increased marketing efforts.
  • Another agenda on their roadmap is to bring inbuilt Tor or some IP obfuscation mechanism that will make it completely anonymous.
  • Apart from these, some innovative and exciting things like sigma protocol, decentralized anonymous voting and Zcoin Labs are on their roadmap, making this project worth checking out.
  • Last but not least, its recent price is a good indicator of its healthy market sentiment and shows that there are people who understand this project’s worth. Just to put things into perspective – a unit of Zcoin was priced $2 in March 2017 and now it is $37*.*

Zcoin Team & Progress

Zerocoin is a cryptocurrency proposed by professor Matthew D. Green, a professor of Johns Hopkins University, and graduate students Ian Miers and Christina Garman. It was proposed as an extension to the Bitcoin protocol that would add true cryptographic anonymity to Bitcoin transactions.
Zerocoin was first implemented into a fully functional cryptocurrency and released to the public by Poramin Insom, the lead developer, as Zcoin in September 2016.
Some of the notable dev members of the team are listed below.
Poramin Insom
Founder and Core Developer
Poramin Insom created what was the world's 4th most valuable cryptocurrency in February 2014. He is also the world's first person to implement stealth addresses in QT-Wallets, improving cryptocurrency anonymity. He earned a master’s degree in Information Security from Johns Hopkins University, where he wrote a paper on a proposed practical implementation of the Zerocoin protocol.
Alexander N.
Developer
Alexander N. aka Aizensou is a full-stack developer who has experience in many programming languages (C++, C#, Python, Perl, Java etc.) and has been involved in the cryptocurrency space since 2013. He has a broad development portfolio from low level APIs in Python and C++ to Android native applications in Java. In addition to his involvement in cryptocurrencies, Alexander was doing his P.h.D. in machine learning at a German university from 2012 to 2016.
Saran Siriphantnon
Developer
Saran Siriphantnon is the CTO of Satang.co/Satoshift, a fintech company focusing on creating an open financial system for Southeast Asia. He served as President of the Computer System Administrator Group at King Mongkut's Institute of Technology Ladkrabang.
Tadhg Riordan
Solidity Developer
Tadhg Riordan is a 24 year old Software Developer from Wexford, Ireland. He recently completed his MSc from Trinity College Dublin, where he worked with Blockchain privacy mechanisms, focusing particularly on Zero-Knowledge Proofs and the Ethereum platform. He is a strong advocate for the adoption of cryptocurrency and for complete financial privacy.
Apart from these, their team comprises of other developers, community managers, support personnel and advisors who maintain the required balance.

Advisors:

Aram Jivanyan (Cryptography Advisor): Co-Founder at Skycryptor & KMSchai
Torphop Korgtadam (It Security Consultant): Senior Vice President, Head Of Internal Audit Strategy, Innovation and Decision Science at United Overseas Bank Limited
Alexander N. aka Aizensou (Advisor)

Unique/Key Features Against Its Competitors:

  • Anonymous transactions. The project establishes a notably higher level of anonymity and seeks to bypass current analysis techniques which governments use to reveal the identity of users.
  • Not subject to transaction graph analysis. Zcoin has an anonymity set that encompasses all minted coins in a particular RSA accumulator that can scale to many thousands.
  • Innovative process. Tokens are burned cryptographically and replaced with new coins without a transaction history. This actively prevents anyone else from using the tokens again and stops the public from being directed to a user's transaction history.
  • Transparency focused. Zcoin's main advantage is its auditable money supply.
submitted by atomarsofficial to Atomars [link] [comments]

Summary of how Wikileaks and Assange were compromised between Oct and Nov 2016 (From Endchan screenshot)

Link to image http://i.imgur.com/12sDLZA.png Link to mempool graph http://i.imgur.com/JZbFHri.jpg
Unfortunately endchan POLAK forum (unmoderated) was hacked in December and all threads were lost. I still have a lot saved from the png anon references, but a ton of info was lost in the hack and lost because archive.is is compromised and didn't save a lot of very interesting stuff. The png had an archive of a few threads with a ton of info regarding how to find the keys. I only became aware of this effort in late november, so I have no connection to any 'groups' I simply spectated.
EDIT: Here's some good info. This is all I could find for internet outage on dec 19, so something definitely did happen. This doesn't say it was very large, but still. Pretty similar to the well documented one that happened on Oct 17 though.
Also, here is a megaupload link for docs.png which contains a lot of threads that are now lost that have a lot of good info on some instructions on how to decode the blockchain to find the files.
Here is the summary of what reportedly happened to Wikileaks and Assange beginning on Oct 17 ending Dec 19. The summary was written Dec 21.
TLDR: Blockchain has backups from since 2013. It also has checksum hashes and upload proofs for all files. There is a lot of stuff in there that triggers xkeyscore or echelon and is virtually impossible to share or talk about. Three months have been spent trying to teach others how to recreate the steps. There is a noticable pattern. Group finds it, tries teaching others how to do it, then everything is deleted and everyone goes silent. Then a new group finds the breadcrumbs and starts over. It's not clear what happened yesterday or what will happen the next, but there are people from all over the world investigating. At this point there is no part of the internet where it is allowed.
Oct 17: Strange Activity is noticed at the embassy. First responders investigate, periscope is killed, twitter goes full Orwell, archive.org is changed to no longer save sites properly. Something that is instantly deleted is posted several times on plebbit, halfchan, fullchan, onion links and darkweb. It is all wiped. People regroup in several places since there is no way to post without threads getting deleted or sites going down. A lot end up here (endchan).
Oct 21: As the director of Wikileaks is dying a huge ddos takes down most sites. Blockchain is attacked. Lots of stuff gets deleted.
Oct 24: Someone finds Wikileaks backups in the blockchain and posts instructions and code to decode the data.
Oct 27: The deletions get too severe. Sites begin being flooded with illegal content or going down. People create their own private channel to discuss progress. The keys and all hidden data in the blockchain are found. The group pushes the information into a few cryptocurrencies. Blockchain is flooded. Mempool graphs have a giant spike on Oct 27. Bitcoin soft fork begins. Onion threads with the info get instantly wiped. Everyone involved go silent except a couple people. This group is called "group 1" and finding the keys is called first impact.
Late Oct: People realize that unlocking the data gets you Xkeyscore'd, cutting off your internet, attacking sites until the stuff is deleted.
Early Nov: Focus changes to teaching others how to find the information on airgapped computers to avoid detection and sacrificing public channels of communication. Threads that have progress start being flooded with illegal content every morning.
Nov 8: Wikileaks.org begins changing. Some files are deleted. Checksum hashes no longer match old backups.
At some point in Nov, the IRS asks bitcoin to give them the identities of all transactions. Copies of the blockchain start showing 'undecodable' or empty transactions not seen before.
Mid Nov: 'Group 2' doxxes the people pretending to be Wikileaks and tried to spread more detailed instructions for getting the files. Posts did not last more than a few minutes. It seems like they tried to push to blockchain but apparently the data didn't make it in. Group 2 goes silent. This day is second impact.
Nov 25: Third impact. Files are found by a third group that doesn't seem to be American. They post instructions all over the place, but nothing lasts more than a few hours. They tried to encode the data into the blockchain but it's not clear if it made it in. This day is the second spike on the mempool graph.
Some point after this, people agree to stop using the endchan thread because the admins keep having to deal with too much illegal content flooding and the site going down. It becomes clear that any channel used to discuss this is 'sacrificed', in other words, it starts going down a lot, mods are flipped, deletion, illegal spams, etc. This[endchan] thread is created for this reason. You can figure out what is special about this thread if you read the logs in the png. Most progress after this point is on logless channels on the darkweb. Most of these eventually go down. The endchan thread is eventually locked. Everyone that posted is blocked to this day. It is then deleted.
Dec: Planning for d-day begins. All holding groups spend all of december teaching others how to find the files.
Mid Dec: Someone alledgedly speaking on behaf of applebaum posts links to code he wrote to find and repair keys in memory. New teams are told to use it. Obama talks of cyber war with Russia.
Dec 18: Files are found in Japan. A meshnet using PS3s is used to spread the files, but this doesn't last long.
Dec 19: D-Day. Shit is happening all over the world. Many ISPs, torrent sites, and other sites go down. Wikileaks releases new insurance file. UK, EC, and US insurance files from before no longer show up on wikileaks.org unless you have IPs from specific countries. One of the biggest internet outages in history and I cannot find a single news site that reported it. Holding groups go silent. Some people try to regroup with their old teams.
submitted by snowmandan to conspiracy [link] [comments]

I wrote a 30,000 ft. "executive summary" intro document for cryptos. Not for you, for your non-technical parents or friends.

