Bitcoin Wallet - Send and Receive Bitcoin Instantly using ...
Bitcoin Wallet - Send and Receive Bitcoin Instantly using ...
SovereignWallet: Recover Your Wallet If You Lose Your ...
Seven Key Things You Should Know About The Halving Of Bitcoin
Importing your private keys into Electrum – Bitcoin Electrum
Bitcoin’s Security is Fine. Fears over the declining block ...
My Trezor (MEW?) account got compremised, funds were stolen
Hello ladies and gentleman, I hope you can help me out somehow. I put it in bitcoin as well despite its ethereum but its about trezor and the btc part is involved. In mid september all my ethereum and ethereum based stuff was cleared from my MEW accounts for roughly 38k USD. Trezor couldnt help me at all and we went through all the topics and questions they had which lead to nothing exept an basic answer “your seeds got compromised in the past“, which doesn’t make any sense and I will explain why. Lets say, Im a person with some basic tech knowledge and worked as admin and I use common sense to handle my crypto stuff which is part of my business and daily task since 2 years.I check all things again before sending. Adress, amount etc and never had any problems before.I never was on a fake page where I had to give my seed or passphrases inI dont open spam mails nor use my new laptop for something else then work, like visiting porn sites or shady stuff or use cracks etc. I didnt even found a malitous cookie after checking everything. The laptop I used was 3 months old and set up on my own with windows, firwall, antivir and anti malware stuff. Things I am doing form me and my friends since year 2000. No cracks used for programms, everything legal. I use a trezor one since then which is updated accordingly when the tool or page prompts me. I used to use chrome as my default browser (which i learned, over the past months trying to figure out what might have happened, is one oft the worst browsers). No one has my seedsno one knows my pin to entert the trezorI dont store any of this information onlineI dont know my private keys from trezor So what happened was that september 9 in the evening, a few hours after I sent some usdt deposit to my adress, I want to check if everything is there, login to my MEW account (online, not offline and url was correct. no addon used, just the shortcut in my browser which i safed there and always used and later checked i fit was linked to something else which wasnt), and the account was empty. Three ethereum adresses where i stored some coins, eth and usdt. I realised that every transaction below happened while i was standing infront of my laptop (checked time happening), trezor connected cause i did some btc transaction before and chatted to customers on different chat tools like telegram or skype. Obvsly without signing any transaction at all everything was sent to other adresses. It seemed someone got the keys to those adresses before. Now, I dont even know my private keys to those adresses which are stored in trezor right? I wasnt logged into MEW before this incident for about 1.5 days. The btc part on my trezor is MUCH more valuable, but still there. After trezor couldnt help me about what happened and MEW treated me like the standard idiot who gets highjacked and then wonders why his money is gone, I went trough so many possibilities. For the most time I thought some kind of KRACK attack happened. The only problem is trezor says they dont extract the private keys. Some gurus in this topic ( i read on reddit here) say its possible to get them from the network. Even parts are enough to encrypt the whole key after a while which would underline the timeline that it took 6 days from working in this hotel and having the unusual situation with the sending (down explained) till the accs got cleared. The hotel incident happened the week before my accounts got cleared. I was visitting friends and coworking agents in Vietnam and stayed in a red doorz hotel in Ho Chi Minh. Using the Hotel Wifi and a nvpn.net VPN I sent some usdt funds via MEW to a befriended customer and something very stranged happened, which I never had before.I sent 4k usdt to a customer and the transaction took 13 min working working working and then failed. I’ve never had something like that. We thought it might be because of eth network or so but we never had that before, me and him sending a lot transactions every day. Then i copied all details in again and send another 4k and somehow he recieved both! check the screen. The one transaction processed nearly 13 min then failed. 2min later i sent a new one and without any evidence in this screen he recieved both. https://s19.directupload.net/images/200121/27e8uyd3.jpg later https://s19.directupload.net/images/200121/3todak3u.png So he sent me back the additional 4k and I shut down everything not thinking about this much anymore. Only when the accounts got cleared I was searching for any unusual happenings which could have let to this because pretty much all other “typical“ mistakes people normally do we could exclude. If somehow my seeds got compromised why only the ETH stuff? The btc parts on the trezor had much much more value. I never searched for trezor page on the web and used a link to access my wallets or to do updates. I always used the trezor bridge and made a shortcut to my wallet in my browser. For MEW i always used the same shortcut in my browser which worked pretty fine for the past years an everytime when setting the browser or pc new i checked it all before. Because of the unusual thing which happened in Vietnam I flew back there (from philippines) prepared with tools and checking because I couldnt let go and I didnt find any other plausible cause. I even got back my old room. In this hotel there are three hotel wifi network and I remeber 100% that I used the 2nd one before cause it had the strongest signal. Anyway. I switched on wireshark and later on Fiddler, repeated all steps I used to do before. Checking if some rerouting, dns poisening or readressing or so is happening. Nothing unusual happened in the first when entering MEW (I sent some bait funds there). In the 2nd network I used in september the trezor basically totally freaked out. He didnt let me enter MEW, I had to reenter my pin up to 5 times sometimes, It gave me error messages in MEW or it took 30 fucking seconds to enter it. Trezor writes about this: “When you enter an invalid PIN a few times, the Trezor adds a forced waiting time between attempts.You can see this feature on the photo where the Trezor is making you wait for 15 seconds before another attempt.This countdown is then multiplied by the factor of two until you reach the 16th invalid PIN entry. After that, the device automatically wipes its memory - deleting all data from it. The behavior of your Trezor at MEW is undoubtedly not standard or in any form pleasantly functional. Nevertheless, it also isn't anything superbly unusual or unexpected, taking poor internet connection into account.“ The thing is, the pin is 6 digits but pretty basic and I never ever entered it wrong. And I used the strongest wifi and could open webpages very easily . As well as: “Sadly, this does not tell us anything about how your funds could be compromised. None of this could have ever exposed your private keys or made your device vulnerable in any way. The Reddit thread you linked discusses cracking BIP-39 passphrases, which is irrelevant to your case. Cracking such passphrases assumes the person trying to break the wallet already has full possession of the recovery seed (recovery words). See, a passphrase is not your recovery seed or some additional password on your device. It is an extension of the seed, and it is also 100% useless without controlling the full seed. The only threat you are exposed to when using Chrome is using Google itself. When googling "trezor" or "trezor wallet", you might stumble upon a phishing site which will present itself as a genuine Trezor website and force you to go through a fake "recovery" process. There you'd give out your recovery seed, which subsequently grants full access to your wallet and funds. It's reasonable to assume that malware could guide you to such a website. To this day, we are not aware of any such incident ever happening, and even then, there are protections in place to defend you against phishing attempts.“ Basically, something I never did and all funds would haven been gone then. I checked the 3rd network as well, and like the 1st nothing special happened. Only in the 2nd. These are the funds and how the got cleared off the wallets. I always show last transaction from me to the adress as well on the screens. So adress: 0x253ABB6d747a9404A007f57AaDEc1cA2b80694a1 They withdrew this: 1k USDT and the small amount ETH to send stuff https://s19.directupload.net/images/200121/sg2lumg8.png adress: 0x01fd43a713D8F46FF9a7Ed108da2FF74884D8400 They withdrew this:Majority of USDT and small eth for sending stuff https://s19.directupload.net/images/200121/arycubto.png adress: 0xf73c8C30072488d932011696436B46005504A7aeThey withdrew this: Majority of ETh, then all coins from valueable to worthless and then some rest eth https://s19.directupload.net/images/200121/urbgm2y5.png https://s19.directupload.net/images/200121/rdkod59h.jpg So this is what happened at 12th september between 16:49 and 17:15. Sick to see that all happened between 16:49 and 17:00 and its like someone came back checking and saw the 0.014 eth and withdrew it 17:15. Around 10pm i discovered what happened. So, do you have any ideas? Questions? Feel free to guess or ask Im glad for everything which might lead to what might have happened. I somehow can’t let go off the feeling something inbetween the network, MEW and trezor ist he cause, but what do I know.
Which type of curren(t) do you want to see(cy)? A analysis of the intention behind bitcoin(s). [Part 2]
Part 1 It's been a bit of time since the first post during which I believe things have crystallised further as to the intentions of the three primary bitcoin variants. I was going to go on a long winded journey to try to weave together the various bits and pieces to let the reader discern from themselves but there's simply too much material that needs to be covered and the effort that it would require is not something that I can invest right now. Firstly we must define what bitcoin actually is. Many people think of bitcoin as a unit of a digital currency like a dollar in your bank but without a physical substrate. That's kind of correct as a way to explain its likeness to something many people are familiar with but instead it's a bit more nuanced than that. If we look at a wallet from 2011 that has never moved any coins, we can find that there are now multiple "bitcoins" on multiple different blockchains. This post will discuss the main three variants which are Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV. In this respect many people are still hotly debating which is the REAL bitcoin variant and which bitcoins you want to be "investing" in. The genius of bitcoin was not in defining a class of non physical objects to send around. Why bitcoin was so revolutionary is that it combined cryptography, economics, law, computer science, networking, mathematics, etc. and created a protocol which was basically a rule set to be followed which creates a game of incentives that provides security to a p2p network to prevent double spends. The game theory is extremely important to understand. When a transaction is made on the bitcoin network your wallet essentially generates a string of characters which includes your public cryptographic key, a signature which is derived from the private key:pub key pair, the hash of the previous block and an address derived from a public key of the person you want to send the coins to. Because each transaction includes the hash of the previous block (a hash is something that will always generate the same 64 character string result from EXACTLY the same data inputs) the blocks are literally chained together. Bitcoin and the blockchain are thus defined in the technical white paper which accompanied the release client as a chain of digital signatures. The miners validate transactions on the network and compete with one another to detect double spends on the network. If a miner finds the correct solution to the current block (and in doing so is the one who writes all the transactions that have elapsed since the last block was found, in to the next block) says that a transaction is confirmed but then the rest of the network disagree that the transactions occurred in the order that this miner says (for double spends), then the network will reject the version of the blockchain that that miner is working on. In that respect the miners are incentivised to check each other's work and ensure the majority are working on the correct version of the chain. The miners are thus bound by the game theoretical design of NAKAMOTO CONSENSUS and the ENFORCES of the rule set. It is important to note the term ENFORCER rather than RULE CREATOR as this is defined in the white paper which is a document copyrighted by Satoshi Nakamoto in 2009. Now if we look at the three primary variants of bitcoin understanding these important defining characteristics of what the bitcoin protocol actually is we can make an argument that the variants that changed some of these defining attributes as no longer being bitcoin rather than trying to argue based off market appraisal which is essentially defining bitcoin as a social media consensus rather than a set in stone rule set. BITCOIN CORE: On first examination Bitcoin Core appears to be the incumbent bitcoin that many are being lead to believe is the "true" bitcoin and the others are knock off scams. The outward stated rationale behind the bitcoin core variant is that computational resources, bandwidth, storage are scarce and that before increasing the size of each block to allow for more transactions we should be increasing the efficiency with which the data being fed in to a block is stored. In order to achieve this one of the first suggested implementations was a process known as SegWit (segregating the witness data). This means that when you construct a bitcoin transaction, in the header of the tx, instead of the inputs being public key and a signature + Hash + address(to), the signature data is moved outside of header as this can save space within the header and allow more transactions to fill the block. More of the history of the proposal can be read about here (bearing in mind that article is published by the bitcoinmagazine which is founded by ethereum devs Vitalik and Mihai and can't necessarily be trusted to give an unbiased record of events). The idea of a segwit like solution was proposed as early as 2012 by the likes of Greg Maxwell and Luke Dash Jnr and Peter Todd in an apparent effort to "FIX" transaction malleability and enable side chains. Those familiar with the motto "problem reaction solution" may understand here that the problem being presented may not always be an authentic problem and it may actually just be necessary preparation for implementing a desired solution. The real technical arguments as to whether moving signature data outside of the transaction in the header actually invalidates the definition of bitcoin as being a chain of digital signatures is outside my realm of expertise but instead we can examine the character of the individuals and groups involved in endorsing such a solution. Greg Maxwell is a hard to know individual that has been involved with bitcoin since its very early days but in some articles he portrays himself as portrays himself as one of bitcoins harshest earliest critics. Before that he worked with Mozilla and Wikipedia and a few mentions of him can be found on some old linux sites or such. He has no entry on wikipedia other than a non hyperlinked listing as the CTO of Blockstream. Blockstream was a company founded by Greg Maxwell and Adam Back, but in business registration documents only Adam Back is listed as the business contact but registered by James Murdock as the agent. They received funding from a number of VC firms but also Joi Ito and Reid Hoffman and there are suggestions that MIT media labs and the Digital Currency Initiative. For those paying attention Joi Ito and Reid Hoffman have links to Jeffrey Epstein and his offsider Ghislaine Maxwell. Ghislaine is the daughter of publishing tycoon and fraudster Robert Maxwell (Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch, a yiddish orthodox czech). It is emerging that the Maxwells are implicated with Mossad and involved in many different psyops throughout the last decades. Greg Maxwell is verified as nullc but a few months ago was outed using sock puppets as another reddit user contrarian__ who also admits to being Jewish in one of his comments as the former. Greg has had a colourful history with his roll as a bitcoin core developer successfully ousting two of the developers put there by Satoshi (Gavin Andreson and Mike Hearn) and being referred to by Andreson as a toxic troll with counterpart Samon Mow. At this point rather than crafting the narrative around Greg, I will provide a few links for the reader to assess on their own time:
Now I could just go on dumping more and more articles but that doesn't really weave it all together. Essentially it is very well possible that the 'FIX' of bitcoin proposed with SegWit was done by those who are moral reprobates who have been rubbing shoulders money launderers and human traffickers. Gregory Maxwell was removed from wikipedia, worked with Mozilla who donated a quarter of a million to MIT media labs and had relationship with Joi Ito, the company he founded received funding from people associated with Epstein who have demonstrated their poor character and dishonesty and attempted to wage toxic wars against those early bitcoin developers who wished to scale bitcoin as per the white paper and without changing consensus rules or signature structures. The argument that BTC is bitcoin because the exchanges and the market have chosen is not necessarily a logical supposition when the vast majority of the money that has flown in to inflate the price of BTC comes from a cryptographic USD token that was created by Brock Pierce (Might Ducks child stahollywood pedo scandal Digital Entertainment Network) who attended Jeffrey Epstein's Island for conferences. The group Tether who issues the USDT has been getting nailed by the New York Attorney General office with claims of $1.4 trillion in damages from their dodgey practices. Brock Pierce has since distanced himself from Tether but Blockstream still works closely with them and they are now exploring issuing tether on the ethereum network. Tether lost it's US banking partner in early 2017 before the monstrous run up for bitcoin prices. Afterwards they alleged they had full reserves of USD however, they were never audited and were printing hundreds of millions of dollars of tether each week during peak mania which was used to buy bitcoin (which was then used as collateral to issue more tether against the bitcoin they bought at a value they inflated). Around $30m in USDT is crossing between China to Russia daily and when some of the groups also related to USDT/Tether were raided they found them in possession of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of counterfeit physical US bills. Because of all this it then becomes important to reassess the arguments that were made for the implementation of pegged sidechains, segregated witnesses and other second layer solutions. If preventing the bitcoin blockchain from bloating was the main argument for second layer solutions, what was the plan for scaling the data related to the records of transactions that occur on the second layer. You will then need to rely on less robust ways of securing the second layer than Proof Of Work but still have the same amount of data to contend with, unless there was plans all along for second layer solutions to enable records to be deleted /pruned to facilitate money laundering and violation of laws put in place to prevent banking secrecy etc. There's much more to it as well and I encourage anyone interested to go digging on their own in to this murky cesspit. Although I know very well what sort of stuff Epstein has been up to I have been out of the loop and haven't familiarised myself with everyone involved in his network that is coming to light. Stay tuned for part 3 which will be an analysis of the shit show that is the Bitcoin Cash variant...
