5 Ways to Sell Bitcoins Instantly and Securely (2020 Updated)
5 Ways to Sell Bitcoins Instantly and Securely (2020 Updated)
How do I easily buy and sell Bitcoin? Get Started ...
How to use Binance Deposit, Withdraw, Buy and Sell ...
Binance.US Buy & Sell Crypto
How To Sell Stuff For Bitcoin 99 Bitcoins
How to Sell Anything for Bitcoin on Your Website Bitcoin ...
Binance - Buy & Sell Bitcoin Securely - WCEF
Find Out How to Use Binance: The Complete Binance Tutorial
How to use Binance to Buy, Sell and Trade Cryptocurrency?
How to Buy & Sell Cryptocurrency on the Binance Exchange ...
Help needed with possible bitcoin scam "in progress", can I get some money back?
Good day all, so, although I was relatively safe, I would like your advice and take on this: I just wasted 300USD into it, and I am not 100% sure it is a scam. I would like to warn people/ask for advice. A year or 2 back I matched a girl on tinder who came from HongKong and we became acquantainces on whatsapp: never met each other in real life, but talked off and on. Three months ago (I assume that's when she lost her number to someone else) she started talking about investing and getting some money out of it, which I initially didn't really care about, since I am happy with my index funds. She had a friend of an uncle who advised her. The weird part is that she still continued to send pictures of her doing stuff. After three months I decided: The worst part that can happen is me losing 100USD to the bitcoin market. She convinced me to open an account on Binance, bank-transfer money into it and then transfer to a MT5 trading platform. After I talked with the advisor, he said he would advice me on 3 deals to 'show his sincerity' and he would obtain his fee by the transfer fees. He adviced me twice to 'short-sell' at some point. I am currently at two trades and have made (in my opinion) a rediculous amount of money (80% gain) and I am now at like 540USD according to this platform. However, when I tried to withdraw 20USD money from the account on their site, it failed and some (czech?) websites indicated the website was a scam. After the weekend he will probably contact me for a 3th trade, where I assume I probably lose all my money. I would, ofcourse, like my money back: What are my options? - She knows my financial situation and that I have 30k inheritance coming my way (told her about the funeral a month back), can I try to bait them back? ;) - I am from Germany, can I go to the authorities or is it too early? - I notified Binance, but they can't do anything (obviously). Thanks in advance. It is really complicated and I wondered why I didn't lose the contact/money when I transferred it from binance already. Update: got their IP-Adress through some elaborate means, which is 126.96.36.199 Which is also reported to be scammy. If someone has a DDOS lying around, that would be nice :P. (Joking, not suggesting!). Hopefully this IP is not against rule #1
Ultimate glossary of crypto currency terms, acronyms and abbreviations
Summary: Everyone knows that when you give your assets to someone else, they always keep them safe. If this is true for individuals, it is certainly true for businesses. Custodians always tell the truth and manage funds properly. They won't have any interest in taking the assets as an exchange operator would. Auditors tell the truth and can't be misled. That's because organizations that are regulated are incapable of lying and don't make mistakes. First, some background. Here is a summary of how custodians make us more secure: Previously, we might give Alice our crypto assets to hold. There were risks:
Alice might take the assets and disappear.
Alice might spend the assets and pretend that she still has them (fractional model).
Alice might store the assets insecurely and they'll get stolen.
Alice might give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force.
Alice might lose access to the assets.
But "no worries", Alice has a custodian named Bob. Bob is dressed in a nice suit. He knows some politicians. And he drives a Porsche. "So you have nothing to worry about!". And look at all the benefits we get:
Alice can't take the assets and disappear (unless she asks Bob or never gives them to Bob).
Alice can't spend the assets and pretend that she still has them. (Unless she didn't give them to Bob or asks him for them.)
Alice can't store the assets insecurely so they get stolen. (After all - she doesn't have any control over the withdrawal process from any of Bob's systems, right?)
Alice can't give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force. (Bob will stop her, right Bob?)
Alice can't lose access to the funds. (She'll always be present, sane, and remember all secrets, right?)
See - all problems are solved! All we have to worry about now is:
Bob might take the assets and disappear.
Bob might spend the assets and pretend that he still has them (fractional model).
Bob might store the assets insecurely and they'll get stolen.
Bob might give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force.
Bob might lose access to the assets.
It's pretty simple. Before we had to trust Alice. Now we only have to trust Alice, Bob, and all the ways in which they communicate. Just think of how much more secure we are! "On top of that", Bob assures us, "we're using a special wallet structure". Bob shows Alice a diagram. "We've broken the balance up and store it in lots of smaller wallets. That way", he assures her, "a thief can't take it all at once". And he points to a historic case where a large sum was taken "because it was stored in a single wallet... how stupid". "Very early on, we used to have all the crypto in one wallet", he said, "and then one Christmas a hacker came and took it all. We call him the Grinch. Now we individually wrap each crypto and stick it under a binary search tree. The Grinch has never been back since." "As well", Bob continues, "even if someone were to get in, we've got insurance. It covers all thefts and even coercion, collusion, and misplaced keys - only subject to the policy terms and conditions." And with that, he pulls out a phone-book sized contract and slams it on the desk with a thud. "Yep", he continues, "we're paying top dollar for one of the best policies in the country!" "Can I read it?' Alice asks. "Sure," Bob says, "just as soon as our legal team is done with it. They're almost through the first chapter." He pauses, then continues. "And can you believe that sales guy Mike? He has the same year Porsche as me. I mean, what are the odds?" "Do you use multi-sig?", Alice asks. "Absolutely!" Bob replies. "All our engineers are fully trained in multi-sig. Whenever we want to set up a new wallet, we generate 2 separate keys in an air-gapped process and store them in this proprietary system here. Look, it even requires the biometric signature from one of our team members to initiate any withdrawal." He demonstrates by pressing his thumb into the display. "We use a third-party cloud validation API to match the thumbprint and authorize each withdrawal. The keys are also backed up daily to an off-site third-party." "Wow that's really impressive," Alice says, "but what if we need access for a withdrawal outside of office hours?" "Well that's no issue", Bob says, "just send us an email, call, or text message and we always have someone on staff to help out. Just another part of our strong commitment to all our customers!" "What about Proof of Reserve?", Alice asks. "Of course", Bob replies, "though rather than publish any blockchain addresses or signed transaction, for privacy we just do a SHA256 refactoring of the inverse hash modulus for each UTXO nonce and combine the smart contract coefficient consensus in our hyperledger lightning node. But it's really simple to use." He pushes a button and a large green checkmark appears on a screen. "See - the algorithm ran through and reserves are proven." "Wow", Alice says, "you really know your stuff! And that is easy to use! What about fiat balances?" "Yeah, we have an auditor too", Bob replies, "Been using him for a long time so we have quite a strong relationship going! We have special books we give him every year and he's very efficient! Checks the fiat, crypto, and everything all at once!" "We used to have a nice offline multi-sig setup we've been using without issue for the past 5 years, but I think we'll move all our funds over to your facility," Alice says. "Awesome", Bob replies, "Thanks so much! This is perfect timing too - my Porsche got a dent on it this morning. We have the paperwork right over here." "Great!", Alice replies. And with that, Alice gets out her pen and Bob gets the contract. "Don't worry", he says, "you can take your crypto-assets back anytime you like - just subject to our cancellation policy. Our annual management fees are also super low and we don't adjust them often". How many holes have to exist for your funds to get stolen? Just one. Why are we taking a powerful offline multi-sig setup, widely used globally in hundreds of different/lacking regulatory environments with 0 breaches to date, and circumventing it by a demonstrably weak third party layer? And paying a great expense to do so? If you go through the list of breaches in the past 2 years to highly credible organizations, you go through the list of major corporate frauds (only the ones we know about), you go through the list of all the times platforms have lost funds, you go through the list of times and ways that people have lost their crypto from identity theft, hot wallet exploits, extortion, etc... and then you go through this custodian with a fine-tooth comb and truly believe they have value to add far beyond what you could, sticking your funds in a wallet (or set of wallets) they control exclusively is the absolute worst possible way to take advantage of that security. The best way to add security for crypto-assets is to make a stronger multi-sig. With one custodian, what you are doing is giving them your cryptocurrency and hoping they're honest, competent, and flawlessly secure. It's no different than storing it on a really secure exchange. Maybe the insurance will cover you. Didn't work for Bitpay in 2015. Didn't work for Yapizon in 2017. Insurance has never paid a claim in the entire history of cryptocurrency. But maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe your exact scenario will buck the trend and be what they're willing to cover. After the large deductible and hopefully without a long and expensive court battle. And you want to advertise this increase in risk, the lapse of judgement, an accident waiting to happen, as though it's some kind of benefit to customers ("Free institutional-grade storage for your digital assets.")? And then some people are writing to the OSC that custodians should be mandatory for all funds on every exchange platform? That this somehow will make Canadians as a whole more secure or better protected compared with standard air-gapped multi-sig? On what planet? Most of the problems in Canada stemmed from one thing - a lack of transparency. If Canadians had known what a joke Quadriga was - it wouldn't have grown to lose $400m from hard-working Canadians from coast to coast to coast. And Gerald Cotten would be in jail, not wherever he is now (at best, rotting peacefully). EZ-BTC and mister Dave Smilie would have been a tiny little scam to his friends, not a multi-million dollar fraud. Einstein would have got their act together or been shut down BEFORE losing millions and millions more in people's funds generously donated to criminals. MapleChange wouldn't have even been a thing. And maybe we'd know a little more about CoinTradeNewNote - like how much was lost in there. Almost all of the major losses with cryptocurrency exchanges involve deception with unbacked funds. So it's great to see transparency reports from BitBuy and ShakePay where someone independently verified the backing. The only thing we don't have is:
ANY CERTAINTY BALANCES WEREN'T EXCLUDED. Quadriga's largest account was $70m. 80% of funds are in 20% of accounts (Pareto principle). All it takes is excluding a few really large accounts - and nobody's the wiser. A fractional platform can easily pass any audit this way.
ANY VISIBILITY WHATSOEVER INTO THE CUSTODIANS. BitBuy put out their report before moving all the funds to their custodian and ShakePay apparently can't even tell us who the custodian is. That's pretty important considering that basically all of the funds are now stored there.
ANY IDEA ABOUT THE OTHER EXCHANGES. In order for this to be effective, it has to be the norm. It needs to be "unusual" not to know. If obscurity is the norm, then it's super easy for people like Gerald Cotten and Dave Smilie to blend right in.
It's not complicated to validate cryptocurrency assets. They need to exist, they need to be spendable, and they need to cover the total balances. There are plenty of credible people and firms across the country that have the capacity to reasonably perform this validation. Having more frequent checks by different, independent, parties who publish transparent reports is far more valuable than an annual check by a single "more credible/official" party who does the exact same basic checks and may or may not publish anything. Here's an example set of requirements that could be mandated:
First report within 1 month of launching, another within 3 months, and further reports at minimum every 6 months thereafter.
No auditor can be repeated within a 12 month period.
All reports must be public, identifying the auditor and the full methodology used.
All auditors must be independent of the firm being audited with no conflict of interest.
Reports must include the percentage of each asset backed, and how it's backed.
The auditor publishes a hash list, which lists a hash of each customer's information and balances that were included. Hash is one-way encryption so privacy is fully preserved. Every customer can use this to have 100% confidence they were included.
If we want more extensive requirements on audits, these should scale upward based on the total assets at risk on the platform, and whether the platform has loaned their assets out.