This document was originally written for my dad, an intelligent guy who was utterly baffled about the cryptocurrency world. The aim was to be extremely concise, giving a broad overview of the industry and some popular coins while staying non-technical. For many of you there will be nothing new here, but recognize that you are in the 0.001% of the population heavily into crypto technology.
I've reproduced it for Reddit below, or you can find the original post here on my website. Download the PDF there or hit the direct link: .PDF version.
Donations happily accepted:
ETH: 0x4e03Bf5CCE3eec4Ddae4d3d6aAD46ca4f198AeD6 BTC: 1GqWMZRRygRJJWYYTWHkAVoRcgyQHjgBMZ XMR: 42Y1S1KBoPk381kc7hA68zaiC78BxMoCADjLrFcTdWiE7ejhZc49s1t9i7P2EmTnHsLDiKoSUiogCbLVHXRJxjrCT4WG8ic XRB: xrb_1bpzh745s9kzk8ymfnks3jtdi65ayumdstokzd4yw4ohu3fopxmiocjcntcu 

Background

This document is purely informational. At the time of writing there are over 1000 cryptocurrencies (“cryptos”) in a highly volatile, high risk market. Many of the smaller “altcoins” require significant technical knowledge to store and transact safely. I advise you to carefully scrutinize each crypto’s flavor of blockchain, potential utility, team of developers, and guiding philosophy, before making any investment [1] decisions. With that out of the way, what follows are brief, extremely high-level summaries of some cryptos which have my interest, listed in current market cap order. But first, some info:
Each crypto is a different implementation of a blockchain network. Originally developed as decentralized digital cash, these technologies have evolved into much broader platforms, powering the future of decentralized applications across every industry in the global economy. Without getting into the weeds, [2] most cryptos work on similar principles:
Distributed Ledgers Each node on a blockchain network has a copy of every transaction, which enables a network of trust that eliminates fraud. [3]
Decentralized “Miners” comprise the infrastructure of a blockchain network. [4] They are monetarily incentivized to add computing power to the network, simultaneously securing and processing each transaction. [5]
Peer-to-peer Cryptos act like digital cash-- they require no third party to transact and are relatively untraceable. Unlike cash, you can back them up.
Global Transactions are processed cheaply and instantly, anywhere on Earth. Using cryptos, an African peasant and a San Francisco engineer have the same access to capital, markets, and network services.
Secure Blockchains are predicated on the same cryptographic technology that secures your sensitive data and government secrets. They have passed seven years of real-world penetration testing with no failures. [6]

Bitcoin (BTC)

The first cryptocurrency. As with first movers in any technology, there are associated pros and cons. Bitcoin has by far the strongest brand recognition and deepest market penetration, and it is the only crypto which can be used directly as a currency at over 100,000 physical and web stores around the world. In Venezuela and Zimbabwe, where geopolitical events have created hyperinflation in the centralized fiat currency, citizens have moved to Bitcoin as a de facto transaction standard. [7]
However, Bitcoin unveiled a number of issues that have been solved by subsequent cryptos. It is experiencing significant scaling issues, resulting in high fees and long confirmation times. The argument over potential solutions created a rift in the Bitcoin developer community, who “forked” the network into two separate blockchains amidst drama and politicking in October 2017. Potential solutions to these issues abound, with some already in place, and others nearing deployment.
Bitcoin currently has the highest market cap, and since it is easy to buy with fiat currency, the price of many smaller cryptos (“altcoins”) are loosely pegged to its price. This will change in the coming year(s).

Ethereum (ETH)

Where Bitcoin is a currency, Ethereum is a platform, designed as a foundational protocol on which to develop decentralized applications (“Dapps”). Anyone can write code and deploy their program on the global network for extremely low fees. Just like Twitter wouldn’t exist without the open platform of the internet, the next world-changing Dapp can’t exist without Ethereum.
Current Dapps include a global market for idle computing power and storage, peer-to-peer real estate transactions (no trusted third party for escrow), identity networks for governments and corporations (think digital Social Security card), and monetization strategies for the internet which replace advertising. Think back 10 years to the advent of smartphones, and then to our culture today-- Ethereum could have a similar network effect on humanity.
Ethereum is currently the #2 market cap crypto below Bitcoin, and many believe it will surpass it in 2018. It has a large, active group of developers working to solve scaling issues, [8] maintain security, and create entirely new programming conventions. If successful, platforms like Ethereum may well be the foundation of the decentralized internet of the future.

Ripple (XRP)

Ripple is significantly more centralized than most crypto networks, designed as a backbone for the global banking and financial technology (“fintech”) industries. It is a network for exchanging between fiat currencies and other asset classes instantly and cheaply, especially when transacting cross-border and between separate institutions. It uses large banks and remittance companies as “anchors” to allow trading between any asset on the network, and big names like Bank of America, American Express, RBC, and UBS are partners. The utility of this network is global and massive in scale.
It is extremely important to note that not all cryptos have the same number of tokens. Ripple has 100 Billion tokens compared to Bitcoin’s 21 Million. Do not directly compare price between cryptos. XRP will likely never reach $1k, [9] but the price will rise commensurate with its utility as a financial tool.
In some sense, Ripple is anathema to the original philosophical vision of this technology space. And while I agree with the cyberpunk notion of decentralized currencies, separation of money and state, this is the natural progression of the crypto world. The internet was an incredible decentralized wild west of Usenet groups and listservs before Eternal September and the dot-com boom, but its maturation affected every part of global society.

Cardano (ADA)

Cardano’s main claim to fame: it is the only crypto developed using academic methodologies by a global collective of engineers and researchers, built on a foundation of industry-leading, peer-reviewed cryptographic research. The network was designed from first-principles to allow scalability, system upgrades, and to balance the privacy of its users with the security needs of regulators.
One part of this ecosystem is the Cardano Foundation, a Swiss non-profit founded to work proactively with governments and regulatory bodies to institute legal frameworks around the crypto industry. Detractors of Cardano claim that it doesn’t do anything innovative, but supporters see the academic backing and focus on regulation development as uniquely valuable.

Stellar Lumens (XLM)

Stellar Lumens and Ripple were founded by the same person. They initially shared the same code, but today the two are distinct in their technical back-end as well as their guiding philosophy and development goals. Ripple is closed-source, for-profit, deflationary, and intended for use by large financial institutions. Stellar is open-source, non-profit, inflationary, and intended to promote international wealth distribution. As such, they are not direct competitors.
IBM is a major partner to Stellar. Their network is already processing live transactions in 12 currency corridors across the South Pacific, with plans to process 60% of all cross-border payments in the South Pacific’s retail foreign exchange corridor by Q2 2018.
Beyond its utility as a financial tool, the Stellar network may become a competitor to Ethereum as a platform for application development and Initial Coin Offerings (“ICOs”). The theoretical maximum throughput for the network is higher, and it takes less computational power to run. The Stellar development team is highly active, has written extensive documentation for third-party developers, and has an impressive list of advisors, including Patrick Collison (Stripe), Sam Altman (Y Combinator), and other giants in the software development community.

Iota (IOT)

Iota was developed as the infrastructure backbone for the Internet of Things (IoT), sometimes called the machine economy. As the world of inanimate objects is networked together, their need to communicate grows exponentially. Fridges, thermostats, self-driving cars, printers, planes, and industrial sensors all need a secure protocol with which to transact information.
Iota uses a “Tangle” instead of a traditional blockchain, and this is the main innovation driving the crypto’s value. Each device that sends a transaction confirms two other transactions in the Tanlge. This removes the need for miners, and enables unique features like zero fees and infinite scalability. The supply of tokens is fixed forever at 2.8*1015, a staggeringly large number (almost three thousand trillion), and the price you see reported is technically “MIOT”, or the price for a million tokens.

Monero (XMR)

The most successful privacy-focused cryptocurrency. In Bitcoin and most other cryptos, anyone can examine the public ledger and trace specific coins through the network. If your identity can be attached to a public address on that network, an accurate picture of your transaction history can be built-- who, what, and when. Monero builds anonymity into the system using strong cryptographic principles, which makes it functionally impossible to trace coins, [10] attach names to wallets, or extract metadata from transactions. The development team actively publishes in the cryptography research community.
Anonymous transactions are not new-- we call it cash. Only in the past two decades has anonymity grown scarce in the first-world with the rise of credit cards and ubiquitous digital records. Personal data is becoming the most valuable resource on Earth, and there are many legitimate reasons for law-abiding citizens to want digital privacy, but it is true that with anonymity comes bad actors-- Monero is the currency of choice for the majority of black market (“darknet”) transactions. Similarly, US Dollars are the main vehicle for the $320B annual drug trade. An investment here should be based on the underlying cryptographic research and technology behind this coin, as well as competitors like Zcash. [11]

RaiBlocks (XRB)

Zero fees and instantaneous transfer make RaiBlocks extremely attractive for exchange of value, in many senses outperforming Bitcoin at its original intended purpose. This crypto has seen an explosion in price and exposure over the past month, and it may become the network of choice for transferring value within and between crypto exchanges.
Just in the first week of 2018: the CEO of Ledger (makers of the most popular hardware wallet on the market) waived the $50k code review fee to get RaiBlocks on his product, and XRB got listed on Binance and Kucoin, two of the largest altcoin exchanges globally. This is one to watch for 2018. [12]

VeChain (VEN)

Developed as a single answer to the problem of supply-chain logistics, VeChain is knocking on the door of a fast-growing $8 trillion industry. Every shipping container and packaged product in the world requires constant tracking and verification. A smart economy for logistics built on the blockchain promises greater efficiency and lower cost through the entire process flow.
Don’t take my word for it-- VeChain has investment from PwC (5th largest US corporation), Groupe Renault, Kuehne & Nagel (world’s largest freight company), and DIG (China’s largest wine importer). The Chinese government has mandated VeChain to serve as blockchain technology partner to the city of Gui’an, a special economic zone and testbed for China’s smart city of the future. This crypto has some of the strongest commercial partnerships in the industry, and a large active development team.
  1. “Investment” is a misnomer. Cryptos are traded like securities, but grant you no equity (like trading currency).
  2. The weeds for Bitcoin: basic intro (1:36), non-technical explanation (5:24), Bitcoin 101 – Andreas Antonopoulos (23:51).
  3. It is impossible to double-spend or create a fake transaction, as each ledger is confirmed against every other ledger.
  4. Some utility token blockchains use DAG networks or similar non-linear networks which don’t require mining.
  5. In practice, these are giant warehouses full of specialized computers constantly processing transactions. Miners locate to the cheapest electricity source, and the bulk of mining currently occurs in China.
  6. Centralized second-layer exchange websites have been hacked, but the core technology is untouched.
  7. This effect has been termed "bitcoinization".
  8. The Ethereum roadmap shows moving from a Proof of Work (PoW) to Proof of Stake (PoS) consensus model.
  9. At $2.62 per XRP token, Ripple already commands a $100B market cap.
  10. After a January 2017 update.
  11. Monero uses ring signatures while Zcash uses ZK-SNARKs to create anonymity. Both have pros and cons.
  12. Note: all signs point to this crypto being renamed “Nano” in the coming weeks: nano.co.
submitted by jhchawk to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Bubble Week Day 1 - Tulip Mania