Best General RenVM Questions | September 2019 *These questions are sourced directly from Telegram Q: Given the RenVM Mainnet Roll-out Plan, what are the differences between how Darknodes participate in the P2P Network, Consensus, and Execution within RenVM? A: An outline of each component and its role in RenVM system is outlined below:P2P NetworkThe peer-to-peer network is used for two core purposes: peer discovery, and message saturation. Peer discovery allows Darknodes to learn about other active Darknodes in their shard, and in the network at large. Message saturation ensures that all messages sent around the network are seen by everyone. ConsensusThe consensus engine is used to reach a strict ordering of transactions that go through RenVM. This ensures that the Darknodes powering RenVM are able to agree on what actions to take, and when. ExecutionThe execution engine is used to run secure multiparty computations. This is how actions in RenVM are ultimately taken. These actions involve generating private keys, signing interoperability transactions, and, in the future, running general-purpose application logic. And all of this in secret. Q: How do I shut down my current Darknode(s)? A: Follow this instruction set explicitly and you won't have any issues: https://renproject.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360020365234-How-to-Fully-Deregister-a-Darknode Q: Is running a Darknode on Chaosnet useful for the team? A: Yes, by running a Chaosnet Darknode you are inherently helping us test. One of the core purposes of Chaosnet is to the real world incentives of RenVM. Running (and continuing to run) a Chaosnet Darknode says something about the incentives at play: they’re enough to get people running Darknodes. And this helps us! In fact, by not running a Chaosnet Darknode you’re also inherently helping us test. It’s telling us there’s something not quite right with the incentives. Q: And what's the incentive for someone to collude and attack the network during Chaosnet? A: The ability to steal real BTC/ZEC/BCH, the want to help us test the network, the want to betray their fellow colluders and take their REN bonds, and of course, some (wo)men just want to watch the world burn. Q: All of this de-registering and re-registering for mainnet is a bit annoying, is it necessary? A: We do certainly understand the point as it's been discussed at length but registration for the RenVM Mainnet is a necessary component (applying automatic updates for current Darknodes to run RenVM is not technically feasible). This announcement is very much an administrative piece to ensure our community has plenty of time and notice to proceed at the speed they prefer. Chasonet is designed for testing and those willing to actively experiment, but certainly not mandatory and there is no pressure on the general community to be active during this period. In summary for those who prefer to be less active, should de-register their current Darknode(s) and wait patiently for activation at the release of Mainnet SubZero, no other action is needed. Q: Is RenVM secure against quantum computing? A: The core of RZL sMPC is theoretical secure. This means that no amount of compute power can break it (making it post-Q safe). There are some parts of it that are not (zkSNARKs and some hashes that aren’t known whether or not they’re post-Q safe) but these are easy to replace (with zkSTARKs and some post-Q safe hashes). RZL sMPC provides ECDSA signatures because that’s what it is used by Ethereum, Bitcoin, etc. Whatever solution they come up with, will be the solution that RZL has to be upgraded to use (the whole point of RenVM is not to tell other chains how to do things, and still provide interop; this means waiting on them to define their solution and then working with that). In short, if a QC can steal funds from RenVM, it’s because it can steal funds from any Ethereum/Bitcoin/etc. private key. Q: If I don't deregister my Darknode by RenVM Mainnet, will I lose my 100K REN? A: The REN bond is safe forever. You can deregister your Darknode from the legacy Mainnet whenever. We recommend doing it now, because it can take three days, and once Chaosnet rolls around that’s where our support focus will be. Q: When shifting in funds, say a user doesn't have eth funds and this call fails const newSigResult = await ethSig.submitToEthereum (web3.currentProvider). what is the best way for that user to pick up where they left off if they leave the web page to get some ETH, and then come back? Should the app generates a new shift in the object, override the params and gateway address objects, re-submit to RenVM, and then make the above call again? Assume the transaction info such as original params and gateway address are stored in local storage so those will be available when the user comes back. A: This is the approach we take. We store the RenVM tx in local storage and then when the user comes back we can construct the Ethereum tx and hand it to them for signing again. You can construct the RenVM tx locally and store it before asking the user to send their BTC to the gateway to protect against unexpected shutdowns. This way, you can recover from them leaving the app at any point in the process without loss of funds. (This also allows you to resend the RenVM tx in the event that the first send fails for any reason.) Q 1: Could you elaborate on the proportionality of (a) Total value of bonded REN (b) Total value of assets under RenVM control? Does RenVM require (b) <= (a) at all times? RenVM would need an Oracle to determine the USD value of both (a) and (b). A 1: The oraclisation is done by the Darknodes. Each of them assesses what they determine that value of (a) and (b) to be and if 2/3rds of them independently decide (b) can be increased then the network will be able to go ahead with the computation. We do require (b) < (a) but have not determined the exact ratio. Because Darknodes are randomly sampled (and constantly reshuffled) from the entire group, this value can consider the entire amount of REN bonded (not just the REN bonded by one shard). Q 2: There's potentially an incentive-misalignment issue here: Darknodes would want to bypass the (b) < (a) limit in order to continue to process more tx's and collect fees. A 2: True, but there’s also a natural incentive for Darknodes to want to keep the network secure. A hack would likely render their REN to drop dramatically in price and they’re REN will be locked for 2-3 months after deregistration. This is also true of users. They should be wary of keeping assets locked up when it nears the secure threshold. This can be encouraged by scaling down the burning fees/raising minting fees to encourage the movement of funds “in the right direction” Q: Quick question: right now, a developer can choose to wait for 0 confirmations before minting zBTC on Ethereum when shifting in real BTC. Will the RenVM network require a minimum number of bitcoin confirmations, or is that always up to the application developer? If it's up to the developer, what if the developer chooses 0 confirmations, mints zBTC, and then double spends on the bitcoin network, invalidating that original bitcoin transaction? shouldn't that invalidate the zBTC that was already minted from the original 0 conf transaction? A: The developer cannot choose. RenVM will wait for the appropriate number of confirmations. On Testnet, this number is currently set to zero because it makes testing easier. On Mainnet, there will be systems for people to take on the “confirmation risk” and provide float. Devs can also set it up so that people can deposit ahead-of-time. We are also exploring Lightning and similar concepts. Q: I've noticed an increase of tx's made through RenVm, how tests are going on; have you met any unexpected obstacles? A: We’ve encountered a few issues with nodes when they are rebooted/crash (we are constantly rebooting/crashing them to make sure the network continues to operate as expected under those circumstances). But, we have fixes in the work for all these issues and it hasn’t prevented us from being able to add new features (BCash and SegWit support has recently hit Devnet and will be arriving on Testnet soon). Q1: If home chain = destination chain, then RenVM is effectively a mixing service? A1: It can be used that way, definitely. But, it has to have a few more privacy features enabled, shifting alone won’t do. Q2: RenVM mints Aztec notes for example? A2: Yep, that’s the plan; we need to wait until the Ignition ceremony before this can be done. It’s one of the next features in our pipeline though! BTC would “appear” on Ethereum with no known owner. And, if you wait an amount of time between getting the authorizing from RenVM and using the signature, then it would be impossible to trace it back to the request that went to RenVM. Q: When I go to the Command Center, the page doesn't load? A: One has to be on the Kovan Testnet (on Metamask). To do this, select the top middle button on your Metamask tab and click Kovan Test Network (Purple circle). If you’d like to see it in action, submit a trade on our Testnet Dex Demo (https://renproject.github.io/renvm-demo/) and see it proceed through RenVM via the Hyperdrive tab: https://dcc-testnet.republicprotocol.com/hyperdrive Q: Mixicles & RenVM: It seems like Mixicles could be used to preserve privacy features for on and off-chain settlements in a blockchain agnostic way. Wouldn’t this be seen as a threat as smart contracts could now replace a darkpool while maintaining the element of anonymity? A: Mixicles (and all other ZK on-chain stuff we’ve seen) gives you privacy on the chain. So you can prove things have been done right (one of the things we like about public blockchains), without exposing any information about the thing (an issue with public blockchains). But, the prover still has access to the information. This rules it out for many kinds of private apps. RenVM gives you absolute privacy. You can do things with data, and prove things about data, without anyone anywhere ever knowing anything about the data. This is much more general. Q: Can’t people just fork RenVM? A: What ultimately prevents forks is the network effect. All projects that want to take decentralization seriously need to open-source their implementations. Almost by definition, a decentralized network is nothing but its community of people willing to work together; this is the very essence of “trust no-one except for the majority”. If you refuse to open-source you don’t have a community, you have hostages. Building up momentum and creating a large network and community is incredibly valuable and not something that can be forked. Bitcoin is still Bitcoin, despite the large number of forks that have been created, and most of the time forks don’t overtake or outpace the original because there is too much inertia in the original community. There are other, less philosophical, benefits too. Open-source code means you can get more feedback, people can help fix bugs, identify potential security issues, anyone can validate the implementation, people can build their own implementations (resulting in highly desirable “N versioning” which prevents a single bug compromising all nodes). https://renproject.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360001180915-General-RenVM-Questions-September-2019
Real-life evidence of the breadown of Bitcoin's (BTC) security model.
