Ultimate glossary of crypto currency terms, acronyms and abbreviations
Crypto-Powered: Understanding Bitcoin, Ethereum, and DeFi
Until one understands the basics of this tech, they won’t be able to grasp or appreciate the impact it has on our digital bank, Genesis Block. https://reddit.com/link/ho4bif/video/n0euarkifu951/player This is the second post ofCrypto-Powered— a new series that examines what it means forGenesis Blockto be a digital bank that’s powered by crypto, blockchain, and decentralized protocols. --- Our previous post set the stage for this series. We discussed the state of consumer finance and how the success of today’s high-flying fintech unicorns will be short-lived as long as they’re building on legacy finance — a weak foundation that is ripe for massive disruption. Instead, the future of consumer finance belongs to those who are deeply familiar with blockchain tech & decentralized protocols, build on it as the foundation, and know how to take it to the world. Like Genesis Block. Today we begin our journey down the crypto rabbit hole. This post will be an important introduction for those still learning about Bitcoin, Ethereum, or DeFi (Decentralized Finance). This post (and the next few) will go into greater detail about how this technology gives Genesis Block an edge, a superpower, and an unfair advantage. Let’s dive in… https://preview.redd.it/1ugdxoqjfu951.jpg?width=650&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=36edde1079c3cff5f6b15b8cd30e6c436626d5d8
Bitcoin: The First Cryptocurrency
There are plenty of online resources to learn about Bitcoin (Coinbase, Binance, Gemini, Naval, Alex Gladstein, Marc Andreessen, Chris Dixon). I don’t wanna spend a lot of time on that here, but let’s do a quick overview for those still getting ramped up. Cryptocurrency is the most popular use-case of blockchain technology today. And Bitcoin was the first cryptocurrency to be invented.
Bitcoin is the most decentralized of all crypto assets today — no government, company, or third party can control or censor it.
Bitcoin has two primary features (as do most other cryptocurrencies):
Send Value You can send value to anyone, anywhere in the world. Nobody can intercept, delay or stop it — not even governments or financial institutions. Unlike with traditional money transfers or bank wires, there are no layers of middlemen. This results in a process that is much more cost-efficient. Some popular use-cases include remittances and cross-border payments.
A few negative moments in Bitcoin’s history include the collapse of Mt. Gox — which resulted in hundreds of millions of customer funds being stolen — as well as Bitcoin’s role in dark markets like Silk Road — where Bitcoin arguably found its initial userbase. However, like most breakthrough technology, Bitcoin is neither good nor bad. It’s neutral. People can use it for good or they can use it for evil. Thankfully, it’s being used less and less for illicit activity. Criminals are starting to understand that transactions on a blockchain are public and traceable — it’s exactly the type of system they usually try to avoid. And it’s true, at this point “a lot more” crimes are actually committed with fiat than crypto. As a result, the perception of bitcoin and cryptocurrency has been changing over the years to a more positive light. Bitcoin has even started to enter the world of media & entertainment. It’s been mentioned in Hollywood films like Spiderman: Into the Spider-Verse and in songs from major artists like Eminem. It’s been mentioned in countless TV shows like Billions, The Simpsons, Big Bang Theory, Gray’s Anatomy, Family Guy, and more. As covid19 has ravaged economies and central banks have been printing money, Bitcoin has caught the attention of many legendary Wall Street investors like Paul Tudor Jones, saying that Bitcoin is a great bet against inflation (reminding him of Gold in the 1970s). Cash App already lets their 25M users buy Bitcoin. It’s rumored that PayPal and Venmo will soon let their 325M users start buying Bitcoin. Bitcoin is by far the most dominant cryptocurrency and is showing no signs of slowing down. For more than a decade it has delivered on its core use-cases — being able to send or store value.
At this point, Bitcoin has very much entered the zeitgeist of modern pop culture — at least in the West.
When Ethereum launched in 2015, it opened up a world of new possibilities and use-cases for crypto. With Ethereum Smart Contracts (i.e. applications), this exciting new digital money (cryptocurrency) became a lot less dumb. Developers could now build applications that go beyond the simple use-cases of “send value” & “store value.” They could program cryptocurrency to have rules, behavior, and logic to respond to different inputs. And always enforced by code. Additional reading on Ethereum fromLinda XieorVitalik Buterin.
Because these applications are built on blockchain technology (Ethereum), they preserve many of the same characteristics as Bitcoin: no one can stop, censor or shut down these apps because they are decentralized.
Just as tokens grew in popularity in 2017–2018, so did online marketplaces where these tokens could be bought, sold, and traded. This was a fledgling asset class — the merchants selling picks, axes, and shovels were finally starting to emerge.
I had a front-row seat — both as an investor and token creator. This was the Wild West with all the frontier drama & scandal that you’d expect.
Binance — now the world’s largest crypto exchange —was launched during this time. They along with many others (especially from Asia) made it really easy for speculators, traders, and degenerate gamblers to participate in these markets. Similar to other financial markets, the goal was straightforward: buy low and sell high. https://preview.redd.it/tytsu5jnfu951.jpg?width=600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe3425b7e4a71fa953b953f0c7f6eaff6504a0d1 That period left an embarrassing stain on our industry that we’ve still been trying to recover from. It was a period rampant with market manipulation, pump-and-dumps, and scams. To some extent, the crypto industry still suffers from that today, but it’s nothing compared to what it was then.
While the potential of getting filthy rich brought a lot of fly-by-nighters and charlatans into the industry, it also brought a lot of innovators, entrepreneurs, and builders.
The launch and growth of Ethereum has been an incredible technological breakthrough. As with past tech breakthroughs, it has led to a wave of innovation, experimentation, and development. The creativity around tokens, smart contracts, and decentralized applications has been fascinating to witness. Now a few years later, the fruits of those labors are starting to be realized.
I know that for the hardcore crypto people, what we covered today is nothing new. But for those who are still getting up to speed, welcome! I hope this was helpful and that it fuels your interest to learn more. Until you understand the basics of this technology, you won’t be able to fully appreciate the impact that it has on our new digital bank, Genesis Block. You won’t be able to understand the implications, how it relates, or how it helps. After today’s post, some of you probably have a lot more questions. What are specific examples or use-cases of DeFi? Why does it need to be on a blockchain? What benefits does it bring to Genesis Block and our users? In upcoming posts, we answer these questions. Today’s post was just Level 1. It set the foundation for where we’re headed next: even deeper down the crypto rabbit hole. --- Other Ways to Consume Today's Episode:
We have a lot more content coming. Be sure to follow our channels: https://genesisblock.com/follow/ Have you already downloaded the app? We're Genesis Block, a new digital bank that's powered by crypto & decentralized protocols. The app is live in the App Store (iOS & Android). Get the link to download at https://genesisblock.com/download
Consider a Bitcoin that allows users to trace the transaction history of their coins vs one that has "fungibility and privacy improvements" that strip this information. Which Bitcoin would offer more utility to society? I will argue that a Bitcoin with individually identifiable coins is superior and that fears of government blacklisting undesirable coins are misplaced. First consider that the Bitcoin with identifiable coins offers the market more information than the one that does not. Simply put, a money that provides more information to market is better than one what provides less. Many people seem to argue this would allow government(s) to blacklist certain coins they deem illegal and then control Bitcoin. If government were to do this, argue this is simply a soft fork of Bitcoin that would be ignored. People often talk about forks in the Bitcoin code, but the code is merely the implementation of the social consensus. It is the social consensus that determines Bitcoin's monetary policy and that is the base layer at which any fork occurs, with the software fork just being incidental and along for the ride. Suppose government where to open up nodes and hard fork to a Bitcoin that gives them 1M extra coins raising the limit to 22M. Obviously this fork would be soundly rejected by the community and would flounder. Now consider that alternatively government owning 1M coins simply decrees that 1M coins owned by others are worthless and illegal to transact with. This would decrease the supply in this forked representation of Bitcoin and, if accepted increase the percentage of the Bitcoin they own. This may very well start off as government stripping 1M "tainted or illegal coins", but would no doubt continue once it is established that government has this power over Bitcoin's monetary supply. Soon after, government would create some nonsense reason to blacklist the coins they haven't moved in X years, claiming they are abandoned, of course doing so would be of benefit to the state--increasing the value of their Bitcoins. This would continue with the state taking more and more of they value of the money supply until it ends in the same disastrous state that always eventually results when governments have control of they money supply. Of course, I argue that such an attempt would backfire very badly for the state & those who sheepishly obey the command to fork Bitcoin to include only government-approved bitcoins. Let us look at an often occurring situation where there is some shitty country that has mismanaged it's monetary supply to the point people are starting to use another harder money, such as perhaps the US dollar. Imagine a situation where you live in such a country and you have half your money in USD and half your money in a rapidly devaluing Tropico Peso. You would expect to see transactions in the Peso to increase as it drives out the "good money" USD--consistent with Gresham's law. In such a situation, the USD's value would climb relative to the Tropico Peso. This should be obvious as people would rather hold the dollars and spend the pesos. Now imagine the Tropico government decreed that it is illegal to transact in dollars. This would only serve to hasten and magnify the collapse of the Peso, as now people can hold and spend Pesos, but they can ONLY hold dollars. It is simply the case that the value of a money does not depend very much at all on how much people are able to spend it or willing to accept it, but rather the desire of society as a whole to hold the money as a store of value over. One such evidence of this fact that was very shocking to me, was the price of Bitcoin immediately after the Silk Road was shut down. In late 2013, a large percentage of Bitcoin transactions were related to the Silk Road and after this avenue was closed off, the price quickly grew in value. Therefore when government attempts a GASF, to fork Bitcoin into only government approved bitcoins, they create a situation where people following this fork are going to end up paying a premium for "clean, government approved" coins that are allowed to be spent, and a situation where there are "unclean" coins that cannot be used to buy things (but can still be held). Paradoxically I would expect the illegal coins to gain in value as they are being held (and traded in black markets). Most probably GASF would fail with the market simply rejecting the government's fork attempt, but if it didn't it would inevitably fail later when government continued to meddle with the monetary policy to enrich itself, which would be to the benefit of anyone who ignored government and bought the "illegal coins" at a discount. In short, Bitcoin's monetary policy is determined by social consensus. Blacklisting coins would be an attempt to fork that consensus and would surely fail causing great economic harm to anyone who followed it.
