submitted by /u/crasheger [link] [comments] |
source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9vuwev/nice_two_in_a_row/
This blog brings you the best Cryptocurrency & Blockchain, ICO & P2P and Exchange & Laws news. Also contains technology and research based post from all around the world every single day. Get informed! Think Future!
There's a large number of people in various social media now pushing narratives that are purely speculative. As a counter-measure, consider the facts that we know:
1) The relay issues are mitigated but not solved - we still need to parallelize and optimize the clients to handle significantly higher load: 32mb blocks are not enough, 128mb blocks are also not enough.
2) Many nodes are updates, but not all are. Many nodes have sufficient hardware backing them to handle millions of TX's per hour, but not all have the RAM and/or I/O needed. Some will fall out - remember that if they're important for business they will come back online again.
3) The stresstest tools used in the previous test were new and unrefined, so the old tests limitation no longer apply, therefor it is good to revalidate our assumptions and see where the current bottlenecks are.
4) Hash rate percentages are interesting, but is still a relative term to some arbitrarily choosen timeframe. Actual exa/peta-hashes working on BCH compared to available hashes for the algorithm is still very low so fluctuations in valuations of the BCH token can bring in, or push out, huge percentages on short notice.
5) All three "camps" has some merit - to some people. Your opinion might be different from mine, but in the end Bitcoin is fundamentally a human experiment. Before assuming people are malicious, consider the alternatives: they could have different experiences, ideologies. They could also just be plain stupid, or they could be uneducated. Each explanation for their behaviour warrants a different response to their actions.
If anyone who is running BU node that crashed has debug info they are willing to submit please message me
And I guess it really did cause centralization, knocking a majority of BU nodes off the network.
My node has a 42MB, er 46MB mempool.
It's growing. So it's most likely that there are a lot of transactions being submitted to the network.
SV has started stress-testing/spamming in order to mine 32 MB blocks.
Simultaneously, BU nodes have either started crashing or being pulled offline.
Also simultaneously, the shill narrative has shifted to "only ABC and SV can handle 32 MB blocks, switch from BU to ABC."
They want to force two camps. They're trying to eliminate flexibility, and invalidate BU's support for both implementations.
Keep running BU, wait for the BU developers to make a statement, ignore the trolls.
It seems like the buttcoiners before them, they have now changed their allegiances to a new underhanded and dubious opposition movement. They are no longer supporters of Blockstream and their Bitcoin Core cabal , but are now defenders of Craig Wright and his associates.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
I asked Calvin on his position should ABC win the hash battle, and he responded “If ABC win, then I will follow and constantly work on striving to make future changes for the better.”
https://coingeek.com/will-protracted-hash-war/
Calvin concedes publicly to follow ABC in the (seemingly increasingly probable) circumstance of ABC chain being dominant.
He says this 2 days after he has seen the futures pricing on poloniex make themselves clear
https://poloniex.com/exchange#usdc_bchabc
Numbers can't lie.
Info source:
The emerging features of Blockchain and Cryptocurrency technologies are making many IT firms to accept them as new data structures. One of the messages has been delivered at the ScotChain18 conference in Edinburgh that the growth of the technologies could remove internal IT infrastructure.
Jeremy Drane, the Chief Commercial Officer for Libra, said that some IT farms may accept Blockchain and cryptocurrency to their current IT Infrastructure. Systems of those farms are unable to work with two evolving technologies as their data is very different.
Apolline Blandin, the Research Assistant on Cryptoasset and Blockchain Technology, addressed the need for implementing and developing the cryptocurrency in the industry. Whereas Deloitte’s Risk Advisory Leader for Fintech and RegTech Kent McKenzie addressed the regulation challenges across worldwide.
It is stated that this software is not fully developed, therefore, to make a company or product attractive to customers is not proper due to the involvement of the different technologies in each cryptocurrency solution.
While adapting blockchain technology, arising issues are faced by the startup ventures as well as large corporates. To drive success stories, the technology should be seamless, secure and speedy while accessing data. In order to pave the way for developing the blockchain technology, businesses need to evolve their digital infrastructures for the next generation of the cloud as well as crypto services.
Before adapting the Blockchain and cryptocurrency technologies, many companies investigate their business strategies as these evolving technologies will have an impact on the ability of traditional IT infrastructures for supporting the ‘new order’, The Scotsman reported.
Most people are showing more interest in the blockchain technology rather than cryptocurrency. The google trends unveil that search queries for the blockchain technology are more as compared to cryptocurrency. Plus, the search queries for the distributed ledger technology will be growing day by day due to the increasing demand of the technology. Many experts predicted that the growing adaption of Blockchain would give a strong competition to cryptocurrency, Smartereum reported.