This post presents a simple procedure that permits: 1) the invalidation of a transaction recently sent by a payer to a payee, and; 2) the clawback of the coins associated with the transaction. This proof allows us to infer the following: a) Corecoin/SegWitcoin's trustlessness model is irremediably crippled. In this post, we call Corecoin/Segwitcoin the version of Bitcoin forcibly and probably intentionally degraded by a Blockstream-influenced developer group (for those who know about the politics of Bitcoin repository, you know I am being polite) b) The current crippled version of Bitcoin is unusable/untrustworthy for on-chain exchange-of-value (a critical property of money). c) Any contraption that does not display a critical property of money is not money. Q.E.D.: **Corecoin/Segwitcoin is not money.** Any investment made under the belief that Bitcoin is money is unsound and should be reconsidered. The effect of this discovery on the fiat value of Bitcoin (in USD or Euros) is yet to be quantified. ///////////////////////////// (long-read begins here, skip to DEMONSTRATION below if you are in a rush)
If we wanted to completely explain the reasoning underpinning every assertion of this demonstration, this post should be several thousands of words long. Therefore we will provide ample references throughout, and will leave it to the reader to fill in some blanks and discuss any flaws in the comments section. We are fully aware there are ample opportunities for nit-picking. C'est la vie. btw English is my 3rd spoken language, laugh with me of my flaws. About Zero-Confirmation transactions (0-conf) The original version of Bitcoin allowed for so-called "0-conf transactions". Although far from being perfectly secure, they allowed for the convenient and quick exchange of value between parties, at a reasonably and acceptable low risk, akin to that of currency forgery, in-person fraud and third-party processors charge backs. Here is a pertinent thread where Satoshi discusses this feature:
The 2 main features of 0-confirmation are: 1) A payer can spend his own change right away 2) Miners "generally" enforce "first-seen" policy - Optional, but they have an incentive to do so, and it's been indirectly but clearly demonstrated by some Peter Todd shenanigans with a Chinese miner. Political bonus: Gavin Andresen and Tom Harding had devised a way to increase the security of 0-conf, but it was rejected by the Blockstream-influenced repository maintainers. Suggested reading: On Zero Confirmation Transactions https://chrispacia.wordpress.com/2015/11/29/on-zero-confirmation-transactions/ About Replace by fee transaction (RBF) After the briefly described political fiasco (above), Peter Todd managed to get RBF committed into the Bitcoin code. The thinking goes like this "The miners are rational profit maximizers: let them accept higher fees if people are offering it". That was the end of 0-conf in Corecoin/Segwitcoin. Political bonus: It was at this point that Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn were shunned and for all intent and purposes excluded from providing any meaningful development work for Bitcoin Core. A "standard operating procedure" still to this day: toe the party line, and you are made "incommunicado". Very convenient when Blocstream partisans "demonstrate" the absence of evidence of centralised control of the repository. Typical rebuttal example: https://medium.com/@whalecalls/fud-or-fact-blockstream-inc-is-the-main-force-behind-bitcoin-and-taken-over-160aed93c003 What a bunch of bozos. Remember folks: Absence of evidence =/= Evidence of absence! /////////////////////////////
PRELUDE TO THE DEMO
The preceding section introduced a way to "double spend" a coin before its associated transaction is included in a block by a miner (RBF). Originally this "attack" vector also had a time constraint: since 95%+ of transactions were pickep-up in the very next block, speed was of the essence for the attacker. Not anymore. Why? Nowadays, it is not unusual for the mempool backlog to stay for extended periods of time above 40,000 transactions, with recent peaks way above 200,000 transactions. Assuming 2,500 transactions per block, this represents a backlog of 16 to 80 blocks. Naively assuming an even distribution of fees, the time required to process a transaction with an average fee is therefore 80 to 400 minutes + processing of incoming transactions. So: 80 to 400 minutes is an absolute best-case scenario (only a backlog, no incoming transacions). We could pull our fancy pencil and produce a detailled granulometry, but here it's not the point, the point is: 80 to 400 minutes is a long time, and most likely it will be days. I hope we all agree that a span of 80 minutes to several days is a long time to conduct an attack! Bonus: I will spare you the story about the extension of the mempool's expiring delay, another blatant proof of Core's failure. To witness the memory pool fiasco on the Corecoin/Segwitcoin chain (special thanks to nullc, please google: "Jochen mempool" or "Joehoe's mempool" Remember folks: Time is money. /////////////////////////////
Final version 1.3.0 of the core software was released bringing all the enhancements reported last month to the rest of the community. The groundwork for SPV (simplified payment verification) is complete, another reduction of fees is being deployed, and performance stepped up once again with a 50% reduction in startup time, 20% increased sync speed and more than 3x faster peer delivery of block headers (a key update for SPV). Decrediton's integrations of SPV and Politeia are open for testing by experienced users. Read the full release notes and get the downloads on GitHub. As always, don't forget to verify signatures. dcrd: completed several steps towards multipeer downloads, improved introduction to the software in the main README, continued porting cleanups and refactoring from upstream btcd. Currently in review are initial release of smart fee estimator and a change to UTXO set semantics. The latter is a large and important change that provides simpler handling, and resolves various issues with the previous approach. A lot of testing and careful review is needed so help is welcome. Educational series for new Decred developers by @matheusd added two episodes: 02 Simnet Setup shows how to automate simnet management with tmux and 03 Miner Reward Invalidation explains block validity rules. Finally, a pull request template with a list of checks was added to help guide the contributors to dcrd. dcrwallet: bugfixes and RPC improvements to support desktop and mobile wallets. Developers are welcome to comment on this idea to derive stakepool keys from the HD wallet seed. This would eliminate the need to backup and restore redeem scripts, thus greatly improving wallet UX. (missed in July issue) Decrediton: bugfixes, refactoring to make the sync process more robust, new loading animations, design polishing. Politeia: multiple improvements to the CLI client (security conscious users with more funds at risk might prefer CLI) and security hardening. A feature to deprecate or timeout proposals was identified as necessary for initial release and the work started. A privacy enhancement to not leak metadata of ticket holders was merged. Android: update from @collins: "Second test release for dcrandroid is out. Major bugs have been fixed since last test. Latest code from SPV sync has been integrated. Once again, bug reports are welcome and issues can be opened on GitHub". Ask in #dev room for the APK to join testing. A new security page was added that allows one to validate addresses and to sign/verify messages, similar to Decrediton's Security Center. Work on translations is beginning. Overall the app is quite stable and accepting more testers. Next milestone is getting the test app on the app store. iOS: the app started accepting testers last week. @macsleven: "the test version of Decred Wallet for iOS is available, we have a link for installing the app but the builds currently require your UDID. Contact either @macsleven or @raedah with your UDID if you would like to help test.". Nearest goal is to make the app crash free. Both mobile apps received new design themes. dcrdata: v3.0 was released for mainnet! Highlights: charts, "merged debits" view, agendas page, Insight API support, side chain tracking, Go 1.11 support with module builds, numerous backend improvements. Full release notes here. This release featured 9 contributors and development lead @chappjc noted: "This collaboration with @raedahgroup on our own block explorer and web API for @decredproject has been super productive.". Up next is supporting dynamic page widths site wide and deploying new visual blocks home page. Trezor: proof of concept implementation for Trezor Model T firmware is in the works (previous work was for Model One). Ticket splitting: updated to use Go modules and added simnet support, several fixes. docs: beginner's guide overhaul, multiple fixes and cleanups. decred.org: added 3rd party wallets, removed inactive PoW pools and removed web wallet. @Richard-Red is building a curated list of Decred-related GitHub repositories. Welcome to new people contributing for the first time: @klebe, @s_ben, @victorguedes, and PrimeDominus! Dev activity stats for September: 219 active PRs, 197 commits, 28.7k added and 18.8k deleted lines spread across 6 repositories. Contributions came from 4-10 developers per repository. (chart)
Hashrate: started and ended the month around 75 PH/s, hitting a low of 60.5 and a new high of 110 PH/s. BeePool is again the leader with their share varying between 23-54%, followed by F2Pool 13-30%, Coinmine 4-6% and Luxor 3-5%. As in previous months, there were multiple spikes of unidentified hashrate. Staking: 30-day average ticket price is 98 DCR (+2.4). The price varied between 95.7 and 101.9 DCR. Locked DCR amount was 3.86-3.96 million DCR, or 45.7-46.5% of the supply. Nodes: there are 201 public listening nodes and 325 normal nodes per dcred.eu. Version distribution: 5% are v1.4.0(pre) dev builds (+3%), 30% on v1.3.0 (+25%), 42% on v1.2.0 (-20%), 15% on v1.1.2 (-7%), 6% on v1.1.0. More than 76% of nodes run v1.2.0 and higher and therefore support client filters. Data as of Oct 1.
Obelisk posted two updates on their mailing list. 70% of Batch 1 units are shipped, an extensive user guide is available, Obelisk Scanner application was released that allows one to automatically update firmware. First firmware update was released and bumped SC1 hashrate by 10-20%, added new pools and fixed multiple bugs. Next update will focus on DCR1. It is worth a special mention that the firmware source code is now open! Let us hope more manufacturers will follow this example. A few details about Whatsminer surfaced this month. The manufacturer is MicroBT, also known as Bitwei and commonly misspelled as Bitewei. Pangolinminer is a reseller, and the model name is Whatsminer D1. Bitmain has finally entered Decred ASIC space with their Antminer DR3. Hash rate is 7.8 TH/s while pulling 1410 W, at the price of $673. These specs mean it has the best GH/W and GH/USD of currently sold miners until the Whatsminer or others come out, although its GH/USD of 11.6 already competes with Whatsminer's 10.5. Discussed on Reddit and bitcointalk, unboxing video here.
@matheusd started tests on testnet several months ago. I contacted him so we could integrate with the pool in June this year. We set up the machine in July and bought the first split ticket on mainnet, using the decredbrasil pool, on July 19. It was voted on July 30. After this first vote on mainnet, we opened the tests to selected users (with more technical background) on the pool. In August we opened the tests to everyone, and would call people who want to join to the #ticket_splitting channel, or to our own Slack (in Portuguese, so mostly Brazilian users). We have 28 split tickets already voted, and 16 are live. So little more than 40 split tickets total were bought on decredbrasil pool. (@girino in #pos-voting)
KuCoin exchange listed DCBTC and DCETH pairs. To celebrate their anniversary they had a 99% trading fees discount on DCR pairs for 2 weeks. Three more wallets integrated Decred in September:
Atomic desktop wallet added Decred in version 0.1.31. The team answered many questions on Reddit.
AnyBit wallet added Decred. It features built-in price and news tracking. Notably, the source code is open for their Android and iOS wallets.
Coboadded Decred support into their Android and iOS wallets.
ChangeNow announced Decred addition to their Android app that allows accountless swaps between 150+ assets. Coinbase launched informational asset pages for top 50 coins by market cap, including Decred. First the pages started showing in the Coinbase app for a small group of testers, and later the web price dashboard went live.
The birth of a Brazilian girl was registered on the Decred blockchain using OriginalMy, a blockchain proof of authenticity services provider. Read the full story in Portuguese and in English.
Advertising report for September is ready. Next month the graphics for all the ads will be changing.
Marketing might seem quiet right now, but a ton is actually going on behind the scenes to put the right foundation in place for the future. Discovery data are being analyzed to generate a positioning strategy, as well as a messaging hierarchy that can guide how to talk about Decred. This will all be agreed upon via consensus of the community in the work channels, and materials will be distributed. Next, work is being done to identify the right PR partner to help with media relations, media training, and coordination at events. While all of this is coming up to speed, we believe the website needs a refresher reflecting the soon to be agreed upon messaging, plus a more intuitive architecture to make it easier to navigate. (@Dustorf)
Raedah Group went on the streets of Portland, USA with a pretty blue tent. (photos)
Meetup at Binzantin Cafe in Taipei, Taiwan. @morphymore: "There were 20-ish attendees, and about half of them have joined the Chinese FB group. Most of them don't hear about Decred before, but have expressed the interest in learning more about it after the event. Overall, it's a good exposure for Decred in the Taiwan community.". A report with photos was posted on Facebook, more photos are here and here.
@joshuam made a Decred Jacket appearance at Singapore Grand Prix. (photos)
NewTech PDX meetup in Portland, USA. Raedah Group presented Decred and reported "lots of new converts". (photos)
North Shore Bitcoin & Blockchain in Glenview, USA. @dustorf gave a five minute overview of Decred and noted: "There were only about 25 people, but about 1/3 of them were aware of Decred prior. (...) Our simple presence and explanation of the project moved opinion from 'another shitcoin they sold after mining' to 'an interesting and viable project worthy of further investigation'.". (photos: 12)
Bitcoin Meetup CDMX in Mexico City on Oct 6. @elian will be talking about Decred at the oldest Bitcoin meetup in Mexico.
SF Blockchain Week in San Francisco, USA on Oct 9. @lukebp will discuss DPoS vs PoS on a panel 9:30a-10:15a at the Titans of Tech Stage, Hilton Union Square.
Decred Meetup in Casablanca, Morocco on Oct 27. @butterfly will host the event and talk about Decred in French.
Texas Bitcoin Conference Austin, USA on Oct 27-28. @BAB: "The great thing about this is that it will also be a Decred Summit. We will have half of the conference dedicated to Decred topics, updates, etc."
Websummit in Lisbon, Portugal on Nov 5-8. @moo31337 will be on a panel discussing "2018: A Rollercoaster Year for Cryptocurrencies"
We'll begin shortly reviewing conferences and events planned for the first half of 2019. Highlights are sure to include The North American Bitcoin Conference in Miami (Jan 16-18) and Consensus in NYC (May 14-16). If you have suggestions of events or conferences Decred should attend, please share them in #event_planning. In 2019, we would like to expand our presence in Europe, Asia, and South America, and we're looking for community members to help identify and staff those events. (@Dustorf)
August issue of Decred Journal was translated to Russian. Many thanks to @DZ! Rency cryptocurrency ratings published a report on Decred and incorporated a lot of feedback from the community on Reddit. September issue of Chinese CCID ratings was published (snapshot), Decred is still at the bottom. Videos:
The underbelly of blockchain Governance - fiat licensing and our code with Marco Peerboom and Chris DeRose (youtube, tweet, decred, missed in August issue) Insightful dialogue about men's underwear, licenses, subtleties of GPL, BSD wars, tiling window managers and much more.
Introduction to Decred (Korean, youtube) @Killawhale collected a lot of feedback from the community and produced this video to spread the word in Korea.
Perspectives on Governance from Nathan Wilcox, Jonathan Zeppettini, Vitalik Buterin (z.cash)
Decred - an example of governance (Portuguese, youtube)
Decred, the crypto that wants to compete with Bitcoin (French, youtube)
Exodus.io Live with Marco from Decred! (youtube) Marco joins Exodus.io to discuss what makes DCR an asset that will stand the test of time.
Building Decred With Systems Development Lead Marco Peereboom - Governance, Politeia, Lightning (youtube) Topics: early days, Politeia, the structure of Decred, dcrtime, Lightning Network, attracting users and developers, future plans (DEX, Schnorr signatures, privacy, DAEs).