February — The first ever cryptocurrency exchange, Bitcoin Market, is established. The first trade takes place a month later. April — The first public bitcoin trade takes place: 1000BTC traded for $30 at an exchange rate of 0.03USD/1BTC May — The first real-world bitcoin transaction is undertaken by Laszlo Hanyecz, who paid 10000BTC for two Papa John’s pizzas (Approximately $25 USD) June — Bitcoin developer Gavin Andreson creates a faucet offering 5 free BTC to the public July — First notable usage of the word “blockchain” appears on BitcoinTalk forum. Prior to this, it was referred to as ‘Proof-of-Work chain’ July — Bitcoin exchange named Magic The Gathering Online eXchange—also known as Mt. Gox—established August —Bitcoin protocol bug leads to emergency hard fork December — Satoshi Nakamoto ceases communication with the world
January — One-quarter of the eventual total of 21M bitcoins have been generated February — Bitcoin reaches parity for the first time with USD April — Bitcoin reaches parity with EUR and GBP June — WikiLeaks begins accepting Bitcoin donations June — Mt. Gox hacked, resulting in suspension of trading and a precipitous price drop for Bitcoin August — First Bitcoin Improvement Proposal: BIP Purpose and Guidelines October — Litecoin released December — Bitcoin featured as a major plot element in an episode of ‘The Good Wife’ as 9.45 million viewers watch.
May — Bitcoin Magazine, founded by Mihai Alisie and Vitalik Buterin, publishes first issue July — Government of Estonia begins incorporating blockchain into digital ID efforts September — Bitcoin Foundation created October — BitPay reports having over 1,000 merchants accepting bitcoin under its payment processing service November — First Bitcoin halving to 25 BTC per block
February — Reddit begins accepting bitcoins for Gold memberships March — Cyprus government bailout levies bank accounts with over $100k. Flight to Bitcoin results in major price spike. May —Total Bitcoin value surpasses 1 billion USD with 11M Bitcoin in circulation May — The first cryptocurrency market rally and crash takes place. Prices rise from $13 to $220, and then drop to $70 June — First major cryptocurrency theft. 25,000 BTC is stolen from Bitcoin forum founder July — Mastercoin becomes the first project to conduct an ICO August — U.S. Federal Court issues opinion that Bitcoin is a currency or form of money October — The FBI shuts down dark web marketplace Silk Road, confiscating approximately 26,000 bitcoins November — Vitalik Buterin releases the Ethereum White Paper: “A Next-Generation Smart Contract and Decentralized Application Platform” December — The first commit to the Ethereum codebase takes place
January — Vitalik Buterin announces Ethereum at the North American Bitcoin Conference in Miami February — HMRC in the UK classifies Bitcoin as private money March — Newsweek claims Dorian Nakamoto is Bitcoin creator. He is not April — Gavin Wood releases the Ethereum Yellow Paper: “Ethereum: A Secure Decentralised Generalised Transaction Ledger” June — Ethereum Foundation established in Zug, Switzerland June — US Marshals Service auctions off 30,000 Bitcoin confiscated from Silk Road. All are purchased by venture capitalist Tim Draper July — Ethereum token launch raises 31,591 BTC ($18,439,086) over 42 days September — TeraExchange launches first U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission approved Bitcoin over-the-counter swap October — ConsenSys is founded by Joe Lubin December — By year’s end, Paypal, Zynga, u/, Expedia, Newegg, Dell, Dish Network, and Microsoft are all accepting Bitcoin for payments
January — Coinbase opens up the first U.S-based cryptocurrency exchange February — Stripe initiates bitcoin payment integration for merchants April — NASDAQ initiates blockchain trial June — NYDFS releases final version of its BitLicense virtual currency regulations July — Ethereum’s first live mainnet release—Frontier—launched. August — Augur, the first token launch on the Ethereum network takes place September — R3 consortium formed with nine financial institutions, increases to over 40 members within six months October — Gemini exchange launches, founded by Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss November — Announcement of first zero knowledge proof, ZK-Snarks December — Linux Foundation establishes Hyperledger project
January — Zcash announced February — HyperLedger project announced by Linux Foundation with thirty founding members March — Second Ethereum mainnet release, Homestead, is rolled out. April — The DAO (decentralized autonomous organization) launches a 28-day crowdsale. After one month, it raises an Ether value of more than US$150M May — Chinese Financial Blockchain Shenzhen Consortium launches with 31 members June — The DAO is attacked with 3.6M of the 11.5M Ether in The DAO redirected to the attacker’s Ethereum account July — The DAO attack results in a hard fork of the Ethereum Blockchain to recover funds. A minority group rejecting the hard fork continues to use the original blockchain renamed Ethereum Classic July — Second Bitcoin halving to 12.5BTC per block mined November — CME Launches Bitcoin Price Index
January — Bitcoin price breaks US$1,000 for the first time in three years February — Enterprise Ethereum Alliance formed with 30 founding members, over 150 members six months later March — Multiple applications for Bitcoin ETFs rejected by the SEC April — Bitcoin is officially recognized as currency by Japan June — EOS begins its year-long ICO, eventually raising $4 billion July — Parity hack exposes weaknesses in multisig wallets August — Bitcoin Cash forks from the Bitcoin Network October — Ethereum releases Byzantium soft fork network upgrade, part one of Metropolis September — China bans ICOs October — Bitcoin price surpasses $5,000 USD for the first time November — Bitcoin price surpasses $10,000 USD for the first time December — Ethereum Dapp Cryptokitties goes viral, pushing the Ethereum network to its limits
January — Ethereum price peaks near $1400 USD March — Google bans all ads pertaining to cryptocurrency March — Twitter bans all ads pertaining to cryptocurrency April — 2018 outpaces 2017 with $6.3 billion raised in token launches in the first four months of the year April — EU government commits $300 million to developing blockchain projects June — The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission states that Ether is not a security. July — Over 100,000 ERC20 tokens created August — New York Stock Exchange owner announces Bakkt, a federally regulated digital asset exchange October — Bitcoin’s 10th birthday November — VC investment in blockchain tech surpasses $1 billion December — 90% of banks in the US and Europe report exploration of blockchain tech
January — Coinstar machines begin selling cryptocurrency at grocery stores across the US February — Ethereum’s Constantinople hard fork is released, part two of Metropolis April — Bitcoin surpasses 400 million total transactions June — Facebook announces Libra July — United States senate holds hearings titled ‘Examining Regulatory Frameworks for Digital Currencies and Blockchain” August — Ethereum developer dominance reaches 4x that of any other blockchain October — Over 80 million distinct Ethereum addresses have been created September — Santander bank settles both sides of a $20 million bond on Ethereum November — Over 3000 Dapps created. Of them, 2700 are built on Ethereum
This post was inspired by the video “Roger Ver’s Thoughts on Craig Wright”. Oh, wait. Sorry. “Roger Ver’s Thoughts on 15th November Bitcoin Cash Upgrade”. Not sure how I mixed those two up. To get it out of the way first and foremost: I have nothing but utmost respect for Roger Ver. You have done more than just about anyone to bring Bitcoin to the world, and for that you will always have my eternal gratitude. While there are trolls on both sides, the crucifixion of Bitcoin Jesus in the past week has been disheartening to see. As a miner, I respect his decision to choose the roadmap that he desires. It is understandable that the Bitcoin (BCH) upgrade is causing a clash of personalities. However, what has been particularly frustrating is the lack of debate around the technical merits of Bitcoin ABC vs Bitcoin SV. The entire conversation has now revolved around Craig Wright the individual instead of what is best for Bitcoin Cash moving forward. Roger’s video did confirm something about difference of opinions between the Bitcoin ABC and Bitcoin SV camps. When Roger wasn’t talking about Craig Wright, he spent a portion of his video discussing how individuals should be free to trade drugs without the intervention of the state. He used this position to silently attack Craig Wright for allegedly wanting to control the free trade of individuals. This appears to confirm what Craig Wright has been saying: that DATASIGVERIFY can be used to enable widely illegal use-cases of transactions, and Roger’s support for the ABC roadmap stems from his personal belief that Bitcoin should enable all trade regardless of legal status across the globe. Speaking for myself, I think the drug war is immoral. I think human beings should be allowed to put anything they want in their own bodies as long as they are not harming others. I live in the United States and have personally seen the negative consequences of the drug war. This is a problem. The debasement of our currency and theft at the hands of central banks is a separate problem. Bitcoin was explicitly created to solve one of these problems. Roger says in his video that “cryptocurrencies” were created to enable trade free from government oversight. However, Satoshi Nakamoto never once said this about Bitcoin. Satoshi Nakamoto was explicitly clear, however, that Bitcoin provided a solution to the debasement of currency.