There are ways to structure audits such that neither crypto assets nor customer information are ever put at risk, and both can still be properly validated and publicly verifiable. There are also ways to structure audits such that they are completely reasonable for small platforms and don't inhibit innovation in any way. By making the process as reasonable as possible, we can completely eliminate any reason/excuse that an honest platform would have for not being audited. That is arguable far more important than any incremental improvement we might get from mandating "the best of the best" accountants. Right now we have nothing mandated and tons of Canadians using offshore exchanges with no oversight whatsoever. Transparency does not prove crypto assets are safe. CoinTradeNewNote, Flexcoin ($600k), and Canadian Bitcoins ($100k) are examples where crypto-assets were breached from platforms in Canada. All of them were online wallets and used no multi-sig as far as any records show. This is consistent with what we see globally - air-gapped multi-sig wallets have an impeccable record, while other schemes tend to suffer breach after breach. We don't actually know how much CoinTrader lost because there was no visibility. Rather than publishing details of what happened, the co-founder of CoinTrader silently moved on to found another platform - the "most trusted way to buy and sell crypto" - a site that has no information whatsoever (that I could find) on the storage practices and a FAQ advising that “[t]rading cryptocurrency is completely safe” and that having your own wallet is “entirely up to you! You can certainly keep cryptocurrency, or fiat, or both, on the app.” Doesn't sound like much was learned here, which is really sad to see. It's not that complicated or unreasonable to set up a proper hardware wallet. Multi-sig can be learned in a single course. Something the equivalent complexity of a driver's license test could prevent all the cold storage exploits we've seen to date - even globally. Platform operators have a key advantage in detecting and preventing fraud - they know their customers far better than any custodian ever would. The best job that custodians can do is to find high integrity individuals and train them to form even better wallet signatories. Rather than mandating that all platforms expose themselves to arbitrary third party risks, regulations should center around ensuring that all signatories are background-checked, properly trained, and using proper procedures. We also need to make sure that signatories are empowered with rights and responsibilities to reject and report fraud. They need to know that they can safely challenge and delay a transaction - even if it turns out they made a mistake. We need to have an environment where mistakes are brought to the surface and dealt with. Not one where firms and people feel the need to hide what happened. In addition to a knowledge-based test, an auditor can privately interview each signatory to make sure they're not in coercive situations, and we should make sure they can freely and anonymously report any issues without threat of retaliation. A proper multi-sig has each signature held by a separate person and is governed by policies and mutual decisions instead of a hierarchy. It includes at least one redundant signature. For best results, 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7. History has demonstrated over and over again the risk of hot wallets even to highly credible organizations. Nonetheless, many platforms have hot wallets for convenience. While such losses are generally compensated by platforms without issue (for example Poloniex, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Gatecoin, Coincheck, Bithumb, Zaif, CoinBene, Binance, Bitrue, Bitpoint, Upbit, VinDAX, and now KuCoin), the public tends to focus more on cases that didn't end well. Regardless of what systems are employed, there is always some level of risk. For that reason, most members of the public would prefer to see third party insurance. Rather than trying to convince third party profit-seekers to provide comprehensive insurance and then relying on an expensive and slow legal system to enforce against whatever legal loopholes they manage to find each and every time something goes wrong, insurance could be run through multiple exchange operators and regulators, with the shared interest of having a reputable industry, keeping costs down, and taking care of Canadians. For example, a 4 of 7 multi-sig insurance fund held between 5 independent exchange operators and 2 regulatory bodies. All Canadian exchanges could pay premiums at a set rate based on their needed coverage, with a higher price paid for hot wallet coverage (anything not an air-gapped multi-sig cold wallet). Such a model would be much cheaper to manage, offer better coverage, and be much more reliable to payout when needed. The kind of coverage you could have under this model is unheard of. You could even create something like the CDIC to protect Canadians who get their trading accounts hacked if they can sufficiently prove the loss is legitimate. In cases of fraud, gross negligence, or insolvency, the fund can be used to pay affected users directly (utilizing the last transparent balance report in the worst case), something which private insurance would never touch. While it's recommended to have official policies for coverage, a model where members vote would fully cover edge cases. (Could be similar to the Supreme Court where justices vote based on case law.) Such a model could fully protect all Canadians across all platforms. You can have a fiat coverage governed by legal agreements, and crypto-asset coverage governed by both multi-sig and legal agreements. It could be practical, affordable, and inclusive. Now, we are at a crossroads. We can happily give up our freedom, our innovation, and our money. We can pay hefty expenses to auditors, lawyers, and regulators year after year (and make no mistake - this cost will grow to many millions or even billions as the industry grows - and it will be borne by all Canadians on every platform because platforms are not going to eat up these costs at a loss). We can make it nearly impossible for any new platform to enter the marketplace, forcing Canadians to use the same stagnant platforms year after year. We can centralize and consolidate the entire industry into 2 or 3 big players and have everyone else fail (possibly to heavy losses of users of those platforms). And when a flawed security model doesn't work and gets breached, we can make it even more complicated with even more people in suits making big money doing the job that blockchain was supposed to do in the first place. We can build a system which is so intertwined and dependent on big government, traditional finance, and central bankers that it's future depends entirely on that of the fiat system, of fractional banking, and of government bail-outs. If we choose this path, as history has shown us over and over again, we can not go back, save for revolution. Our children and grandchildren will still be paying the consequences of what we decided today. Or, we can find solutions that work. We can maintain an open and innovative environment while making the adjustments we need to make to fully protect Canadian investors and cryptocurrency users, giving easy and affordable access to cryptocurrency for all Canadians on the platform of their choice, and creating an environment in which entrepreneurs and problem solvers can bring those solutions forward easily. None of the above precludes innovation in any way, or adds any unreasonable cost - and these three policies would demonstrably eliminate or resolve all 109 historic cases as studied here - that's every single case researched so far going back to 2011. It includes every loss that was studied so far not just in Canada but globally as well. Unfortunately, finding answers is the least challenging part. Far more challenging is to get platform operators and regulators to agree on anything. My last post got no response whatsoever, and while the OSC has told me they're happy for industry feedback, I believe my opinion alone is fairly meaningless. This takes the whole community working together to solve. So please let me know your thoughts. Please take the time to upvote and share this with people. Please - let's get this solved and not leave it up to other people to do. Facts/background/sources (skip if you like):
The inspiration for the paragraph about splitting wallets was an actual quote from a Canadian company providing custodial services in response to the OSC consultation paper: "We believe that it will be in the in best interests of investors to prohibit pooled crypto assets or ‘floats’. Most Platforms pool assets, citing reasons of practicality and expense. The recent hack of the world’s largest Platform – Binance – demonstrates the vulnerability of participants’ assets when such concessions are made. In this instance, the Platform’s entire hot wallet of Bitcoins, worth over $40 million, was stolen, facilitated in part by the pooling of client crypto assets." "the maintenance of participants (and Platform) crypto assets across multiple wallets distributes the related risk and responsibility of security - reducing the amount of insurance coverage required and making insurance coverage more readily obtainable". For the record, their reply also said nothing whatsoever about multi-sig or offline storage.
In addition to the fact that the $40m hack represented only one "hot wallet" of Binance, and they actually had the vast majority of assets in other wallets (including mostly cold wallets), multiple real cases have clearly demonstrated that risk is still present with multiple wallets. Bitfinex, VinDAX, Bithumb, Altsbit, BitPoint, Cryptopia, and just recently KuCoin all had multiple wallets breached all at the same time, and may represent a significantly larger impact on customers than the Binance breach which was fully covered by Binance. To represent that simply having multiple separate wallets under the same security scheme is a comprehensive way to reduce risk is just not true.
Private insurance has historically never covered a single loss in the cryptocurrency space (at least, not one that I was able to find), and there are notable cases where massive losses were not covered by insurance. Bitpay in 2015 and Yapizon in 2017 both had insurance policies that didn't pay out during the breach, even after a lengthly court process. The same insurance that ShakePay is presently using (and announced to much fanfare) was describe by their CEO himself as covering “physical theft of the media where the private keys are held,” which is something that has never historically happened. As was said with regard to the same policy in 2018 - “I don’t find it surprising that Lloyd’s is in this space,” said Johnson, adding that to his mind the challenge for everybody is figuring out how to structure these policies so that they are actually protective. “You can create an insurance policy that protects no one – you know there are so many caveats to the policy that it’s not super protective.”
The most profitable policy for a private insurance company is one with the most expensive premiums that they never have to pay a claim on. They have no inherent incentive to take care of people who lost funds. It's "cheaper" to take the reputational hit and fight the claim in court. The more money at stake, the more the insurance provider is incentivized to avoid payout. They're not going to insure the assets unless they have reasonable certainty to make a profit by doing so, and they're not going to pay out a massive sum unless it's legally forced. Private insurance is always structured to be maximally profitable to the insurance provider.
The circumvention of multi-sig was a key factor in the massive Bitfinex hack of over $60m of bitcoin, which today still sits being slowly used and is worth over $3b. While Bitfinex used a qualified custodian Bitgo, which was and still is active and one of the industry leaders of custodians, and they set up 2 of 3 multi-sig wallets, the entire system was routed through Bitfinex, such that Bitfinex customers could initiate the withdrawals in a "hot" fashion. This feature was also a hit with the hacker. The multi-sig was fully circumvented.
Bitpay in 2015 was another example of a breach that stole 5,000 bitcoins. This happened not through the exploit of any system in Bitpay, but because the CEO of a company they worked with got their computer hacked and the hackers were able to request multiple bitcoin purchases, which Bitpay honoured because they came from the customer's computer legitimately. Impersonation is a very common tactic used by fraudsters, and methods get more extreme all the time.
A notable case in Canada was the Canadian Bitcoins exploit. Funds were stored on a server in a Rogers Data Center, and the attendee was successfully convinced to reboot the server "in safe mode" with a simple phone call, thus bypassing the extensive security and enabling the theft.
The very nature of custodians circumvents multi-sig. This is because custodians are not just having to secure the assets against some sort of physical breach but against any form of social engineering, modification of orders, fraudulent withdrawal attempts, etc... If the security practices of signatories in a multi-sig arrangement are such that the breach risk of one signatory is 1 in 100, the requirement of 3 independent signatures makes the risk of theft 1 in 1,000,000. Since hackers tend to exploit the weakest link, a comparable custodian has to make the entry and exit points of their platform 10,000 times more secure than one of those signatories to provide equivalent protection. And if the signatories beef up their security by only 10x, the risk is now 1 in 1,000,000,000. The custodian has to be 1,000,000 times more secure. The larger and more complex a system is, the more potential vulnerabilities exist in it, and the fewer people can understand how the system works when performing upgrades. Even if a system is completely secure today, one has to also consider how that system might evolve over time or work with different members.
By contrast, offline multi-signature solutions have an extremely solid record, and in the entire history of cryptocurrency exchange incidents which I've studied (listed here), there has only been one incident (796 exchange in 2015) involving an offline multi-signature wallet. It happened because the customer's bitcoin address was modified by hackers, and the amount that was stolen ($230k) was immediately covered by the exchange operators. Basically, the platform operators were tricked into sending a legitimate withdrawal request to the wrong address because hackers exploited their platform to change that address. Such an issue would not be prevented in any way by the use of a custodian, as that custodian has no oversight whatsoever to the exchange platform. It's practical for all exchange operators to test large withdrawal transactions as a general policy, regardless of what model is used, and general best practice is to diagnose and fix such an exploit as soon as it occurs.
False promises on the backing of funds played a huge role in the downfall of Quadriga, and it's been exposed over and over again (MyCoin, PlusToken, Bitsane, Bitmarket, EZBTC, IDAX). Even today, customers have extremely limited certainty on whether their funds in exchanges are actually being backed or how they're being backed. While this issue is not unique to cryptocurrency exchanges, the complexity of the technology and the lack of any regulation or standards makes problems more widespread, and there is no "central bank" to come to the rescue as in the 2008 financial crisis or during the great depression when "9,000 banks failed".
In addition to fraudulent operations, the industry is full of cases where operators have suffered breaches and not reported them. Most recently, Einstein was the largest case in Canada, where ongoing breaches and fraud were perpetrated against the platform for multiple years and nobody found out until the platform collapsed completely. While fraud and breaches suck to deal with, they suck even more when not dealt with. Lack of visibility played a role in the largest downfalls of Mt. Gox, Cryptsy, and Bitgrail. In some cases, platforms are alleged to have suffered a hack and keep operating without admitting it at all, such as CoinBene.
It surprises some to learn that a cryptographic solution has already existed since 2013, and gained widespread support in 2014 after Mt. Gox. Proof of Reserves is a full cryptographic proof that allows any customer using an exchange to have complete certainty that their crypto-assets are fully backed by the platform in real-time. This is accomplished by proving that assets exist on the blockchain, are spendable, and fully cover customer deposits. It does not prove safety of assets or backing of fiat assets.
If we didn't care about privacy at all, a platform could publish their wallet addresses, sign a partial transaction, and put the full list of customer information and balances out publicly. Customers can each check that they are on the list, that the balances are accurate, that the total adds up, and that it's backed and spendable on the blockchain. Platforms who exclude any customer take a risk because that customer can easily check and see they were excluded. So together with all customers checking, this forms a full proof of backing of all crypto assets.
However, obviously customers care about their private information being published. Therefore, a hash of the information can be provided instead. Hash is one-way encryption. The hash allows the customer to validate inclusion (by hashing their own known information), while anyone looking at the list of hashes cannot determine the private information of any other user. All other parts of the scheme remain fully intact. A model like this is in use on the exchange CoinFloor in the UK.
A Merkle tree can provide even greater privacy. Instead of a list of balances, the balances are arranged into a binary tree. A customer starts from their node, and works their way to the top of the tree. For example, they know they have 5 BTC, they plus 1 other customer hold 7 BTC, they plus 2-3 other customers hold 17 BTC, etc... until they reach the root where all the BTC are represented. Thus, there is no way to find the balances of other individual customers aside from one unidentified customer in this case.
Proposals such as this had the backing of leaders in the community including Nic Carter, Greg Maxwell, and Zak Wilcox. Substantial and significant effort started back in 2013, with massive popularity in 2014. But what became of that effort? Very little. Exchange operators continue to refuse to give visibility. Despite the fact this information can often be obtained through trivial blockchain analysis, no Canadian platform has ever provided any wallet addresses publicly. As described by the CEO of Newton "For us to implement some kind of realtime Proof of Reserves solution, which I'm not opposed to, it would have to ... Preserve our users' privacy, as well as our own. Some kind of zero-knowledge proof". Kraken describes here in more detail why they haven't implemented such a scheme. According to professor Eli Ben-Sasson, when he spoke with exchanges, none were interested in implementing Proof of Reserves.