Decentralized autonomous funding of blockchain projects by @Richard-Red (medium, discussion on decred and dashpay)
The trouble with infrastructure, "thin" protocols in particular, is that someone has to build them at a cost. e.g. LN takes a ton of work, doesn't necessarily generate value itself, but it magnifies the value of BTC or whatever coin that uses it. I see the DEX in a similar light - whoever creates it is not going to make a bunch of money from it, but it will magnify the value of the underlying asset(s) that end up having a deep order book on the DEX. (@jy-p in #dex)
Twitter: why decentralized governance and funding are necessary for network survival and the power of controlling the narrative; learning about governance more broadly by watching its evolution in cryptocurrency space, importance of community consensus and communications infrastructure. Reddit: yet another strong pitch by @solar; question about buyer protections; dcrtime internals; a proposal to sponsor hoodies in the University of Cape Town; Lightning Network support for altcoins. Chats: skills to operate a stakepool; voting details: 2 of 3 votes can approve a block, what votes really approve are regular tx, etc; scriptless script atomic swaps using Schnorr adaptor signatures; dev dashboard, choosing work, people do best when working on what interests them most; opportunities for governments and enterprise for anchoring legal data to blockchain; terminology: DAO vs DAE; human-friendly payments, sharing xpub vs payment protocols; funding btcsuite development; Politeia vote types: approval vote, sentiment vote and a defund vote, also linking proposals and financial statements; algo trading and programming languages (yes, on #trading!); alternative implementation, C/C++/Go/Rust; HFTs, algo trading, fake volume and slippage; offline wallets, usb/write-only media/optical scanners vs auditing traffic between dcrd and dcrwallet; Proof of Activity did not inspire Decred but spurred Decred to get moving, Wikipedia page hurdles; how stakeholders could veto blocks; how many votes are needed to approve a proposal; why Decrediton uses Electron; CVE-2018-17144 and over-dependence on single Bitcoin implementation, btcsuite, fuzz testing; tracking proposal progress after voting and funding; why the wallet does not store the seed at all; power connectors, electricity, wiring and fire safety; reasonable spendings from project fund; ways to measure sync progress better than block height; using Politeia without email address; concurrency in Go, locks vs channels. #support is not often mentioned, but it must be noted that every day on this channel people get high quality support. (@bee: To my surprise, even those poor souls running Windows 10. My greatest respect to the support team!)
In September DCR was trading in the range of USD 34-45 / BTC 0.0054-0.0063. On Sep 6, DCR revisited the bottom of USD 34 / BTC 0.0054 when BTC quickly dropped from USD 7,300 to 6,400. On Sep 14, a small price rise coincided with both the start of KuCoin trading and hashrate spike to 104 PH/s. Looking at coinmarketcap charts, the trading volume is a bit lower than in July and August. As of Oct 4, Decred is #18 by the number of daily transactions with 3,200 tx, and #9 by the USD value of daily issuance with $230k. (source: onchainfx) Interesting observation by @ImacallyouJawdy: while we sit at 2018 price lows the amount locked in tickets is testing 2018 high.
ASIC for Lyra2REv2 was spotted on the web. Vertcoin team is preparing a new PoW algorithm. This would be the 3rd fork after two previous forks to change the algorithm in 2014 and 2015. A report titled The Positive Externalities of Bitcoin Mining discusses the benefits of PoW mining that are often overlooked by the critics of its energy use. A Brief Study of Cryptonetwork Forks by Alex Evans of Placeholder studies the behavior of users, developers and miners after the fork, and makes the cases that it is hard for child chains to attract users and developers from their parent chains. New research on private atomic swaps: the paper "Anonymous Atomic Swaps Using Homomorphic Hashing" attempts to break the public link between two transactions. (bitcointalk, decred) On Sep 18 Poloniex announced delisting of 8 more assets. That day they took a 12-80% dive showing their dependence on this one exchange. Circle introduced USDC markets on Poloniex: "USDC is a fully collateralized US dollar stablecoin using the ERC-20 standard that provides detailed financial and operational transparency, operates within the regulated framework of US money transmission laws, and is reinforced by established banking partners and auditors.". Coinbase announced new asset listing process and is accepting submissions on their listing portal. (decred) The New York State Office of the Attorney General posted a study of 13 exchanges that contains many insights. A critical vulnerability was discovered and fixed in Bitcoin Core. Few days later a full disclosure was posted revealing the severity of the bug. In a bitcointalk thread btcd was called 'amateur' despite not being vulnerable, and some Core developers voiced their concerns about multiple implementations. The Bitcoin Unlimited developer who found the bug shared his perspective in a blog post. Decred's vision so far is that more full node implementations is a strength, just like for any Internet protocol.
About This Issue
This is the 6th issue of Decred Journal. It is mirrored on GitHub, Medium and Reddit. Past issues are available here. Most information from third parties is relayed directly from source after a minimal sanity check. The authors of Decred Journal have no ability to verify all claims. Please beware of scams and do your own research. Feedback is appreciated: please comment on Reddit, GitHub or #writers_room on Matrix or Slack. Contributions are also welcome: some areas are adding content, pre-release review or translations to other languages. Credits (Slack names, alphabetical order): bee, Dustorf, jz, Haon, oregonisaac, raedah and Richard-Red.
My attempt at an ELI5 for cryptocurrency to help my friends.
This is a long one so fair warning and no there is no tl;dr. I've only been at this for about 6 months and worked up this paper the other day for my friends who are interested but know very little about this. Hopefully whoever reads this can make in corrections as I am far from an expert. Blockchain Cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, Ether are all blockchains. Blockchains are basically a spreadsheet (LEDGER) that is duplicated multiple times across a network and updated regularly simultaneously. There is no centralized version of this ledger. It is hosted simultaneously by thousands/millions of computers. These ledgers will update on their own, Bitcoin as an example automatically checks itself every 10 minutes. Each of these 10-minute increment of transactions (in bitcoins case transactions would be sending or receiving bitcoins from one person to another for goods or services) are called BLOCKS. For these blocks to be confirmed, accepted, and updated to the ledger nodes are required. Nodes (Mining/Forging) A node is a computer running the blockchain software on the network. The blockchain software will automatically download the entire ledger of all transactions since its inception. At regular intervals, the software will take the transactions of a block (data on the ledger) and convert them into a mathematical puzzle to be solved by randomly chosen nodes (MINING). Mining requires powerful processors (typically GPUs) and substantial quantities of energy to receive mined tokens profitably. When a specific number of nodes solve the puzzle with the same answer they are basically confirming that the data on the block is accurate as multiple independent nodes found the same answer. When confirmed, the block gets added to the previous blocks making a chain of blocks aka a blockchain. As an incentive to run your computer as a node you are rewarded with TOKENS. If a single person or group of people wanted to manipulate the ledger, the amount of machinery and electricity used to achieve the majority of miners thus allowing you to manipulate the ledger is so exponentially expensive that it serves no reasonable purpose. This is an example of a Proof of Work Blockchain System (computer solves puzzle and rewarded with tokens) Tokens Tokens are part of the core of the blockchain. They are an incentive to validate transactions and create blocks. They gain intrinsic value based on the blockchain they are associated with. Some blockchains grant token holder’s different abilities. With Bitcoin, tokens are needed to pay for transaction fees. Others allow voting rights on how certain blockchain functions are managed. There is a limited amount of Bitcoin that will ever be released to nodes (21 million expected to be all be released by 2033) which also keep inflation from being a problem. Blockchains can create their platform with whatever number of tokens they would like and release them or create means to mine them as they see fit. Essentially, as with any other fiat money (currency that a government has declared to be legal tender NOT backed by a physical commodity), as adoption and trust increases the value of the token will increase. If most people accept Bitcoin for services and stores accept Bitcoin for goods than it is as good as the next currency. Wallets Whether you mine for tokens, are paid in tokens for goods or services or purchase tokens from a person or currency exchange you need a place to store them securely and a way to send and receive them. Cryptocurrency Wallets don’t store currency, they hold your public and private keys that interface with the blockchain so you can access your balance, send money and manage your funds. The public key allows others to send money to the public key only. A wallet that is "offline" (see Hardware or Paper below) cannot access funds or send money unless it is accessed with another form of wallet, either desktop, online, or mobile. 1) Desktop Wallet - Installed on your computer and are only accessible from that SINGLE computer. Very secure but if someone hacks your computer you are exposed. 2) Online Wallet - Run remotely (cloud based) and are far more convenient to access but make them more vulnerable as they are controlled by a third party and are also vulnerable to hacking attacks. Exchange wallets are online wallets but you are not in control of the private key. View it as a wallet that is lended to you so you can trade. The wallet is technically not yours. 3) Mobile - Ran on an app and are useful as they can be used anywhere including retail stores 4) Hardware - Private keys are stored on a tangible device like a USB drive. They can make transactions online but they are stored offline. Compatible with web interfaces and support many but not all currencies. To use, plug into a computer, enter a pin, send currency and confirm. Safest form of storage. 5) Paper - Basically a physical printout of your private and public keys. It is not stored online anywhere and the only way transactions can happen is if you transfer money with the help of an Online wallet. Example of a Public Key = 1A684DbsHQKPVCWgaUsYdF4uQGwTiA9BFT Example of a Private Key = E9873D79C6D87DC0FB6A5778633389F4453213303DA61F20BD67FC233AA33262 Most wallets provide a Recovery Mnemonic Passcode that is a series of words (typically 12 to 24 words) in a specific order. If you lose your login information for your wallet you can supply the mnemonic passcode and retrieve your lost login information. If you lose your login information and your mnemonic passcode your wallet will be inaccessible and your tokens are lost to you. The above basically describes a first generation Blockchain Cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin. It is used basically as currency with no centralized entity regulating the release of additional currency and keeping the ledger of where the money is going secure and extremely safe from manipulation. Second Generation Blockchain The second generation blockchains sprung out of this environment with something more valuable. Utilizing the blockchain system to allow applications to be ran on top of a decentralized secure system. Instead of just recording transactions, contracts could be transmitted the same way. More complex transactions (SMART CONTRACTS) allow for things such as: - Funds to be spent only when a required percentage of people agree - Manage agreements between users (such as insurance) - Provide utility to other contracts - Store information about an application such as domain registration information or membership records This basically can allow applications to be ran on top of the blockchain system. This can cut out the middleman for many real-world applications (mortgages, banking, communications, security confirmations etc.) Proof of Work/Proof of Stake As I mentioned earlier, Proof of Work (PoW) requires nodes to solve a mathematical puzzle which is rewarded with tokens. Proof of Stake (PoS) is different, the tokens with proof of stake systems are pre-mined meaning they are all created when the blockchain system is created. Blocks are not verified by the typical method. The block validator uses the blockchain software to stake their tokens and are chosen based on specific factors depending on how many tokens the person holds and for how long. Depending on how many tokens they hold will restrict the quantity of blocks they can validate. If they own more they can validate more often but all validators will be chosen randomly keeping the rewards fairly distributed (unlike PoW which typically reward the first completed.) The blockchain still requires a mathematical puzzle to be solved but it is much easier than PoW requiring far less time and energy. If the blockchain has premined all of their tokens then new tokens cannot be mined for rewards in PoS. The reward for staking your tokens to be a validator is a portion of the transaction fee that is charged as part of normal transactions on the blockchain. That is why PoS miners are called forgers. If manipulation is attempted than their stake can be taken from their wallet adding more motivation to prevent data manipulation. Fork Some cryptocurrencies may need to update or upgrade the coding of their blockchain software. When this happens usually a fork occurs. This basically means the cryptocurrency splits into two separate cryptocurrencies. Because the nature of blockchain technology, they are decentralized and autonomous so the older version cannot be deleted or removed. If people choose to continue using the old version they can. For mining/forging purposes the nodes will need to choose which they will mine/forge and download the blockchain software on their computer to proceed. When the fork occurs, anyone holding tokens in the original currency will be given the same number of tokens in the forked currency. (When Bitcoin forked to Bitcoin Cash, anyone holding x amount