“The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that's required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust.” – Satoshi Nakamoto 02/11/2009
As we’ve written previously, the genesis block is often cited as a criticism of the 2008 bailout. However, the content of the article outlines that the bailout had already occurred. The article reveals that the government was poised to go a step further by buying up the toxic bank assets as part of a nationalization effort! In this scenario, according to the Times, "a 'bad bank' would be created to dispose of bad debts. The Treasury would take bad loans off the hands of troubled banks, perhaps swapping them for government bonds. The toxic assets, blamed for poisoning the financial system, would be parked in a state vehicle or 'bad bank' that would manage them and attempt to dispose of them while 'detoxifying' the main-stream banking system." The article outlines a much more nightmarish scenario than bank bailouts, one that would effectively remove any element of private enterprise from banking and use the State to seize the bank's assets. The United States is progressively getting to a point where cannabis can be freely traded and used without legal repercussion. As a citizen, each election has given me the opportunity to bring us closer to enacting that policy at a national level. However, I have never had the ability to have a direct impact on preventing the debasement of the United States dollar. The dollar is manipulated by a “private” organization that is accountable to no one, and on a yearly basis we are given arbitrary interest rates that I have no control over. The government uses its arbitrary control over the money supply to enable itself to spend trillions of dollars it doesn’t have on foreign wars. Roger Ver has passionately argued against this in multiple videos available on the internet. This is what Bitcoin promised to me when I first learned about it. This is what makes it important to me. When the Silk Road was shut down, Bitcoin was unaffected. Bitcoin, like the US dollar, was just a tool that was used for transactions. There is an inherent danger that governments, whether you like it or not, would use every tool at their disposal to shut down any system that enabled at a protocol level illegal trade. They, rightfully or wrongfully, did this with the Silk Road. Roger’s video seems to hint that he thinks Bitcoin Cash should be an experiment in playing chicken with governments across the world about our right to trade freely without State intervention. The problem is that this is a vast underestimation of just how quickly Bitcoin (BCH) could be shut down if the protocol itself was the tool being used for illegal trade instead of being the money exchanged on top of illegal trade platforms. I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with Roger’s philosophy on what “cryptocurrencies” should be. However, I know what Bitcoin is. Bitcoin is simply hard, sound money. That is boring to a lot of those in the “cryptocurrency” space, but it is the essential tool that enables freedom for the globe. It allows those in Zimbabwe to have sound currency free from the 50 billion dollar bills handed out like candy by the government. It allows those of us in the US to be free from the arbitrary manipulation of the Fed. Hard, sound, unchanging money that can be used as peer to peer digital cash IS the killer use case of Bitcoin. That is why we are here building on top of Bitcoin Cash daily. When Roger and ABC want to play ball with governments across the globe and turn Bitcoin into something that puts it in legal jeopardy, it threatens the value of my bitcoins. Similar to the uncertainty we go through in the US every year as we await the arbitrary interest rates handed out by the Fed, we are now going to wait in limbo to see if governments will hold Bitcoin Cash miners responsible for enabling illegal trade at a protocol level. This is an insanely dangerous prospect to introduce to Bitcoin (BCH) so early in its lifespan. In one of Satoshi Nakamoto’s last public posts, he made it clear just how important it was to not kick the hornet’s nest that is government:
“It would have been nice to get this attention in any other context. WikiLeaks has kicked the hornet's nest, and the swarm is headed towards us.” – Satoshi Nakamoto 12/11/2010
Why anyone would want to put our opportunity of sound monetary policy in jeopardy to enable illegal trading at a base protocol level is beyond me. I respect anyone who has an anarcho-capitalist ideology. But, please don’t debase my currency by putting it at risk of legal intervention because you want to impose that ideology on the world. We took the time to set up a Q&A with the Bitcoin SV developers Steve Shadders and Daniel Connolly. We posted on Reddit and gathered a ton of questions from the “community”. We received insanely intelligent, measured, and sane responses to all of the “attack vectors” proposed against increasing the block size and re-enabling old opcodes. Jonathon Toomim spent what must have been an hour or so asking 15+ questions in the Reddit thread of which we obtained answers to most. We have yet to see him respond to the technical answers given by the SV team. In Roger’s entire video today about the upcoming November fork, he didn’t once mention one reason why he disagrees with the SV roadmap. Instead, he has decided to go on Reddit and use the same tactics that were used by Core against Bitcoin Unlimited back in the day by framing the upcoming fork as “BCH vs BSV”, weeks before miners have had the ability to actually vote. What Bitcoin SV wants to accomplish is enable sound money for the globe. This is boring. This is not glamorous. It is, however, the greatest tool of freedom we can give the globe. We cannot let ideology or personalities change that goal. Ultimately, it won’t. We have been continual advocates for miners, the ones who spend 1000x more investing in the network than the /btc trolls, to decide the future of BCH. We look forward to seeing what they choose on Nov 15th. Roger mentions that it is our right to fork off and create our own chains. While that is okay to have as an opinion, Satoshi Nakamoto was explicit that we should be building one global chain. We adhere to the idea that miners should vote with their hashpower and determine the emergent chain after November 15th.
“It is strictly necessary that the longest chain is always considered the valid one. Nodes that were present may remember that one branch was there first and got replaced by another, but there would be no way for them to convince those who were not present of this. We can't have subfactions of nodes that cling to one branch that they think was first, others that saw another branch first, and others that joined later and never saw what happened. The CPU proof-of-worker proof-of-work vote must have the final say. The only way for everyone to stay on the same page is to believe that the longest chain is always the valid one, no matter what.” – Satoshi Nakamoto 11/09/2008
Connor of The BCH Boys
Edit: A clarification. I used the phrase "Bitcoin is boring". I want to clarify that Bitcoin itself is capable of far more than we've ever thought possible, and this statement is one I will be elaborating on further in the future.
Which type of curren(t) do you want to see(cy)? An analysis of the intention behind bitcoin(s). Part 3
Part 1 Part 2 So I have been subbed to /bitcoin since it had less than two thousand subs but haven't posted there in years. I think I took a break from researching bitcoin to take a foray into the world of conspiracy around 2014 and only got back in to it around the beginning of 2017 but with a bit of sense of skepticism and cynicism about everything. I think I returned to /bitcoin around that time but there had been a rift that had emerged in the community between those that said that bitcoin was censoring any discussion around big blocks but then also just censorship in general. This lead to the formation of /btc which became the main spot for big blockers to gather to talk about protocol development. Following the fork of Bitcoin Cash and SegWit (BTC) in August 2017 the camps were further divided when the fence sitters were denied their SegWit2x compromise. Many from the fence sitters then deferred back to the incumbent bitcoin as citing muh network effect, liquidity, and hashpower while some who felt betrayed by the failure of getting S2X through went to support BCH for some attempt at on chain scaling rather than through pegged side chains or Lightning Network. Bitcoin cash initially went with a modest doubling of the blocksize to 2MB but implemented some other features like a new more rapidly adjusting difficulty algorithm to protect themselves against hashpower fluctuations from the majority chain. In about July of that year I had seen what I potentially thought was someone LARPing on /biz/ but screencapped, that segwit2x which was scheduled for november 2017 would be called off and then hashpower would switch to BCH causing congestion and chain death spiral on BTC and BCH would pump massively. I was partial to the idea as the game theory and incentives on a big block bitcoin should attract miners. About a month after SegWit2x was indeed called off while the BTC blockchain was hugely congested, BCH went through a violent pump reaching 0.5 BTC/BCH on a European exchange called Kraken while it also pumped ridiculously on American exchange coinbase. Shortly afterwards the market took a giant dump all over those people who bought the top and it has since retraced to roughly 30:1 or so now. After that pump though BCH kind of gained some bagholders I guess who started to learn the talking points presented by personalities like Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, Peter Rizun and Amaury Sechet. Craig S Wright by this time had been outed as Satoshi but had in 2016 publicly failed to convince the public with the cryptographic proof he provided. To which he later published the article I don't have the courage to prove I am the bitcoin creator. In essence this allowed many to disregard anything he offered to the crypto community though his company nChain was very much interested in providing the technical support to scale what he saw as the true implementation of bitcoin. Following debate around a set of planned protocol upgrades between a bitcoin node implementation by his company nChain and the developers of another client Bitcoin ABC (adjustable block cap), the two parties both dug their heels in and wouldn't compromise. As it became clear that a fork was imminent there was a lot of vitriol tossed out towards Wright, another big billionaire backer Calvin Ayre and other personalities like Roger Ver and Jihan Wu. Craig's credibility was disregarded because of his failure to provide convincing cryptographic proof but still people who wanted to pursue the protocol upgrades that nChain were planning (as it best followed their interpretation of the bitcoin white paper) pursued his variant, while others who followed the socia consensus deferred to the positions of their personalities like Wu, Ver, and Sechet but even developers from Ethereum and other protocols chimed in to convince everyone that CSW is a fraud. This was referred to as the hash war and was the first time that the bitcoin protocol had been contentiously hard forked. Hashpower is the CPU cycles you can commit to the Proof of Work function in bitcoin and the majority will generate the longest chain as they have the most proof of work. To win the contentious hard fork legitimately and make sure your chain will always be safe going forward you need to maintain your version of the blockchain with 51% of the hashpower on the network and force the other parties to continue to spend money on building a blockchain that is never going to be inserted in to the majority chain. As well as this you need to convince exchanges that you have the majority chain and have them feel safe to accept deposits and withdrawals so that they don't lose money in the chaos. This is how it would play out if both parties acted according to the rules of bitcoin and the Nakamoto Consensus. There was a lot of shit talking between the two parties on social media with Craig Wright making a number of claims such as "you split, we bankrupt you" "I don't care if there is no ability to move coins to an exchange for a year" and other such warnings not to engage in foul play.. To explain this aftermath is quite tedious so It might be better to defer to this video for the in depth analysis but basically Roger Ver had to rent hashpower that was supposed to be mining BTC from his mining farm bitcoin.com, Jihan Wu did the same from his Bitmain Mining Farm which was a violation of his fiduciary duty as the CEO of a company preparing for an IPO. In this video of a livestream during the hashwar where Andreas Brekken admits to basically colluding with exchange owners like Coinbase, Kraken (exchange Roger Ver invested in), Bitfinex and others to release a patched ABC client to the exchanges and introducing "checkpoints" in to the BCH blockchain (which he even says is arguably "centralisation") in order to prevent deep reorgs of the BCH blockchain. >"We knew we were going to win in 30 mins we had the victory because of these checkpoints that we released to a cartel of friendly businesses in a patch so then we just sat around drinking beers all day". By releasing a patched client that has code in it to prevent deep reorgs by having