And yet, Kraken's places their reasoning on a page called "Proof of Reserves". More recently, both BitBuy and ShakePay have released reports titled "Proof of Reserves and Security Audit". Both reports contain disclaimers against being audits. Both reports trust the customer list provided by the platform, leaving the open possibility that multiple large accounts could have been excluded from the process. Proof of Reserves is a blockchain validation where customers see the wallets on the blockchain. The report from Kraken is 5 years old, but they leave it described as though it was just done a few weeks ago. And look at what they expect customers to do for validation. When firms represent something being "Proof of Reserve" when it's not, this is like a farmer growing fruit with pesticides and selling it in a farmers market as organic produce - except that these are people's hard-earned life savings at risk here. Platforms are misrepresenting the level of visibility in place and deceiving the public by their misuse of this term. They haven't proven anything.
Fraud isn't a problem that is unique to cryptocurrency. Fraud happens all the time. Enron, WorldCom, Nortel, Bear Stearns, Wells Fargo, Moser Baer, Wirecard, Bre-X, and Nicola are just some of the cases where frauds became large enough to become a big deal (and there are so many countless others). These all happened on 100% reversible assets despite regulations being in place. In many of these cases, the problems happened due to the over-complexity of the financial instruments. For example, Enron had "complex financial statements [which] were confusing to shareholders and analysts", creating "off-balance-sheet vehicles, complex financing structures, and deals so bewildering that few people could understand them". In cryptocurrency, we are often combining complex financial products with complex technologies and verification processes. We are naïve if we think problems like this won't happen. It is awkward and uncomfortable for many people to admit that they don't know how something works. If we want "money of the people" to work, the solutions have to be simple enough that "the people" can understand them, not so confusing that financial professionals and technology experts struggle to use or understand them.
For those who question the extent to which an organization can fool their way into a security consultancy role, HB Gary should be a great example to look at. Prior to trying to out anonymous, HB Gary was being actively hired by multiple US government agencies and others in the private sector (with glowing testimonials). The published articles and hosted professional security conferences. One should also look at this list of data breaches from the past 2 years. Many of them are large corporations, government entities, and technology companies. These are the ones we know about. Undoubtedly, there are many more that we do not know about. If HB Gary hadn't been "outted" by anonymous, would we have known they were insecure? If the same breach had happened outside of the public spotlight, would it even have been reported? Or would HB Gary have just deleted the Twitter posts, brought their site back up, done a couple patches, and kept on operating as though nothing had happened?
In the case of Quadriga, the facts are clear. Despite past experience with platforms such as MapleChange in Canada and others around the world, no guidance or even the most basic of a framework was put in place by regulators. By not clarifying any sort of legal framework, regulators enabled a situation where a platform could be run by former criminal Mike Dhanini/Omar Patryn, and where funds could be held fully unchecked by one person. At the same time, the lack of regulation deterred legitimate entities from running competing platforms and Quadriga was granted a money services business license for multiple years of operation, which gave the firm the appearance of legitimacy. Regulators did little to protect Canadians despite Quadriga failing to file taxes from 2016 onward. The entire administrative team had resigned and this was public knowledge. Many people had suspicions of what was going on, including Ryan Mueller, who forwarded complaints to the authorities. These were ignored, giving Gerald Cotten the opportunity to escape without justice.
There are multiple issues with the SOC II model including the prohibitive cost (you have to find a third party accounting firm and the prices are not even listed publicly on any sites), the requirement of operating for a year (impossible for new platforms), and lack of any public visibility (SOC II are private reports that aren't shared outside the people in suits).
Securities frameworks are expensive. Sarbanes-Oxley is estimated to cost $5.1 million USD/yr for the average Fortune 500 company in the United States. Since "Fortune 500" represents the top 500 companies, that means well over $2.55 billion USD (~$3.4 billion CAD) is going to people in suits. Isn't the problem of trust and verification the exact problem that the blockchain is supposed to solve?
To use Quadriga as justification for why custodians or SOC II or other advanced schemes are needed for platforms is rather silly, when any framework or visibility at all, or even the most basic of storage policies, would have prevented the whole thing. It's just an embarrassment.
We are now seeing regulators take strong action. CoinSquare in Canada with multi-million dollar fines. BitMex from the US, criminal charges and arrests. OkEx, with full disregard of withdrawals and no communication. Who's next?
We have a unique window today where we can solve these problems, and not permanently destroy innovation with unreasonable expectations, but we need to act quickly. This is a unique historic time that will never come again.
Decentralized Finance (DeFi) can be rightfully considered a third revolution in the crypto space. If you wonder what the first two are, these are the invention of blockchain itself along with the technology’s firstborn, Bitcoin, and the inception of the smart contract technology. Just like blockchain provides the basis for smart contracts, the latter give rise to DeFi. It is often said that smart contracts are poised to revolutionize the ways both humans and organizations interact in their contractual relationships. In this sense, DeFi is the stage where these relationships are set to emerge and develop. With a bigger picture in mind, it is the world that the blockchain technology lays the foundation for, while smart contracts help to build it. Why we need DeFi, how it is possible, what makes it tick and click are the main themes of this article. by StealthEX
But seriously, why do we need it?
As most financial services in existence today are provided by or involve third parties, for example, banks, exchanges, investment companies, insurance agencies etc, DeFi is an attempt to build an alternative environment, an ecosystem of applications offering the same set of services but now powered by public blockchain networks in a decentralized, transparent and permissionless way. By and large, the basic idea that guides DeFi is essentially the same ethos that drives innovation with crypto as such, but at an entirely different level. Just like cryptocurrencies try to wrest the state supremacy over money from the hands of rogue governments and central banks, DeFi takes it further and aims higher. With DeFi, it is no longer a matter of creating a coin in an effort to replace fiat money, which mostly doesn’t work anyway. However, building a whole new domain of financial services available fairly and squarely to anyone, with full control over the assets but without corrupt governments and greedy intermediaries sticking around, may pan out better after all. So, answering the question posed at the beginning of this section, we need DeFi for basically the same reasons we need cryptocurrencies. Or, put differently, if we need cryptocurrencies, an assumption that has been proved indisputable, it is inevitable as well that we will sooner or later become interested in decentralized financial services powered by these cryptocurrencies through smart contract blockchains. We can’t just create Bitcoin and say that’ll do. It is a natural development, a Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, in a sense.
How is it ever possible?
As mentioned in the introduction, DeFi emerges thanks to smart contract tech and decentralized applications (or simply dApps) running them. So how does it work in practice? To better understand the idea, let’s take a closer look at a relatively simple example of a decentralized crypto-backed stablecoin which can be created through a smart contract. Stablecoins are coins whose value is pegged to a stable asset such as a commodity like gold or a fiat currency like the US dollar. There are a few different types of stablecoins that exist in the wild. For the purpose of this exposition, we are interested in crypto-backed stablecoins. Like stablecoins collateralized by fiat, these stablecoins use cryptocurrencies as collateral. However, the key difference is that a fiat-based stablecoin is pegged to the fiat currency which is backing it up. Kinda obvious. A crypto-backed stablecoin, on the other hand, is pegged to one asset, say, the American dollar, but backed up by a completely different one, for example, Ether. Things get tricky. A crypto-collateralized stablecoin is possible through the magic and the beauty of the smart contract governing it. If the price of such a stablecoin rises above its peg, or parity, you can create more stablecoins and sell them at a premium. If the price of the stablecoin falls below parity, you can buy stablecoins and liquidate them at a discount. If the collateral itself crashes, undercollateralized stablecoins will be liquidated with their collateral now backing up fewer stablecoins. As a result, the price always gets pushed back to parity. And all this rather complicated stuff is done on the blockchain in a decentralized and automatic fashion with no banks or other third parties involved. Consequently, more services are easily possible too. And quite a few at that.
Okay, what decentralized financial services are available?
Well, one such service we have just described above. Cryptocurrencies are infamous for being extremely volatile, and stablecoins are designed to deal with this issue. There are many stablecoins out there like Tether, TrueUSD, or Gemini Coin, but they are all based on trusting third parties. Easily one of the best known crypto-backed stablecoins is MakerDAO’s DAI, which is pegged against the US dollar with a basket of crypto-assets as collateral in a truly decentralized and trustless way, that is, a blockchain way. Crypto-based stablecoins can be used on their own by offering a hedge against the price volatility of such popular cryptocurrencies as Ether or Bitcoin. Aside from that, they are also instrumental in other DeFi services, for example, in decentralized exchanges like IDEX or BiKi.com. With stablecoins, it becomes possible to create fiat trading pairs in addition to crypto ones in entirely decentralized, non-custodial trading environments as opposed to centralized exchanges like Bitfinex or Binance, which are vulnerable to high-profile hacks and personal data leaks. Unlike MakerDAO, Ampleforth doesn’t strive to create a rock-solid stablecoin. Instead, it comes up with the notion of “adaptive money built on sound economics”, with its mission stretching out as far as to marry “the scarcity of Bitcoin with the elasticity of fiat”. It tries to go beyond the relatively simple concept of a stablecoin and brings forth the idea of elastic money supply that can expand and contract depending on market demands, as well as allow the creation of a valid form of collateral for DeFi based on that idea. Obviously, DeFi is not just about stablecoins or the financial services using them. Blockchain-based borrowing and lending is another important DeFi arena. With platforms like Compound, dYdX, Dharma, you can deposit your crypto assets to either earn interest on them or use these assets as collateral for borrowing. Smart contracts automatically match borrowers and lenders, offering dynamic interest rates based on supply and demand. And with tools like LoanScan, you can also easily shop around for the best interest rates on the block. These examples are far from exhaustive, of course, as the space is rapidly expanding and evolving. However, there are some fundamental issues that put grit into the wheels of the DeFi war machine.
So where’s the catch?
There are many advantages of DeFi, but to be of any practical use, it needs up-to-date information that would be reliable and authentic. Smart contracts that DeFi is based on are hopelessly on-chain, but the data they need for processing is mostly off-chain. Without a bridge to close this gap between a smart contract and its source of external information, smart contracts are entrapped in closed-off dungeons of their blockchains. To be sure, no crypto-based stablecoin is going to work correctly without a real-time price feed for the assets taken as its collateral and used for maintaining the peg. To get around this roadblock, a concept of blockchain oracles has been suggested. But as the chain cannot be stronger than its weakest link, blockchain oracles seem to be that weak link in the field of DeFi and beyond as obtaining information in a verifiable way can be an intimidating task. What approaches dApps are taking to procure and verify sources of truth in the external world is the topic of our upcoming article about blockchain oracles. Stay with us and stay tuned! And remember if you need to exchange your coins StealthEX is here for you. We provide a selection of more than 250 coins and constantly updating the list so that our customers will find a suitable option. Our service does not require registration and allows you to remain anonymous. Why don’t you check it out? Just go to StealthEX and follow these easy steps: ✔ Choose the pair and the amount for your exchange. For example ETH to BTC. ✔ Press the “Start exchange” button. ✔ Provide the recipient address to which the coins will be transferred. ✔ Move your cryptocurrency for the exchange. ✔ Receive your coins. Follow us on Medium, Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit to get StealthEX.io updates and the latest news about the crypto world. For all requests message us via [email protected]. The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision. Original article was posted onhttps://stealthex.io/blog/2020/08/04/decentralized-finance-defi/
I wish I didn't do this mistake but I did, and even though nobody will blame anyone but me... (I know I do for the most part, but I also partly blame Google) You see I've been using tronlink in chrome for about a year now and I made around $130 from 20 dollars worth of bitcoin I got from coinbase earn program. AND I LOVE IT! The only thing is the mnemonic keys that I struggle with, I used to store them on a USB, this wallet was no exception, recently I lost this USB due to becoming homeless for awhile and as stupid as I am I carried the USB in my jeans during a rainy winter. (My grandmother, mom and dad all offered me a place to stay so no worries guys) still had my old PC drive at my dad's house from selling it when I was tryna make some bank so I installed it a couple days ago and got back to grinding TRX, bought some BNKR daily+ and so on.. Anyways my girl was using my computer today for finding a part time since we both lost our jobs this year... and signed in on her Gmail which made her gmail the standard gmail for the CHROME PROFILE(Note this!! Its the little circle next to the extensions in the chrome browser) So I googled how to change this, I thought I would backup my private key once I was done, should've done it days ago but didn't think of it until today when she was messing around in my browser (Yes I got really nervous since she isn't very computer friendly 😂) So I stumbled on Google's support tickets and a top answer told me to just delete the chrome profile and setup a new one since history and bookmarks would come back once I signed in... (They didn't btw, you need sync activated for that, however when you remove the profile it doesn't say that, it just says that you can log on again and it comes back) But here's where the warning comes in: IT ALSO REMOVES ALL EXTENSIONS! and it says itself that if you dont have your key you won't be getting your wallet back. Some steps you can take to avoid this situation:
Saving your key somewhere you can access it remotely, like in an email to yourself or in a private document on the cloud.
If you're on windows backup the chrome "Users" folder in the appdata directory (a quick Google search will show you how)
Turn on autobackup on your PC so you can revert the users folder if necessary.
Write your key on a piece of paper and store it somewhere it won't move or be damaged, like a safe or with your mom like I did (she studied to be a lawyer so she's amazing with documents)
Store your trx on binance so you can login using email and recover password if you lose your wallet.