Introduction
All,
First, I'm posting this from a throwaway account because I want what I write to be judged on the quality of my analysis.
Second, I've thought for quite sometime now that it would be interesting to put together a series of posts analyzing lessons that can be learned from historical bubbles in history. This post represents day 1 of this series.
Schedule of Posts
Here is my plan for this series:
Day Topic
1 Tulip Mania
2 South Sea Company
3 Silver Bust and Uranium Folly
4 Is Bitcoin Next?
5 Concluding Thoughts
Is This a Personal Finance Topic?
When writing this series of posts, I tried to determine whether they belonged in personalfinance, investing, or somewhere else. Ultimately, my key take away from these posts is to remind you of the importance of investing in a diversified portfolio of assets and the dangers of engaging in speculation. This message seems to me to be at the heart of this sub's beliefs on investing and thus ultimately I believe that it is a personal finance topic.
What Is A Bubble?
To adapt a phrase from Justice Stewart, "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["bubble"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it".
Ultimately, it is very difficult to identify a bubble (and making even relatively basic strides earned Dr. Robert Shiller a nobel prize).
However, at the risk of oversimplifying, I believe bubbles have a few key characteristics:
Tulip Mania
Tulip Mania is perhaps the first widely recorded and analyzed bubble. In the early 1600s, Tulips rapidly gained popularity in the Netherlands as a status symbol due to the vibrant colors of Tulips, especially as compared to many of other available flowers at the time.
At the peak of the bubble, a single Tulip sold for approximately 10 times the annual income of an average worker (roughly $580,000 in 2017 dollars).
Additionally, the first "derivative contracts" were created as part of this bubble - individuals traded the right to buy future tulips.
The bubble collapsed when interest in Tulips diminished - ships found nobody willing to pay market price for their "valuable" cargo. Speculators found nobody willing to buy their futures contracts for a greater price. And, as with all bubbles, many of those left "holding the bag" were financially ruined.
Bubble Checklist - Tulip Mania
Yes - the value increased by 20x-100x the original price (exact multiple depends on which source you examine) over a few months.
Unclear - there appear to be no specific instances of market manipulation, but certainly the "futures market" was unregulated and subject to manipulation/rumors. Additionally, by modern standards the market was certainly opaque and rife with insider trading.
Absolutely - futures contracts required minimal/no upfront payment and allowed speculation based on future prices with essentially no current outlay of cash.
Yes - just as quickly as prices rose, they also declined (drop rate of 99.999% upon market collapse). The idea that a decorative flower could be worth a decade of wages clearly indicates a divergence between the stated market price during the bubble and the intrinsic value of the asset.
Visual Aid - Standardized Tulip Prices
Graph of Tulip Mania
Data Source - note that since I plan to show multiple bubbles, I re-standardized the data provided to be in multiples of the original price (i.e. a value of 100 represents a price 100x higher than the originally observed price). Further, while Appendix 1 helps provide pricing data, not all values are completely clear and in such cases I used my best judgement.
submitted by pfbubbleweek to personalfinance [link] [comments]