of Bitcoin would receive a new wallet for Bitcoin Cash also containing x amount of Bitcoin Cash.) This is called a Hard Fork and all previous transactions are made invalid. There are also Soft Forks, in this case it is backwards compatible and all previous transactions are valid. This can result in two currencies but in most cases, it doesn’t as it is usually accepted by most miners/forgers because it is backwards compatible. Exchanges Online currency exchanges allow you to buy, sell or exchange fiat money (USD, EUR, etc) with digital currencies or in most cases digital currencies for other digital currencies. There are a large variety of different exchanges that are operated in multiple countries but there are around a dozen that the majority of cryptocurrency trading volume are present on. Not all cryptocurrencies will be listed on all exchanges, some have specific prerequisites to be listed on their exchange and there may be fees associated as well. Once your account is set up you will have a list of all available cryptocurrencies to trade. Each currency will have an associated online wallet with the public key address allowing you to send that specific currency to that wallet. (Many exchanges are having delayed or canceled identity verification, currency transfers and lack sufficient customer support due to the influx of new traders) Examples of top exchanges: 1) Coinbase (trades fiat) 2) GDAX (trades fiat) 3) Gemini (trades fiat) 4) Changelly (trades fiat) 5) Bittrex 6) Binance 7) HitBTC 8) EtherDelta 9) Bitfinex 10) Kraken 11) Bithumb 12) Bitstamp 13) Poloniex 14) OKEx Sending/Receiving Tokens All wallets have the ability to send digital currency to other wallets. The function is relatively easy, make sure the currency you are sending is going to the appropriate wallet for that currency. Ethereum tokens cannot be sent to a Bitcoin wallet for example. (The tokens aren’t actually moving location; the list of transactions/ownership is what is stored in the wallet). Triple check the wallet private key you are sending the tokens to. If you type the wrong address the tokens will be lost in nearly all incidents. Some mobile wallets allow you to scan a QR code that will automatically enter the public key rather than copying/pasting or typing out the public key. Taxes As of January 1, 2018 it appears that taxing on digital currency has changed. Every trade between any digital currencies (Bitcoin to Ether, Ether to Litecoin etc) will be a taxable transaction. If you hold the currency for longer than one year than you will pay capital gain tax when it is traded or sold (15%-20%) and if you sell or trade in less than a year you will have to add the profit to your taxable income to adjust your tax bracket. Altcoins Altcoins are basically any coin that is not Bitcoin. Most cryptocurrencies do not have a native blockchain (their own independent dedicated blockchain). Bitcoin, Ether, Ripple, Waves, NXT, Cardano all have their own native blockchain. Many other cryptocurrencies run on other cryptocurrency’s blockchains. Litecoin runs on Bitcoins blockchain, hundreds run on the Ethereum blockchain. These currencies act as smart contracts running on the adopted blockchain. DApps (Decentralized Applications) For a blockchain application to be considered a DApp it must be 1) Open source, code available to all 2) Decentralized, uses blockchain cryptographic tech 3) Incentive, must have tokens to fuel itself 4) Algorithm/Protocol, generates tokens and has a built-in consensus mechanism (mining/forging.) There are 3 types of DApps, each basically piggybacks off the platform of the previous Type 1 – Have their own blockchain (like bitcoin) Type 2 – Use the blockchain of Type 1 DApps Type 3 – Use the protocol of Type 2 DApps ICO (Initial Coin Offering) Much like an IPO (Initial Public Offering) that offers stock in a private company to the public, an ICO raises money for new Cryptocurrency ventures. Typically, a minimum investment is required in the form of a cryptocurrency such as Bitcoin or Ether and the investor is given tokens of the cryptocurrency at a reduced cost. Due to the fact that ICO’s are so new, government agencies have not begun regulating these ventures making them extremely risky as anyone with a competent coder can create and market a cryptocurrency that can be used to swindle investors who aren’t cautious. The US government no longer allows its citizens to participate in ICO’s and if you are using a computer with an IP address located in the United States, ICO’s websites will not allow you to invest. Research 1) Whitepapers – Each cryptocurrency will have their own dedicated websites and most will have a whitepaper that has a description of what their cryptocurrency is designed to do. 2) Roadmaps – Also on each cryptocurrency’s website, they tend to have a roadmap or timeline as to when they are planning to complete certain milestones be it added features to the blockchain or wallet or any other important events. 3) Coinmarketcap.com – List of every available cryptocurrency, the exchanges they trade on, market cap, trade volume, available tokens, newly created tokens etc. 4) Reddit.com (cryptocurrency subreddit) – Subreddits focused on cryptocurrency as well as specific subreddits focused on individual cryptocurrencies. Be cautious as many people on these sites are uninformed and/or are trying to manipulate the market by fooling others to buy or sell based on fraudulent information. 5) Bitcointalk.org – Forums specific to individual cryptocurrencies. There is a lot of self-marketing (bounties) on this site. Take what they say with a grain of salt 6) TwitteFacebook (Social Media) – Many times news from team members or the cryptocurrency’s social media page will break news before it is listed on any of the above-mentioned outlets. Find out who is working for the cryptocurrency you are interested in and start following the team’s social media. Don’t forget to look at their linkedin accounts if available, previous employment and behavioral history to confirm they are competent. 7) Github - Code from projects can be uploaded here and reviewed for issues and revisions. Common Terms/Slang Shilling – covert advertising, personally endorsing a token so as to manipulate the price to either recoup a loss or increase gains on a token the individual owns. FUD – Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt; another method to manipulate the price of a token the person owns by making others second guess their investment decision on a specific token. FOMO – Fear Of Missing Out; buying a token (usually after the price has already increased) hoping they haven’t missed the majority of a price increase. Shitcoin – A cryptocurrency that has become worthless overtime or a scam operation. To the Moon – Massive increase in a token’s price. I'm sure there are probably revisions to be done on this as I am still getting my head around all of the concepts. Any help to this would be appreciated.
I just decentralized the entire $1.4 trillion derivatives market and created a new kind of mathematical object.
White paper is in progress, but I will summarize the theory here. I offer it to the internet for free, and only hope that you will use its power responsibly. Also, I made an error in the topic title... the derivatives market isn't worth 1.4 trillion (ap, you twit). It's $1.4 quadrillion. What I propose is a new kind of asset, a 2-dimensional and n-dimensional bitcoin. I am calling it a cryptocontract. As I listened to speculation about the price of bitcoin on stage at the Dubai Conference, it occurred to me what the next step should be. Bitcoin binary options recently became a thing (http://btcoracle.com/) but it's not enough. It's all still centralized. All trading is. All trading and asset speculation is conducted through the SEC and other central regulatory agencies. There's no way to either hedge your risk on a given asset, OR to speculate on a particular asset's price in the future without going through a centrally regulated agency. Say hello to crypto-options. It's been a while since I've been in computer science (like ten years) so I don't know exactly how this would work, but I do know how it would function. What you would need is a crypto asset with a public hash that has TWO solutions (or more, but lets start simple). That way, when that crypto asset is generated (let's call it a cryptocontract for future brevity) it has a hard condition coded into it that will resolve at some point in the future, based on the price of a given asset. For example, let $condition = "the price of bitcoin is greater than $1000 on June 1st, 2015". Now I know this is problematic on several fronts. First of all you have to encode date sequencing into the condition, but that could be taken care of via block numbers. Second, you need to agree on a metric of measure for the value, which I'm not sure how you would hard code into the contract. The ultimate goal, of course, is to allow two people to make a bet which neither can back out of. Now that the cryptocontract is generated, the public hash that represents it (or is it, again I'm not an expert on this stuff) needs to have TWO solutions or keys. That way owner 1, who is betting that $condition will be false owns it, and owner 2, who is betting that $condition will be true also owns it. As the specified block (or date) on the condition approaches, the contract naturally resolves to either true or false. In other words, just like a real options contract, it becomes either more or less likely to happen. See where I'm going with this? Just like a real options contract, it's not just about the cryptoasset and it's eventual resolution. The contract itself THEN also has a value and can be traded, sold, and bought. Right now if you want to do this, whether it's to wildly gamble or hedge your risk, you have to go through a central agency. But with my cryptocontract you don't have to. It's decentralized by design, anonymous so you don't even have to know or trust the person that you are creating the contract with, and resolves automatically so that no one can back out of the bet once made. Even better, if you later decide that you like the value of your current side of the contract at this moment and don't want to see it through to resolution, you can simply sell it on the open market. Here's an important part: Once the asset hits its expiration block, it AUTOMATICALLY resolves so that at that moment, only one of the private keys becomes valid and the other invalid, based on whether $condition is true. Once you can create a hash with two private solutions, it should be trivial to create one with multiple solutions, or even one with multiple conditions. Basically, you can then create a ladder of conditions with multiple owners all owning a slice of that cryptocontract. As the contract nears resolution and only one of those eventualities becomes true, one owner emerges and resolves at the specified time. Holy shit, this could even be used for elections and all sorts of other applications. Imagine an election with perfect transparency, with all voters assigned a way to 'bid' on the outcome of the cryptocontract, with each candidate owning a slice of that contract. When the contract resolves at 'final' election day, one candidate emerges. I just decentralized the 1.4 trillion derivatives market and solved the transparency problem with democracy, and it's not even noon yet. If one of you other geniuses makes this real, hit me up on Changetip. Consider this my first white paper, bitch. 2-dimensional and n-dimensional cryptocoins are a real, mathematical construct. Because they can exist, they will eventually exist. And they will be worth trillions of dollars. The only question is who will create and popularize them first? americanpegasus just changed the world. Again. edit #1 - 0902z - 14/12/14: I'm just realizing how such an asset would have initial value, and I'm thinking about how it would function. Would it be a side chain, or built upon the bitcoin block chain? It would have to be. Because in order for it to exist, value has to be input into it. For example, if I offer you such a contract, you have to buy it from me. The only way to make this happen is in bitcoins. So how would this work? Ok, let's let the cryptocontract be represented by the symbol &, and this particular contract, "The price of bitcoins will be greater than $1000 on June 1st, 2015" be 'b'. Also, let my stake in the contract be represented by &b-1 (believing it will happen), and yours represented as &b-0 (believing it will not happen). So I am offering &b-1 for sale. My price is approximately $350, or 1 bitcoin. Even if that's not a fair price, let's just assume it is for ease of illustration. I don't believe it will come true, and if you do, let's dance. You agree to purchase this asset, and so we have to create it on the network. To do that we'll need to both pay into a system so that we both have something at stake. I transfer a bitcoin into &b, and so do you. At this point we both own &b, as there are two private keys. By design, no value can be extracted from &b until the target block (resolution date) has passed. This prevents anyone from backing out of the bet. And at the target block (which it timed to occur around June 1st, 2015) one of our private keys is destroyed, and only the other remains, effectively granting us access to the 2 bitcoins stored within. Of course, throughout the contract process, the value of each of our keys fluctuates too. If it looks increasingly likely that condition will be true, the value of &b-1 approaches the limit of 2, while &b-0 approaches zero (worthless). But this method only allows the issuance of straight bets. It works as long as all the functions work, but there's a better way, and also the problem of external values still needs to be solved. I have a long drive home. I'll keep thinking about this. Ideas are welcome. I don't own math; we all do, I just want to help create it. edit #2 - 0936z - 14/12/14: Shit, what if value didn't NEED to be extracted? What if bitcoins were destroyed in the process of creating this cryptocontract (&)? Then the contract would by default have the value of 2 bitcoins because that's how much currency was destroyed in the creation of it. Then no 'extraction of value' is necessary. The asset (almost like a collectible trading card, but one created by literally burning money) only exists because two people agreed to destroy money to create it. And eventually, only one of them will own it. The value of 2 bitcoins in this object is inherent, as long as the faith of the cryptocontract system remains. edit 3: I figured it out. I solved the centralization issue. It obviously can't be based on a USD exchange set value. It either has to be one of two things. Either a fluctuating value determined by people's faith in buying what the contract represents.... or A globally observable and verifiable metric like total hash rate! Holy shit! Game theory for the win!