the client refer to a checkpoint from a block mined by someone who supported BCHABC if another group of hash power was to try to insert a new chain history, this cartel of exchanges and mining farm operators conspired in private to change the nature of the bitcoin protocol and Nakamoto Consensus. Since the fork there have been a number of other BCH clients that have come up that require funding and have their own ideas about what things to implement on the BCH chain. What began to emerge was actually not necessarily an intention of scaling bitcoin but rather to implement Schnorr signatures to obfuscate transactions and to date the ABC client still has a default blocksize of 2MB but advertised as 16MB. What this demonstrates for BCH is that through the collusion, the cartel can immediately get a favourable outcome from the developers to keep their businesses secure and from the personalities/developers to work on obfuscating records of transactions on the chain rather than scaling their protocol. After the SegWit fork, many from the BCH camp alleged that through the funding to Blockstream from AXA and groups that tied to the Bilderbergs, Blockstream would be beholden to the legacy banking and would be a spoke and hub centralised model, so naturally many of the "down with central banks anarcho capitalist types" had gathered in the BCH community. Through these sympathies it seems that people have been susceptible to being sold things like coin mixing and obfuscation with developers offering their opinions about how money needs to be anonymous to stop the evil government and central banks despite ideas like Mises’ Regression Theorem, which claims that in order for something to be money in the most proper sense, it must be traceable to an originally non-monetary barter commodity such as gold. What this suggests is that there is an underlying intent from the people that have mechanisms to exert their will upon the protocol of bitcoin and that if obfuscation is their first priority rather than working on creating a scalable platform, this demonstrates that they don't wish to actually be global money but more so something that makes it easier to move money that you don't want seen. Roger Ver has often expressed sentiments of injustice about the treatment of Silk Road found Ross Ulbricht and donated a large amount of money to a fund for his defence. I initially got in to bitcoin seeking out the Silk Road and though I only wanted to test it to buy small quantities of mdma, lsd, and mescaline back in 2011 there was all sorts of criminal activity on there like scam manuals, counterfeits, ID, Credit Card info, and other darknet markets like armoury were selling pretty crazy weapons. It has been alleged by Craig Wright that in his capacity as a digital forensics expert he was involved with tracing bitcoin that was used to fund the trafficking of 12-16 year olds on the silk road. There have been attempts at debunking such claims by saying that silk road was moderated for such stuff by Ulbricht and others, but one only has to take a look in to the premise of pizza gate to understand that there it may be possible to hide in plain site with certain code words for utilising the market services and escrow of websites like the silk road. The recent pedo bust from South Korea demonstrates the importance of being able to track bitcoin transactions and if the first thing BCH wanted to do after separating itself from Satoshi's Vision and running on developer and cartel agendas was to implement obfuscation methods, this type of criminal activity will only proliferate. Questions one must ask oneself then are things like why do they want this first? Are some of these developers, personalities and cartel businesses sitting on coins that they know are tarnished from the silk road and want to implement obfuscation practices so they can actually cash in some of the value they are unable to access? Merchants from the silk road 1 are still being caught even as recently as this year when they attempted to move coins that were known to have moved through the silk road. Chain analytics are only becoming more and more powerful and the records can never be changed under the original bitcoin protocol but with developer induced protocol changes like Schnorr signatures, and coinjoin it may be possible to start laundering these coins out in to circulation. I must admit with the cynicism I had towards government and law enforcement and my enjoying controlled substances occasionally I was sympathetic to Ross and donated to his legal fund back in the day and for many years claimed that I wouldn't pay my taxes when I wanted to cash out of bitcoin. I think many people in the space possess this same kind of mentality and subsequently can be preyed upon by people who wish to do much more in the obfuscation than dodge tax and party. Another interesting observation is that despite the fact that btc spun off as a result of censorship around big block scaling on bitcoin, that subreddit itself has engaged in plenty of censorship for basically anyone who wants to discuss the ideas presented by Dr Craig Wright on that sub. When I posted my part 2 of this series in there a week ago I was immediately met with intense negativity and ad hominems so as to discourage others from reading the submission and my post history was immediately throttled to 1 comment every 10 mins. This is not quite as bad as cryptocurrency where my post made it through the new queue to gather some upvotes and a discussion started but I was immediately banned from that sub for 7 days for reason "Content standards - you're making accusations based on no evidence just a dump of links that do nothing to justify your claims except maybe trustnodes link (which has posted fabricated information about this subreddit mods) and a Reddit post. Keep the conspiracy theories in /conspiracy" My post was also kept at zero in bitcoin and conspiracy so technically btc was the least censored besides C_S_T. In addition to the throttling I was also flagged by the u/BsvAlertBot which says whether or not a user has a questionable amount of activity in BSV subreddits and then a break down of your percentages. This was done in response to combat the "toxic trolls" of BSV but within bitcoincashSV there are many users that have migrated from what was originally supposed to be a uncensored subreddit to discuss bitcoin and many such as u/cryptacritic17 has have switched sides after having been made to essentially DOXX themselves in btc to prove that they aren't a toxic troll for raising criticisms of the way certain things are handled within that coin and development groups. Other prominent users such as u/jim-btc have been banned for impersonating another user which was in actual fact himself and he has uploaded evidence of him being in control of said account to the blockchain. Mod Log, Mod Damage Control, Mod Narrative BTFO. Interestingly in the comments on the picture uploaded to the blockchain you can see the spin to call him an SV shill when in actual fact he is just an OG bitcoiner that wanted bitcoin to scale as per the whitepaper. What is essentially going on in the Bitcoin space is that there is a battle of the protocols and a battle for social consensus. The incumbent BTC has majority of the attention and awareness as it is being backed by legacy banking and finance with In-Q-Tel and AXA funding blockstream as well as Epstein associates and MIT, but in the power vaccum that presented itself as to who would steward the big block variant, a posse of cryptoanarchists have gained control of the social media forums and attempted to exert their will upon what should essentially be a Set In Stone Protocol to create something that facilitates their economic activity (such as selling explosives online)) while attempting to leverage their position as moderators who control the social forum to spin their actions as something different (note memorydealers is Roger Ver). For all his tears for the children killed in wars, it seems that what cryptoanarchists such as u/memorydealers want is to delist/shut down governments and they will go to any efforts such as censorship to make sure that it is their implementation of bitcoin that will do that. Are we really going to have a better world with people easier able to hide transactions/launder money? Because of this power vacuum there also exists a number of different development groups but what is emerging now is that they are struggling for money to fund their development. The main engineering is done by self professed benevolent dictator Amaury Sechet (deadalnix) who in leaked telegram screen caps appears to be losing it as funding for development has dried up and money raised in an anarchist fashion wasn't compliant with laws around fundraising sources and FVNI (development society that manages BCH development and these donations) is run by known scammer David R Allen. David was founder of 2014 Israeli ICO Getgems (GEMZ) that scammed investors out of more than 2500 Bitcoins. The SV supported sky-lark who released this information has since deleted all their accounts but other users have claimed that sky-lark was sent personal details about themselves and pictures of their loved ones and subsequently deleted all their social media accounts afterwards. There are other shifty behaviours like hiring Japanese influencers to shill their coin, recruiting a Hayden Otto that up until 2018 was shilling Pascal Coin to become a major ambassador for BCH in the Australian city of Townsville. Townsville was claimed to be BCH city hosting a BCH conference there and claiming loads of adoption, but at the conference itself their idea of demonstrating adoption was handing a Point of Sale device to the bar to accept bitcoin payments but Otto actually just putting his credit card behind the bar to settle and he would keep the BCH that everyone paid. In the lead up to the conference the second top moderator of btc was added to the moderators of townsville to shill their coin but has ended up with the townsville subreddit wanting to ban all bitcoin talk from the subreddit. Many of the BCH developers are now infighting as funding dries up and they find themselves floundering with no vision of how to achieve scale or get actual real world adoption. Amaury has recently accused Peter Rizun of propagandising, told multiple users in the telegram to fuck off and from all accounts appears to be a malignant narcissist incapable of maintaining any kind of healthy relationship with people he is supposed to be working with. Peter Rizun has begun lurking in bitcoincashSV and recognising some of the ideas coming from BSV as having merit while Roger has started to distance himself from the creation of BCH. Interestingly at a point early in the BCH history Roger believed Dr Craig Wright was Satoshi, but once CSW wouldn't go along with their planned road map and revealed the fact he had patents on blockchain technology and wanted to go down a path that worked with Law, Roger retracted that statement and said he was tricked by Craig. He joined in on the faketoshi campaign and has been attempted to be sued by Dr Wright for libel in the UK to which Roger refused to engage citing grounds of jurisdiction. Ironically this avoidance of Roger to meet Dr Wright in court to defend his claims can be seen as the very argument against justice being served by private courts under an anarchocapitalist paradigm with essentially someone with resources simply being able to either flee a private court's jurisdiction or engage a team of lawyers that can bury any chances of an everyday person being able to get justice. There is much more going on with the BCH drama that can be explained in a single post but it is clear that some of the major personalities in the project are very much interested in having their ideals projected on to the technical implementation of the bitcoin protocol and have no qualms spouting rhetoric around the anti-censorship qualities of bitcoin/BCH while at the same time employing significant censorship on their social media forums to control what people are exposed to and getting rid of anyone who challenges their vision. I posit that were this coin to become a success, these "benevolent dictators" as they put it would love their new found positions of wealth/dominance yet if their behaviour to get there is anything to go by, would demonstrate the same power tripping practices of censorship, weasel acts, misleading people about adoption statistics and curating of the narrative. When the hashrate from Rogers bitcoin.com minging operation on BCH dropped dramatically and a lot of empty blocks were being mined, his employer and 2IC moderator u/BitcoinXio (who stepped in to replace roger as CEO) was in the sub informing everyone it was simply variance that was the reason when only a few days later it was revealed that they had reduced their hash power significantly. This is not appropriate behaviour for one of the primary enterprises engaged in stewarding BCH and encouraging adoption nor is the inability to be accountable for such dishonest practices as well. It seems bitcoin.com treats btc as their own personal spam page where Roger can ask for donations despite it being against the sub rules and spin/ban any challenge to the narrative they seek to create. Let's see how the censorship goes as I post this around a few of the same places as the last piece. Stay tuned for the next write up where I take a deep dive in to the coin that everyone doesn't want you to know about.