INT - Comparison with Other IoT Projects

What defines a good IoT project? Defining this will help us understand what some of the problems they might struggle with and which projects excel in those areas. IoT will be a huge industry in the coming years. The true Internet 3.0 will be one of seamless data and value transfer. There will be a tremendous amount of devices connected to this network, from your light bulbs to your refrigerator to your car, all autonomously transacting together in an ever growing network in concert, creating an intelligent, seamless world of satisfying wants and needs.
.
Let’s use the vastness of what the future state of this network is to be as our basis of what makes a good project.
.
Scalability
In that future we will need very high scalability to accommodate the exponential growth in transaction volume that will occur. The network doesn’t need to have the ability to do high transactions per second in the beginning, just a robust plan to grow that ability as the network develops. We’ve seen this issue already with Bitcoin on an admittedly small market penetration. If scaling isn’t a one of the more prominent parts of your framework, that is a glaring hole.
.
Applicability
Second to scalability is applicability. One size does not fit all in this space. Some uses will need real-time streaming of data where fast and cheap transactions are key and others will need heavier transactions full of data to be analyzed by the network for predictive uses. Some uses will need smart contracts so that devices can execute actions autonomously and others will need the ability to encrypt data and to transact anonymously to protect the privacy of the users in this future of hyper-connectivity. We cannot possibly predict the all of the future needs of this network so the ease of adaptability in a network of high applicability is a must.
.
Interoperability
In order for this network to have the high level of applicability mentioned, it would need to have access to real world data outside of it’s network to work off of or even to transact with. This interoperability can come in several forms. I am not a maximalist, thinking that there will be one clear winner in any space. So it is easy, therefore, to imagine that we would want to be able to interact with some other networks for payment/settlement or data gathering. Maybe autonomously paying for bills with Bitcoin or Monero, maybe smart contracts that will need to be fed additional data from the Internet or maybe even sending an auto invite for a wine tasting for the wine shipment that’s been RFID’d and tracked through WTC. In either case, in order to afford the highest applicability, the network will need the ability to interact with outside networks.
.
Consensus
How the network gains consensus is often something that is overlooked in the discussion of network suitability. If the network is to support a myriad of application and transaction types, the consensus mechanism must be able to handle it without choking the network or restricting transaction type. PoW can become a bottleneck as the competition for block reward requires an increase in difficulty for block generation, you therefore have to allow time for this computation in between blocks, often leading to less than optimal block times for fast transactions. This can create a transaction backlog as we have seen before. PoS can solve some of these issues but is not immune to this either. A novel approach to gaining consensus will have to be made if it is going to handle the variety and volume to be seen.
.
Developability
All of this can be combined to create a network that is best equipped to take on the IoT ecosystem. But the penetration into the market will be solely held back by the difficulty in connecting and interacting with the network from the perspective of manufacturers and their devices. Having to learn a new code language in order to write a smart contract or create a node or if there are strict requirements on the hardware capability of the devices, these are all barriers that make it harder and more expensive for companies to work with the network. Ultimately, despite how perfect or feature packed your network is, a manufacturer will more likely develop devices for those that are easy to work with.
.
In short, what the network needs to focus on is:
-Scalability – How does it globally scale?
-Applicability – Does it have data transfer ability, fast, cheap transactions, smart contracts, privacy?
-Interoperability – Can it communicate with the outside world, other blockchains?
-Consensus – Will it gain consensus in a way that supports scalability and applicability?
-Developability – Will it be easy for manufactures to develop devices and interact with the network?
.
.
The idea of using blockchain technology to be the basis of the IoT ecosystem is not a new idea. There are several projects out there now that are aiming at tackling the problem. Below you will see a high level breakdown of those projects with some pros and cons from how I interpret the best solution to be. You will also see some supply chain projects listed below. Supply chain solutions are just small niches in the larger IoT ecosystem. Item birth record, manufacturing history, package tracking can all be “Things” which the Internet of Things track. In fact, INT already has leaked some information hinting that they are cooperating with pharmaceutical companies to track the manufacture and packaging of the drugs they produce. INT may someday include WTC or VEN as one of its subchains feeding in information into the ecosystem.
.
.
IOTA
IOTA is a feeless and blockchain-less network called a directed acyclic graph. In my opinion, this creates more issues than it fixes.
The key to keeping IOTA feeless is that there are no miners to pay because the work associated with verifying a transaction is distributed to among all users, with each user verifying two separate transactions for their one. This creates some problems both in the enabling of smart contracts and the ability to create user privacy. Most privacy methods (zk-SNARKs in specific) require the one doing the verifying to use computationally intensive cryptography which are outside the capability of most devices on the IoT network (a weather sensor isn’t going to be able to build the ZK proof of a transaction every second or two). In a network where the device does the verifying of a transaction, cryptographic privacy becomes impractical. And even if there were a few systems capable of processing those transactions, there is no reward for doing the extra work. Fees keep the network safe by incentivizing honesty in the nodes, by paying those who have to work harder to verify a certain transaction, and by making it expensive to attack the network or disrupt privacy (Sybil Attacks).
IOTA also doesn’t have and may never have the ability to enable smart contracts. By the very nature of the Tangle (a chain of transactions with only partial structure unlike a linear and organized blockchain), establishing the correct time order of transactions is difficult, and in some situations, impossible. Even if the transactions have been time stamped, there is no way to verify them and are therefore open to spoofing. Knowing transaction order is absolutely vital to executing step based smart contracts.
There does exist a subset of smart contracts that do not require a strong time order of transactions in order to operate properly. But accepting this just limits the use cases of the network. In any case, smart contracts will not be able to operate directly on chain in IOTA. There will need to be a trusted off chain Oracle that watches transactions, establishes timelines, and runs the smart contract network
.
-Scalability – High
-Applicability – Low, no smart contracts, no privacy, not able to run on lightweight devices
-Interoperability – Maybe, Oracle possibility
-Consensus – Low, DAG won’t support simple IoT devices and I don’t see all devices confirming other transactions as a reality
-Developability – To be seen, currently working with many manufacturers
.
.
Ethereum
Ethereum is the granddaddy of smart contract blockchain. It is, arguably, in the best position to be the center point of the IoT ecosystem. Adoption is wide ranging, it is fast, cheap to transact with and well known; it is a Turing complete decentralized virtual computer that can do anything if you have enough gas and memory. But some of the things that make it the most advanced, will hold it back from being the best choice.
Turing completeness means that the programming language is complete (can describe any problem) and can solve any problem given that there is enough gas to pay for it and enough memory to run the code. You could therefore, create an infinite variety of different smart contracts. This infinite variability makes it impossible to create zk-SNARK verifiers efficiently enough to not cost more gas than is currently available in the block. Implementing zk-SNARKs in Ethereum would therefore require significant changes to the smart contract structure to only allow a small subset of contracts to permit zk-SNARK transactions. That would mean a wholesale change to the Ethereum Virtual Machine. Even in Zcash, where zk-SNARK is successfully implemented for a single, simple transaction type, they had to encode some of the network’s consensus rules into zk-SNARKs to limit the possible outcomes of the proof (Like changing the question of where are you in the US to where are you in the US along these given highways) to limit the computation time required to construct the proof.
Previously I wrote about how INT is using the Double Chain Consensus algorithm to allow easy scaling, segregation of network traffic and blockchain size by breaking the network down into separate cells, each with their own nodes and blockchains. This is building on lessons learned from single chain blockchains like Bitcoin. Ethereum, which is also a single chain blockchain, also suffers from these congestion issues as we have seen from the latest Cryptokitties craze. Although far less of an impact than that which has been seen with Bitcoin, transaction times grew as did the fees associated. Ethereum has proposed a new, second layer solution to solve the scaling issue: Sharding. Sharding draws from the traditional scaling technique called database sharding, which splits up pieces of a database and stores them on separate servers where each server points to the other. The goal of this is to have distinct nodes that store and verify a small set of transactions then tie them up to a larger chain, where all the other nodes communicate. If a node needs to know about a transaction on another chain, it finds another node with that information. What does this sound like? This is as close to an explanation of the Double Chain architecture as to what INT themselves provided in their whitepaper.
.
-Scalability – Neutral, has current struggles but there are some proposals to fix this
-Applicability – Medium, has endless smart contract possibilities, no privacy currently with some proposals to fix this
-Interoperability – Maybe, Oracle possibility
-Consensus – Medium, PoW currently with proposals to change to better scaling and future proofing.
-Developability – To be seen
.
.
IoTeX
A young project, made up of several accredited academics in cryptography, machine learning and data security. This is one of the most technically supported whitepapers I have read.They set out to solve scalability in the relay/subchain architecture proposed by Polkadot and used by INT. This architecture lends well to scaling and adaptability, as there is no end to the amount of subchains you can add to the network, given node and consensus bandwidth.
The way they look to address privacy is interesting. On the main parent (or relay) chain, they plan on implementing some of the technology from Monero, namely, ring signatures, bulletproofs and stealth addresses. While these are proven and respected technologies, this presents some worries as these techniques are known to not be lightweight and it takes away from the inherent generality of the core of the network. I believe the core should be as general and lightweight as possible to allow for scaling, ease of update, and adaptability. With adding this functionality, all data and transactions are made private and untraceable and therefore put through heavier computation. There are some applications where this is not optimal. A data stream may need to be read from many devices where encrypting it requires decryption for every use. A plain, public and traceable network would allow this simple use. This specificity should be made at the subchain level.
Subchains will have the ability to define their needs in terms of block times, smart contracting needs, etc. This lends to high applicability.
They address interoperability directly by laying out the framework for pegging (transaction on one chain causing a transaction on another), and cross-chain communication.
They do not address anywhere in the whitepaper the storage of data in the network. IoT devices will not be transaction only devices, they will need to maintain data, transmit data and query data. Without the ability to do so, the network will be crippled in its application.
IoTeX will use a variation of DPoS as the consensus mechanism. They are not specific on how this mechanism will work with no talk of data flow and node communication diagram. This will be their biggest hurdle and why I believe it was left out of the white paper. Cryptography and theory is easy to elaborate on within each specific subject but tying it all together, subchains with smart contracts, transacting with other side chains, with ring signatures, bulletproofs and stealth addresses on the main chain, will be a challenge that I am not sure can be done efficiently.
They may be well positioned to make this work but you are talking about having some of the core concepts of your network being based on problems that haven’t been solved and computationally heavy technologies, namely private transactions within smart contracts. So while all the theory and technical explanations make my pants tight, the realist in me will believe it when he sees it.
.
-Scalability – Neutral to medium, has the framework to address it with some issues that will hold it back.
-Applicability – Medium, has smart contract possibilities, privacy baked into network, no data framework
-Interoperability – Medium, inherent in the network design
-Consensus – Low, inherent private transactions may choke network. Consensus mechanism not at all laid out.
-Developability – To be seen, not mentioned.
.
.
CPChain
CPC puts a lot of their focus on data storage. They recognize that one of the core needs of an IoT network will be the ability to quickly store and reference large amounts of data and that this has to be separate from the transactional basis of the network as to not slow it down. They propose solving this using distributed hash tables (DHT) in the same fashion as INT, which stores data in a decentralized fashion so no one source owns the complete record. This system is much the same as the one used by BitTorrent, which allows data to be available regardless of which nodes will be online at a given time. The data privacy issue is solved by using client side encryption with one-to-many public key cryptography allowing many devices to decrypt a singly encrypted file while no two devices share the same key.
This data layer will be run on a separate, parallel chain as to not clog the network and to enable scalability. In spite of this, they don’t discuss how they will scale on the main chain. In order to partially solve this, it will use a two layer consensus structure centered on PoS to increase consensus efficiency. This two layer system will still require the main layer to do the entirety of the verification and block generation. This will be a scaling issue where the network will have no division of labor to segregate congestion to not affect the whole network.
They do recognize that the main chain would not be robust or reliable enough to handle high frequency or real-time devices and therefore propose side chains for those device types. Despite this, they are adding a significant amount of functionality (smart contracts, data interpretation) to the main chain instead of a more general and light weight main chain, which constrains the possible applications for the network and also makes it more difficult to upgrade the network.
So while this project, on the surface level (not very technical whitepaper), seems to be a robust and well thought out framework, it doesn’t lend itself to an all-encompassing IoT network but more for a narrower, data centric, IoT application.
.
-Scalability – Neutral to medium, has the framework to address it somewhat, too much responsibility and functionality on the main chain may slow it down.
-Applicability – Medium, has smart contract possibilities, elaborate data storage solution with privacy in mind as well has high frequency applications thought out
-Interoperability – Low, not discussed
-Consensus – Low to medium, discussed solution has high reliance on single chain
-Developability – To be seen, not mentioned.
.
.
ITC
The whitepaper reads like someone just grabbed some of the big hitters in crypto buzzword bingo and threw them in there and explained what they were using Wikipedia. It says nothing about how they will tie it all together, economically incentivize the security of the network or maintain the data structures. I have a feeling none of them actually have any idea how to do any of this. For Christ sake they explain blockchain as the core of the “Solutions” portion of their whitepaper. This project is not worth any more analysis.
.
.
RuffChain
Centralization and trust. Not very well thought out at this stage. DPoS consensus on a single chain. Not much more than that.
.
.
WaltonChain
Waltonchain focuses on tracking and validating the manufacture and shipping of items using RFID technology. The structure will have a main chain/subchain framework, which will allow the network to segregate traffic and infinitely scale by the addition of subchains given available nodes and main chain bandwidth.
DPoST (Stake & Trust) will be the core of their consensus mechanism, which adds trust to the traditional staking structure. This trust is based on the age of the coins in the staker’s node. The longer that node has held the coins, combined with the amount of coins held, the more likely that node will be elected to create the block. I am not sure how I feel about this but generally dislike trust.
Waltonchain's framework will also allow smart contracts on the main chain. Again, this level of main chain specificity worries me at scale and difficulty in upgrading. This smart contract core also does not lend itself to private transactions. In this small subset of IoT ecosystem, that does not matter as the whole basis of tracking is open and public records.
The whitepaper is not very technical so I cannot comment to their technical completeness or exact implementation strategy.
This implementation of the relay/subchain framework is a very narrow and under-utilized application. As I said before, WTC may someday just be one part of a larger IoT ecosystem while interacting with another IoT network. This will not be an all-encompassing network.
.
-Scalability – High, main/subchain framework infinitely scales
-Applicability – Low to medium, their application is narrow
-Interoperability – Medium, the framework will allow it seamlessly
-Consensus – Neutral, should not choke the network but adds trust to the equation
-Developability – N/A, this is a more centralized project and development will likely be with the WTC
.
.
VeChain
\*Let me preface this by saying I realize there is a place for centralized, corporatized, non-open source projects in this space.* Although I know this project is focused mainly on wider, more general business uses for blockchain, I was requested to include it in this analysis. I have edited my original comment as it was more opinionated and therefore determined not to be productive to the conversation. If you would like to get a feel for my opinion, the original text is in the comments below.\**
This project doesn't have much data to go off as the white paper does not contain much technical detail. It is focused on how they are positioning themselves to enable wider adoption of blockchain technology in the corporate ecosystem.
They also spend a fair amount of time covering their node structure and planned governance. What this reveals is a PoS and PoA combined system with levels of nodes and related reward. Several of the node types require KYC (Know Your Customer) to establish trust in order to be part of the block creating pool.
Again there is not much technically that we can glean from this whitepaper. What is known is that this is not directed at a IoT market and will be a PoS and PoA Ethereum-like network with trusted node setup.
I will leave out the grading points as there is not enough information to properly determine where they are at.
.
.
.
INT
So under this same lens, how does INT stack up? INT borrows their framework from Polkadot, which is a relay/subchain architecture. This framework allows for infinite scaling by the addition of subchains given available nodes and relay chain bandwidth. Custom functionality in subchains allows the one setting up the subchain to define the requirements, be it private transactions, state transaction free data chain, smart contracts, etc. This also lends to endless applicability. The main chain is inherently simple in it’s functionality as to not restrict any uses or future updates in technology or advances.
The consensus structure also takes a novel two-tiered approach in separating validating from block generation in an effort to further enable scaling by removing the block generation choke point from the side chains to the central relay chain. This leaves the subchain nodes to only validate transactions with a light DPoS allowing a free flowing transaction highway.
INT also recognizes the strong need for an IoT network to have robust and efficient data handling and storage. They are utilizing a decentralize storage system using DHT much like the BitTorrent system. This combined with the network implementation of all of the communication protocols (TCP/IP, UDP/IP, MANET) build the framework of a network that will effortlessly integrate any device type for any application.
The multi-chain framework easily accommodates interoperability between established networks like the Internet and enables pegging with other blockchains with a few simple transaction type inclusions. With this cross chain communication, manufactures wouldn’t have to negotiate their needs to fit an established blockchain, they could create their own subchain to fit their needs and interact with the greater network through the relay.
The team also understands the development hurdles facing the environment. They plan to solve this by standardizing requirements for communication and data exchange. They have heavy ties with several manufacturers and are currently developing a IoT router to be the gateway to the network.
.
-Scalability – High, relay/subchain framework enables infinite scalability
-Applicability – High, highest I could find for IoT. Subchains can be created for every possible application.
-Interoperability – High, able to add established networks for data support and cross chain transactions
-Consensus – High, the only structure that separates the two responsibilities of verifying and block generation to further enable scaling and not choke applicability.
-Developability – Medium, network is set up for ease of development with well-known language and subchain capability. Already working with device manufacturers. To be seen.
.
.
So with all that said, INT may be in the best place to tackle this space with their chosen framework and philosophy. They set out to accomplish more than WTC or VEN in a network that is better equipped than IOTA or Ethereum. If they can excecute on what they have laid out, there is no reason that they won’t become the market leader, easily overtaking the market cap of VeChain ($2.5Bn, $10 INT) in the short term and IOTA ($7Bn, $28 INT) in the medium term.
submitted by Graytrain to INT_Chain [link] [comments]

Greg Maxwell used to have intelligent, nuanced opinions about "max blocksize", until he started getting paid by AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group - the legacy financial elite which Bitcoin aims to disintermediate. Greg always refuses to address this massive conflict of interest. Why?