What Makes Bitcoin So Special And why a “better” version of Bitcoin won’t replace it so easily Bitcoin, an invention by the anonymous cypherpunk Satoshi Nakamoto is the worlds first successful cryptocurrency. Prior to Bitcoin it wasn’t possible to pay anyone on the internet without having intermediaries or middle men involved. Shortly after its introduction many variants of Bitcoin arrived on the scene called altcoins, with promises of faster confirmations, better scaling, better privacy features, and with more robust smart contract support. However Bitcoin holds far more value than any of the newcomers. Where does this value come from, and why do so many consider Bitcoin far superior? This article will explore some of the properties of bitcoin and how they come together to make something truly unique, and not very easy to duplicate. Decentralization There would be nothing special about Bitcoin if it were not decentralized. Its that its decentralized that gives it such appeal, nobody is in control, and that’s good. Its natural to want to solve problems by centralizing the solution, but as you do this you create centralized power, which is basically what bitcoin was invented to replace. Bitcoin was invented to be the peoples money, not a crypto PayPal. Decentralization is not always black and white, or yes/no. It’s a scale, and this scale is always under constant pressure. Sometimes centralization attempts are hidden from view, disguised as scaling upgrades. Bitcoin has resisted these well-coordinated attacks on the network successfully. Bitcoin was born in the wild of the cypherpunk internet back corners, and has grown decentralized from there organically. Its, still anonymous inventor (Satoshi Nakamoto) disappeared shortly after starting up the network, and since then the software that runs the nodes are developed and maintained by thousands of volunteers and contributors. Even its development is the most decentralized. Decentralization also means there is nobody to ask permission to use it, nobody who can sensor it, no way to keep transactions inside real world borders, nobody who has ability to seize funds or reverse transactions, nobody to ask permission to start a new application or startup on it. These qualities are all features, not bugs. Bitcoin has the highest overall level of decentralization among all cryptocurrencies. Immutability One of Bitcoins most valuable properties is the immutability of its blockchain. To be immutable means it cannot be changed, and having an unchangeable ledger is something that has never been possible before bitcoin. This is where bitcoin and all of the other coins are different, none of the other coins or altcoins can claim to have a truly immutable ledger or blockchain. Bitcoins consensus algorithm is what regulates and controls how bitcoin works, and it’s very difficult to change consensus without all the interested parties agreeing. There is no president or founder who can wave their magic wand and force consensus changes upon the network like all the other altcoins have. There is no one person, or group of people who are in control of bitcoin, and that’s good. A certain level of inertia in regards to the consensus algorithm exists in bitcoin that is beneficial to its immutability. You generally don’t want to have a system that can be changed very quickly on a whim containing Billions of USD worth of value. For instance, if it was decided by the miners that the mining reward needed to be doubled, such a proposal would be met with great resistance from the other interested parties, and would fail. (*Bitcoins interested parties include bitcoin holders, wallet software developers, miners, developers, merchants, application developers, and others. ) As a side effect, while bitcoin adoption grows it will be harder and harder to get network upgrades into consensus to support increased scaling, and improved privacy features that are on the developers roadmap. Eventually it will be impossible to change the consensus algorithm and it will be locked in stone. *Bitcoin miners provide the processing power that secures the Bitcoin blockchain with 50,599,447,508,000,000(as of this writing) SHA256 Hashes Per Second. This hashing power significantly contributes to the security and immutability of the Bitcoin blockchain. *To be able to keep a secure global immutable ledger without having any intermediaries involved is a tremendous advancement in modern financial technology. *Participants in such a network should also expect reduced counter-party risk exposure. Antifragility Antifragility is a property of systems that increase in capability, resilience, or robustness as a result of stressors, shocks, volatility, noise, mistakes, faults, attacks, or failures. — Wikipedia.org Bitcoin has been under constant attack ever since its early days. A network that, as of this writing, holds $110 billion in value makes for a big honeypot. As a result bitcoin has developed a certain immune system that continues to improve into the future. One of the early fixes to the early bitcoin protocol was to make the script language turing incomplete, which means you cannot write very complex smart contracts on its blockchain. This was removed from the bitcoin protocol because it introduced a broad attack surface. The removal of turing complete scripts from bitcoin hardened it and protected it from many possible attacks. It was decided early in Bitcoins development that it would favor safety and security over flexibility. Many other adjustments have been enacted along the way in response to the constant barrage of attacks. To say that bitcoin has survived and thrived in this environment is an understatement. Bitcoin has never once suffered a hack to its protocol, not once has an invalid transaction been included into the blockchain, not once has a transaction been reversed after suitably being recorded onto the blockchain. Sure, many have had there bitcoin hacked, but its important to know that all of those cases are of people being sloppy with their private keys. Bitcoin was not hacked, your keys were stolen. If you are sloppy with the combination to your safe, don’t be upset when you find it empty. Not your keys, not your bitcoin. I expect that bitcoin will continue to adapt and evolve in response to future threats. Scarcity Bitcoin could possibly be the most scarce asset on earth. There will only ever be barely 21 million bitcoin in existence. Taking into account its decentralized nature, and its immutability, and the inert nature of its protocol development its hard to see this ever changing. With over 7 billion humans on earth, there are not many to go around. fortunately each of those bitcoin can be broken into 100,000,000 units called Satoshi. Unlike gold when the demand for bitcoin quickly rises, the miners cannot just increase the supply in response to increased demand. There is no way to just mine more bitcoin in response to demand. This dynamic along with bitcoins schedule of diminishing mining rewards will contribute to its rarity as adoption grows. This could produce a market cap many multiples of where we are today in a short period of time. Many of the altcoins have no coin cap, or have such weak security model that the cap can be changed by decree. These properties are conducive to the bitcoin network being a great store of value outside the traditional monetary system. The lightning Network In early 2018 a second layer network on top of bitcoin began to run, the Lightning Network. This new network promises to solve many of the scaling challenges that are inherent with recording every single global transaction onto the blockchain. The Lightning Network basically allows for many off-chain transactions to take place that are periodically settled on-chain. The Lightning Network also easily allows for micro transactions, streaming money applications, and a new kind of transaction called atomic swaps, swap Bitcoin for Litecoin without an exchange in a trustless environment. Many other applications are being built on top of the lightning network, many more still have not been thought up yet. Further when making lightning transactions there is never a need to wait 10 minutes for transactions to confirm into a block, like you would when making regular on-chain bitcoin transactions. With a good lightning wallet, and a few bucks worth of bitcoin in a payment channel you (And everyone else on earth) will be able to get that allusive cup of coffee every morning with bitcoin and not break the network. The Lightning Network is just one of many possible layer 2 networks.There are also plans for a second layer network www.rsk.co that will support rich ethereum style smart contracts (turing complete) with bitcoin(BTC) as the token. With all the new capabilities made possible by the 2017 segregated witness upgrade to bitcoin, its possible that many nich cryptocurrency applications could be handled on a second layer using bitcoin as its token. In Conclusion In modern-day times its natural to think that if something is brand new, just wait and a better, faster, cheaper version will be out soon enough. This is certainly a contributing factor to the allure of altcoins. However Bitcoin has developed in a way that may be impossible for it to be replaced. It seems that the really important properties don’t come along when its copied. link to article on medium
Blockchain to fix horribly broken e-mail system like it is today?
E-mail as it is, is horribly broken. Horrendously broken. It wasn't that many years ago that you could be assured your e-mail reaches whoever you were mailing to. Today it is a mere suggestion, that perhaps this should be delivered to this person, at least for any automated e-mail. This seems to be creeping to manual, organic email as well. Hell, we are seeing even internal e-mails being flagged by spamassassin as spam, organic, human written conversations! In that instance, the spamassassin is also maintained by one of the largest hosting providers in the world... Hotmail/MS services has been for years (atleast about 4 years now!) been silently dropping email, not all, but some. There's a bit of relief lately, as they have started to favor a bit more marking as spam, rather than silently dropping. I know, most email users don't see this problem, but those who use email a lot to do their work, and those who need to send automated emails (say, welcome e-mails for a service) this is a big problem. (Disclaimer, for us, our niche of hosting probably causes flagging as well. Our site is blocked by many corporate firewalls for example) Blockchain to the rescue? This is an idea i've been toying around with a few years. What if any single e-mail would cost a faction of a cent, and who receives the e-mail, gets paid for it? Now that would solve a lot of problems. I realize there has been some half assed attempts on blockchain based e-mail, but they are about replacing email (never going to happen). Using blockchain to enhance the current experience, with least minimal friction should be the goal, not re-inventing the wheel. Imagine a say 0.01 cent (0.0001 USD) cost per e-mail. This price would not be cost prohibitive even for free e-mail service providers (Ad revenue etc. should exceed this value), never mind any legit e-mail users. Especially considering you get paid for receiving. So all legit e-mail services would work rather well regardless of the cost. (never mind free email service could profit from this) Spam however? To send 1 million emails you would need to pay 100$. How many spammers would continue doing so? At least it makes things much harder, not so easy to use a botnet to send your email when you need to include your private key(s) to the botnet, or make some kind of private key management system, makes more complicated. Small business newsletters? Say you need to send 100k e-mails to legit customers, 10$ is nothing. To human time crafting that newsletter is order (possibly orders) of magnitude greater than that. Price would also fluctuate as per the market. The most difficult thing would probably be setting the self balancing mechanisms to keep per mail cost sensible. As such, the biggest hurdle in this might not be technical at all. Technically, how could this work? Sender sends a TX for e-mail they are sending for recipient. This TX contains message with mail ID, and a segment which can be used with the email contents to unlock the private key for the payment. This way it is verified that recipient mail servers receives and reads the email. Once the recipient server has calculated the private key, they can either TX the received sum to their wallet, or this needs to be formatted so that once the sender has sent it, they cannot recover the private key and double spend (technical hurdle A. For someone who knows their stuff unlikely to be an major hurdle) Step by step repeat: * Sender checks if recipient has "MailCoin" capability * Sender sends TX to recipient * Sender sends the email to recipient * Recipient notices on mail header (say x-mailcoin-tx: TXID_HERE) that this is a "mailcoin" mail * Recipient checks TX if it has been received * Recipient puts the mail on delivery queue, antispam is instructed of heavy negative score (MTA admin configurable) * Recipient claims the value of the TX (this is the hurdle A). Recipient can only claim the TX value in case they have received the full e-mail. (Question, can this step be pushed even further down the delivery chain, but still remain MTA only level without mail client support?). Most likely solution is that the header contains the encrypted private key, and chain TX contains the key to decrypt that private key to claim the coins, or vice-versa? Once recipient has the email & payment, they simply mark on their Antispam a automatic lower score and deliver it normally. E-mail server side we have several components:
Recipient server needs component to check for TXs
Sender server needs component to send a TX, and check if the recipient has the capability
Recipient server OR dns zone has indicator the recipient can utilize "MailCoins" (DNS IN TXT field most likely, ie. mailcoin.domain.com. IN TXT publicaddress)
Most typical scenario would be the Recipient server works as outgoing as well, with single wallet. So depending on your mail volume, do you send or receive more on that wallet you might never need to worry about the coins (except for value going skyhigh and having like 10k $ worth of "MailCoins"). So perhaps additional components on per use case are needed, or more likely rudimentary scripting capability (ie. "MailCoin" daemon api) to keep the balances in check. Technical hurdle B: This needs to be super super simple to setup. Or sufficient financial incentive. One would need to develop standard components & configs for exim, postfix, and other MTAs. Infact, make it autogenerate wallet ID etc. and easy to replace or import private keys etc. to put in coins for sending if you need to. Privacy: On the blockchain you would not see the e-mail contents, only that e-mail likely took place (TX with mail UUID) to recipient. If sender can be deciphered it depends on them if it can be traced who they were. Automatic mixers? :) Recipient can also keep cycling the receive addresses to keep things private if they want to. The biggest problem i see here, is that if an attacker can deduce the sender and/or recipient, it might to lead to some issues out of the scope of technical solutions. If attacker could read the emails, they would already have accomplished MitM and could just grab all e-mails. Default implementation should be so, that from recipient address outsider cannot deduce the recipient server nor hostname. Also, if attacker gains access to your mail with full headers, they could see the TXs in blockchain. MTA might need to scrub mailcoin related headers (yuck, scrubbing headers ....) for paranoid users, but most likely solution is that recipient retransmits those mailcoins as soon as they got the private key for the balance. Blockchain: Blocks needs to be done every 10seconds or so, it needs to be fast. Preferrably even every 5 seconds, as not to cause any undue delay. Then again, if your application is reliant on receiving email within seconds, one should consider another means for communicating. Imho, email should be considered a little bit like snail mail, but on internet pace: Couple minutes delay is just OK. Block size given the e-mail volume needs to be fairly large as well, considering the time between blocks. This is technical hurdle C: Hosting the full blockchain. I can easily foresee that this would grow to be terabytes in size. However, any large email operator would have vested interest in ensuring smooth operation of the blockchain, and for them, running a full node would have neglible cost. (Technical hurdle C) Single email sent using the system could easily have TX contents of 100 bytes + TX headers + block headers etc. Say 100 bytes, and 100 million emails per day: 9.31GiB per day, 3 399GiB per year, 5 years later: 16.60 TiB just for the mail TXs. Some estimate there is 200+ billion emails per day, but we all know large portion of this is spam. But even at 50 billion emails a day, 100 bytes per mail TX would add to 4.55TiB per day! So optimizing the blockchain size is obviously going to be important. The volume will be obviously much smaller as semi-spam (those daily half opt-in spamvertising from companies you know) will be lower as well. So probs 100+ billion emails per day at 100% adoption. Blockchain should then be compressed, the whole block. Algorithm probably should favor speed over compression rate, and should be task specifically optimized (needs a simple reference release, where you can just stream the block contents into it and get output as compressed or uncompressed). The more compression there is, the more full nodes will be hosted by smaller operators :) For large e-mail server clusters there should be central store for the blockchain, but this can be accessed on the system administratoconfig level already. The MTA components will just remotely talk to single full node daemon (so not really different from many implementations in existence right now), instead of each one running locally a full node. At today's cheapest hosting rates 16.60TiB is roughly around 85-100€ a month. Purchase cost per 8TB drive is around 230€ mark right now, externals are cheaper. Not an issue for any even semi serious mail provider. Not even issue for datahoarder individuals. However at 100 billion mails per day: 9.09TiB per day added, which is prohibitively large! We should be targeting something like 20bytes per mail final storage spent, or even less. If it looks like it is going to grow really large, full node needs to have configurable multiple storages, so they can store parts of the blockchain on multiple different devices (ie. individual might choose to have it on 4 different external drives). Filesystem side optimizations are needed as well, but these are fairly simple, just split into multiple subdirectories by the 10 thousand blocks or so, ie. 1 for blocks 1-10k, 2 for blocks 10 001 to 20k etc. Filesystems get exponentially slower the more files there is per directory. 