**CSW：**My original idea is defined in white paper for no limits. And I also described this in the P2P Foundation. It is a distributed system. Users use it to connect to each other, and the miners, to stop double Spending. I explain this further late in 2010, I basically said that the network expands to have a number of nodes that become large data center type operations, because it's not about running nodes. People who run nodes are foolish unless that making money, that's it. When I created Bitcoin, it is a overlay network of the peer-to-peer network, the top of peer-to-peer network. We did peer-to-peer. Peer-to-peer means not what you send to the network, and then another user gets it by the network. That is outside the definition of peer to peer. That is a typical centralized mesh. Why Bitcoin works is that user Alice sends to user Bob，Bob received the transaction. So Bob wrote that he received it. He sent it to the network. IP to IP was one of the fundamental parts of Bitcoin that was removed by core right after I left, basically, I fix Bitcoin and I had the lay out in the first place. There's no question that what happened, and whatever else and what version of things Nakamoto wanted, because I am Satoshi Nakamoto. I created Bitcoin. Very soon, people will notice that. If you don't like it, I don't care.
Question 2. As the main witnesses of BTC to BCH fork, what do you think was the main reason for the fork at that point of time? Now what do you think about the fork at the time? Have you ever changed your mind?
CSW: There was a BCH fork away from Bitcoin, BTC added a number of things to make cryptocurrency more anonymous, which makes it illegal, which means the government can shut it down. Don’t ever believe the government can’t stop bitcoin. Government, the US government and Chinese government could stop bitcoin in a heartbeat. They are going to follow international law to shut down. The Liberty Reserve closed down involved 42 countries working together. It involved basically a distributive system of 10,000 different operations. Not Raspberry pie nodes because it is only 15 real BTC nodes, operators to ran money system. We can't work to unable governments to see machines. If the criminal use of bitcoin is to become anonymous that government can seize machines, can arrest people, can torture by law. The American government can enforce orders in China. So BTC wanted to make something that was not bitcoin. It wanted to change bitcoin further. So BTC split away from bitcoin. That's the fork. Bitcoin didn't change. I make sure we kept going. Jihan and Bitmain. I would like to have a talk about what we are planning, and the mining, we are building. Jihan and Bitmain, took the information to go into confidence and make sure that there was a fork. So this fork happened because Jihan and Bitmain are basically a bunch of lying stuff, and that would be found out later. The second fork was only last year. That was with BCH. Just to keep it simple. Bitcoin vary again. There’s no system of bitcoin is out to try to make it illegal, to make it criminal, to make it anonymous. Roger Ver, who helps from things like Silk Road and Charlie's friend money laundering operation, which Charlie's friend went to jail for. Other people like them that invested a lot of the dark websites, which all under investigation at the moment, which will be founded to watch in the next several years. People like Roger and even Jihan, wanted to use bitcoin to take the illegal money and transfer, they want it to be a dark web system. So they added extra objects to change the bitcoin further. They try to allow it to be more anonymous in a different way. So the simple thing is, there is bitcoin as I created, and there is bitcoin designed to be illegal and then it forks.
Question 3. Finally, can we invite Dr. Craig and Mr. Jiang to talk about each other's technology l and vision? What is the most worthwhile point to learn?
**CSW：**Sorry, I don’t look at those broken versions of bitcoin. I have no interest in learning about how people don’t want to understand bitcoin, how about you want to see the value and how they want to create the system or see these cryptocurrencies in the 90s. If people want to do that, that’s all their choice, but I am not interested in watching them go down in flames. Thank you.
CSW: He's supposedly trying to mislead the audience by making out the checksum to pass off the transaction. He is basically trying to lie to the people and the audience, making them seen that I don’t understand bitcoin. If you look at why it works, the address was not part of the bitcoin. Bitcoin is a wallet, exchange peer-to-peer with the template. Basically, why does this work is that you have is a transaction that has a checksum to send between wallets. That checksum is a relevant. It never goes into the bitcoin network. The checksum is added only to ensure the transaction to the network while a wallet is correct. The original version of bitcoin didn’t eventually work that way. So what he is trying to mislead you is to say is what I don’t understand checksum etc., which is the lie propagate by people like Bitmain, where insists what it is you do a checksum of the code and then you hand it up. And the third part of this is very simply put. Without the checksum, the transaction sends to the network properly. The checksum is purely a wallet function, so you can add any checksum function and Wormhole would allow this work. Wormhole was an attempt to make an illegal system. Wormhole is another of these things because Jihan and the others wanted to take money out of China. They work with people to do money laundering, so the value that they see of bitcoin is to help money laundering. So they want to try and lie to people and make it that I don’t understand this technology, because they want to keep their money laundering scam going. So if you actually look at my posts, you will see that I've already explained the checksum in details. If you look at the work bitcoin transaction, you will see there has no transaction checksum. No one wants you to look at that because they want you to stay stupid and ignorant, because spending money out of you requires that you are dumb.
Adoption will not increase the price of crypto. Change my mind.
Adoption itself does not increase the crypto price, it merely increases liquidity, and the velocity of this 'money'. The creation of credit cards meant fiat could be more easily spent, but did not in any way increase fiat's value.
Real currencies' values flunctuate depending on other countries wanting to buy another countries' commodities. The only way to purchase those goods is by first acquiring that country's currency. Crypto's value should be ruled the same way. Its value should be based on demand of goods/services that can only be acquired by spending crypto. As long as fiat alternatives exist for payment, crypto should not/cannot moon.
The existence of Silk Road was the closest thing to a pure crypto economy, and by the time it was shut down in October 2013, the Bitcoin price had not yet cracked US$200. Before rampant speculation took over, this should be seen as the real intrinsic value of btc. Now that the authorities are on the case, and there's the tax implications of transactions, the attractiveness of a pure crypto economy is fading.
I will not entertain the 'store of value' fallacy, as I believe this meme was only created so butters could excuse crypto's lack of real-world utility.