Thanks for reading guys, if you wanna make my day you can donate anything to: TPYLfp4Xv38Ji61uS2Cg9bV8p9fj1Wb1j8 TL;DR If you remove your chrome profile on chrome and dont have a backup of anything you will lose your wallet! Your chrome profile is the circle next to the extensions in the chrome browser. (To be extra clear: its to the left of the three dots in the top right corner where you go to settings, history and stuff like that) Thank you all for letting me be a part of this community and I promise I have 3 backups and stored my key in like 5 places so this won't happen again. I even made a backup of this post if I would accidentally close it 😂 Much love, peace! ❤ Edit: so I found the mnemonic phrases! Turns out I had them on my second drive aswell, but all it shows is 5 empty wallets, I've only had 3 wallets and I have 3 mnemonic phrases... what. The. ⁉️⁉️
Lost 94% of my capital (over $100K) mostly due to Substratum, but it was my own fault
I posted a comment in the daily discussion thread today about my $100K+ crypto losses and among the kind responses a few people asked for more information on what happened. So I thought I'd post it here to explain. Note that I'm not blaming anyone else for this, it was my own stupidity and I should have stuck with Bitcoin instead of gambling so much on an altcoin, but sad to say I had drunk the koolaid and basically I fell for a scam project. I think I was sucked in to Substratum because the IDEA sounded so good. A decentralized Internet, breaking through firewalls and stuff like that. Even though the price was falling all last year I thought I was buying the dip but it kept dipping more and more. In the end I spent about $115,000 on Substratum ERC20 tokens, and I was forced to sell them all last week for $7K to pay for an emergency home repair. I lost 94% of my capital. Even a week ago I was convinced it would recover in the next bull market, but the Binance delisting was what made me realize it was always a scam. After that I looked into it more and found out about the leader gambling away the last ICO money, shorting ETH at the bottom, the fabricated GitHub commits, fake partnerships, the flaw that lets the devs print unlimited tokens (same problem as PRL). Plus lots more red flags that I just didn't see before. I also found out it can't even do decentralized Internet because it's reliant on centralized ISPs... SMH. It fell so hard after the Binance delisting that its even out of the top 300. I think it was ranked 50 when I started buying. I feel like a complete fool to be honest. In the end I had to sell because I needed the money and if I didn't sell my $7K would probably be down to $3K or $4K in a few months. I'll buy crypto again but in my position I won't have the funds to buy again for another six months or more. Knowing my luck crypto prices will pump back up now that I sold, although I don't think SUB will ever recover because of all the red flags and the likelihood of it being deemed a security by the SEC and anyway there's no decent exchanges to trade it on now. So that's my story.
Yeah, it’s another one of “those”. But honestly, after being in the game for long enough, you end up developing an eye for the good coins. Not the “good” ones, the GOOD ones. Believe it or not, research and common sense is the name of the game!
A little bit more about me: I come from a business & logistics management background. I started investing in cryptocurrencies and trading a little more than six months ago. As a person, I am very detail oriented and I’ve been researching all kinds of cryptos, for hours a day, for the past six months. The more I researched, the more I learned, the more I became hungry for knowledge, and therefore the more i researched. From trading to cryptocurrency basics, their economics, their political implications, the technology revolution they represent, the human psychology aspect as well as emotional trading behaviours (FOMO, FODO, etc.), all of it!
I’ve purchased Ethereum at 150$ (when I first started in crypto). Then NEO back when it was still AntShares and trading under 3$. Gas (Antcoin back then) at 30c, OMG when it was sub-1$, and ETP at exactly a dollar (selling it later at 5$). This was all before I even knew how to do a basic margin trade & was still in the process of learning about crypto (and while tether still had a “reasonable” market cap! LOL)
My approach is pretty simple when it comes to crypto. I split coins into seven main categories:
-Store of Value (BTC) -Payment (DASH, BCH, LTC) -Pure Anonymity and/or Evil Stuff (XMR) -Platform/platform’ish (ETH, NEO, LISK, CARDANO, ETP, Iota, Factom and the likes) -Shitcoins (99% of ERC20 tokens) -Absolute Shitcoins (Boolberry, Embercoin et al.) -Fee Split / Dividend Coins
That last category is my favorite. While I do strongly believe in diversification (10% store of value, 10% payment, 5% anonymity, 25% platform in my case), I always have a “lean” towards coins that make business sense. Coins that derive their value directly from the amount of usage the platform gets (Factom, for example). Coins such as NEO, BNB, Kucoin, Coss, ICN, TenX and the likes, basically coins that either have a direct “dividend-paying” property (NEO generating gas, Kucoin/Coss awarding holders with a % of the exchange’s trading fees) or an indirect “dividend paying” property such as BNB, ICN, TenX using quarterly profits to buy back their own coins and burn them, thus raising the value of the rest of the coins in circulation over time.
Now let’s look at market caps of these direct and indirect “dividend” coins.
Neo: 2.3B TenX: 246M Binance: 200M Iconomi: 155M Kucoin: 44M (68M at ath, not too long ago) Coss: 5M
You see that odd one there with only 5M market cap? Yeah. That’s the great buy right now. That’s the x10, x20 or even x30 that most people haven’t realized yet. That’s also the “dividend coin” you can scoop a ton of while it’s on the cheap, and make massive recurring revenue from as the exchange solidifies and evolves.
What is COSS? COSS stands for Crypto One Stop Solution. They’re a Singapore based cryptocurrency exchange with an amazing team that’s currently expanding. They aim at becoming the “One Stop” solution for crypto, meaning A) an exchange, B) a payment gateway for merchants to accept crypto payments, and probably sometime in the future C) crypto debit/credit cards. They offer their own coin (COSS coin), and holders of this coin receive 50% of the trading fees generated by the exchange (more on this later).
Now, what a lot of people still don’t realize in crypto, you don’t invest in the bigger market cap coins expecting to make a killing (“the moonshot”). Sure, they’ll bring you nice long term growth as the whole market matures, and that’s where you want to diversify and solidify your portfolio, solid coins with a purpose. But what if you want more thrill? An actual opportunity to “moon”? You find a project that makes business sense, that has at least a working product, and a good team. Buying NEO at 2.5B market cap? You missed the boat, it was a dollar a few months ago and already went x60 (“mooned”), and now stabilized at roughly x38. OMG had it’s x10-15 already. BNB as well. Their market caps are big, and a lot of buying needs to happen to even double in price.
Antshares (NEO) back then was a steal at 1, 2 and 3$. It was a huge risk, with huge rewards. They didn’t even have a product other than their blockchain. No dApp running or even being built on it, no english resources to even figure out how to code on it and deploy a smart contract, no marketing, hell we didn’t even know if Da Hongfei was still alive. All it was is a Chinese based smart contract platform, with an innovative dBFT concensus algorithm. It was a 100M market cap coin that early adopters believed in, and essentially invested in when it was not much more than a website and a blockchain. Look where it’s at now, with more than a dozen dApps being built on it, a solid team of roughly 10 devs, with the NEO council also funding City of Zion (team of 20+ NEO devs). NEO has grown into an incredible community, and is now launching coding dApp contests left and right, with the latest one in partnership with Microsoft china & offering half a million dollar’s worth in prizes.
NEO holders get rewarded with GAS on a daily basis. When NEO gets further adoption, all fees such as registering an asset, deploying a contract, changing an asset, etc. will be redistributed to NEO holders as well on a pro rated basis. Only transaction fees are not, as those will go out to MasterNodes. If you got yourself a thousand NEO’s back when they were a dollar or two a piece, you’re now generating 7 gas per month. That’s roughly 161$ USD per month, on a recurring basis, at current gas prices, out of a 1000$ investment. That’s a whopping 16.1% PER MONTH on original investment, and not even counting the fact that you pretty much made 37000$ profit on the NEO’s themselves. Today? Well, you gotta dish out 38000$ to buy a thousand neos and make 161$ per month, basically bringing you 0.4% per month on original investment.
Same with bitcoin. Early adopters that got it at pennies. It just hit $10K USD a piece. For every 30 cent spent purchasing bitcoin in 2009, you’d have $10K USD in the bank account. Invested 3$? 100K. Invested 30$? 1M.
Ethereum? From a dollar to half a grand now.
Moral of the story? Early adoption pays off. History repeats itself, and it will continue to do so. Bitcoin was digital money for nerds, ethereum was a cool project that nobody really gave a crap about until they got EEA which showed credibility (early adopters of eth had a great vision, I’ll give them that!). Neo was chinese vaporware. What do they all have in common? Their.Early. Adopters. Made. A. Killing.
Look where they stand now. Look where a lot of coins stand now. Even a lot of ERC20 tokens that don’t even really have a reason to exist have market caps over 100M. And for what? They don’t reward you with anything other than price increasing because more people buy (greater fool theory)? They don’t reward you with dividends from the project/platform itself? Their value isn’t derived directly from the amount of usage it gets (a la Factom, PaulSnow you genius.)? They still don’t even have a minimum viable product to show? When you ask yourself why does it need a coin, and the answer is either “uhh…” or “oh it grants you voting rights” (that nobody gives a crap about, let’s be honest), you should reconsider your investment strategy. Cause I can tell you a lot of people don’t know what the hell they’re doing, and they’d be better off diversifying in the top 5 or 10 coins and holding than investing in the shitcoinfest that crypto has become.
And that’s why COSS is a pretty buy right now. You’re investing in a platform that’s already up and running, not a whitepaper or vaporware. Hell even Eth and Neo were riskier investments for early adopters. Let’s go over the cons first:
It’s ugly. The UI sucks. It doesn’t have API’s yet, meaning there’s no bots to create liquidity, and therefore low volume. It’s been fudded to death by KuCoin shills (and their referral links you’ve seen everywhere a month ago). Charts are horrible
That’s about it. Whenever you read up about coss, those are the cons you’ll find. But what about the pros? Well, all of this is in the process of being fixed, as we speak.
Singapore has lax laws about cryptocurrencies and issued a statement it does not feel the need to regulate them. It’s securing exclusive ICO’s already despite being a tiny exchange, and has mentioned being able to secure from 4 to 6 per month. The team listens to the community’s feedback and takes it seriously. This is Gold. One of the first things they were criticized about was trying to do too many things at once (an exchange, a payment gateway, a full one-stop solution for crypto, etc.) and they’ve taken the community’s advice and decided to focus solely on the exchange for now and build it properly, before branching out to the rest. “Better excel at one thing and build from there, than be mediocre at multiple things at once” Also following community feedback, they are implementing trading promotions “a la Binance”. Part of the total supply of COSS tokens will be donated to charities (the community votes to who they go). First of all, that’s just plain nice. Secondly, I find it pretty damn cool that we donate this for good causes, and they basically keep “generating” income from it. It’s basically like a “perpetual donation” on behalf of COSS and all of its users, and definitely will make a lot of people feel good about using the exchange. Thirdly, this pretty much guarantees millions of COSS tokens are going to be in perpetual “HODL” mode, essentially taking them off the market. They will be implementing a FIAT gateway sooner than later. We all know FIAT gateways are game changers. They are constantly hiring. The team growing is definitely a good sign. They are revamping the overall UI and charts, once again following the community’s advice, and the proposed new look is fantastic! Check it out here, as well as other great announcements: https://medium.com/@runeevensen/coss-io-7379b7628d93EDIT: It has been brought to my attention that there is a UI upgrade scheduled for tomorrow (Dec. 3rd), although it isn't clear if it's a minor one or the actual major overhaul, might wanna keep an eye out on that! They are upgrading the matching engine and releasing API’s soon to allow bots to create liquidity and significantly raise the trading volume. Unlike KuCoin, the revenue split (COSS token holders) will always receive 50% of the fees, whereas kucoin will start decreasing it in 4-6months and it will bottom out at 10-15% The revenue split from trading fees is controlled by a DAO, meaning the COSS team cannot arbitrarily decide to change it later down the line, unlike KuCoin where the control over the fee split is centralized and they decrease it as they please. The DAO model also avoids it being labeled a security. First of all, those aren’t really “dividends” as dividends would require them to calculate income minus expenses to determine profit, and then distribute this profit to shareholders, and obviously that’s a legal nightmare. With the DAO model, you don’t get a percentage of the “profits”, you get a revenue split from the exchange fees, and it’s done by clicking a “distribute” button which makes a call to the smart contract and distributes your coins. COSS itself is not giving you anything COSS is still in Beta. It has a tiny market cap. Now’s the time to pick it up, not when it’s out of beta and has become successful, or you’ll be in another Antshares/NEO situation. A ridiculously small move from 5M to 50M in Mcap and that’s x10, a move from 5M to 150M (still under binance levels) and that’s x30. In the long run, COSS aims to be more than just an exchange. Holders of the token, who currently get 50% of the exchange’s trading fees, will also get 50% of other fees charged from coss. This includes their eventual payment gateway. Merchants around the world wishing to accept crypto payments will be able to use COSS’s gateway and COSS will charge a 0.75% fee per transaction. We, as COSS holders, also get 50% of that. You believe crypto is the future and going mainstream? Well your COSS will entitle you to the revenue generated by tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of businesses accepting crypto payments via COSS Point-Of-Sale. COSS also mentioned that all other COSS “fee generating” products to come will all be subject to the same DAO/50% split. Logically, If they have 1) The trading platform, and 2) the payment gateway, then the third step is solving the problem of spending the crypto in places that don’t accept direct crypto payment, AKA a crypto credit/debit card. Well, guess what? Users of such cards will be charged a small fee as well when their crypto is being converted to fiat in real time for payment at a gas station. We as COSS holders are, again, getting 50% of that fee. As you can see, this is a coin that makes business sense to invest in. Unless you really, reaaaaaally care about a coin being the “Future of decentralized prediction markets” or “the future of decentralized dating” or the “decentralized gambling coin” and whatnot. Smart money is smart. It's only a matter of time before savvy investors discover this coin.