10k might start to show slowing down, but is not significant yet. Nodes could also implement secondary compression (compress multiple blocks together), if the blockchain starts to become stupid large. If it starts to become impossible to maintain, we could possibly implement a scrubbing methodology, where very old blocks get the TX contents wiped as they are not necessary anymore. Should not be an issue Blocks with 10second target generated per annum: 3 153 600 Mails per 10second: 115 740 e-mails per 10second block. Final compressed size (say 20 bytes per mail): 2.20MiB + headers etc. per block Let's start small and allow linear growth to this, say 0.1% per day (36.5% annual) and start from 20k / 512KiB. After 3 years: 41.9k / 1072.64KiB per block, After 10 years: 93k / 2380.8KiB. (2027 we should have HDDs in the size of 30TB and daily max size for chain growth is 19.61TiB) On the positive side every problem is an opportunity in disguise. If the blockchain is large, once again botnets will have a hard hard time to spamming, they can't host the full blockchain on infected machines. They will need to develop centralized mechanisms on this regard as well. One method i can see is by having TOR client built in, and via .onion domain to anonymize, but this is two way street, security researchers could exploit this (see above about the private keys) as well. Even without botnets, spammers will need to dedicate significant resources to host the full blockchain. On the flip side, if spammer has also mining operation on the same local area network, they have both the income for mailcoins + full blockchain, and could leverage economies of scale, but this too would increase cost. And after all: This is all about increasing cost for spamming, while having the price in vicinity where real e-mail users, real businesses it is not a significant impact, or may even be an income source Client side Zero, Nada changes. No changes to outlook, thunderbird etc. Everything works under the hood at the MTA level. Very easy adoption for the end user. Everything is in the backend, server side. Economics for users Cost of operation has above been shown to increase wildly for spammers. But how about normal use cases? Joe Average: They receive e-mail a lot more than they send, all kinds of order confirmations, invoices, newsletters and other automated e-mail. They will actually earn (however tiny amounts) from using this system. So for the masses, this is a good thing, they will see the earning potentials! which brings us to .... New business opportunities! I could foresee a business setting up spam traps, the more e-mail you receive the more you earn! So it pays to get your receiver into spam lists. You don't ever need to read these, just confirm receive of them. All of sudden we could see even greater numbers of invalid e-mail addresses in spam lists, making spamming ever more expensive! Free email services might proof to be extremely profitable, to the point of potential revenue sharing with Joe Averages (and above spamtraps). Because free email is mostly joe averages, they will have greater influx than outgoing. On the caveat, free email needs to have limits, but due to the low cost and potential of earnings, they could implement "mail credits" system, base is like 20 emails a day, but each received email could increase this credit limit. As such, it makes actually sense for free email services to implement this at the very least on the receiving side. Business mass emailings. A business which has 100k valid e-mails on their database will not have a problem with paying few dozen bucks to have their mass mailing delivered. BUT they will make extra sure the content is good and targeted, something the recipient wants to receive. These will be the biggest spenders on email, apart from spammers. ISPs, hell they get paid to provide e-mail. And they are on the same spot as free email service providers, they stand to earn more than spend! Blockchain economics This is where things might get interesting, there is so much potential. However, there are several things definitively should not be done:
Initial Coin Offerings
Non-consensus chain (ie. whatever devs say, goes!), always has to be consensus
Infinite & preferential supply
1 & 2 are easy, just do not mine outside of testnet prior to launch. (If devs get paid by companies, there is conflict of interest as well, but let's not get into that right now) 3: Miners and/or full node maintainers decide what goes on. Probably miners like bitcoin is supposed to. 4: Infinite & preferential supply: No after the launch "contracts" etc. to give coins to preferential parties, it should remain as on the launch unless majority consensus says there will be a change. Proof of stake is gray area imho, but then again also proof of work is the rich gets richer. Mining: Storage requirement is a blessing in disguise, the massive storages required for this to function means that there will be no central hardware developer who sells all the shovels, without significant other markets. Ie. WD, Seagate, Toshiba the main players. This means algo needs to be based on the full blockchain being hosted. The hashing needs to be so that GPUs are the king most likely, since almost anything good for CPUs is also doable in GPUs. Eventually someone will likely come with ASIC alternative, but due to masses of data it WILL require high bandwidth, high memory. Nothing like bitcoin currently, where low bandwidth, no memory requirement for the ASIC. There needs to be some expensive commodity components in there (RAM, Storage), and as such GPUs are the most likely candidate, and the bottleneck will not likely be computation, but I/O bandwidth. Quickly thinking, previous block could include number of blocks to be included on the next for verification, in a highly compressible format. Let's say difficulty is number of blocks to be hashed, or from difficulty you can calculate number of blocks to be included. Previous blocks miner just chooses on random blocks to be included on the next one. Listing 10 series of blocks to be included, which can include series instructions. It could request block #5729375+100, or #357492+500 stepping 5 (every 5th block). Hell the random generator could use last block as seed for the next one to make it deterministic YET random as the emails and TXs change. (WTF, Did i just solve how the algo needs to work?!?) Only blocks which would differentiate is the first few, and obviously Genesis, for which an "empty" block would be what is to be hashed. Hashing algo could be SHA256 because of the high requirement of streaming data, and most ASIC miners lacking in bandwidth (infact, it could be made compatible with bitcoin, but only those ASICS with higher I/O bandwidth than storage/ram I/O bandwidth is could actually boost the perf) Different hashable list operations could be (on the block list what to be hashed on the next one): * Single block * Block # + number of blocks * Block # + (number of blocks with stepping) * Block # + number of blocks chosen by random using each hashed block as the seed for choosing next one (makes prefetch, preread, caching not work efficiently) * Number of previous blocks mined (ie. 50 last blocks) * Above but with stepping operator * Above but with choose random next X blocks, with variations based on the last hashed, sum of the hashed * All random pickers would have operation modes for the seed to be used: From hashed sum, the whole block, block contents, block header These modes would ensure the blocks are there and makes it a lot dependable on variable factors, RAM speed, I/O seek time, I/O bandwidth. This way we have proof that the miner has access to those blocks in efficient manner and the full blockchain is stored there, even if it is not practically retrievable from him / her over the internet for others to obtain a copy. HOWEVER, due to the data volumes, i think it is given they have fast access, but a miner would probably prefer not to share their blockchain contents to have bandwidth free for their mining, as the deadlines are tight. It could be built into the full node spec that they do not accept new blocks from sources which are not ready to supply any given block, and perhaps even periodic test of this. However, this would be unenforceable if people start running custom coded nodes which disables this, as it is not part of the blockchain calculation. It is not miner's benefit to "waste" precious bandwidth to serve others the vast blockchain, meanwhile it is end users benefit those running full nodes without mining to get them fast. So an equilibrium might be reached, if miners start loosing out because other miners will not share their blocks, they will start offering them, even if prioritized. At 2MiB blocks, 10 second deadline, a miner would preferentially want the new block within 500ms, which would be barely sufficient time for a round trip across the globe. 500ms for 2MiB is 4MiB/s transfer rate inbound, and when block found you want it out even faster, say 250ms you'll need 8MiB/s burst which very very few have at a home. At more usual 1MiB/s it would take 2secs to submit your new block. On the other hand, if you found the block, you'd have immediate access to begin calcing the next one. Block verification needs to be fast, and as such the above difficulty setting alone is not sufficient, there needs to be nonce. Just picking the right block is not guarantee there will be match, so traditional !???? nonce needs to be set as well most likely. As such, a lot of maths needs to be done to ensure this algorithm does not have dead ends, yet ensures certain blocks needs to be read as full and stored fully by the miners, just plain hashes of the blocks is not sufficient. Perhaps it should be block data + nonce, then all the blocks hashes (with nonce, or pre-chosen salt) and to be generated block combined hash with nonce needs to have certain number of zeroes. Needs testing and maths :) So there are many ways to accomplish proof of storage, we'd need just to figure out the which is the best. Sidenote, this same algo could potentially be used with different settings for immutable, forever storage of data. Since there is no continuing cost to store data, TX Fee for every message (data) byte should be very high in such a coin. Supply. Needs to be predictable and easy to understand. It would be preferential the standard mailing out is always 1x MailCoin, albeit coin itself should be practically infinitively divisable, and as such supply needs to be in the trillions eventually. But these things get complicated really fast, so we need to set a schedule. Current email use is very large, so we should have something in the same magnitude. 8640 blocks per day - so maybe 10 000 coins per block == 86 400 000 new coins per day == 31 536 000 000 new coins per year, halving every 2 years. First halving: 63 072 000 000, Second halving: 94 608 000 000, Third (6 years): 110 376 000 000, but only halving 4 or 5 times to keep some new supply for ever increasing adoption and lost coins. Got all the way here? :D Thanks for reading up. Let me know what you think, and let's start a discussion on the feasibility of such a system! I cannot develop this myself, but i would definitively back an effort up in the ways i can if anyone attempts to do something like this :) And i know i got probably many of the details incorrect The main point of the methods described above is ease of adoption. Without adoption any system is worthless, and with email, you just cannot replace it like that (see the attempts trying to replace IPv4 with IPv6 ...), but you can enhance it. adoption is very critical in communications systems. (No one would have a phone if no one else had a phone) Addendum 1: Forgot to add about pricing and markets, read comment here Addendun 2:Bad actors and voting
I NEED HELP! Can anyone read over my explanation of cryptocurrency and make sure I am making sense?
Hey all, I am currently going to be working on a project that concerns blockchain and cryptocurrency. In order to do so, I am writing a proposal for an advisor to read over and approve. I need to explain cryptocurrency in it, but I also need to make sure I am correct in my explanations and that I a make sense. If someone could read over my explanation, it would be super super appreciated. The audience of the proposal are CS profs, so they aren't exactly familiar with blockchain, but will be familiar with things like private/public key encryption and data structures. Here it is: In recent years, blockchain and digital currencies have rocketed in popularity. Many have realized blockchain technology has the potential to revolutionize society. In general, blockchain can be thought of as a decentralized monetary system shared across the world via the internet, while remaining almost free to use. One may compare the basic functions of a cryptocurrency to the functions of a bank. Apart from how one uses it, owning a variety of cryptocurrency is no different than owning some amount of U.S dollars. For instance, owning one 'Bitcoin' has an equivalent value in USD (currently, 1 Bitcoin is equal to 8513.08\$). Despite being unofficial and not endorsed by any government, value is attributed to these currencies through adoption and speculative investment. Much like stocks, the value of these currencies is very volatile, so many have found it to their advantage to speculate on the price in the hopes of earning some money. Cryptocurrency, however, does not just strive to copy and replace the traditional banking system. For example, unlike U.S currency, no one can just 'print' more Bitcoin. Rather, Bitcoin has a cap of 21 million coins. In this respect, cryptocurrencies are more like gold than normal USD. Despite this, cryptocurrencies put forth clear advantages to traditional banking. They are decentralized and cryptographically secure. Unlike traditional banking, no 'middleman' exists or is necessary to make transactions with bitcoin. Furthermore, transactions are validated and confirmed through a network of 'miners'. All this works because of blockchain which is by its very definition and use-case decentralized. The blockchain solves one of the most prominent roadblocks with a digital and decentralized money system, which can be explained through the 'double-spend' problem. The double-spend problem occurs when some person (person A) owns some amount of money. For example, person A owns 50\$. Person A sends some other individual 50\$. At the same time, Person A creates the same exact transaction but to yet another individual. Clearly, both these transactions cannot go through, since Person A only owns 50\$, not 100\$. Blockchain solves this issue. In essence, blockchain is a ledger that can be downloaded by anyone with an internet connection. This blockchain serves as 'memory' for digital monetary systems. Anyone who downloads and uses a blockchain on their computer can be said to be a 'blockchain node'. Anytime a transaction is created, it is recorded onto the blockchain (the ledger), which then updates, via the internet, every other blockchain anyone else has downloaded. The blockchain keeps track of every single transaction ever made, therefore keeping track of how much money everybody owns. Before a transaction is recorded onto the blockchain, however, it must be confirmed and validated. This is where the network of miners come in, and a process of validation known as 'proof of work' occurs. Essentially, this means a few users (chosen at random) running blockchain nodes, who have also designated themselves as a miner, run through every transaction a user made in order to make certain the money exists and can be transfered. In order to remain decentralized, more than one miner is chosen, and they must all agree to the validity of a transaction. Since these miners are connected over the internet, agreeing becomes a simple matter of first individually checking the validity of a transaction, and then checking if the other miners have also agreed. If a transaction cannot be confirmed, it is considered invalid, and so the blockchain is not updated with this transaction. A simple and useful way to conceptualize the blockchain, then, is as a linked-list of transactions that everyone owns, and is updated if a transaction is found to be valid. The process of confirmation and validation, however, must be executed by a computer processor (in many cases, multiple computer processors) somewhere in the world. This means someone's computer needs energy for the computing power required to verify a transaction. Since very few people would offer up their resources to process arbitrary transactions for free, there must be some incentive involved for users to offer up their processing power. For cryptocurrencies, the incentive becomes generating more of the cryptocurrency one is mining for. At a basic level, however, adding some transaction to a blockchain is a simple activity and not at all resource-intense. It would be very easy to add many of one currency to a blockchain if there was nothing to stop it, therefore drastically increasing supply and making the currency worthless. In order to solve this, mining new transactions or 'adding a new block', is intentionally designed to be very resource-intensive through the use of some very intense mathematical problems. There is a prescribed difficulty for these math problems that goes up over time, so it is impossible to ever reach the ultimate supply cap of a currency. Blockchain nodes are differentiated through private-public key encryption. Once a user downloads the blockchain, it encrypts itself and the user receives a private and public key.The public key can be shared with anybody and serves as an address people may send currency to. In the blockchain, transactions made by any one user are associated with this public key. That is, the public key serves as an identifier in the blockchain entry. This doubles as a identification mechanism, too. Before sending a transaction a user must confirm who they are by signing the transaction with their public key, which may only be done if they also own the private key. It becomes very important to keep the private key safe; losing or giving away one's private key will lead to the compromise of any and all funds of cryptocurrency owned by that key. It is useful to think of the blockchain in terms of an infinite state-machine. That is, the machine has a start state but no defined end-state. One may think of each transaction as a state of this machine. A new transaction creates a new unique state for the machine. These states are kept track of by an internal data structure (IE: the linked-list). All of this creates what we know as the blockchain.
Why OKCoin isn't faking volumes, and why volume is silly measurement on zero fee markets.