11-04 14:33 - 'DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KRATSCOIN AND BITCOIN' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/xia112 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 3-13min
''' • The indivisible minimum KRATSCOIN unit is 0.00001 instead of 0.00000001 to denominate realistic currency rates in FOREX. Denomination cannot be determined or dictated by the value of a currency. If KRATSCOIN is valued at USD10,000.00 then the smallest unit of KRATSCOIN at 0.00001 = USD0.10 and nothing smaller than USD0.10 in KRATSCOIN. Example: If USD1.00 = THB30.00 and the smallest denomination of USD is USD0.10, then a USD0.10 which is THB3.00, is unable to buy a piece of candy at THB1.00. Thus the USD must be converted into a smaller currency of THB in order to buy the THB1.00 candy. • KRATSCOIN is in-line with standard International Foreign Currency Exchange Practice at indivisible minimum unit 0.00001. • Each KRATSCOIN is equipped with a 13 digit “SERIAL CODES AND NUMBERS” and there will be a total of 2,100,000,000,000 SERIAL CODES in total. Example1: 1st KRATSCOIN = AKDJFYRS.00000 Example2: 1st Fraction from 1st KRATSCOIN = AKDJFYRS.00001 Example3: 2nd Fraction from 2nd KRATSCOIN = AKDJFYRS.00002 Example4: Last KRATSCOIN = DLXVZKWR.00000 Example5: 1st Fraction from Last KRATSCOIN = DLXVZKWR.00001 Example6: 2nd Fraction from Last KRATSCOIN = DLXVZKWR.00002 • In Year 2015, Silk Road in DeepWeb utilization of Bitcoin in their transactions amounts to USD1.2billion spanning over 950,000 users. One may argue that Bitcoin is most utilized by the black market, which then maintains its value and worth among other factors. However, the USD1.2bil a year over 950,000 users are far fetch from the Legitimate Users in comparison. Bitcoin transactions runs into USD40.0bil in recent Legitimate Crypto Exchanges. In summary, legitimate transaction of crypto currencies is many times larger use in illegal transactions. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIAT AND CRYPTO: • Fiat Currency is backed by Governments/Countries itself. What determines the value of a currency is the economic health, demand, growth, political stability to name a few, of the respective country. Before 1930, most fiat currencies were backed by gold and silver. • Since 1971, U.S. citizens have been able to utilize Federal Reserve Notes as the only form of money that for the first time had no currency with any gold or silver backing. This is where you get the saying that U.S. dollars are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the U.S. Government - quoted in google.com. • What backs crypto value is purely supply and demand. The demand creation of a crypto is its sole objective. To create demand, the crypto has to have a purpose. And most purpose commonly promoted is utility. The number of ways you can utilize the said crypto. The more utilization factors the more demand there is for it. • There are other ways to substantiate value of a crypto and that is to back the crypto with a 1 to 1 ratio in assets or in USD. Then the question is, how 3,000 crypto currencies in circulation be monetary eco sustainable? Can anyone imagine walking into McDonald and view a chart of 3,000 different pricing? Which also means the crypto is a payment gateway pegging against USD instead of bearing any true characteristic of a currency. • A country’s currency is in its own legit form of legal tender, the only currency acceptable under financial sovereigns of a country. People in the world must be made to understand that. Retailers in Thailand cannot put up products price tags in EUROS/USD, it is illegal. It has to be in Thai Baht. • It is hardly imaginable for everyone in the world to retail with a Crypto-Currencies at a rate of 7 transactions per second. When mining nodes are reduced due to non-performing mining ratio, mining blocks in the Blockchain will significantly be limited too, rendering delays in transactions while usage increases. • In time to come, as trends of crypto picks up, Thailand can issue BAHT COIN or UK the STERLING COIN, exactly what China wishes to do. Digital RMB, but would such crypto currencies be fully decentralized? We all have our answers. Absurd to even think of producing Thai Baht, Pound Sterling or Chinese Yuan at the cost of electricity. It is currencies in digital forms. KRATSCOIN is not meant for that purpose. In some opinion, apart from utilization, a crypto can be for safekeeping, an entity for keeping money while allowing easy liquidation, at a click of a mobile button, not to mention sending or transferring without the trouble of going to banks, which was the original purpose of Bitcoin to begin with. Therefore, KRATSCOIN would be better termed as Crypto Commodity, sharing similarities as Metal Commodities. An individual cannot use gold to make a purchase, neither can one eat gold. It can only be kept or invest in for appreciative value over time. Gold is being exampled for its scarcity which reasons for its higher value over its cousin, silver or bronze. Who or what determines the value of gold? Just like any other crypto, demand by humanity. As in all other commodities, it must also be placed in checks by governments. To put in checks, serial numbers are introduced to protect a country’s commodities outflows or illegal exports. Humanity made Bitcoin a reality. Acceptance by the majority members of the public made Bitcoin to what is it today with the trust they entrusted it with, or is the majority public hopping on the band wagon to make a few quick extra bucks? Whatever the reasons are, the characteristics of Crypto Currencies are only matched by the behavior of Commodities. SERIALIZED COINS - WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE PUBLIC: Every currency has its own remarkable name, design and colors. Dollars, Euros, Pound, Tugrik, Peso, Rupee, Rupiah, Dina, Ringgit, Baht and the list carries on. One thing every currency have in common - Serial Numbers. In any crime, investigators will firstly establish motives and mode of operation, both of which are very likely related to money. So following the money trial is a natural thing to do for investigators/authorities and it has become a common practice. Crimes require funding ie robbers need money to buy guns to carry out its robbing activities. Cutting off financing will reduce criminal activities. That’s the approach governments of the WORLD have adopted for crime fighting. Perhaps people do not realize this while most do not feel the pinch. Humanity tends to take life for granted until apocalypse happens. Take a minute to visualize the tallest tower in your homeland collapse into a pile of dust with thousands of casualties effecting everything else that comes to mind. Imagine a family member, just 1 is enough, is among those casualties. • Imagine if monetary system is not in place and drug dealers, among many, roam the earth freely distributing what can be death threatening substance to your kids. What if you are mugged of your inheritance [items left to you by your father] that is beyond retrieval? As for crypto enthusiast, what if your wallet gets hacked as even the mighty Pentagon gets hacked. All the above can go away if the crypto system leaves a trail for hound dogs to sniff out. Money Trail or Serial Codes Trail to be exact. • Citizens rely on governments and their countries to do what is best for them to lead their daily lives, flourish, advance, improve and strive but at the same time, citizens want to take away the single most important thing deemed crucial in the hierarchy of humanity from governments with additional boastful remarks such as “I transferred $400 million from one corner of the earth to another corner in a single transaction and no governments can do anything about it”. • In-short, to boast unregulated financial movement is to arrogantly promote crime without realizing it while challenging the world’s monetary authority. Oldest advice in the book teaches us never to pick a fight we can’t win. • Serial Coded Coins does not take away the financial movement freedom nor does it take away your privacy. It merely provides Authorities the necessary means needed for crime prevention and fighting. It only re-inforce security and safety. SERIALIZED COINS - WHAT IT MEANS FOR GOVERNMENTS: • Governments are relentlessly trying to find new ways to keep track of crypto transactions. Crypto Currency Exchanges, just like all other Financial Institutions and Banks, are required to practice the most stringent Know Your Customer (widely known as KYC) process. The KYC is designed to provide governing agencies and authorities with information pertaining to crypto ownerships. • But no governments can have information on Peer-to-Peer (also known as P2P) transactions unless the government in question launch a full scale Federal Investigation on certain suspected individuals seeking Wallet Developers to unveil the ownership of certain wallet addresses. Do not forget, National and Global Security trumps Privacy Act. Refusal to co-operate under the pretext of Global or National Security will only result in an out-right ban, which is exactly what happened to Blackberry. • Questions to Governments – What if Wallet Developers or Crypto Exchanges shuts down which can happen for various reasons be it foul-play, sinister or forcefully under threat? What if servers are damaged and ruined? An EMP strike or a simple magnet can make it happen. Information/identities of suspected customers of such addresses shall be lost forever and along with it the Money Trial. • The most probable way of evading Authorities with crypto assets are developing an e-wallet for own illicit purpose. Since the cost of developing an e-wallet is relatively low in considerable cost to hiding, what can governments do to flush out these ants from the vast networks of tunnels? • With Serialized Coded Crypto Assets, it doesn’t matter if servers of Exchanges or Wallets are destroyed. The Serial Codes of each token/coin enables governments of every participating country to track both origin and destination by identifying records of each token/coin in wallet address. It can disappear into a cold wallet but emerging some place later yet Authorities can still detail which particular token/coin has at one moment of time been into which wallet, on what day and date. • If the battle of financial crimes can be resolved with a simple Serialize Coded Crypto Asset, the eradication of corruptions, money laundering, unlawful proceeds and terrorism financing will be made possible. Criminals can no longer exploit the genius creation of Sathoshi – Blockchain and Crypto-Currencies. • Global Security, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Money Laundering could just be excuses granting government agencies the need to have access to financial information in the Monetary System. Nonetheless, it is in the interest of every nation that capital outflow is controlled. Capital Outflow is most frequent when the economy of a country is deteriorating. In the face of an economy meltdown, monetary flow is most needed and yet citizens tend to transfer monies further away illegally from their own country in an act of selfishness. This would not be tolerated by any country. Serial Coded Coin shall prove this attempt futile. • In most part of Asian Countries, many crypto-currency mining operations are carried out illegally. The legality sits on thin fine line where Authorities can pin only stealing of electricity as a major concern to the respective country. Since most Power Companies belongs to the Country in one way or another, it is financially damaging to Power Producers and Utility Suppliers. Serial Codes can determine if the KRATSCOIN is mined legally or illegally making it difficult for miners or mining farms to mine crypto while avoiding making electricity payments. Will this deterrent disrupt the chain of KRATSCOIN supply? That’s not how Blockchain Tech works. TAXATIONS - WHAT IT MEANS FOR PUBLIC AND GOVERNMENTS: • Taxation cannot be imposed on “Illegal & Unlawful Proceeds” instead confiscation is enforced in many countries. Origins or proceeds of Serialized Coded Crypto Assets can be easily identified by the Serial Codes in-conjunction with the Blockchain. This exercise can evidently proof the legitimacy of the aforesaid token/coin. By “Illegal & Unlawful Proceeds” also refers to crypto coins obtained via illegal mining operations. • Taxation on Crypto Assets are calculated on profits deriving from the sale/disposal of the crypto Assets. If we are small crypto believers, the amount of taxation rendered by Inland Revenue will be insignificant. Why risk Freedom of Life over Freedom of Small Monies. If we are big crypto believers, taxation on Serialized Coded Coins can be considered added security to your assets protection. • By adopting Serialized Crypto Assets, declaration is made easily possible via proof of token/coin origin via the Blockchain. If the Authorities can know where our crypto assets come from, the Authorities will know where it will disappear to. It is taxation cum insurance in one tiny sum. This added security with freedom feature will encourage self-declarations of crypto assets to Authorities and Agencies. PRIVACY & ANONIMITY: • Many may be skeptical of their wealth being tracked and monitored. But in this era of technological advance society, everything we touches has our signature. Banks, iPhones, Samsung Mobiles, Google, Facebook, Whatsapp, WeChat, LINE, Viber, Facebook, Properties, Utilities. Almost everything. It is to this fact that there is a need for Privacy Protection Act. • As explained before, Crypto Currency Exchange KYC procedures is designed to expose the identity of Crypto Assets ownership. The Blockchain is supposed to serve as a transparent information platform. The question of privacy over Serialized Coded Coins does not exist, it does not make Serialized Coded Coins ownership any less private. • Ownership of wallet addresses shall always remain anonymous while the only way Authorities can get to it is through Wallet Developers by virtue of Global/National Security Threats or by a Court Order as per the Privacy Protection Act. SAFETY & SECURITY (CODED CRYPTO VS FIAT + COMMODITIES): • No human mind can memorize the millions of serial numbers printed on fiat currencies. The records of Serialized Coded Coins will forever be in the Blockchain embedded within each transaction from wallet to wallet. • Serialized Commodities such as gold can be melted down. Diamonds recrafted. Fiat double printed. But not Serialized Coded Crypto Assets. • Should an accessory system be added into the KRATSCOIN Blockchain, allowing reports on criminal activity be made within the Blockchain, notifying all ledgers of certain stolen Serial Coded Coins, enabling WARNINGS and forbidding next transaction of that particular Serial Coded Coin, wouldn’t this function enhance protection. A theft deterrent function which can never be achieved with physical gold, diamonds or fiat. KRATSCOIN SUMMARY: • Most crypto currencies have not reach a level of security alert for governments. This could be the only reason why a possible ban has not been discussed. China and India has begun efforts to control or ban crypto currencies in their quest to combat capital outflow, writer’s personal opinion. The EU has stopped Libra from implementation. “A company cannot be allowed Authoring Power for issuance of currencies” quoted the governments. KRATSCOIN is fully decentralized with no ownership nor control by any country, company or individual. Once again, the beauty of Bitcoin decentralization concept prevails. • “There is no such thing as a world currency. However, since World War II, the dominant or reserve currency of the world has been the U.S. dollar” quoted in google.com. • Most countries have “Foreign Reserves” as backing to a country’s fiat currency. It is a mean of “back up” attempt should all factors above mentioned leading to the value of their currencies collapse. Then what will happen if the Country of the Foreign Reserves collapse? • Serial Coded KRATSCOIN belongs to no one, no country, no company and therefore theoretically shall not be effected by politics, war or global economy meltdown yet everyone, every country and every government is able to benefit from KRATSCOIN. "Quoted by" [[link]6 [[link]7 [[link]8 [[link]9 [[link]10 ''' DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KRATSCOIN AND BITCOIN Go1dfish undelete link unreddit undelete link Author: xia112 1: lintangnews.c*m/ada*kr**s*o*n-*ni-be*a*ya-d*ngan-bi***in* 2: 0xzx**o***019101*124431*902.*tml 3: ne*s.*oko**y*to.com/*ag/**atsco*n-kt*/ 4: bbs.**anya.cn/p**t-l*ok*u*-836*0*-*.shtml 5: z*uanlan.z*i*u.*om*p/*4*44615 6: l*nta*g*ews.*o*/ada*kr*ts*o*n-*ni-***a*ya-d*ngan-bitcoin/]^^1 7: 0x*x*com/2019101**24*312*02*ht**]^^2 8: news*t**ocr*p*o***m/tag/kr*tscoin-ktc/]*^3 9: bbs.*i*n*a.cn/p**t-loo*ou*-8*61*5-1.sht*l*^^4 10: zhuanl*n.zh*hu.co*/**84**461*]^^5 Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of Blockchain?