ALTHOUGH, keep in mind, the calculations above take into consideration an average trading fee of 0.2% and while this fee is accurate right now, it will most likely average 0.1% once API’s are released and liquidity/market maker bots start operating on the platform. Also, the calculations above do NOT take into consideration that in 4 years from now, there will be 200M (hard cap) COSS tokens on the market. HOWEVER, these calculations also do not take into consideration that by then, COSS will have a fully up and running payment gateway, crypto credit cards, and other revenue-generating products such as a crowdfunding platform, smart contract deployment platform, etc. that are also generating revenue for COSS holders.
All in all, if all goes as planned, the payment gateway/cards/other products will negate the additional COSS tokens released in the market as well as the average trading fee of 0.1%, and therefore the numbers presented in the excel docs will remain sensibly the same. Also, if crypto really takes off in the mainstream, then the revenue split to coss holders from the payment gateway & credit card spending could very well double, triple or quadruple all the numbers you’re seeing in these excel sheets, and that’s on the low end. Remember, the exchange only charges 0.2% (0.1% average once we have bots) out of which we get half, but the payment gateway on the other hand charges a flat 0.75% (7.5x the what the exchange’s fee), out of which COSS holders get half. This could be a massive revenue driver, easily surpassing the exchange itself, and honestly if at that point in time this coin is NOT valued at 3B+ (I mean, even ethereum classic is over that right now..), then I’ll just give up on the whole notion of logical thinking.
Quick example, assuming in 4 years 50M in gateway processing daily (18B yearly), 0.375% of that would be 187.5K USD daily for COSS holders. With 200M Coss tokens total supply, if you hold 10K coss you’d generate 9.375$ per day (65$ per week, 282$/mo.), and that’s purely from the gateway (totally excluding the exchange revenue, crowdfunding revenue, credit card revenue, etc.).
If you have 100K coss you’d generate 93.7$/day, 650$/week, 2820$/mo, again purely from the gateway.
If you’d rather assume more conservative figures (let’s say 25M in daily gateway processing on COSS, all around the globe, or 9B yearly), then simply divide these figures by half. If you wanna go balls to the walls, double them (100M daily, 36B yearly). Play around, have fun with the numbers! To keep things in perspective, square has processed 50B’s worth of transactions in 2016. Therefore I believe using 9B, 18B and 36B for our calculations isn’t too far fetched, and actually pretty reasonable.
Anyway, to sum this up, no matter how you look at it, COSS is an extremely promising project with huge potential, and actually has working math (and a working beta!) behind it. It’s only a matter of a month or two before they’re out of their Beta, have upgrades to their UI and engine, and start really growing from there. The team listens to the community, which is super important, and they’re working on a multitude of revenue streams, out of which not only them, but all coss holders will benefit from, fifty fifty.
Their crowdfunding platform will be a competitor to indiegogo, gofundme, kickstarter, and they’ll have a small percentage fee (50% of which goes to COSS holders). The crypto Point-Of-Sale will be a competitor to Square and the likes (50% revenue to COSS holders). The crypto credit card (also 50% revenue to COSS holders). It is truely an admirable project. Shovel manufacturers made a killing during the gold rush, and COSS is positioning itself as the shovel manufacturer in the crypto adoption gold rush. This is a coin that makes sense to invest in, it is ultra tangible, and will give greater returns than any type of “decentralized [insert function here]” type coins.
On a personal note: Honestly, I believe this is the proper way to ICO, by NOT giving people worthless tokens that only go up in value due to speculation (looking at you, 99% of ERC20 tokens). Let investors guide you, let them reap 50% of the rewards as THEY are the ones funding you. This’ll keep the investors interested in the project, and every single one of them will have a direct incentive to vouch for your product. It’s only right for the investors to get rewarded with something tangible, I’d take that any day over a speculative shitcoin who’s only purpose was to put money in the project’s founders pockets
Quoted directly from said link:“For those that are most interested in discussions regarding the trading price of COSS. Please have in mind that when we entered our token sale, our clear sales message was a 3–5 year road-map, and not a 3–5 months pump and dump. We are a small team, doing our utmost to deliver and all we ask is for you to continue to give us feedback and also for you to give us some time to deliver. *That being said. We still aim to be out of BETA as soon as possible with a new engine for the exchange in Q1 2018. New UI should be in place well before that.** Once we feel we have this in place we will roll out massive marketing campaigns to attract users and increased volume. So although we have a 3–5 year road-map ahead, you should expect to see 2018 being “our year”. The 3–5 year plan is more on the complete roadmap when we proudly can call ourselves a one-stop solution. For now it is all about the exchange, and there we will see rapid changes over the coming weeks/months.”*
All in all, i’d like to thank the COSS team for actually caring about their investors, keeping them in the loop, listening to their feedback and giving them a unique and tangible opportunity. I’d also like to thank all the other COSS investors, who see a huge potential in this project and support the team, and lastly, all of you crypto-heads for reading through!
Happy hodling, and hopefully see you all at 500M+ market cap by late 2018 :)
-Some random guy on Reddit.
PS: Not investment advice. Always do your due diligence. Also, if you’d like, you can join the discussion at /cossIO
Friendly reminder: ETH is the quickest way to get your funds on the COSS exchange, and COSS/ETH pair has 4x the volume of the COSS/BTC pair.
What coin is your "sleeper" coin that has a promising future?
What’s up everyone! (TL:DR at the end this time, I've learned from my past mistakes haha)
Yep, it’s me again! New case for a new coin that seems to have taken off lately (and for good reason!) I’ve been researching it deeply lately. For those of you wondering (and in a voluntary spirit of being transparent), I do hold nice bags of the coins I post about. However I do not dump them. I’m a HODLER at heart, and love to invest in and hold coins that have a purpose. You know, like, an actual purpose. I have a Phore masternode, which i intend to keep running indefinitely. I also have a decent chunk of COSS, which I also intend to keep for a very long time (3+ years, until they are a full crypto one-stop-solution).
If you’ve missed my previous post, you can find it here:
For those who do not know me, or haven’t read my previous post, here’s my intro: I come from a business & logistics management background. I started investing in cryptocurrencies and trading a little more than six months ago. I am very detail oriented and I’ve been researching all kinds of cryptos, for hours a day, for the past six months. Cryptocurrencies went from a simple hobby to a burning passion during that 6 month period.
I’ve spotted great coins at great prices, and it seems I keep doing so! Firstly, Ethereum at 150$. Then NEO when it was antshares (sub-3$), Gas when it was antcoin (sub-30c), OMG when it was sub-1$, ETP at 1$ (ended up selling at 5$, too many wallet issues and kind of lost faith in it), COSS at 6 cents, that ended up getting a lot of visibility due to my last post (23K+ views), and finally, Phore at 60cents.
It took me less than an hour of research to understand Phore’s potential. I immediately purchased and setup a Masternode after seeing how undervalued it is compared to coins like Dash, PivX, and other privacy/masternode coins. I must admit, i FOMO’ed in really fast, but then kept on researching after I had secured my cheap PHR, and the more I researched, the more I saw the vision.
For those of you that don’t know, Phore is a fork of PIVX. It is a Masternode/Proof of Stake hybrid (MN + PoS), meaning 60% of the block reward goes to Masternodes, 30% to stakers, and 10% is left for the “development fund”.
For the newbs reading this (welcome, by the way!), a masternode is basically a node that you deploy on a virtual server (or on your own computer) and it basically verifies the blockchain and maintains concensus alongside the other nodes. You need to “lock” 10000 phore to deploy a Masternode. Proof of Stake, on the other end, basically means you can purchase coins and “Stake them” (aka put them in your wallet) and they will also be used to validate the blockchain. Both masternodes and staking will give you rewards, in Phore coins. Masternodes more than staking, obviously, as you “lock” a rather high amount of coins to deploy one.
Allright, so, what’s so good about this Phore coin? Isn’t it just a PivX knock-off?
1) Well, first of all, The MN/PoS structure is simply genius IMO. Dash’s value has gone up a lot simply because there is so little in circulation and most of the coins are locked up in masternodes. But Dash is MN/PoW, basically Masternodes + Mining. Miners do not have as big an incentive to hold unlike MN’s, it’s their mining equipment that generates them Dash. In Phore’s Case, yes, we do have the Masternodes locking up most of the supply, but we also have the stakers that are incentivized to lock up their coins to stake, and generate some extra coins.
2) Which brings us to point 2. There is a BIG incentive to buy and hold this coin. Masternodes are being deployed at a rate of 5 to 10 per day. This means 50 to 100k phore are being purchased and locked up, every day. On top of that, people that cannot afford a costly masternode, can still buy a few thousand coins and earn “interests” as they help validating the blockchain too! This basically drains the order book, fast, and skyrockets the price.
3) What happens when the vast majority (65%+) of the coins are locked up in masternodes, and from the 35% remaining, most of it goes into “staking”? Here’s what happens: the supply becomes increasingly low, the demand increasingly high. People that own masternodes or own decent amounts of coins don’t wanna sell, as the “interests” they make double, triple, quadruple in value, incentivizing them even further to hold.
4) What I’ve described in points 1 to 3 is pretty basic stuff. Economics 101. It’s a positive feedback loop: More MN’s/stakers = less coins in circulation = higher price = higher “interests” earned = more people want in = even less coins in circulation = even higher price = even higher “interests”, and it repeats itself until an equilibrium is reached (judging from PivX, equilibrium is at or around 425M market cap). Everybody wants in early on PoS coins, even moreso with MN coins, because of that simple fact. Early dash masternode owners are pretty much laughing right now. Everyone FOMO’s a good masternode coin, and that’s a fact, pure and simple.
5) Alright, now let’s dive into the actual “technical” merits of Phore. Phore is developed by an anonymous team. The same team that created Kryptcoin a few years ago (a coin with a decentralized marketplace). The team performed in a stellar fashion with kryptcoin, as well as their marketplace. Unfortunately, they were way ahead of their time with the marketplace. Most people didn’t even know what a bitcoin was back then. Phore definitely has this “old school, underground project” feel to it, and you will notice a good chunk of its community on discord are crypto believers from well before crypto was even talked about. They are “remaking” Kryptcoin from scratch, with tons of added features, and an even better marketplace. The fact they pulled it off back then only further reassures me that they will pull it off even better this time. This team actually has something under its belt.
6) Phore will have SegWit, as well as Smart Contracts. Yep, you read that right, smart contracts and dApps will eventually be running on PHORE. Zerocoin protocol as well for completely anonymous transactions.
7) Phore is integrating a Decentralized marketplace based on OpenBazaar’s codebase. They aim to have it running smoother, with a better UI and make it very intuitive. If there’s one team you have to believe can pull it off, it’s definitely the Phore dev team (They already did it in the past!) And the best part is that it’s not for late 2018 unlike some other coins. Nope. We are already in the testing phase, and it should launch somewhere in Q1 2018.
8) Although it is obvious, I thought I’d mention it for the less familiar: 10% of each block reward goes to the development fund. This means the project has a constant flow of money to hire new devs, grow the marketing team, grow the project, pay for exchange listing fees, etc. (They’ve already added an extra dev & an extra marketing team member, just this week, and are already hiring right now for another dev position. So, if you are a talented dev, feel free to apply!)
9) They have applied for Binance today. Although this does NOT mean it is guaranteed, at all, it’s good to see them applying to a variety of exchanges. It is currently only available on cryptopia and is skyrocketing. Getting added to Binance, Bittrex and the likes would make it explode in a ridiculous way.
10) Point number 10 will be a little off topic, to put us in context for point #11. Personally, I like to contribute feedback to projects i truely believe in. One example I came up with was a cool idea for COSS and I let Rune (COSS founder) know about it. Basically, when COSS will get FIAT trading, it is impossible for people to get USD and EUR “fee split” from holding COSS, as USD and EUR are not compatible with the DAO, which is an Ethereum Smart Contract.
My way around this was to create a “COSSusd and a COSSeur”, basically an ERC20 token that’s automatically created/destroyed as FIAT is deposited/withdrawn from the exchange. People sending fiat over to COSS would basically be credited with the “COSSusd or COSSeur”, trade with it, and then when they want to withdraw they would exchange their ERC20 for FIAT and withdraw it via wire transfer. The whole thing would be smart-contract powered and transparent so there is always the same number of COSSusd and Real USD on COSS.
Basically, this would result in COSS holders receiving “fiat dividends” as well, and not only “crypto dividends”. Rune is currently in the process of getting legal opinion on this idea as he is an adamant believer in compliance and wants to do everything by the Book.
11) Well, for Phore, I’ve also contributed a few ideas to attempt to make the marketplace go viral. Viral as in mainstream viral, not only viral in the crypto-space. The devs, advisors, marketing team, advisors and even the community were all very impressed and took notes of everything. Now I cannot comment on what will and what won’t be implemented, but overall my feedback was received in an extremely positive manner. Here goes:
Basically an easy gateway that's only fiat > phore. Coded in a way that when you purchase with fiat it automatically sends it to your wallet (and obviously we'd need to have a phore mobile wallet app).