Two other important threads discussing this strange and disturbing phenomenon:
So nice of nullc to engage /BTC lately - until, that is, someone mentions Blockstream's funders, that is. Suddenly, the topic is dropped like a white hot rock.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mkv8o/so_nice_of_unullc_to_engage_rbtc_latelyuntil_that/
Some people will be dogmatically promoting a 1MB limit that 1MB is a magic number rather than today's conservative trade-off. 200,000 - 500,000 transactions per day is a good start, indeed, but I'd certainly like to see Bitcoin doing more in the future - Gregory Maxwell
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mk0o2/some_people_will_be_dogmatically_promoting_a_1mb/
Here is the old Greg Maxwell:
(1) Greg Maxwell (around 2014? correction: around 2015) saying "we could probably survive 2MB":
"Even a year ago I said I though we could probably survive 2MB" - nullc
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/43mond/even_a_year_ago_i_said_i_though_we_could_probably/
(2) Greg Maxwell (in 2013), presenting a lengthy, intelligent, and nuanced opinion the tradeoffs involved in a "max blocksize" for Bitcoin, and concluding that "in a couple years it will be clear that 2mb or 10mb or whatever is totally safe relative to all concerns":
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=208200.msg2182597#msg2182597
The important point of this is recognizing there is a set of engineering tradeoffs here [when talking about "max blocksize"].
Too big and everyone can transact but the transactions are worthless because no one can validate - basically that gives us what we have with the dollar.
Too small and everyone can validate but the validation is worthless because no one can transact - this is what you have when you try to use real physical gold online or similar.
The definition of too big / too small is a subtle trade-off that depends on a lot of things like the current capability of technology. ...
Anonymization technology [Tor?] lags the already slow bandwidth scaling we see in the broader thinking, and the ability to potentially anonymize all Bitcoin activity is protective against certain failure scenarios.
My general preference is to err[or] towards being more decentralized. There are three reasons for this:
(1) We can build a multitude of systems of different kinds - decentralized and centralized ones - on top of a strongly decent[e]ralized system, but we can't really build something more decentralized on top of something which is less decentralized. The core of Bitcoin sets the maximum amount of decentralization possible in our ecosystem.
(2) Decentralization is what makes what we're doing unique and valuable compared to the alternatives. If decentralization is not very important to you... you'd likely already be much happier with the USD and PayPal.
(3) Regardless of the block size we need to have robust alternatives for transacting in BTC in order to improve privacy, instant confirmation, lower costs for low value transactions, permit very tiny femtopayments, and to (optionally!) better support reversible transactions ... and once we do the global blockchain throughput rate is less of an issue: Instead of a limit of how many transactions can be done it becomes a factor that controls how costly the alternatives are allowed to be at worst, and a factor in how often people need to depend on external (usually less secure) systems ... and also because I think it's easier to fix if you've gone too small and need to increase it, vs gone too large and shut out the general public from the validation process and handed it over to large entities.
All that said, I do [...] worry a bit that in a couple years it will be clear that 2mb or 10mb or whatever is totally safe relative to all concerns - perhaps even mobile devices with Tor could be full nodes with 10mb blocks on the internet of 2023, and by then there may be plenty of transaction volume to keep fees high enough to support security - and maybe some people will be dogmatically promoting a 1MB limit [...] thinking that 1MB is a magic number rather than today's conservative trade-off.
Then, Blockstream was created in late 2014:
Insurance giant AXA (with strong links to the Bilderberg Group representing the world's financial elite) became one of the main investors behind Blockstream:
Blockstream is now controlled by the Bilderberg Group - seriously! AXA Strategic Ventures, co-lead investor for Blockstream's $55 million financing round, is the investment arm of French insurance giant AXA Group - whose CEO Henri de Castries has been chairman of the Bilderberg Group since 2012.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47zfzt/blockstream_is_now_controlled_by_the_bilderberg/
The insurance company with the biggest exposure to the 1.2 quadrillion dollar (ie, 1200 TRILLION dollar) derivatives casino is AXA. Yeah, that AXA, the company whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group, and whose "venture capital" arm bought out Bitcoin development by "investing" in Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k1r7v/the_insurance_company_with_the_biggest_exposure/
The rest is history:
Mysteriously, the new Greg Maxwell now dogmatically insists on 1 MB blocks - even after months of clear, graphical evidence showing that bigger blocks are urgently needed - and empirical research showing that bigger blocks (up to around 4 MB) are already technically quite feasible:
Cornell Study Recommends 4MB Blocksize for Bitcoin
https://np.reddit.com/btc+bitcoin/search?q=cornell+study+4+mb&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all
Actual Data from a serious test with blocks from 0MB - 10MB
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/3yqcj2/actual_data_from_a_serious_test_with_blocks_from/
Meanwhile Bitcoin development has tragically become dangerously centralized around the tyrannical, economically clueless Greg Maxwell - the person who is most to blame for strangling the network with his newfound stubborn insistence on an artificial 1 MB "max blocksize" limit:
People are starting to realize how toxic Gregory Maxwell is to Bitcoin, saying there are plenty of other coders who could do crypto and networking, and "he drives away more talent than he can attract." Plus, he has a 10-year record of damaging open-source projects, going back to Wikipedia in 2006.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4klqtg/people_are_starting_to_realize_how_toxic_gregory/
https://np.reddit.com/btc+bitcoin/search?q=author%3Aydtm+maxwell&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all
As we also know, Greg becomes very active on these forums during certain critical periods, relentlessly spewing lots of distracting technical stuff, but he is always very careful about two things:
For example, see this devastating comment to Greg from catsfive yesterday - and Greg's non-specific and unconvincing response a day later:
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mbd2h/does_any_of_what_unullc_is_saying_hold_wated3uz7o4
I think it's pretty disingenuous of you to "pretend" you don't know exactly what I'm talking about.
The chairman of Blockstream's biggest investor is also the chairman of the Bilderberg group, itself one of the biggest and most legitimate representatives of the very groups you are currently pretending Bitcoin is here to disintermediate.
I'm not going to insult your intelligence by pretending to explain who these groups are and why they would prefer to see Bitcoin evolve into a settlement layer instead of Satoshi's "P2P cash" system, but, at the very least, I would appreciate it and it would benefit the community as a whole if at least you would stop pretending not to understand the implications of what is being discussed here.
I'm sorry, but it absolutely galls me to watch someone steal this open source project and deliver it - bound and gagged, quite literally - at the feet of the very same rulers who will seek to integrate and extend the power of Bitcoin into their System, a system which, today, it cannot be argued, is the chief source of all the poverty, misery and inequality we see around us today. I'm sorry, but it's beyond the pale.
It is clear to anyone with any business experience whatsoever that Bitcoin Core is controlled by different individuals than those who are presented to the public.
[Austin] Hill, for instance, is a buffoon, and no legitimate tech CEO would take this person seriously or, for that matter, believe for one moment that they are dealing with a legitimate decision-maker.
Furthermore, are you going to continue pretending that you have no opinion on the nature or agenda of AXA Strategic Partners Ventures, Blockstream's largest investors?
Please. With all due respect, you CANNOT seriously expect anyone over the age of 30 to believe you.
A day later, Greg did finally re-appear with a non-specific and unconvincing response - of course, carefully avoiding using words such as "AXA" or "Bilderberg Group" (the owners of Blockstream, who pay his salary):
Huh? I've never heard from any of Blockstream's investors any comment or agenda or ... well, anything about the Bitcoin system.
[...]
The contrived conspiracy theory just falls flat on its face.
Well, I guess that settles that, right? Nothing to see here, just move along, everybody.
Seriously, there are a couple of major problems with Greg's anemic denial here:
  • We have no actual proof whether Gregory Maxwell is telling the truth or lying about this possible massive conflict of interest involving his paymasters from the AXA and the Bilderberg Group;
  • Even if he is narrowly telling the truth when he states that "I've never heard from any of Blockstream's investors any comment or agenda or ... well, anything about the bitcoin system" - this is not enough: because the people involved with the AXA and the Bilderberg Group would certainly be smart enough to avoid saying anything directly to Greg - in order to avoid having their "fingerprints" all over the strangling of Bitcoin's on-chain throughput capacity;
  • It is quite possible that the financial elite behind the Bilderberg Group decided to fund a guy like Greg simply because they realized that they could use him as a "useful idiot" - a mouthpiece who happens to advance their agenda of continuing to control the world's legacy financial systems, by strangling Bitcoin's on-chain throughput capacity.
  • Greg is certainly smart enough to understand the implications of the leader of the Bilderberg Group being one of the main owners of his company - and it is simply evasive and unprofessional of him to continually avoid addressing this potential massive conflict of interest head-on.
This could actually be the biggest conflict of interest in the financial world today:
The head of the Bilderberg Group pays the salary of Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell, who has become the centralized leader of Bitcoin development, and the single person most to blame for strangling the Bitcoin network at artificially tiny 1 MB blocks - a size which he himself years ago admitted would be too small.
There is probably ultimately really nothing that Gregory Maxwell can merely say to convince people that he is not somehow being used by the financial elite behind the Bilderberg Group - especially now when Bitcoin is unnecessarily hitting an artificial 1 MB "blocksize limit" which, more than anyone else, Greg Maxwell is directly to blame for.
Summarizing, the simple facts are:
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Why is Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc trying to pretend AXA isn't one of the top 5 "companies that control the world"? AXA relies on debt & derivatives to pretend it's not bankrupt. Million-dollar Bitcoin would destroy AXA's phony balance sheet. How much is AXA paying Greg to cripple Bitcoin?