“The blockchain is an indestructible digital ledger for keeping track of economic transactions which can be programmed to maintain not only financial transactions but virtually everything that has value.” Now this means that this decentralized ledger is not controlled by any financial institution or government for that matter. In fact, it can be accessed by everyone who has a good internet connection. Other than virtual currencies, there are many companies such as messaging apps, critical infrastructure security, ride sharing, cloud storage, etc. are harnessing the power of blockchain technology. https://preview.redd.it/2x0kqwxqj2w31.jpg?width=1366&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8b5cff8581fd14590334d93dafee89c9f4b87a03 Advantages of the Blockchain Technology Despite the fact that the blockchain technology is a new idea, it has proven its worth and significance in a very short period time. Here’s a list of some key advantages of the blockchain technology. 1. Zero Percentage of Fraud Since blockchain is an open-source ledger, each and every transaction will be made public and hence there will be no chance of fraud taking place. The virtue of the blockchain system will be constantly monitored by miners who keep an eye on all kinds of transactions around the clock. As a matter of fact, there are thousands of miners who validate every single transaction all day all night. Therefore, the virtual currencies based on blockchain will get a hell of a lot of supervision and this makes them almost impenetrable to fraud. 2. No Government Interference The government or any financial institution has absolutely zero control on virtual currencies that are based on the blockchain technology whatsoever. Hence there will be no meddling with by the governments. The government interference has often led to the devaluation of various currencies and a good example for that is the latest Zimbabwean Dollar. Regardless of the nation and currency, one of the top problems, when governments meddle too much with the currencies, is that they end up either with inflation or hyperinflation by degrading and/or printing too much currency in a short period of time. As the blockchain is a decentralized online ledger, it’s next to impossible for governments to interfere and take any action on cryptocurrencies. 3. Instant Transactions The virtual currencies/digital currencies that are based on blockchain offer transaction times that are 10 X faster than the usual bank ones. For instance, if a transaction has made to some person who has a different bank account then it will take minimum two days for the transaction to complete. However, blockchain transactions will be usually completed in just a few minutes. 4. Improved Financial Efficiency The blockchain technology lets individuals and companies make transactions directly to the end user without involving any 3rd-parties. This greatly enhances the financial efficiency in every nation and lets people be less dependent on financial institutions and/or banks. Not only will this save a lot of money for people in terms of fees but also other related expenses with utilizing banks. Disadvantages of Blockchain Technology Just like every coin has two sides, blockchain technology also has a few disadvantages. Here’s the list of some of the key disadvantages of the blockchain technology. 1. Extremely Volatile The virtual currencies that are based on blockchain technology are highly subjected to extreme volatility. Of course, one good example for that is the fluctuating prices of Bitcoin that vary from day to day. One of the reasons behind that extreme volatility is that both the decentralized blockchain technology and the virtual currencies are extremely new to the market. Which means that the companies, investors, governments, and other groups adopting or not adopting them will greatly affect the volatility. The Bitcoin price dropped $200 on the day when China decided to ban on companies from raising ICOs in 2017. This is a huge drop and this kind of volatility is bothering people who are thinking of investing in Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency for that matter. 2. Crime Because of the anonymity that exists in decentralized blockchain and virtual currencies which rely on them, they have become a second home for all illicit transactions. One good instance for that is “Silk Road,” a digital black market. People utilized this platform to things like illicit transactions using blockchain-based virtual currencies. Nonetheless, the FBI shut this place down after learning its existence. Even it was shut down, many people still think that this decentralized technology is too attractive to lawbreakers. 3. Problem for Not Tech Savvy Storing virtual currencies that are blockchain-based are a big headache for people who are not-so tech savvy. Usually, secured storage is easy for users who are familiar with technology. As a matter of fact, it can be accomplished simply via buying “Cold storage” wallets like Trezor. Nevertheless, people who cannot handle technology might face a problem with creating a Bitcoin or Ethereum wallet and then transferring coins from a digital wallet to a cold storage wallet. Therefore, many people who own cryptocurrencies are storing their coins on the exchanges. This could be a problem for users as eavesdroppers often target cryptocurrency exchanges and one example for that is Mt. Gox. As a result, the exchange had lost $460 million. Closing Thoughts Some believe that it will help in creating cryptocurrencies which will become a potential rival to precious metals while others believe that it is soon going to burst like a bubble and nothing more. Nonetheless, blockchain technology is one of the incredibly creative inventions that technology has ever seen. So how we use it is up to us. While the debate is still going on its potentiality and challenges, some companies such as Bedding, Furniture, Electronics, Jewelry, Clothing & more and Tesla have already started accepting virtual currencies that are based on the blockchain. However, it is still not apparent what the retail leaders like Amazon and eBay would do with the cryptocurrency acceptance. But if they start accepting then it could indeed transform the global scenario.