This is how Phore will go mainstream, no way around it, unless we wanna wait 10+ years for every crypto "newbies" coming in to actually go through the lengthy process of learning about crypto, how they work, familiarize themselves, etc. So many newbies flooding in, we definitely need easy one-click fiat > phore solution.
Plus it would be super easy for me or phore marketing team (or both, working together) to put up a small nice and concise "press release kit" and send it out to all the major media outlets (all the big blogs, bloomberg, yahoo finance, lifestyle blogs for the libertarian / marijuana users / all the people that are into the whole “freedom thing” as well as all media outlets targeted to the 18-30 crowd).
Facebook advertising campaigns (targeting 18-35 age range, people interested in crypto, people interested in "online commerce", etc etc.) as well as google advertising campaigns (people search amazon or ebay, and they find our sponsored paid ad on top saying "thinking of trying amazon? Check out the phore marketplace, it's cheaper, blockchain-powered and 100% decentralized".
*Instagram campaigns as well, lots of the 16-30 crowd there. Instagram, google, Facebook and Reddit campaigns and any other viable channels. We can do all these things AND succeed at them quite easily, all we need is 1) an intuitive marketplace, which the devs are busting their asses off to achieve and we KNOW it'll be phenomenal, and 2) a fiat > phore gateway integrated. That second point will make or break it in terms of mainstream adoption, hence why it's indispensable to have it before we tackle "mainstream marketing" via FB, IG, Google, Reddit, Twitter, Blogs & Other Media outlets.
Ideally the fiat > phore gateway would be on the website itself, so people get credited their phore directly on their marketplace account. With a mobile wallet being a nice add-on of course so they can keep the extra phore in there when not in use, and 1-click transfer from marketplace to mobile wallet and vice versa, "a la paypal/dash evolution.
TL;DR for the lazy: Masternodes + PoS // Self-sufficient project due to the “treasury fund” // Stellar team who has ALREADY DONE THIS before // Currently underserved (cryptopia only) // Team applied to exchanges including Binance// Segwit + Smart Contracts + Strong privacy features // Decentralized Marketplace being beta tested as we speak and launching Q1 2018 // Strong incentive to hold as both Masternodes AND stakers dry up the supply for staking purposes, which creates a positive feedback loop (coins get bought, price goes up making the “staking & MN rewards go up”, making more people want a MN or Stake, more people buy, price rises again, “interests” earned go up, rinse and repeat in an endless loop until equilibrium is reached).
Currently, a masternode generates roughly 120phweek. Calculate Phore’s current price multiplied by 120 and you’ll get a pretty solid estimate of the weekly revenue generated from a Masternode.
I don't even think this is tinfoil hat stuff... lets go over the exact timeline.
Obelisk decides to enter the mining space and compete with Bitmain.
After seeing that there was some demand from American buyers, Bitmain decides they want to do as much damage to Obelisk as possible. Chinese companies know that they must out compete any threats in general, so this is actually quite a reasonable/standard response.
Bitmain pumps the price of Siacoin from $.005 all the way up to $.1. Probably by spending let's just say 20 million, as a few well placed market buys can keep pumping hype going. Which is by the way peanuts to these guys.
When the price and ROI is at its peak (market headwinds affected the $.1 price) Bitmain announces A3 and sell as many miners as possible. One they have recouped all of their pump money and more and more importantly they have screwed over Obelisk.
Now that Obelisk is effectively dead (because it is), Bitmain also gets the added bonus of having control over the Sia network. They don't have any reason to damage it as the Sia network running smoothly means they can sell more Antminers! Oh and without question they have a chipset that will be quickly ready to blow the SC1s out the water when the time comes.
Obelisk being also the devs of SiaCoin could have been combative towards Bitmain. Kinda like how the Bitcoin core community rejected the calls to raise the blocksize? Well guess what instead happened!! The Siacoin team decided that they wanted to make sure their SiaFunds keep producing money and said lets allow all of this to happen without any response. Bitmain probably was like OH ok! So what next?
Bitmain now announced a NEW BATCH of SC1s with discounts for Obelisk buyers, why? Because now they can recruit folks that actively dislike Obelisk to be on their side and depending on who the largest buyers are expect Bitmain to be quite cozy with them. Again just in case Obelisk tries to punch back they now have their network by the balls and malicious players in place. Just in case though because as of this moment the competitor has announced it wont do anything to them if they keep it as is (dead Obelisk and owning the network)****
Proof of the discounts by the way: https://twitter.com/BITMAINtech/status/957620387558260736 So what are the next steps? Bitmain will do all it can to ensure Obelisks do not ROI. Killing the company off for good. Expect Siacoin to be sold to shit AFTER their next batch profits (or the moment SC1 releases). Oh and how can they do this most effectively? By getting listed on Binance the largest exchange in China. I wonder who is calling for these listings?? The new A3 miners, why? Because this entire drama is making SC holders itchy to offload. So the community is now going to get listed on Binance so a wave community members (let's assume 15k new people) can sell... This is how its done ladies and gentlemen, this is shrewd and clever business practices at play put in place by folks that can execute. One set of folks had trouble delivering t shirts... the other has achieved a non-hostile hostile takeover of an entire network. Bitmain is using game theory and peoples incentives to achieve its goals, it didn't have to try anything shady rather it uses understanding of humans rational thought + their greed to get what it wants. Honestly I'm impressed at how well executed this was. BONUS: This is where I will put the tinfoil hat on. If Bitmain was able to implement some hidden features in its miners that would really put the icing on this. ****EDIT: What is even better is that by having Obelisk buyers purchase A3s the chances for a fork are lowered as there will be no-one calling for a fork. Thanks for pointing that out to me in the comments.
How many ripple did roger sell to pump BAB this week?
I have to say, the BAB pump caught me pantz dawn. It was so dead market-wise that even the whole shill playbook wasn't working: 1 - inflate rBTC with fake subscribers; 2 - pump egon1 and jessquit threads; 3 - shit on LN, shit on SV; 4 - bring peter rizun to cause more drama and upvote his nonsense to heavens; 5 - display more fake NQ adoption. If anything, the last drama surrounding BU resignations left a clear picture of how lonely ABC is, so a sort of "hubris pump" was expected. But since the regular playbook was not cutting it, there's really one explanation: RV burnt huge stashes of altcoins to pump BAB (or even his own fiat). Look at ripple, it didn't move, it is stale at 30 cents for quite some time. It is strange when everything-and-their-monkey is mooning. My second theory: they flipped EOS gains. Again, EOS is one of those pumps that makes no sense, their consensus is fucked and right now 3 million was stolen from bithumb, not really the moment one expects a pump, but a dump. My third theory: jihan/bitmain found a new exchange in Asia to co-opt with bribes and compromise the APIs. This may be apparent checking data out there. But jihan is an EOS investor and RV sock puppet bitcoinistehfuture is shilling EOS. Pumping BAB was very easy because there was no demand. Now they definitely got some binance moon-lambo boys in. BSV dumps also help BAB pumps, but I don't think this pump used BSV, only selling enough to keep it down. It was about politics, RV once more acting with hubris and no brains. I still have the impression that south koreans prefer "cheap bitcoin", as they have a history of buying altcoin forks, ripple and this sort of stuff. Very strange pump, indeed.
Slack log for Ark token's value proposition discussion 16-07-18
Please find below a log of the discussion we had in slack regarding the ark token's value proposition. Some of the community members who happen to be long term holders of ark feel that the ark token's value proposition isn't clearly communicated by the team so they asked about it. I'm posting the entire discussion it here to make a permanent record since slack wipes messages after a while. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- arigard [7:21 PM] Hey team, so I'm curious. Is there any update on a new white paper at all that was being mentioned? I've been holding Ark since it hit Bittrex and I personally don't really have a clear idea about how the token is going to work in the overall picture, or what really the direction is for the project once v2 is out. It feels like things have gone a bit flat recently, are there any updates on direction and what the plan is once V2 is live? Is there any idea about when it might go live? Or how the Ark token will fit into the economy (will it be a gas?). I see a lot of other projects i'm invested in coming up with very clear roadmaps/dates and direction about what they want to be and I still personally feel Ark's message is a little confused and hard to read especially for people who are not coders/developers. rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:22 PM] the roadmap is on the site, arkdirectory.com/kits has nice presentations and other goodies roks0n (deadlock) [7:23 PM] @Matthew_DC mentioned a couple of days ago that he’s preparing several blog posts which should explain most of these @arigard rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:23 PM] the Blog also goes into lots of v2 details Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:24 PM] Hi everyone. rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:24 PM] Ark is Ark, not like Eth with gas, hence no gas. Hey @Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) welcome back Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:24 PM] Hey rob, hi Rok :slightly_smiling_face: roks0n (deadlock) [7:25 PM] Rob, I think he means how everything will be connected with ArkVM etc. similar conversation as the one few days ago (edited) Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:25 PM] It's been a while, but I was head on in the project, sorry for not showing more often. arigard [7:25 PM] Yeah my main question is really I still don't know what will give the actual Ark token value . goldenpepe [7:25 PM] we dont know how the arkvm will work All we can do is wait Doubled1c3 (ArkStickers.com) [7:26 PM] uploaded and commented on this image: bucket.jpg @Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) goldenpepe [7:26 PM] We can make assumptions but that's all they'll be roks0n (deadlock) [7:26 PM] @arigard this was the discussion: https://arkecosystem.slack.com/archives/C2ABRLZB8/p1531422791000216 roks0n (deadlock) definitely, I’m not blaming anyone :slightly_smiling_face: Was just curious if there were any developments in terms of the updated whitepaper because I was reading one of the threads on reddit from 6 months ago where it was mentioned you’re looking to hire someone write it up. Posted in #generalJul 12th arigard [7:26 PM] And I kind of feel this is such a big elephant in the room for people in the long run. roks0n (deadlock) [7:26 PM] click on the link and read from that post on (edited) arigard [7:26 PM] ok Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:27 PM] I saw that there has been some drawbacks with the V2 ? (Not sure if it's exact, I only came a few times and seemed to understand it was so) goldenpepe [7:28 PM] There are just some incompatibilities between v1 and v2 in devnet which is why devnet is currently down rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:28 PM] ArkVM may be unnecessary as more modern approaches to handling contracts are available, one of the main issue is having them be distributed just like the tokens. goldenpepe [7:28 PM] There's a community run v2-only devnet though #devnet_unofficial rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:28 PM] it's more like drawback with v1 arigard [7:30 PM] I mean I've seen a lot of stuff in that discussion discussed over the past year and there still seems to be no concrete answers coming out and that is a bit of worry to me personally. It makes it look like the team doesn't even know. I think most that know of Ark understand it wants to create an easy way to deploy blockchains and work as a platform and have some inoperability options. But the fundamentals of how that work right now seems to be up in the air. In other projects I know what gives those tokens value, but in Ark I don't, so it's hard for me as an investor to really sell to someone else the benefits of the token when there is a big question mark still on it. rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:33 PM] do you know that Ark Deployer has been available for quite some time? arigard [7:34 PM] Yes, that doesn't really answer any questions though. mak [7:34 PM] Ark deployer helps the main chain's business case somehow? arigard [7:35 PM] What gives Ark token actual value? Like what is the reason people need to buy and hold the Ark token? That is my question. Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:36 PM] @mak what you're saying is kinda like answering you can use a hammer when asked what a nail do. arigard [7:36 PM] You don't need to buy the Ark token to deploy a chain. You can just do it. Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:36 PM] I mean, the Ark Deployer doesn't answer what's the Ark. mak [7:36 PM] @Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) my point was directed towards rob's comment. I think you misunderstood it. Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:37 PM] @mak My bad then. I apologize. Blockhunter [7:38 PM] :boogieark9: rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:38 PM] " I think most that know of Ark understand it wants to create an easy way to deploy blockchains and work as a platform and have some inoperability options. But the fundamentals of how that work right now seems to be up in the air." This is why I wrote that.. there is no mystery of how that works. You are mistaken or uninformed. arkenstone [7:38 PM] That's the problem here because team is programming orientated but there hasn't been alot done on business aspect of the token and marketing investor point big view mak [7:38 PM] That only explains the value of the ark codebase not the blockchain though arigard [7:38 PM] I think you seem to be trying to turn the argument in a seperate direction. It's a simple question. What gives the Ark token value. rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:39 PM] The market does. It's on 19 different exchanges. arigard [7:39 PM] Seems like you are being unhelpfully obtuse. I'll rephrase. roks0n (deadlock) [7:39 PM] so one thing that is clear to me is interoperability using ACES, where ARK is used as a “middleman” between two different chains, so if there’s high volume between those chains, it means the volume of ark increases as well .. what I’d like to know is how things will work with arkvm and how it will all work with sidechains (on eth, all the side chains will basically link back to the main chain which will be the one responsible for security afaik?) arigard [7:39 PM] What gives the Ark token value in the Ark ecosystem. Blockhunter [7:40 PM] Vote for Pedro he will make all your dreams come true arigard [7:40 PM] Eth is a gas, Waves is a gas. Ark is... what? mak [7:40 PM] ACES can work with any chains though. Doesn't have to be ark main chain. So I guess tomorrow persona can become the settlement layer for the Ark ecosystem and there's no incentive to stop it from happening. arigard [7:40 PM] ^ roks0n (deadlock) [7:41 PM] Mak, correct but if there are already lots of chains connected between ARK, it will be more appealing to link it through ARK directly Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:41 PM] As I understand it, ACES could be using any given blockchain as the middle man... roks0n (deadlock) [7:41 PM] it doesn’t mean that it can’t be copied tho arigard [7:41 PM] But there are no chains connected through Ark atm That have any real value anyway roks0n (deadlock) [7:41 PM] eth and btc are arigard [7:41 PM] And they can be connected through any Ark clone. bangomatic [7:41 PM] I'd love to hear the Ark team chime in on this discussion arigard [7:42 PM] So anyone can come along and make another chain that can instantly overtake Ark at this present time if there isn't a failsafe reason for Ark to be the defacto currency. rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:42 PM] https://arkecosystem.slack.com/archives/C2ABRLZB8/p1531762883000422 you can't keep saying things like this as if they are true. arigard That have any real value anyway Posted in #generalToday at 7:41 PM Blockhunter [7:42 PM] Interoperability to the moon mak [7:42 PM] "it will be more appealing to link it through ARK directly" Currently Ark is the only mature chain because it's been around longer but the moment persona or some other bridge chain gets listed on an exchange that dynamic is no longer there. So why would you prefer Ark over persona when that happens. That's the question as far as I understand it. (edited) rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:43 PM] Persona has other goals, not duplicating Ark goals Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:43 PM] @bangomatic Hi! arigard [7:43 PM] What current sidechain of Ark has real value/position in the crypto market? Persona? bangomatic [7:43 PM] hey @Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe)! mak [7:43 PM] The blockchain as a transaction medium doesn't care about secondary goals. It still has all the capabilities that Ark has. Colby [7:43 PM] What has value right now? :thinking_face: rob [ Ark Labs ] https://arkecosystem.slack.com/archives/C2ABRLZB8/p1531762883000422 you can't keep saying things like this as if they are true. https://arkecosystem.slack.com/archives/C2ABRLZB8/p1531762883000422 Posted in #generalToday at 7:42 PM arigard [7:43 PM] Ark's ecosystem at present is not big enough to be a reason not to just take the tech and start your own. To think otherwise is ludicrous. rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:44 PM] that's a fine opinion Jarunik [7:44 PM] it is harder than you think :slightly_smiling_face: arigard [7:44 PM] We aren't Eth with multi $100mn + start ups and even if we were, what's currently to stop one of those just overtaking Ark and leaving it behind? Jarunik [7:45 PM] i hope some ark clones get really sucessful to be honest :slightly_smiling_face: Colby [7:45 PM] Same here! Jarunik i hope some ark clones get really sucessful to be honest :slightly_smiling_face: Posted in #generalToday at 7:45 PM Blockhunter [7:45 PM] HODL ROCKET TECHNOLOGY mak [7:45 PM] Same here but then there's no reason to hold Ark over something else arigard [7:45 PM] i hope so too if there is some reason for Ark to always be there at the top considering it's the Ark platform. Colby [7:45 PM] But the thing is that I am wondering, if ark clones get successful, what benefits does it give back to ark Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:45 PM] @Jarunik to create an ecosystem? mak [7:45 PM] Right now we have to consider Ark's value not the other bridge chains arigard [7:45 PM] But if there isn't a reason for Ark to exist at the top, why are we all holding it? Colby [7:45 PM] Haha I think we are all thinking the same :slightly_smiling_face: arigard [7:45 PM] It's a terrible business plan rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:46 PM] the point of BridgeChains is to allow new projects with no access the market a path to them through Ark, and hence gain value. Other blockchains connections are through ACES, such as BTC, LTC, ETH, and more coming.. Persona has a way to trade Ark <> Prs arigard [7:47 PM] What is to stop them from getting their own exchanges in the future and just using Ark as a stepping stone to becoming their own platform operator? mak [7:47 PM] Sure rob, but there's now 10 different projects doing the same and they are faster in development than the ark team is arigard [7:47 PM] ^ Blockhunter [7:47 PM] Ark is the Yoda of blockchain and they need a better catchphrase. Better than ark gives no dates or point click blockchain arigard [7:48 PM] This attitude seems horribly naive if this is the value proposition. mak [7:48 PM] All of us believe in the vision that Ark brought us but I personally am not sure if Ark is the best option to execute that vision in time arigard [7:48 PM] The issue is, we don't know what the value proposition is. mak [7:48 PM] Other projects seem much faster rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:48 PM] if you are into speculation, which it seems you are, then on paper all of your projects with no code are better and have more value than Ark arigard [7:48 PM] That's not true at all. lol. Matthew_DC [7:49 PM] At the most base level, ARK is a common currency token that is essentially automatically compatible with every bridge chain that is built based on ARK and is optimized for transaction volume and throughput to avoid bloat of other mechanisms introduced by the other chains. That is at the most basic level. By holding the ARK token itself, you will be able to enact the functions of multiple bridged chains both issued by our team and others. You will also be able to utilize the ARK chain as a pegged token to many bridged chains but that process will be transparent to users as it will be done behind the scenes without the user needing to do any functions. To think that someone will fork the code and generate a more effective ARK main chain means you have no confidence in the ARK team as the primary developer of the technology itself. In this case, if we are not and someone pushes a better version of the network, then I would argue maybe they SHOULD be chosen. That is the point of a free and open market. Not to mention the potential for registering and providing snapshot hashes to the main ARK blockchain to provide added security measures to a bridge chain with lower security due to lower market share etc, those are just baseline reasons. As I mentioned the other day, at face value, consider this. What brings value to Litecoin or Bitcoin or Doge? In essence, ARK is a more effective currency and base network than all of these aforementioned networks with all of the added benefits being added for additional use cases. roks0n (deadlock) [7:50 PM] will ark based chains be bridged via arkvm? goldenpepe [7:50 PM] They cant be You'd need the VM on both sides Matthew_DC [7:50 PM] I am currently on a conference call and have a lot going on so I can't respond too much. goldenpepe [7:50 PM] You can use AIP11's new tx types to do a sort of escrow between chains though i think mak [7:50 PM] @Matthew_DC Are you saying that the bridgechains deployed by ark-deployer don't have the same features? rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:50 PM] ArkVM is not for bridging chains goldenpepe [7:51 PM] It can be Coinme [7:51 PM] And ICO's that will join Ark in the future will use it for buying their token. goldenpepe [7:51 PM] But both chains will need to be running the VM Matthew_DC [7:51 PM] The ARK main chain will have specific methods of allowing token transfer and utilization between chains to include quasi-centralized methods through aces, decentralized aces based intermediary networks, Time locked transfers, among custom built smart contract like logic built into the core technology itself that doesn't make the network susceptible to the bloat and mis-utilization an vulnerabilities of full VM use. goldenpepe [7:51 PM] (which the main ark chain wont be) mak [7:51 PM] "ICO's that will join Ark in the future will use it for buying their token" Or any other bridgechain that's listed on exchanges @Matthew_DC So will all of the bridgechains, no? I could start an ACES node today for persona and it will have no difference from what you describe. Matthew_DC [7:52 PM] @mak no, we promised ARK would be open source and everything we build for the core ARK blockchain will be open source. arigard [7:53 PM] You can be open source and still protect your value.. Matthew_DC [7:54 PM] The point of ARK from day 1 has been to create a better base layer blockchain technology and protocol for everyone everywhere to be able to use to create anything they can dream up. The ARK token is a core payment layer for the ecosystem including any applications we build ourselves, sponsor, partner with, or support. mak [7:54 PM] It seems like the team's vision for Ark is as a software product only and there's no business plan for the main chain. Which is fine but it's not explained as such. (edited) Blockhunter [7:55 PM] Great to see such active discussions goldenpepe [7:55 PM] I think what Matt is trying to portray is this: A single universal Ark Ecosystem wallet holding ARK that has a nice UI with a list of dapps in the ecosystem You select a dapp You send a tx from the wallet using Ark ----------------Everything below this line is transparent to the user----------------- The Ark transaction has instructions in the smartbridge field The Ark gets converted to dappCoin via an intermediary like ACES (trustful) or a trustless escrow smart contract The intermediary received Ark and uses the dappCoin on the dapp chain to do whatever it is the user wanted to do using the instructions in the smartbridge field The dappchain responds to the request to the intermediary Intermediary sends an Ark tx with the results of the dapp computation/action in the smartbridge field ---------------Everything above this line is transparent to the user------------------- After 8+ seconds, user's wallet shows them the result of their interaction with the dapp bridgechain That's where the value of Ark will come from The Ark coin will be a universal "omni-coin" Matthew_DC [7:56 PM] :this: This goldenpepe [7:56 PM] That will instantly shapeshift into bridgechain coins to interact with the bridgechain dapp mak [7:58 PM] I understand what your point is and I agree it will work but only as long as none of the bridge chains are on an exchange when for example persona gets listed on binance the scenario changes and now either chain can become the backbone of the ark ecosystem arigard [7:58 PM] Yes. We see that. But hypothetically what is to stop a bridged Ark chain from becoming bigger than Ark and then going on to become that gateway? At this point it just seems to be hopium that the Ark network will always be the one people look to. But in one year, or two, or five, it might not be the case. What is to stop Ark being just sidelined if another team come along with develop on what Ark has built and propel it forward and take the mantle? goldenpepe [7:58 PM] What you say will be a problem only if the utility of the dapp coin is greater than the utility of the ark omnicoin Would you rather hold a coin that can do one thing and is forever tied to a single chain arigard [7:59 PM] But in other crypto's an app becoming sucessfull is a benefit. In Ark's network it could be a negative. goldenpepe [7:59 PM] Or would you rather hold a coin that can interact with that single chain and 3232523432 others arigard [7:59 PM] But why can't another coin become an omnicoin? If there are no limitations against it goldenpepe [7:59 PM] Why can't another coin become ethereum? mak [7:59 PM] "What you say will be a problem only if the utility of the dapp coin is greater than the utility of the ark omnicoin" Or if it gives out better staking returns etc like persona because of higher inflation rate goldenpepe [7:59 PM] if there are no limitations against it You can literally go on AWS right now and deploy an ethereum clone chain arigard [7:59 PM] It can, but an ETH token can't oust ETH That's the difference. We are giving people an easy route here. rob [ Ark Labs ] [7:59 PM] do you often think your children should not surpass you? Or is that the hope? Matthew_DC [8:00 PM] Well it's about security, trust, potential vulnerabilities due to added functionality, the ability of the bridgechain team to create interactions and focus on use cases for their token outside of their core use, etc. But that's the point of open and free markets goldenpepe [8:00 PM] There is a solution to your concern @arigard Matthew_DC [8:00 PM] What is to stop someone from being better than Bitcoin? arigard [8:01 PM] I think all these strawman arguments are fun, but they still aren't adressing the issuel goldenpepe [8:01 PM] Instead of having Ark Deployer literally cloning the ark codebase, have it be a turnkey solution to run a layer 2 chain Matthew_DC [8:01 PM] You could go fork Ethereum right now and have an exact copy of the capability of the main Eth chain. goldenpepe [8:01 PM] bridgechain dapps can be "colored coins" that are forever tied to the main chain arigard [8:01 PM] Yeah but you wouldn't have those businesses on the chain. goldenpepe [8:01 PM] but that would introduce bloat Matthew_DC [8:01 PM] So you are saying the utility of Ethereum is adoption. arigard [8:01 PM] And those businesses won't have the potential to become the main ETH. Matthew_DC [8:01 PM] Which is the case for the value of any token. goldenpepe [8:01 PM] @arigard It sounds like you want ark to become Ethereum Plasma arigard [8:02 PM] I just want an answer. Matthew_DC [8:02 PM] How many companies are pulling their ERC20 tokens off of Ethereum because of the issues? Colby [8:02 PM] Yeah but correct me if im wrong goldenpepe [8:02 PM] There is no answer that will satisfy what you are asking arigard [8:02 PM] And i keep getting strawmanned. Colby [8:02 PM] Ethereum projects NEED eth for gas Matthew_DC [8:02 PM] We talk to people almost every day that are looking to leave Ethereum. Colby [8:02 PM] Ark is needed for? arigard [8:02 PM] ^ Colby [8:02 PM] This is all I am wondering, where does the ark coin fit into it I love the idea goldenpepe [8:02 PM] @arigard You want ark-based coins to rely on Ark The team wants the Ark chain to not be bloated The solution to this is unironically ethereum plasma and sharding Colby [8:02 PM] but have been waiting for a while to know how the Ark coin will actually be used goldenpepe [8:03 PM] Shards in ethereum are basically "bridgechains" arigard [8:03 PM] Ok, and those teams might be big enough and clued up enough to eventually knock Ark from being the de facto omni coin. That's the worry. If this is in fact the possibility. Then it should be clear. mak [8:03 PM] "You could go fork Ethereum right now and have an exact copy of the capability of the main Eth chain." @Matthew_DC