Here was an interesting brief exchange between Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc and u/BitAlien about AXA:
https://np.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/62d2yq/why_bitcoin_is_under_attack/dfm6jt?context=3
The "non-nullc" side of the conversation has already been censored by r\bitcoin - but I had previously archived it here :)
https://archive.fo/yWnWh#selection-2613.0-2615.1
u/BitAlien says to u/nullc :
Blockstream is funded by big banks, for example, AXA.
https://blockstream.com/2016/02/02/blockstream-new-investors-55-million-series-a.html
u/nullc says to u/BitAlien :
is funded by big banks, for example, AXA
AXA is a French multinational insurance firm.
But I guess we shouldn't expect much from someone who thinks miners unilatterally control bitcoin.
Typical semantics games and hair-splitting and bullshitting from Greg.
But I guess we shouldn't expect too much honesty or even understanding from someone like Greg who thinks that miners don't control Bitcoin.
AXA-owned Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc doesn't understand how Bitcoin mining works
Mining is how you vote for rule changes. Greg's comments on BU revealed he has no idea how Bitcoin works. He thought "honest" meant "plays by Core rules." [But] there is no "honesty" involved. There is only the assumption that the majority of miners are INTELLIGENTLY PROFIT-SEEKING. - ForkiusMaximus
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5zxl2l/mining_is_how_you_vote_for_rule_changes_gregs/
AXA-owned Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc is economically illiterate
Adam Back & Greg Maxwell are experts in mathematics and engineering, but not in markets and economics. They should not be in charge of "central planning" for things like "max blocksize". They're desperately attempting to prevent the market from deciding on this. But it will, despite their efforts.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/46052e/adam_back_greg_maxwell_are_experts_in_mathematics/)
AXA-owned Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc doesn't understand how fiat works
Gregory Maxwell nullc has evidently never heard of terms like "the 1%", "TPTB", "oligarchy", or "plutocracy", revealing a childlike naïveté when he says: "‘Majority sets the rules regardless of what some minority thinks’ is the governing principle behind the fiats of major democracies."
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/44qr31/gregory_maxwell_unullc_has_evidently_never_heard/
AXA-owned Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc is toxic to Bitcoin
People are starting to realize how toxic Gregory Maxwell is to Bitcoin, saying there are plenty of other coders who could do crypto and networking, and "he drives away more talent than he can attract." Plus, he has a 10-year record of damaging open-source projects, going back to Wikipedia in 2006.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4klqtg/people_are_starting_to_realize_how_toxic_gregory/
So here we have Greg this week, desperately engaging in his usual little "semantics" games - claiming that AXA isn't technically a bank - when the real point is that:
AXA is clearly one of the most powerful fiat finance firms in the world.
Maybe when he's talking about the hairball of C++ spaghetti code that him and his fellow devs at Core/Blockstream are slowing turning their version of Bitcoin's codebase into... in that arcane (and increasingly irrelevant :) area maybe he still can dazzle some people with his usual meaningless technically correct but essentially erroneous bullshit.
But when it comes to finance and economics, Greg is in way over his head - and in those areas, he can't bullshit anyone. In fact, pretty much everything Greg ever says about finance or economics or banks is simply wrong.
He thinks he's proved some point by claiming that AXA isn't technically a bank.
But AXA is far worse than a mere "bank" or a mere "French multinational insurance company".
AXA is one of the top-five "companies that control the world" - and now (some people think) AXA is in charge of paying for Bitcoin "development".
A recent infographic published in the German Magazine "Die Zeit" showed that AXA is indeed the second-most-connected finance company in the world - right at the rotten "core" of the "fantasy fiat" financial system that runs our world today.
Who owns the world? (1) Barclays, (2) AXA, (3) State Street Bank. (Infographic in German - but you can understand it without knowing much German: "Wem gehört die Welt?" = "Who owns the world?") AXA is the #2 company with the most economic poweconnections in the world. And AXA owns Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5btu02/who_owns_the_world_1_barclays_2_axa_3_state/
The link to the PDF at Die Zeit in the above OP is gone now - but there's other copies online:
https://www.konsumentenschutz.ch/sks/content/uploads/2014/03/Wem-geh%C3%B6rt-die-Welt.pdfother
http://www.zeit.de/2012/23/IG-Capitalist-Network
https://archive.fo/o/EzRea/https://www.konsumentenschutz.ch/sks/content/uploads/2014/03/Wem-geh%C3%B6rt-die-Welt.pdf
Plus there's lots of other research and articles at sites like the financial magazine Forbes, or the scientific publishing site plos.org, with articles which say the same thing - all the tables and graphs show that:
AXA is consistently among the top five "companies that control everything"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2011/10/22/the-147-companies-that-control-everything/#56b72685105b
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0025995
http://www98.griffith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/handle/10072/37499/64037_1.pdf;sequence=1
https://www.outsiderclub.com/report/who-really-controls-the-world/1032
AXA is right at the rotten "core" of the world financial system. Their last CEO was even the head of the friggin' Bilderberg Group.
Blockstream is now controlled by the Bilderberg Group - seriously! AXA Strategic Ventures, co-lead investor for Blockstream's $55 million financing round, is the investment arm of French insurance giant AXA Group - whose CEO Henri de Castries has been chairman of the Bilderberg Group since 2012.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/47zfzt/blockstream_is_now_controlled_by_the_bilderberg/
So, let's get a few things straight here.
"AXA" might not be a household name to many people.
And Greg was "technically right" when he denied that AXA is a "bank" (which is basically the only kind of "right" that Greg ever is these days: "technically" :-)
But AXA is one of the most powerful finance companies in the world.
AXA was started as a French insurance company.
And now it's a French multinational insurance company.
But if you study up a bit on AXA, you'll see that they're not just any old "insurance" company.
AXA has their fingers in just about everything around the world - including a certain team of toxic Bitcoin devs who are radically trying to change Bitcoin:
And ever since AXA started throwing tens of millions of dollars in filthy fantasy fiat at a certain toxic dev named Gregory Maxwell, CTO of Blockstream, suddenly he started saying that we can't have nice things like the gradually increasing blocksizes (and gradually increasing Bitcoin prices - which fortunately tend to increase proportional to the square of the blocksize because of Metcalfe's law :-) which were some of the main reasons most of us invested in Bitcoin in the first place.
My, my, my - how some people have changed!
Greg Maxwell used to have intelligent, nuanced opinions about "max blocksize", until he started getting paid by AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group - the legacy financial elite which Bitcoin aims to disintermediate. Greg always refuses to address this massive conflict of interest. Why?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4mlo0z/greg_maxwell_used_to_have_intelligent_nuanced/
Previously, Greg Maxwell u/nullc (CTO of Blockstream), Adam Back u/adam3us (CEO of Blockstream), and u/theymos (owner of r\bitcoin) all said that bigger blocks would be fine. Now they prefer to risk splitting the community & the network, instead of upgrading to bigger blocks. What happened to them?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5dtfld/previously_greg_maxwell_unullc_cto_of_blockstream/
"Even a year ago I said I though we could probably survive 2MB" - nullc
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/43mond/even_a_year_ago_i_said_i_though_we_could_probably/
Core/Blockstream supporters like to tiptoe around the facts a lot - hoping we won't pay attention to the fact that they're getting paid by a company like AXA, or hoping we'll get confused if Greg says that AXA isn't a bank but rather an insurance firm.
But the facts are the facts, whether AXA is an insurance giant or a bank:
  • AXA would be exposed as bankrupt in a world dominated by a "counterparty-free" asset class like Bitcoin.
  • AXA pays Greg's salary - and Greg is one of the major forces who has been actively attempting to block Bitcoin's on-chain scaling - and there's no way getting around the fact that artificially small blocksizes do lead to artificially low prices.
AXA kinda reminds me of AIG
If anyone here was paying attention when the cracks first started showing in the world fiat finance system around 2008, you may recall the name of another mega-insurance company, that was also one of the most connected finance companies in the world: AIG.
Falling Giant: A Case Study Of AIG
What was once the unthinkable occurred on September 16, 2008. On that date, the federal government gave the American International Group - better known as AIG (NYSE:AIG) - a bailout of $85 billion. In exchange, the U.S. government received nearly 80% of the firm's equity. For decades, AIG was the world's biggest insurer, a company known around the world for providing protection for individuals, companies and others. But in September, the company would have gone under if it were not for government assistance.
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/american-investment-group-aig-bailout.asp
Why the Fed saved AIG and not Lehman
Bernanke did say he believed an AIG failure would be "catastrophic," and that the heavy use of derivatives made the AIG problem potentially more explosive.
An AIG failure, thanks to the firm's size and its vast web of trading partners, "would have triggered an intensification of the general run on international banking institutions," Bernanke said.
http://fortune.com/2010/09/02/why-the-fed-saved-aig-and-not-lehman/
Just like AIG, AXA is a "systemically important" finance company - one of the biggest insurance companies in the world.
And (like all major banks and insurance firms), AXA is drowning in worthless debt and bets (derivatives).
Most of AXA's balance sheet would go up in a puff of smoke if they actually did "mark-to-market" (ie, if they actually factored in the probability of the counterparties of their debts and bets actually coming through and paying AXA the full amount it says on the pretty little spreadsheets on everyone's computer screens).
In other words: Like most giant banks and insurers, AXA has mainly debt and bets. They rely on counterparties to pay them - maybe, someday, if the whole system doesn't go tits-up by then.
In other words: Like most giant banks and insurers, AXA does not hold the "private keys" to their so-called wealth :-)
So, like most giant multinational banks and insurers who spend all their time playing with debts and bets, AXA has been teetering on the edge of the abyss since 2008 - held together by chewing gum and paper clips and the miracle of Quantitative Easing - and also by all the clever accounting tricks that instantly become possible when money can go from being a gleam in a banker's eye to a pixel on a screen with just a few keystrokes - that wonderful world of "fantasy fiat" where central bankers ninja-mine billions of dollars in worthless paper and pixels into existence every month - and then for some reason every other month they have to hold a special "emergency central bankers meeting" to deal with the latest financial crisis du jour which "nobody could have seen coming".
AIG back in 2008 - much like AXA today - was another "systemically important" worldwide mega-insurance giant - with most of its net worth merely a pure fantasy on a spreadsheet and in a four-color annual report - glossing over the ugly reality that it's all based on toxic debts and derivatives which will never ever be paid off.
Mega-banks Mega-insurers like AXA are addicted to the never-ending "fantasy fiat" being injected into the casino of musical chairs involving bets upon bets upon bets upon bets upon bets - counterparty against counterparty against counterparty against counterparty - going 'round and 'round on the big beautiful carroussel where everyone is waiting on the next guy to pay up - and meanwhile everyone's cooking their books and sweeping their losses "under the rug", offshore or onto the taxpayers or into special-purpose vehicles - while the central banks keep printing up a trillion more here and a trillion more there in worthless debt-backed paper and pixels - while entire nations slowly sink into the toxic financial sludge of ever-increasing upayable debt and lower productivity and higher inflation, dragging down everyone's economies, enslaving everyone to increasing worktime and decreasing paychecks and unaffordable healthcare and education, corrupting our institutions and our leaders, distorting our investment and "capital allocation" decisions, inflating housing and healthcare and education beyond everyone's reach - and sending people off to die in endless wars to prop up the deadly failing Saudi-American oil-for-arms Petrodollar ninja-mined currency cartel.
In 2008, when the multinational insurance company AIG (along with their fellow gambling buddies at the multinational investment banks Bear Stearns and Lehmans) almost went down the drain due to all their toxic gambling debts, they also almost took the rest of the world with them.
And that's when the "core" dev team working for the miners central banks (the Fed, ECB, BoE, BoJ - who all report to the "central bank of central banks" BIS in Basel) - started cranking up their mining rigs printing presses and keyboards and pixels to the max, unilaterally manipulating the "issuance schedule" of their shitcoins and flooding the world with tens of trillions in their worthless phoney fiat to save their sorry asses after all their toxic debts and bad bets.
AXA is at the very rotten "core" of this system - like AIG, a "systemically important" (ie, "too big to fail") mega-gigantic multinational insurance company - a fantasy fiat finance firm quietly sitting at the rotten core of our current corrupt financial system, basically impacting everything and everybody on this planet.
The "masters of the universe" from AXA are the people who go to Davos every year wining and dining on lobster and champagne - part of that elite circle that prints up endless money which they hand out to their friends while they continue to enslave everyone else - and then of course they always turn around and tell us we can't have nice things like roads and schools and healthcare because "austerity". (But somehow we always can have plenty of wars and prisons and climate change and terrorism because for some weird reason our "leaders" seem to love creating disasters.)
The smart people at AXA are probably all having nightmares - and the smart people at all the other companies in that circle of "too-big-to-fail" "fantasy fiat finance firms" are probably also having nightmares - about the following very possible scenario:
If Bitcoin succeeds, debt-and-derivatives-dependent financial "giants" like AXA will probably be exposed as having been bankrupt this entire time.