The post Will IT Firms Accept Blockchain And Cryptocurrency As New Data Structures appeared first on OWLT Market.
"Script is Turing complete"
"2nd layer IS Script!"
"Remove the OP code limit!"
"Script can do everything Ethereum can do and more"
EXCEPT verify a signature. NEVER verify a signature. Unless you like prison food. OK?
I really can't see CoinGeek spending all those petahashes to mine on a chain that the market is signaling to be of a very low value.
It will be more embarrassing to see this SV network become a ridiculed shitcoin than it is to recognize it simply doesn't have economic support right now.
If CoinGeek is smart, they will call it off.
https://github.com/Electron-Cash/keys-n-hashes/pull/29
https://i.imgur.com/sHyUN3L.png
looking at this users github history shows some pretty weird stuff. Just saying, be careful. I also notice he forked bitcoin sv. not saying sv is trying to sabotage signatures, probably someone trying to make them look bad. divide and conquer? trolling?
Everyone on this forum is focused on CSW, but at the end if the day CSW is just the man with the megaphone.
Does anyone in the space (/u/memorydealers?) have a channel of communication open with Calvin? CSW can talk all day about "enduring the most pain" and "going to war," but it's Calvin's money on the line, and it's Calvin who ultimately says what his development team and hashpower should be doing.
I'm just wondering if there isn't a concerted appeal that could be made here at the last minute. Calvin is ultimately a capitalist, and every indication is that he is going to lose A LOT of money. And I do mean A LOT of money. CSW does not have to be a rational actor, Calvin does.
Calvin has already indicated willingness to be a rational actor in the latest CoinGeek blog post, maybe he's asking for a life preserve that will help him save face.
Clearly the market is signalling SV to have an ever decreasing value against BCH ABC which you can see here https://poloniex.com/exchange#usdc_bch
SV chain has around 10% the price of BCH ABC, and SV continues sinking against ABC. CSW will certainly say that he did this as a test for the community, since he has already failed before the hashwar started. When he does, he will try to come back into the community, but we need to make sure that the trash stays in the garbage where it belongs.
ABC is victorious, the market has decided, and the hash will follow. CSW has once again embarrassed himself and proven to be impotent, adding one more notch to his long track record.
From /u/parker08
You must be proud to lie about people and get them banned so they cannot have free speech in this sub, you are a piece of shit jessquit, if I ever find you in real life I will fuck you up, I promise.
I didn't lie about anyone or ask anyone to be banned.
I don't support these bans for this very reason. It escalates aggression.
I have reported this to reddit admins FWIW.
Edit : FWIW this is the exchange that I believe precipitated his ban:
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9viyuu/csw_vs_satoshi_nakamoto/e9clf06
We were fortunate that the ABC /BU /XT ecosystem failed gracefully during the last stress test.
One wonders if the SV client will likewise fail gracefully on giant 128MB blocks, or if its node network will fall over and fragment. I'm pretty sure there is no way it can gracefully handle 128M.
For the BCH fork on Aug 1 of last year, a lot of people had their coins on an exchange or somewhere else they didn't control the keys. If I remember correctly, Coinbase and many other exchanges didn't give out BCH coins for many days/weeks/months later.
If there is a chain split and a different chain occurs for SV, you might want to have them as well. If you do, make sure you control the private keys for your wallet address. Then you can claim both coins. If your BCH coins are somewhere you don't control, you might get SV late or never at all.
On the nature of "Who controls Bitcoin"
The SV side are attempting to consolidate the power of Devs and Miners, placing all control in the hands of two people.
A year ago I claimed that a balance of power between the three factions is necessary for the system's survival.
We might get to see if the SV chain can survive without this balance.
Let's give BCH a taste of its own medicine. They think they're following Satoshi, right? So we'll provide them a fake Satoshi and get a bunch of them to follow him, he'll say lots of things they agree with, like "Greg Maxwell is a dick" and "block should be bigger" and "only hash matters" and "miner vote." Fake Satoshi will be tough and have swagger and make the underdog BCHers feel empowered again.
Get this part. It's brilliant. What he'll do is argue that the block size should be increased -- while at the same time fighting against the optimizations that allow them to raise the block size. This will cause a guaranteed split in the community, because on the one hand how can a BCHer be against a block size increase? but on the other hand, how can a BCHer be against a code optimization for bigger blocks?