Ethereum has value because all the dapps live on it which is not true for ark arigard [8:03 PM] Because as an investor it worries me, a lot. I don't know where the value of Ark as an investment is 100% right now. Jarunik [8:03 PM] Ark is basically the inverse approach to Ethereum. Eth goes for big one-fits all first and tries to shard ... Ark is creating shards and then combines them goldenpepe [8:03 PM] There is no solution to what @arigard and @mak are saying right now Literally no existing solution Only proposals like sharding arigard [8:04 PM] And all this noise about defensiveness doesn't help. These are legit concerns. Matthew_DC [8:04 PM] When was it not clear that if a company comes along and builds a better more used product it could potentially take over market share? That's how all free markets work. You can't believe in open source and build and open source product without that risk. arigard [8:04 PM] But that isn't the same thing. Ark is literally building THE tools for people to then do that. mak [8:04 PM] @Matthew_DC Just to clarify I appreciate the work you guys are doing but I want to make an informed investment decision about holding the ark token arigard [8:04 PM] As a platform. Jarunik [8:04 PM] yes ... that is the idea how to grow arigard [8:04 PM] if you cloned Bitcoin back in the day you were a seperate currency. Jarunik [8:04 PM] provide good tools for others to create chains arigard [8:04 PM] This is a platform, its totally different. And what we are discuswsing here is who runs that platform. Matthew_DC [8:05 PM] If someone launched an Ethereum chain right now and gained adoption there is a huge potential that all tokens decide to move their ERC20 tokens to the new chain and it becomes the new Ethereum and you have in essence lost all value because Ethereum is not capable of being used on the bridge chain as a currency. ARK maintains it's value if for no other reason than the pegged value to any chain we personally create to include VM chain, token issuance chain, etc. arigard [8:05 PM] If it's built by Ark, does Ark always retain control? if not, why? What happens if Ark ends up building tools for a subsidary project that propels itself above them. Investors will just move to that coin. Matthew_DC [8:05 PM] Because it's an open decentralized system. The problem is people don't actually believe in decentralization if it possibly harms their potential for monetary gain. rob [ Ark Labs ] [8:06 PM] we hope bridgechains get popular because that also means more for Ark in many ways. arigard [8:06 PM] You can be decentralized without being 100% altruistic. It's not mutually exclusive. mak [8:06 PM] @goldenpepe Since you guys claim that there's no solution for this how about I present one which @Matthew_DC can decide if it's useful or not. Make delegate voting for the ArkVM happen on the main chain. So anyone who wants to become a delegate for the VM needs to hold money on the main chain. arigard [8:07 PM] It just seems people are being dogmatic about this. And if this isn't about investment. Why have an ICO? Matthew_DC [8:07 PM] Ethereum being the core chain for all ERC20 token based businesses centralizes the industry in a massive way. Not only is Ethereum itself centralized in the way it's mining structure was developed, but it also is centralized in that if the Ethereum network is compromised, thousands of companies assets and business are now compromised. We don't believe that is the future. mak [8:07 PM] I'm not saying that this should be done for all sidechains. Just for the VM and it will be a special case. Matthew_DC [8:07 PM] We believe in a different business model. That has been at the core of every description and explanation I have given from day 1. arigard [8:07 PM] Ok and that's fine, but my point is this should be made very clear if it's the case. From the team officially. goldenpepe [8:07 PM] @mak now you're strawmanning me Matthew_DC [8:07 PM] Where is it not clear? goldenpepe [8:08 PM] I was addressing the fact that the idea that bridgechains shouldnt be independent and should be tied to Ark being in conflict with the Ark team's idea that the main chain should not be bloated with dapps The only plausible solution to that right now is Ethereum Plasma Sharding yokoama (thefoundry Delegate) [8:09 PM] Sharting mak [8:09 PM] "We believe in a different business model." I respect that. But it changes the ark's value proposition to just being a source of funding to the ark team and a means of speculation. goldenpepe [8:09 PM] Shards in ethereum are like bridgechains but the coins are all erc20s that rely on ethereum Matthew_DC [8:09 PM] People said ARK's DPoS mechanism would be a failure when we changed the voting structure because they said it wouldn't be secure enough. It has turned out to be massively secure compared to the centralized cartel run solutions of other DPoS chains. This is another fundamental issue where we believe we have a model that will work and will create value and thousands of use cases for the ARK token in a seamless way for the average user. goldenpepe [8:09 PM] and the shard blocks dont interfere or bloat up the "main" eth chain mak [8:09 PM] @goldenpepe I'm not suggesting deploying dapps on main chain. Just that the voting should take place there so there is always incentive to keep money on the main chain. Matthew_DC [8:10 PM] At no point did we say ARK was gas and have constantly made sure to outline the differences between ARK and Ethereum. I believe the Eth model is flawed. goldenpepe [8:11 PM] The current ethereum model is flawed If sharding works then it's going to solve a lot of its issues (i dont hold any ethereum btw) arigard [8:12 PM] At no point have we actually had an updated white paper discussing this question in detail, clearly. It's not on the website and if it is it's buried somewhere in a blog post. The fact these discussions keep cropping up is proof of this. nukacolaplease [8:12 PM] I think we don't understand clearly what makes Ark important after the launch of the sidechains, Ark will be only an "exchange token"? The sidechain doesn't need Ark for operating goldenpepe [8:12 PM] +1 on needing a new whitepaper Matthew_DC [8:12 PM] replied to a thread: This is a means of centralization of the network. Instead, by utilizing a form of pegged bridge chains, we can maintain a similar effect without creating centralization and reliance on 1 chain for others to properly function. arkenstone [8:12 PM] I think these things should be clearly written in a new WB and officially made public and promoted goldenpepe [8:12 PM] A new whitepaper would clear up so much FUD pieface [8:13 PM] Yeah I think a new WP is needed for sure arigard [8:13 PM] So don't start going "Oh everybody knows this, it's clear" Show me where on the front page of the website it tells you how the token mechanics will work in the ecosystem? It's not good it being on some powerpoint on a google drive, or hidden in comments in the slack. mak [8:13 PM] I though there wasn't going to be a new whitepaper. arigard [8:13 PM] It needs to be clear to investors how it works, exactly. goldenpepe [8:13 PM] I agree with arigard here I only know what I know because I live on slack Matthew_DC [8:13 PM] The solutions are still in development and there are always opportunities to continue to adapt the model, that's why I have these conversations and ask for feedback regularly, but the core fundamental belief of how open and free decentralized markets should work most likely won't change. arkenstone [8:13 PM] Same here goldenpepe [8:14 PM] The vast majority of ark holders have no idea they just bought bc of the cool red triangle arigard [8:14 PM] Stop playing cute, this is people's money you are asking for. So at least give them the benefit of being honest that there is no inherent business model reason why Ark will be necessary in the future. And let them make their decisions. roks0n (deadlock) [8:14 PM] I agree, it took me months of following discussion on slack and digging around reddit to get information arigard [8:14 PM] With proper information. mak [8:14 PM] replied to a thread: It's centralizing value onto one chain but doesn't bottleneck the ecosystem so I don't see anything being wrong with that. Matthew_DC [8:15 PM] replied to a thread: I'm not arguing with you and I made a clear post here within the last 2 days that our website messaging is shit and needs completely redone. If the ARK network is compromised or the consensus mechanism of the ARK main net is compromised then all subsequent networks reliant on that consensus would be compromised as well. mad4thrash [8:15 PM] In my opinion Ark's value come from (in the future) the fact that by holding one coin I can interact with every bridgechain plus any ACES services Matthew_DC [8:16 PM] So what I am saying is that we have to be cautious of these kinds of decisions and ensure that we aren't inadvertently creating attack vectors to take down partners, businesses, and other industries using the technology. I'm sorry guys, I have to go, but I would love to continue this conversation on Reddit or here at a later time. mak [8:16 PM] "all subsequent networks reliant on that consensus would be compromised as well" ^ Correction: only the VM chain will be compromised since I'm not advocating that all bridgechains should vote on the main chain. Matthew_DC [8:19 PM] In an isolated case, if we can map it out and vet the concept, I'm more than happy to hear it out and have the conversation. Solowatch [8:19 PM] So I think we can all agree an updated Whitepaper is due Matthew_DC [8:20 PM] This is a community project and we are shaping pieces of it together as we continue to build. We have already made changes based on community feedback on many occasions. So I would love to see someone post a proposal to reddit or even as an AIP at some point that we could discuss. Jarunik [8:20 PM] If you write a white paper it will be outdated soon :smile: Solowatch [8:21 PM] Well a V2 whitepaper shouldn’t be outdated soon I don’t care about a V1 or V1.5 whitepaper lol I want a whitepaper for V2 that’s clearly explaining all these concerns that the community has arkenstone [8:22 PM] :this: Solowatch [8:23 PM] I wrote a few questions down that I’ll post in here later today that @rob [ Ark Labs ] asked for. Please add to it if I missed anything once I do. arkenstone [8:23 PM] And I think now it's the time do it. Present it with full package on mainet launch.. (edited) Solowatch [8:23 PM] Or PM and I’ll add them before posting mak [8:25 PM] Anyways thanks for listening and responding @Matthew_DC. Some of us have been trying to discuss this with the ark team but didn't get much feedback until today. arigard [8:25 PM] Yeah +1 arkenstone [8:28 PM] Alot of early investors are getting worried
2. Selling Bitcoin with PayPal. One method people search for online often, is how to sell Bitcoins and receive funds to your PayPal account. PayPal, in general, aren’t very fond of Bitcoin mainly due to the fact that they can’t give their customers chargeback protection for Bitcoin transactions (here’s why).Having said that, there are still some workarounds that will allow you to sell ... Find an existing seller looking to sell Bitcoin Cash (BCH) or create a new buy order yourself. Open a trade with your chosen seller and they’ll send the BCH to the blind escrow account. Once you’ve sent the agreed payment via bank transfer or other payment method, the seller will confirm they’ve received the funds. The BCH you’ve bought will then be released from the blind escrow and ... Trade over 40 cryptocurrencies and enjoy the lowest trading fees in America. Hi, welcome to this ultimate guide on how to use Binance.com to trade (buy/sell), deposit, withdraw cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, Ripple or any other. Everything is step-by-step and as simple as possible. Just go through this ultimate guide and you are ready to do your first trade on Binance. Take a look some recommended escrow services — each one of them has a good reputation and is generally trusted by the Bitcoin community. Where to Sell Your Stuff Online. Below is a list of every reputable Bitcoin marketplace and online classifieds site where you can sell your stuff for bitcoins. In this article lets look at How to use Binance to Buy and sell Bitcoins and other cryptocurrency. Step 1: Click HERE and open the Binance website on your browser.. Step 2: At the top right you will find the link Login or Register.Click on the text Register and a new page will open up. Note: Click HERE for the Binance Mobile App guide.. Step 3: On the registration page fill in your email id ... Binance – Buy & Sell Bitcoin Securely – Apps On Google Play for Beginners. Table of Contents The Main Principles Of Bitcoin Trading – Get Familiar With Bitcoin Digital Currency The 10-Second Trick For Trade Bitcoin (Btc): Your Guide To Bitcoin Trading – Capital … The smart Trick of How To Trade Bitcoin In 2020 – A Comprehensive Guide That Nobody is Talking About Unknown Facts About ... I’ll save the tricky stuff for another day! So, let’s learn how to use ... Bitcoin can be traded with 143 different coins, so we say that Bitcoin has 143 trading pairs on Binance. In this example, our account is funded with Ethereum, so we are only able to trade with Ethereum. To find out which cryptocurrencies are offered for trading with Ethereum, select ETH in the top right corner. You ... For the DIY enthusiast perhaps not interested in any of the above solutions, all that is truly needed to sell stuff for bitcoin on a website is a BCH address and a wallet. And that is the beauty ... By the end of our course you will learn how to use the Binance platform to purchase & sell cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin & Ethereum.. With our course you will learn how to execute Limit, Market & Stop Limit orders.
Basic Binance buy & Sell! buy & hold ur altcoins! (tagalog)
How to buy and sell Cryptocurrencys on Binance. BitCoin and Ripple - Duration: 8:06. Jermaine Ellis 30,054 views. 8:06. Edward Snowden: How Your Cell Phone Spies on You - Duration: 24:16. ... Learn the basics of Bitcoin Trading in Philippines for beginners. In this video I will show how to Buy and Sell or Trade btc to other altcoins. I will also s... How to buy and sell Cryptocurrencys on Binance. BitCoin and Ripple - Duration: 8:06. Jermaine Ellis 29,009 views. 8:06. how to Create new bitpay wallet (sinhala) money withdrawal and deposit sri ... New Binance exchange tutorial 2020. How to deposit and withdraw, how to use the exchange itself and we also discuss some more features of the Binance platfor... How To Get Up To Speed With Cryptocurrency,Using Binance.Check Out This Powerful Software To Jump Start Your Crypto Career.Click The Link To Get Started.http... For BUY AND SELL/EXCHANGE https://www.binance.com/?ref=12090952 Genesis Mining Promo COde 3% discount Code: fEY3Z1 Hasflare: https://hashflare.io/r/A7C1FFA6-... for more question just send me an email: [email protected] For BUY AND SELL/EXCHANGE Binance https://www.binance.com/?ref=12090952 Hitbtc https://hitbtc.com... How to buy and sell Cryptocurrencys on Binance. BitCoin and Ripple Binance https://goo.gl/AzWFhh Once you buy or sell $100 of digital currency or more will g... Binance is also offering a reward of 20 EURO to the first 5000 users to register at www.binance.je.so go ahead guys and grab the opportunity to be in the first 5000 users but users has to complete ... Binance exchange tutorial: how to sell on binance. I sold all my binance coins for bitcoins. Register on binance: https://www.binance.com/register.html?ref=1...