All their debts and bets will be exposed as not being worth the paper and pixels they were printed on - and at that point, in a cryptocurrency world, the only real money in the world will be "counterparty-free" assets ie cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin - where all you need to hold is your own private keys - and you're not dependent on the next deadbeat debt-ridden fiat slave down the line coughing up to pay you.
Some of those people at AXA and the rest of that mafia are probably quietly buying - sad that they missed out when Bitcoin was only $10 or $100 - but happy they can still get it for $1000 while Blockstream continues to suppress the price - and who knows, what the hell, they might as well throw some of that juicy "banker's bonus" into Bitcoin now just in case it really does go to $1 million a coin someday - which it could easily do with just 32MB blocks, and no modifications to the code (ie, no SegWit, no BU, no nuthin', just a slowly growing blocksize supporting a price growing roughly proportional to the square of the blocksize - like Bitcoin always actually did before the economically illiterate devs at Blockstream imposed their centrally planned blocksize on our previously decentralized system).
Meanwhile, other people at AXA and other major finance firms might be taking a different tack: happy to see all the disinfo and discord being sown among the Bitcoin community like they've been doing since they were founded in late 2014 - buying out all the devs, dumbing down the community to the point where now even the CTO of Blockstream Greg Mawxell gets the whitepaper totally backwards.
Maybe Core/Blockstream's failure-to-scale is a feature not a bug - for companies like AXA.
After all, AXA - like most of the major banks in the Europe and the US - are now basically totally dependent on debt and derivatives to pretend they're not already bankrupt.
Maybe Blockstream's dead-end road-map (written up by none other than Greg Maxwell), which has been slowly strangling Bitcoin for over two years now - and which could ultimately destroy Bitcoin via the poison pill of Core/Blockstream's SegWit trojan horse - maybe all this never-ending history of obstrution and foot-dragging and lying and failure from Blockstream is actually a feature and not a bug, as far as AXA and their banking buddies are concerned.
The insurance company with the biggest exposure to the 1.2 quadrillion dollar (ie, 1200 TRILLION dollar) derivatives casino is AXA. Yeah, that AXA, the company whose CEO is head of the Bilderberg Group, and whose "venture capital" arm bought out Bitcoin development by "investing" in Blockstream.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4k1r7v/the_insurance_company_with_the_biggest_exposure/
If Bitcoin becomes a major currency, then tens of trillions of dollars on the "legacy ledger of fantasy fiat" will evaporate, destroying AXA, whose CEO is head of the Bilderbergers. This is the real reason why AXA bought Blockstream: to artificially suppress Bitcoin volume and price with 1MB blocks.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4r2pw5/if_bitcoin_becomes_a_major_currency_then_tens_of/
AXA has even invented some kind of "climate catastrophe" derivative - a bet where if the global warming destroys an entire region of the world, the "winner" gets paid.
Of course, derivatives would be something attractive to an insurance company - since basically most of their business is about making and taking bets.
So who knows - maybe AXA is "betting against" Bitcoin - and their little investment in the loser devs at Core/Blockstream is part of their strategy for "winning" that bet.
This trader's price & volume graph / model predicted that we should be over $10,000 USD/BTC by now. The model broke in late 2014 - when AXA-funded Blockstream was founded, and started spreading propaganda and crippleware, centrally imposing artificially tiny blocksize to suppress the volume & price.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5obe2m/this_traders_price_volume_graph_model_predicted/
"I'm angry about AXA scraping some counterfeit money out of their fraudulent empire to pay autistic lunatics millions of dollars to stall the biggest sociotechnological phenomenon since the internet and then blame me and people like me for being upset about it." ~ u/dresden_k
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5xjkof/im_angry_about_axa_scraping_some_counterfeit/
Bitcoin can go to 10,000 USD with 4 MB blocks, so it will go to 10,000 USD with 4 MB blocks. All the censorship & shilling on r\bitcoin & fantasy fiat from AXA can't stop that. BitcoinCORE might STALL at 1,000 USD and 1 MB blocks, but BITCOIN will SCALE to 10,000 USD and 4 MB blocks - and beyond
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5jgkxv/bitcoin_can_go_to_10000_usd_with_4_mb_blocks_so/
AXA/Blockstream are suppressing Bitcoin price at 1000 bits = 1 USD. If 1 bit = 1 USD, then Bitcoin's market cap would be 15 trillion USD - close to the 82 trillion USD of "money" in the world. With Bitcoin Unlimited, we can get to 1 bit = 1 USD on-chain with 32MB blocksize ("Million-Dollar Bitcoin")
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/5u72va/axablockstream_are_suppressing_bitcoin_price_at/
Anyways, people are noticing that it's a little... odd... the way Greg Maxwell seems to go to such lengths, in order to cover up the fact that bigger blocks have always correlated to higher price.
He seems to get very... uncomfortable... when people start pointing out that:
It sure looks like AXA is paying Greg Maxwell to suppress the Bitcoin price.
Greg Maxwell has now publicly confessed that he is engaging in deliberate market manipulation to artificially suppress Bitcoin adoption and price. He could be doing this so that he and his associates can continue to accumulate while the price is still low (1 BTC = $570, ie 1 USD can buy 1750 "bits")
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/4wgq48/greg_maxwell_has_now_publicly_confessed_that_he/
Why did Blockstream CTO u/nullc Greg Maxwell risk being exposed as a fraud, by lying about basic math? He tried to convince people that Bitcoin does not obey Metcalfe's Law (claiming that Bitcoin price & volume are not correlated, when they obviously are). Why is this lie so precious to him?
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/57dsgz/why_did_blockstream_cto_unullc_greg_maxwell_risk/
I don't know how a so-called Bitcoin dev can sleep at night knowing he's getting paid by fucking AXA - a company that would probably go bankrupt if Bitcoin becomes a major world currency.
Greg must have to go through some pretty complicated mental gymastics to justify in his mind what everyone else can see: he is a fucking sellout to one of the biggest fiat finance firms in the world - he's getting paid by (and defending) a company which would probably go bankrupt if Bitcoin ever achieved multi-trillion dollar market cap.
Greg is literally getting paid by the second-most-connected "systemically important" (ie, "too big to fail") finance firm in the world - which will probably go bankrupt if Bitcoin were ever to assume its rightful place as a major currency with total market cap measured in the tens of trillions of dollars, destroying most of the toxic sludge of debt and derivatives keeping a bank financial giant like AXA afloat.
And it may at first sound batshit crazy (until You Do The Math), but Bitcoin actually really could go to one-million-dollars-a-coin in the next 8 years or so - without SegWit or BU or anything else - simply by continuing with Satoshi's original 32MB built-in blocksize limit and continuing to let miners keep blocks as small as possible to satisfy demand while avoiding orphans - a power which they've had this whole friggin' time and which they've been managing very well thank you.
Bitcoin Original: Reinstate Satoshi's original 32MB max blocksize. If actual blocks grow 54% per year (and price grows 1.542 = 2.37x per year - Metcalfe's Law), then in 8 years we'd have 32MB blocks, 100 txns/sec, 1 BTC = 1 million USD - 100% on-chain P2P cash, without SegWit/Lightning or Unlimited
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5uljaf/bitcoin_original_reinstate_satoshis_original_32mb/
Meanwhile Greg continues to work for Blockstream which is getting tens of millions of dollars from a company which would go bankrupt if Bitcoin were to actually scale on-chain to 32MB blocks and 1 million dollars per coin without all of Greg's meddling.
So Greg continues to get paid by AXA, spreading his ignorance about economics and his lies about Bitcoin on these forums.
In the end, who knows what Greg's motivations are, or AXA's motivations are.
But one thing we do know is this:
Satoshi didn't put Greg Maxwell or AXA in charge of deciding the blocksize.
The tricky part to understand about "one CPU, one vote" is that it does not mean there is some "pre-existing set of rules" which the miners somehow "enforce" (despite all the times when you hear some Core idiot using words like "consensus layer" or "enforcing the rules").
The tricky part about really understanding Bitcoin is this:
Hashpower doesn't just enforce the rules - hashpower makes the rules.
And if you think about it, this makes sense.
It's the only way Bitcoin actually could be decentralized.
It's kinda subtle - and it might be hard for someone to understand if they've been a slave to centralized authorities their whole life - but when we say that Bitcoin is "decentralized" then what it means is:
We all make the rules.
Because if hashpower doesn't make the rules - then you'd be right back where you started from, with some idiot like Greg Maxwell "making the rules" - or some corrupt too-big-to-fail bank debt-and-derivative-backed "fantasy fiat financial firm" like AXA making the rules - by buying out a dev team and telling us that that dev team "makes the rules".
But fortunately, Greg's opinions and ignorance and lies don't matter anymore.
Miners are waking up to the fact that they've always controlled the blocksize - and they always will control the blocksize - and there isn't a single goddamn thing Greg Maxwell or Blockstream or AXA can do to stop them from changing it - whether the miners end up using BU or Classic or BitcoinEC or they patch the code themselves.
The debate is not "SHOULD THE BLOCKSIZE BE 1MB VERSUS 1.7MB?". The debate is: "WHO SHOULD DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?" (1) Should an obsolete temporary anti-spam hack freeze blocks at 1MB? (2) Should a centralized dev team soft-fork the blocksize to 1.7MB? (3) OR SHOULD THE MARKET DECIDE THE BLOCKSIZE?
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5pcpec/the_debate_is_not_should_the_blocksize_be_1mb/
Core/Blockstream are now in the Kübler-Ross "Bargaining" phase - talking about "compromise". Sorry, but markets don't do "compromise". Markets do COMPETITION. Markets do winner-takes-all. The whitepaper doesn't talk about "compromise" - it says that 51% of the hashpower determines WHAT IS BITCOIN.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/5y9qtg/coreblockstream_are_now_in_the_k%C3%BCblerross/
Clearing up Some Widespread Confusions about BU
Core deliberately provides software with a blocksize policy pre-baked in.
The ONLY thing BU-style software changes is that baking in. It refuses to bundle controversial blocksize policy in with the rest of the code it is offering. It unties the blocksize settings from the dev teams, so that you don't have to shop for both as a packaged unit.
The idea is that you can now have Core software security without having to submit to Core blocksize policy.
Running Core is like buying a Sony TV that only lets you watch Fox, because the other channels are locked away and you have to know how to solder a circuit board to see them. To change the channel, you as a layman would have to switch to a different TV made by some other manufacturer, who you may not think makes as reliable of TVs.
This is because Sony believes people should only ever watch Fox "because there are dangerous channels out there" or "because since everyone needs to watch the same channel, it is our job to decide what that channel is."
So the community is stuck with either watching Fox on their nice, reliable Sony TVs, or switching to all watching ABC on some more questionable TVs made by some new maker (like, in 2015 the XT team was the new maker and BIP101 was ABC).
BU (and now Classic and BitcoinEC) shatters that whole bizarre paradigm. BU is a TV that lets you tune to any channel you want, at your own risk.
The community is free to converge on any channel it wants to, and since everyone in this analogy wants to watch the same channel they will coordinate to find one.
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/602vsy/clearing_up_some_widespread_confusions_about_bu/
Adjustable blocksize cap (ABC) is dangerous? The blocksize cap has always been user-adjustable. Core just has a really shitty inferface for it.
What does it tell you that Core and its supporters are up in arms about a change that merely makes something more convenient for users and couldn't be prevented from happening anyway? Attacking the adjustable blocksize feature in BU and Classic as "dangerous" is a kind of trap, as it is an implicit admission that Bitcoin was being protected only by a small barrier of inconvenience, and a completely temporary one at that. If this was such a "danger" or such a vector for an "attack," how come we never heard about it before?
Even if we accept the improbable premise that inconvenience is the great bastion holding Bitcoin together and the paternalistic premise that stakeholders need to be fed consensus using a spoon of inconvenience, we still must ask, who shall do the spoonfeeding?
Core accepts these two amazing premises and further declares that Core alone shall be allowed to do the spoonfeeding. Or rather, if you really want to you can be spoonfed by other implementation clients like libbitcoin and btcd as long as they are all feeding you the same stances on controversial consensus settings as Core does.
It is high time the community see central planning and abuse of power for what it is, and reject both:
  • Throw off central planning by removing petty "inconvenience walls" (such as baked-in, dev-recommended blocksize caps) that interfere with stakeholders coordinating choices amongst themselves on controversial matters ...
  • Make such abuse of power impossible by encouraging many competing implementations to grow and blossom
https://np.reddit.com/btc/comments/617gf9/adjustable_blocksize_cap_abc_is_dangerous_the/
So it's time for Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell u/nullc to get over his delusions of grandeur - and to admit he's just another dev, with just another opinion.
He also needs to look in the mirror and search his soul and confront the sad reality that he's basically turned into a sellout working for a shitty startup getting paid by the 5th (or 4th or 2nd) "most connected", "systemically important", "too-big-to-fail", debt-and-derivative-dependent multinational bank mega-insurance giant in the world AXA - a major fiat firm firm which is terrified of going bankrupt just like that other mega-insurnace firm AIG already almost did before the Fed rescued them in 2008 - a fiat finance firm which is probably very conflicted about Bitcoin, at the very least.
Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell is getting paid by the most systemically important bank mega-insurance giant in the world, sitting at the rotten "core" of the our civilization's corrupt, dying fiat cartel.
Blockstream CTO Greg Maxwell is getting paid by a mega-bank mega-insurance company that will probably go bankrupt if and when Bitcoin ever gets a multi-trillion dollar market cap, which it can easily do with just 32MB blocks and no code changes at all from clueless meddling devs like him.
submitted by ydtm to btc [link] [comments]