Fake Satoshi can escalate the call to civil war and keep his troops rallied into a froth going into the coin split. This will provide the necessary subterfuge to allow us to move hashpower from BTC to BCH and crush the BCH chain "for the good of Satoshi's Vision" before they can implement their scaling code on Nov 15.
just consider it some interesting fanfiction
At a time when crypto market investors seem to be worried about the various regulatory bodies tightening the noose around crypto exchanges, the news of the horizon of cryptocurrency payment options expanding over multiple platforms and industries comes as a whiff of fresh air. Square was one of the first major payment processors to support Bitcoin transactions, in a series of progressive moves. Founded in 2009, Square is a merchant services and mobile payments company that’s known for its portable point of sale systems such as Square Register and Square Reader.
Although a lot of finance experts seem to disagree on the short-term prospects of cryptocurrencies, the push for its adoption is a bandwagon that insiders, leaders and investors can easily hop onto. That’s the reason why a lot of investors were over the moon when Binance’s CEO, Changpeng Zhao revealed that Binance Coin (BNB), an ERC20 token can be used to purchase an aircraft.
The crypto market received another hot news on November 7 when Bithumb, the South Korean exchange announced the launch of its cryptocurrency payment service for major online shopping marketplace Qoo10. Referred to as Asia’s Amazon by Bithumb, the exchange started offering the Bithumb cash payment service for Qoo10 from November 5. Alongside, Paypal, E-money and Payco, this payment option is now listed on the marketplace.
In November 2017, Square moved to beta test Bitcoin payments and by January this year, the company had released the feature to most of Cash App’s users. With this move, Square can now compete head-to-head with several incumbents in the crypto payments processing space. BitPay’s been an incumbent since May 2011 and the new entrant as of February 2018 is Coinbase Commerce, as reported on Cryptoslate.
Binance’s aforementioned announcement pertaining to BNB token came just days after Hinomaru Limousine, in collaboration with Remixpoint, released a plan to integrate Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin and Ethereum payments into its transportation services, as reported on NewsBTC. A world-famous Swiss watchmaking brand, Hublot, also unveiled limited support for crypto payments. The brand released the exclusive “BIG BANG P2P” watch. It is a Bitcoin-inspired watch that’s created to celebrate the cryptocurrency’s 10th anniversary.
Bithumb had revealed to crypto market investors in November 2017 that it was working towards creating a simple payment system to facilitate its members to use their cryptocurrencies and KRW to pay for goods and services, as reported on BitcoinNews. A Bithumb official had further added that all cryptocurrencies held in the exchange’s accounts can be used by the users.
The post Market Investors Excited Over Horizon of Crypto Payment Options Expanding appeared first on OWLT Market.
The Ministry of Education has chosen ledger technology NEM to curb fake degree certificates issued in the University Consortium. It is believed that NEM has the potential to derive the result as it is speedy and has authentication requirements as well as unique traceability features. MADICT– Majlis Dekan-dekan ICT (Council of ICT Deans) has brought this innovative idea in January 2018 and currently it has launchedthe e-Scroll system.
To develop the blockchain technology for storing and securing each certificate data, the Ministry of Education has formed a team which is comprised of 6 International Islamic Universities include Universiti Malaysia Terengganu (UMT), Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM), Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) and the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) and Universiti Sains Malaysia (UMS). Whereas IIUM is the current Head of the University Consortium. Professor Datuk Dr. Norbik Bashah Idris from IIUM is leading the team and they will develop ledger technology NEM. Within a moment, the verification process of each certificate will be done through QR Code.
The Ministry had noticed experts in the Universities in Malaysia and proposed them to adopt and develop the ledger technology NEM. Also, it aims to provide expert training for developing the technology and making students more aware of the technology in the Malaysian Universities at the same time. It was stated that all Ph.D. students from IIUM graduating will receive their degree certificates verified through ledger technology NEM in the coming days, New Straits Times reported.
NEM Foundation has decided to boost the economic growth of Australia by implementing the new ledger technology NEM in three sectors include government, academia and industry. With ledger technology NEM technology, government organizations can record transaction by improving transparency, establishing trust and preventing frauds. It helps every industry to change the way of maintaining the information include customer, supply chain and transaction. Various educational sectors can store data include degrees, transcripts and assessments, NEM official website reported.
The post How Ledger Technology NEM Will Curb Fake Degree Certificates Issued In The University Consortium appeared first on OWLT Market.
A cryptocurrency exchange startup, Confido disappeared overnight in November 2017, after it collected $175,000 through its initial coin offering (ICO). Similarly, another crypto startup, LoopX, abruptly shut down in February 2018, after raising $4.5 million through a combination of Ethereum and Bitcoin, from investors. This exchange too promised guaranteed profits. The latest name to join this bandwagon of exit scams is Pure Bit, a South Korean exchange.