Hello Everyone, This is a post to answer many people's question, I don't think Zane Tackett really explained the root of the confusion with volume in his post. I saw a lot of posts complaining about Chinese exchanges faking volume, I'd like to contribute to this discussion by showing (from a neutral perspective) why OKCoin and Huobi do not fake their volume, and why the complaints about this topic are just plain useless, I am going to include a python bot which you can try out yourself to test my hypothesis. The Controversy Many people have accused Chinese exchanges of faking volume, mainly stating spread changes and quick order movements as their main backing reason, this has caused a lot of discussion. Essentially the main argument is that exchanges fake volume to make their credibility rise, pulling in more people so they can make money of CNY withdrawals. This has even led their manager of international operations to state why these claims are false. Why are 0% fees feasible? Because that's Just how China does it. There is a more competitive market on Chinese exchanges as most Chinese are in for immeadiete profit algo based trading. Americans & Europeans mainly buy Bitcoin as a long term investment expecting its value to rise over time, which means the 0.2% fee and the lack of a proper API are not really an issue for them. Chinese exchanges still make CNY off of their CNY withdrawal fees. OK, you mentioned this high frequency trading stuff, why does it matter? As someone who is using a VPS in Beijing at the same place OKcoin's datacenter is based, I am still getting one upped on orders, these guys do exist. Someone trading once a minute with 1 BTC volume everytime will have a total volume of over 1400BTC! OK, prove it! It is important to note that increased leverage oportunities exist for high volume traders in the form of OKCoin reward points. It only takes a few lines of code to make a bot that trades within the spread and makes no direct loss which fakes volume. I know this code is is not good, how bad I am at python just outlines how easy this is! This was done using this python wrapper https://github.com/trexmatt/OKCoin-API, I excluded imports and private key imports, pm me if you need help! Moved code to the edit! You should probably also create a balance fetcher and place buy and sells at the min volume from a list to avoid invalid balances, not including that here for the sake of keeping it short! PM me if you need help (optimally sleep 5 seconds, refetch, and then place altering orders after sleeping). Then what should I used instead of volume? Easy, spread and market depth. Not misleading, and the most relevant to trading! Edit: Turns out reddit is shitty for posting code, so I placed a simplified version here, PM me if you want a functional volume faker, and I will post a link to github here. (unless OKCoin is against that). Edit: Here is a bot that should give you a few million USD trading volume per day even if you just have 1BTC!, you may want to do some partial handling yourself, you can adjust the order depth you take by adjusting key values!
M = okcoin.MarketData() okcoin_sell_list = dict.items(M.get_depth('btc_cny').asks) lowest_sell = min(okcoin_sell_list) okcoin_lowest_sell_price_btc = lowest_sell okcoin_lowest_sell_volume_btc = lowest_sell okcoin_buy_list = dict.items(M.get_depth('btc_cny').bids) highest_buy = max(okcoin_buy_list) okcoin_highest_buy_price_btc = highest_buy okcoin_highest_buy_volume_btc = highest_buy """Get balances!""" bbb = okconf.get_info() okcoin_cny_balance = float(bbb['info']['funds']['free']['cny']) okcoin_btc_balance = float(bbb['info']['funds']['free']['btc']) """calculate min volume!""" min_volume1 = min(okcoin_highest_buy_volume_btc,okcoin_btc_balance) min_volume2 = min(okcoin_cny_balance/okcoin_lowest_sell_price,okcoin_lowest_sell_volume) """Now just trade one by one!""" if 0.01 < min_volume_1: okconf.trade('btc_cny', 'sell', okcoin_highest_buy_price_btc, min_volume_1) if 0.01 < min_volume_2: okconf.trade('btc_cny', 'buy', okcoin_lowest_sell_price_btc, min_volume2) time.sleep(5)
Does a minimum of tokens need to be sold to execute the project? No. There is a maximum of 204.780.000 tokens to be sold in this Round 1 but no particular minimum is required. Fluz Fluz is an up-and-running company but requires the token sale raise to execute its business plans for the international expansión and the transformation of its business to the blockchain technology. Are my tokens secure? Individual token security measures are critical for all individual investors once they receive the tokens. Fluz Fluz works with Zeppelin Solutions as Smart Contract Auditor to ensure the underlying smart contract is adequately shielded. Is this an ICO and are you introducing a crypto currency? An ICO is an initial coin offering. We are undertaking a token sale where the tokens will initially have limited use. For avoidance of doubt: the Fluz Token will initially only be capable of being used to purchase premier seats in the existing Fluz Fluz platform. Going forward, we will develop the platform using blockchain and enable further functionality for the Fluz Token (including its use as a cryptocurrency). Until that time, Fluz Tokens cannot yet be used as payment method to buy digital gift cards on the site or to buy good and services outside of the Fluz Fluz closed environment. Is the Fluz Fluz token a security token under SEC considerations? No. The Fluz Fluz token cannot be considered a security as it resists the Howey test and does by no means establish any equity holding in Fluz Fluz nor any dividend nor company profit sharing. The Fluz Token also falls outside the definition of a security under Gibraltar law, which is the applicable jurisdiction in this Token Sale. Can I buy the token from anywhere in the world? Individuals in Restricted Jurisdictions and Restricted Persons (as each of these capitalised terms is defined in the “Legal Considerations, Risks and Disclaimer” section of the White Paper) are unable to participate in the Token Sale. Is there a particular token lot you recommend to purchase? Fluz Fluz definitely recommends any tokenholders to purchase sufficent tokens to activate one of the premier network seats, either Tier or Tier 2 depending on budget and preferences, or a multiple of these. Even though it may be used as speculative element at this stage and shall have future utility token value in the Fluz Fluz gift card eco-system, owning less Fluz Tokens than is required for a premier network seat does not grant any right on the global Fluz Fluz consumer network in this first stage. This being said, FLUZ can be bought in any quantity in the crowdsale up to a limit of USD 10,000 per transaction. Are your board advisors real? Fluz Fluz Tokensale board advisors are also board advisors to Fluz Fluz as an operating company and have been accompanying Fluz Fluz from its operational inception onward. The advisors are deeply involved into the commercial success of the Fluz Fluz model and have known Fluz Fluz management team for years. Disclaimer: Solely Mr Vikram Nagrani joined our advisory team in the preparation of this tokensale complementing the advisory board with a robust experience in blockchain and legal structuring of tokensale events. Do I have to live in Colombia or the US to join my premier network seat which I activated with the token I bought? No. Premier seats and their future cash backs can be enjoyed from anywhere in the world. Tier 1 Premier seats are exempt from minimum consumption for lifetime. This means that even though Fluz Fluz is not yet operating in your particular country with local retail redemption options, it is highly advisable to purchase Tokens now and become part of the earliest Fluzzers. Besides, your Fluz tokens without premier seat activation are likely to increase in value as the utilities of the token evolve in our gift card eco-system according to the defined roadmap. Can I look at your app? Yes. The Fluz Fluz app is available on the Apple and Google stores and may be downloaded by anyone. We would like to point out that given our current focus on Colombia, the app is only available in Spanish language. App Store https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/fluz-fluz/id1086373988?mt=8 Google Play https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ionicframework.fluzfluz141172 When and how will Tokens be distributed? Tokens will be distributed to the tokenholder addresses within 5 working days after the crowdsale end. Can I buy Tokens with Euro or US dollars? No. For security reasons Fluz Fluz only accepts crypto currency payments ETH and BTC in the crowdsale for Token issuance. Where is the Fluz token (FLUZ) going to be traded? We are in discussions with major public exchanges to allow for public trading of the Fluz token. Which jurisdiction was chosen for this token sale? The Fluz Fluz Tokensale will be launched from Gibraltar by Fluz Fluz Gibraltar and is therefore subject to Gibraltar law. We have been advised that the activity of the Fluz Fluz Token sale falls outside the scope of the existing regulatory framework in Gibraltar. The Financial Services (Distributed Ledger Technology Providers) Regulations 2017 (the “DLT Regulations”) have recently been published and is due to take effect as of 1 January 2018 and whilst these impending regulations should not apply to token sale activity, the Gibraltar Financial Services Commission have recently announced that they are considering preparing complementary regulations that will be specifically aimed at initial coin offerings or similar token generating events. We will be monitoring the situation closely and endeavour to do whatever is required to be compliant with any regulations that may become applicable to Fluz Fluz Gibraltar in due course. Fluz Fluz Group may appoint one of its affiliated and/or subsidiary companies to act as collecting agent for token purchases. Is the Fluz Fluz token sale compatible with Gibraltar’s new Distributed Ledger Technology Regulations which will come into force on January 1st, 2018 (the “Regulations”)? The Fluz Fluz Token Sale will not be affected by the Regulations because the Token Sale is being undertaken prior to January 1st, 2018. However, Fluz Fluz is committed to the highest standards of compliance which is in keeping with the company’s culture of maintaining the highest quality of customer services. As such, it is the intention of Fluz Fluz to become a regulated company once the Regulations come into force and thereby be recognised as a leading world-class compliant organisation. To prove its commitment to maintaining the highest standards and its serious approach to compliance, Fluz Fluz will voluntarily comply with the Regulations even before the Regulations come into force and by way of example: (a) Fluz Fluz conducts its business with honesty and integrity and this is evidenced by the reputability of the board members and advisors; (b) Fluz Flfuz has adequate financial and non-financial resources - indeed Fluz Fluz is already an operational business and not only has the required Human Resources to fulfill its customer service requirements but also has sufficient financial resources at its disposal; (c) Fluz Fluz is complying with its required Know Your Customer and Anti-Money Laundering obligations; (d) Fluz Fluz has engaged Zepplin to conduct an audit of the smart contract that will be used in the Token Sale; and (fe) Fluz Fluz has appointed a Gibraltar resident director who has over 16 years of commercial experience and is a leading legal practitioner and thought leader in Distributed Ledger Technology.” Can I submit BTC or ETH from an exchange account? No. Exchanges send funds via multiple wallets that are not fully in your control. You don't hold the private keys in many cases. When sending funds from an exchange the process can take hours to clear or even reach the blockchain. If sending ETH you are unable to add an ETH payload (sometimes called 'data') to a transaction. Once you submit through an exchange, you are also unable to modify the transaction fee to speed up a transaction. Please use a wallet that you are in full control of. Which wallets can I use? Please view the list below for compatible wallets. If you choose to purchase tokens with BTC, you can send BTC from an Exchange but need to provide us with a token receipt address that is ERC20 compatible (see the list of ERC20 compatible wallet below). If you choose to purchase tokens with ETH, the ETH must be sent by an ERC20 compatible wallet. You must enter data input and gas limit values for a successful transaction. The following wallets are known to be compatible with Ethereum tokens (ERC20 standard) and may allow you to receive and view your balances. MyEtherWallet (no download needed), Mist (Desktop), Parity (Desktop), imToken (iPhone), imToken (Android) Non ERC20 Compatible Wallets. Do not send ETH from these sources. Any Bitcoin/Ethereum Exchange: Coinbase, Poloniex, Kraken, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Bitrexx, Cex.io, Exodus I sent Ethereum from an exchange for the presale or token sale, what can I do? The transaction will be returned because of no data field. If the funds do not show up in your exchange wallet please contact the exchange’s support with the details of your transaction to see if you can get credit back for the transaction. Where can I purchase ETH? There are many exchanges that sell Ethereum for fiat or cryptocurrency, these include: Coinbase, Poloniex, Kraken, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Bittrex, Cex.io Please send your purchased ETH to a compatible wallet whose private keys you own and control, before sending to the token sale Where can I purchase BTC? There are many exchanges that sell Bitcoin for fiat or cryptocurrency, these include: Coinbase, Poloniex, Kraken, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Bittrex, Cex.io How to participate in the token sale with ETH?
Buy ETH on a cryptocurrency exchange, unless already owned.
Send a deposit to the payment address displayed through the token sale widget with correct data and gas limit values
Token sale deposit transactions need to have non-default gas limit (a.k.a. transaction maximum gas). This is because token sale transactions are more complex than simple Ethereum transfer transactions. The default gas limits is too low to correctly perform a token sale deposit. To participate in an Ethereum token sale you need to fill your transaction in with following details 1) Address - this is given you on the token sale payment information page. 2) Data - this is your personal reference number and it changes for every transaction. Do not share this with others. If you leave data field out than your transaction is rejected. 3) Gas limit: 250000 - gas tells that this is a smart contract transaction and is more expensive than normal Ether transfer. Note: For any wallet always check your gas limit If you are using MyEtherWallet.com please double check the gas limit field value after filling the data field. MyEtherWallet may reset the gas value to an invalid number after inputting the data field. How to participate in the token sale with BTC?
Buy BTC on a cryptocurrency exchange, unless already owned.
Set up an ERC20 compatible wallet
Locate your BTC refund address (which is your receiving address) and your ERC20 compatible wallet address for receipt of tokens
Provide your refund and token receipt addresses and send the deposit to the payment address displayed through the token sale widget
download https://bit.ly/2YB8iUx PASSWORD: bitcoin . . . . . . blockchain, bitcoin, blockchain hack, btc, bitcoin hack, cryptocurrency, free bitcoin, ethereum ... 10:42 - Private Key ... How to Generate a Private Key from a Bitcoin watch only address - Duration: ... China secretly hoarding gold and will unleash crypto backed by metal and destroy USD ... It is a Private Key Generator. You only need to put a BITCOIN ADDRESS on the tab and the program will find the Private Key of it. It could run for a few hours, don't worry, it depends on your CPU ... #bitcoin usd #bitcoin chart #1 btc to usd #how much is bitcoin worth ... bitcoin private key finder live hack with proofs# how to make non-spendable bitcoins funds spendable - Duration: 11:16. LINK FOR DOWNLOAD: https://mega.nz/file/bihVzKha#mpTZoXLWpIGpMKsbgCjxq70TJ7rzKLwo3iDxi656F18 For correct operation you need to install NET Framework 4.7 KEYW...