Cryptocurrencies Market Cap History Chart (BTC ETH XRP Altcoins) History of Bitcoin Price (BTC) History of Bitcoin 2009-2018 (Git Visualization) - YouTube BITCOIN PRICE PLUMMETS IN MINUTES!  WHAT IS NEXT FOR BTC? Wikipedia cautious about Bitcoin -- Price Bounces Back -- Neo Bee Fraud

Bitcoin Value History Graph Monday, 31 August 2020. If you put 1 000 in bitcoin 2017 price of ethereum in real time bitcoin could be about to make a bitcoin btc price prediction for 2020 bitcoin price history and guide history of bitcoin wikipedia. Wikipedia and Bitcoin The main reason Wikipedia succeeded was because of the idea that nobody can control the site’s emission or its value, similar to Bitcoin. This means every individual can make decisions, edit, learn, and improve the system. The fast growth of Wikipedia and Bitcoin is part of the two’s similarities. Wikipedia and Bitcoin's Blockchain 2. Bitcoin Price History: A Timeline. In order to understand Bitcoin’s price today, as well as its possible future price timeline, it is useful to take a look back on the history of Bitcoin price. While it would be impossible to list every event since its invention that had an impact its price, below, we’ve highlighted the most notable ones. Bitcoin price today is $13,157.97 USD with a 24-hour trading volume of $23,730,036,740 USD. Bitcoin is up 1.33% in the last 24 hours. The current CoinMarketCap ranking is #1, with a market cap of $243,779,373,909 USD. It has a circulating supply of 18,527,131 BTC coins and a max. supply of 21,000,000 BTC coins. You can find the top exchanges to trade Bitcoin listed on our Bitcoin history. Bitcoin is the first example of decentralized digital money established in 2008 by a person or a group of people under the pseudonym of Satoshi Nakamoto. This account of bitcoin history resumes the first ten-years (2008 - 2019) of the cryptocurrency. Bitcoin price since 2009 to 2019. Bitcoin price charts.

[index] [34745] [46476] [33294] [27505] [29264] [3829] [35008] [43928] [14771] [47039]

Cryptocurrencies Market Cap History Chart (BTC ETH XRP Altcoins)

In todays video we take a look at the Bitcoin price and what to expect if history will repeat. This chart is so clear as the clearest water I have ever seen ... What is NAMECOIN BITCOIN'S First Fork http://youtu.be/oBkhPhu3_B4 Test Scanning Stainless Steel BITCOIN WALLET view http://youtu.be/P3Cny4iX-CM Why the block... Bitcoin price drops 15% in a matter of minutes. What does this mean for bitcoin bulls? Is btc even bullish anymore? Here is what you can look out for on the bitcoin charts. This video represent history of BTC-USD exchange rate until 2019.07.11 Bitcoin price is like crazy right now. How much will rising up? and, How much will falling down? Vous pouvez me tiper directement en bitcoin à cette adresse: 1FboUA5ZvzTXyUGEugSFct1bixjEsZjGmx Ou sur tipeee en suivant ce lien : https://www.tipeee.com/le-...

#