A fraudulent practice carried out by unethical cryptocurrency promoters who disappear with investors’ money after or during an ICO is known as an exit scam. The modus operandi that is followed is very simple. Promoters enter the market by launching a new crypto trading platform on a promising concept. The platform then raises money from various investors during the ICO. Once they collect a substantial amount, the promoters vanish with the money collected via the ICO, leaving the investors in the lurch.
Although it is somewhat challenging to identify an ICO announced by a cryptocurrency exchange, investors need to keep certain pointers in mind, before they make an investment decision. One of the biggest challenges pertaining to the virtual world is ownership and accountability. Hence, investors must compulsorily verify the credentials of the crypto team prior to investing their hard-earned money in ICOs.
Investors must also be cautious if a certain business concept sounds too good to be true. Also, ambiguously written and unclear white papers should be a big red flag for investors to identify a potential exit scam. In case a cryptocurrency project seems to be a concept-only and non-existent product, then investors must understand that it probably won’t work. Another sign of an exit scam is big promotions. While all ICO offerings with big promotions may not be potential exit scams, an investor must adopt a cautious approach and carry out background checks of the claims being made, as reported on Investopedia.
In the case of Pure Bit cryptocurrency exchange, the firm’s Facebook page has suddenly disappeared. Not only that, but most of its other public-facing contact options has also vanished. The Pure Bit ICO seemed quite similar to other crypto exchanges that been have funded via the ICO model. Over 13,000 ETH was collected in this ICO, which has now suddenly disappeared, as reported on CCN.
The post How To Identify Exit Scam Stunts Pulled In By Cryptocurrency Exchanges appeared first on OWLT Market.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) seem very serious regarding its objective of taming crypto exchanges. The SEC has also issued an open warning to the latter. In fact, exchanges must take this seriously, as there’s no out-innovating the regulatory reach of the commission.
Tokens and cryptocurrencies offered through initial coin offerings (ICOs) are assumed as securities by the SEC. Thus it is of the opinion that cryptocurrency exchanges need to follow the same rules as every exchange. The SEC says that crypto exchanges should register as an alternative trading system (ATS) or a broker-dealer through the commission, as a national securities exchange. However, seeing the present state of affairs, the SEC says that the situation is a mess.
A lot of crypto platforms refer themselves as exchanges. This gives investors the misimpression that they are regulated or in other words, they meet the regulatory standards of a national securities exchange. Many of these so-called exchanges have also set up their own rules in terms of listing new tokens.
Taking its initiative of taming exchanges further, the SEC is in the midst of its first ever case against an exchange running on the Ethereum blockchain. Robert Cohen, the chief of the SEC’s newly created cyber unit said that using any blockchain to create an exchange without central operations, does not take away the original creator’s responsibility.
Cohen said that the focus is not on the label that is attached to something or the technology that is used. The focus is on what the platform is doing, whether it’s on a smart contract or not and whether it is decentralized or not, as reported on Forbes. The commission’s charges are not against the exchange, but Zachary Coburn, the founder of the unlicensed decentralized token exchange, EtherDelta.
In order to help investors pick an appropriate crypto exchange, the SEC has provided a list of questions for them, as reported on TechCrunch. Some of these questions include: Do the investors trade securities on the platform? If yes, is the platform registered as a national securities exchange? What are the trading protocols on the platform? How are prices set on the said platform? How does the exchange safeguard the users’ trading and personal identification information?
The post SEC Is Very Serious About Taming Crypto Exchanges appeared first on OWLT Market.
According to coin.dance, Bitcoin SV is the minority hashrates. According to the community, Bitcoin SV is run by assholes. According to public info, Bitcoin SV wants to steal money from users. According to public observations, the most vocal spammers are Bitcoin SV trolls. Bitcoin SV, run by thieves and assholes and trolls, is not what I signed up for.
Right now, I am accumulating as much BCH as possible prior to the fork, so that I can sell the BSV fork to get more Bitcoin Cash. You can do that at exchanges like CoinEx.com
Also some other information you might want to read to understand why Bitcoin SV fork is not Bitcoin and why more hashrates support ABC.
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9vi00u/craig_wright_plan_on_stealing_old_wallet_balances/
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9vkpz2/csw_represents_everything_crypto_goes_against_1/
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9vaqn4/guys_im_going_to_say_it_bitcoin_sv_is_an_attempt/
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9vh8ll/starting_to_doubt_faketoshi_weve_been_documenting/
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9v9um9/a_letter_from_csw_to_roger_ver/
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9uiqki/hash_already_moving_over_from_btc_to_bch_the_hash/
https://np.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/9vewhx/bitmain_to_deploy_90000_antminer_s9_miners_for/
From what I see in the community there is no love for SV but I'm wondering if their development effort and their objectives would be more seriously considered if CSW wasn't involved.