The fundamentals of bitcoin as an asset exist and they are stupider than you can imagine
tldr; tldr; Hodling is deflationary and all those wild price swings from bitcoin are changes in the fundamental value of bitcoin. Really. tldr; Imagine there is a market where $100 worth of goods are sold every day using 100 bitcoins which cycle around. Then each bitcoin would be worth $1. Now suppose that 50 of the bitcoins were being held in anticipation of growing in value so only 50 bitcoins were cycling each day. For all the goods in the market to be sold every day each bitcoin will now be worth $2. Introduction There has been a lot of discussion about what the fundamental value of bitcoin is. The consensus view in this subreddit is that the fundamental value is zero. I argue in this post that the fundamental value of bitcoin is whatever the price is right now, or a something close to it. This is because the fundamentals of bitcoin are stupid. Unimaginably stupid. Bitcoin as Currency Bitcoin is a terrible currency compared to normal statist filthy fiat. Bitcoins are often permanently lost due to hacking or easily made mistakes. Transactions take considerable time to be confirmed. The price is highly volatile. But this post isn’t going into those issues in depth. There is little evidence for mainstream Bitcoin use. A report by Morgan Stanley on the acceptance of Bitcoin from online retailers found that only 3 out of the 500 online retailers tracked accepted Bitcoin payments, a decrease from 5 in the previous year. The report concluded: “Bitcoin acceptance is virtually zero and shrinking”. The number of transaction on darknet markets is large. On darknet markets users buy illegal products using cryptocurrencies (not just Bitcoin). Due to their illegal nature, it is impossible to know the exact value of transactions that take place on them. Between February 2011 and July 2013 the darknet market Silk Road had 1,229,465 transactions comprising 9,519,644 bitcoins in revenue. Darknet markets, along with ransomware payments are the only uses where there is evidence of a substantial number of bitcoin transactions taking place. To work at scale darknet markets require cryptocurrency to pay for goods on sale. The anonymous nature of cryptocurrency allows transactions to take place without the buyer or the seller knowing anything about each other (although if a buyer has drugs mailed to them the seller will know who they are). If darknet markets used another form of payment then law enforcement could buy something and then track both the money going to the seller and the commission paid to the darknet market. It isn’t true as many people have claimed that nothing backs bitcoin. Bitcoin is backed by darknet markets. There are a few kinds of people who buy bitcoin and want to spend it. They include drug buyers, those who need to pay off ransomware, money launders, fraudsters, and a few others but for simplicity’s sake I will just call them drug buyers. Likewise, there are a few types of people who sell products for bitcoin but again for simplicity’s sake I will call them drug sellers. Non-circularity Bitcoin is a currency with a property that I call non-circularity. With Actual Money, when I buy something in a shop, the money I paid with goes towards the wages of the staff, rent and the products themselves among other expenses. This money then flows on to others. When a drug seller receives bitcoin in exchange for their drugs they can’t use the bitcoin to pay for their groceries or to pay their rent. They must exchange the bitcoin for filthy fiat to buy food. The inability to use bitcoin for further purchases means it is a non-circular currency. Bitcoin is a medium of a medium of exchange. A full bitcoin transaction thus consists of three parts:
A drug buyer goes to a bitcoin exchange to get bitcoin in exchange for filthy fiat
The drug buyer goes to the DNM to exchange bitcoin for drugs from the drug seller
The drug seller goes to the bitcoin exchange to get filthy fiat in exchange for bitcoin
An exchange is any place which matches buyers and sellers of bitcoin. This includes online exchanges like Coinbase as well as LocalBitcoins which matches people for face to face transactions. As nobody receives bitcoin for payment except drug dealers, the only place for drug buyers to get bitcoin is an exchange. The extreme volatility of bitcoin means that drug buyers and sellers try to complete the process as quickly as possible and avoid holding onto bitcoin. Perfect Price Unstickiness For normal currencies prices are sticky. That means that nominal prices do not respond quickly to changing economic conditions. In contrast bitcoin has what I call perfect price unstickiness so the price of goods in bitcoin changes almost perfectly to changes in the value of bitcoin. This is because prices for items which can be bought with bitcoin are never actually set in bitcoin, probably due to the high volatility. Instead they are set in fiat. The amount in fiat can either be listed directly, so $US50 for these drugs, or the price can be listed in the converted amount of bitcoin, 0.005BTC if 1 BTC = $US10,000. Changes in the price of bitcoin on exchanges are instantly reflected in the prices of drugs in bitcoins on darknet markets. Hodling Another feature of bitcoin that should be considered is that people hodl bitcoin. The word comes from a typo of ‘hold’. Bitcoin is often bought on exchanges not for use as a currency to buy drugs, but as an asset in expectation of a price rise. Hodlers are the third type of user of bitcoin along with drug buyers and drug sellers. Although they don’t use it. What’s the difference between an asset that is held and one that is hodled? This is admittedly vague, but an asset is hodled if it is being held, it can be held for long periods at low costs, it can but isn’t generating any income and there are no plans to generate income from it soon. Cash under the mattress is being hodled, cash in my wallet that I am going to buy stuff with soon is not. Money in my bank account is generating income and so is not hodled. Bitcoin held in anticipation of price rises is being hodled. Bitcoin bought to buy drugs but which has not been used yet is not. Gold stored in a vault is being hodled, gold used for electronics purposes is not (jewellery is a harder case). A vacant block of land with no plans to develop it or use it for anything is being hodled but one that is soon going to have an apartment block built on it is not. Commodities can be held and do not generate income until sold but it is expensive to hold most commodities for long periods of time. This prevents most commodities from being hodled. Velocity The velocity of money is the average number of times a unit of fiat changes hands in a period. You can skip the next three paragraphs as they are a little annoying and you can get by without them. Just know that I am defining the velocity of bitcoin as what the velocity of bitcoin would be if no bitcoin was being hodled. Due to hodling, the velocity of bitcoin under the conventional definition can vary wildly. Consider two cases. Both have 100 bitcoins, 100 transactions a day and all non-hodled bitcoins are spent each day. The first has no hodled bitcoins, the second 50 hodled bitcoins. The first has a velocity of bitcoin of 1 transaction per day, the second is 0.5 per day. I want a definition of velocity of bitcoin that is not impacted by changes in hodling. I did consider doing this analysis through changes in velocity but the final formula is easier to understand if we find a definition of velocity of bitcoin that is independent of the level of hodling. The definition that achieves this is (Length of Time)/(Average length of time to complete transaction). When there is no hodling the two definitions agree but the new definition is unchanged by any rise or fall in the level of hodling, which is what we need. From this point on when I refer to the velocity of bitcoin I am referring to the second definition. The actual time to complete a bitcoin transaction seems to be over a week. In an interview one vendor claimed that it took one week for the bitcoin to be released from escrow and longer to convert it to actual money. Intuitive argument Assume that the amount of drugs sold on darknet markets changes little from week to week. If the price of bitcoin doubles over the week then the number of bitcoins flowing through the darknet markets will halve. So where have the bitcoins gone? Drug buyers and sellers don’t have them. The only option is hodlers. In fact, it was the hodlers buying the bitcoins that caused the price to change. Formula The conventional formula for the relationship between velocity of money (V), nominal amount of money (M), price level (P) and real economic activity (Q) is V*M = P*Q I am going to change that equation slightly so it now concerns the velocity of bitcoin (V), the total number of bitcoins (M), the price level of bitcoin (P), the total value in fiat of all economic transactions (Q) and the proportion of bitcoins that are hodled (h). If h*M bitcoins are being hodled then there are (1-h)*M bitcoins being used in economic transactions. The new equation is V*(1-h)*M = P*Q Next we isolate P: P = V*(1-h)*M/Q If the price level changes from 1 to 1.1 that means that there has been 10% inflation over the period and that the value of bitcoin has fallen. To find the value of a single bitcoin we have to take the reciprocal of P and that gives a formula for the true value of bitcoin: 1/P = Q/[V*(1-h)*M] In the rest of the post when I write the price of bitcoin I mean the price bitcoin sells for on exchanges. I establish in the next section that this price must be close to the true value of bitcoin. Equilibrium This section uses the flow of bitcoin model established earlier. We assume no activity from hodlers and that economic users do not hodl bitcoin (not true but it simplifies and does not hurt the model). Furthermore, we assume that all activity on the bitcoin exchanges happens, then all activity on the darknet markets happens. Drug sellers sell their bitcoin to drug buyers, then drug buyers use the bitcoin to buy drugs on the darknet markets. Neither the exchanges or the darknet markets charge commissions. I use specific numbers but my reasoning is easily generalizable. To establish why the equation is true we must consider what happens if the actual price is higher or lower than the price given by the formula. First let us suppose that the price is lower than the price predicted by the formula. Over the time period of a day suppose that Q = 100 (so $100 worth of transactions a day), V = 1 (transactions take a day), M = 100 (100 bitcoins) and h = 0.5 (50 bitcoins are hodled). This gives a predicted price of $2. Suppose the price is instead $1. Every day there are $100 worth of drugs available to be sold and buyers willing to buy $100 worth of drugs. At a price of $1 and with only 50 bitcoins available for economic use each day that means that only $50 worth of drugs can be sold. This would drop Q to 50 and immediately correct the equation. However, there are buyers and sellers who want more drug dealing than that. Some buyers are not going to be able to get their drugs given the current price. Some of them will be willing to pay higher prices for bitcoin to guarantee they can have their drugs. Suppose that the drug sellers have 50 bitcoins (hodlers also have 50). They want to sell their 50 bitcoins to drug buyers on an exchange. Some drug buyers then bid the price of bitcoin up to $1.10 (for example). This benefits other drug buyers as now $55 worth of drug transactions can take place each day. In this way, the price will be bid up to $2, the equilibrium price. If the price is $1 and the drug buyers have the 50 bitcoins then they will spend the bitcoins to buy $50 worth of drugs and then we are in the situation above. Now suppose the reverse happens and the actual price is higher than the predicted price. Let the actual price be $4, with all the same example values from the previous example, so the predicted price is $2. On the exchange drug sellers have 50 bitcoins worth $200 to sell. Drug buyers want to buy $100 worth of bitcoin. At this price only 25 bitcoins are sold. To ensure they sell more of their bitcoin, drug buyers bid down the price. If the price does not immediately reach $2 then the left-over bitcoins will be held by the drug sellers until the next day when the price will be bid down again. The drug sellers holding bitcoin for a few extra days is not the same as hodling because they are actively trying to sell them on an exchange but they haven’t because the price isn’t in equilibrium. They could instead decide to sell only 25 bitcoins and hodl the other 25. This would raise h to 0.75 and the price would be in equilibrium again. Now suppose that the drug buyers have 50 bitcoins and the price is $4. Then $100 worth of drugs are bought with 25 bitcoins. The drug sellers will not be able to sell their bitcoin as drug buyers already have enough bitcoin to buy the next round of drugs they want. The drug buyers spend their last 25 bitcoin and drug sellers now have 50 bitcoins and the situation is as above. In conclusion, the price of Bitcoin is fundamentally determined by speculators and brought into equilibrium by criminals. Inflows and Outflows of Hodling The previous section treated the level of hodling as constant, except when drug buyers or sellers decide to hodl extra bitcoins that are in their possession. Now we will treat the amount of hodled bitcoins as changing. The next topic to consider is the relationship between filthy fiat spent to hodl bitcoins and the bitcoin price. To calculate how much it costs to raise the hodl ratio from 0 to h we assume that the bitcoins are bought continuously. We integrate the function Q/[M*V*(1-t/M)] between 0 and h*M. The result is (Q/V)ln[1/(1-h)]. To double the price of bitcoin by taking h from 0 to 0.5 will cost (Q/V)ln(2). In fact, it will always cost this amount to double the price of bitcoin as we can see by finding the difference between the total value of hodled bitcoin when we consider hodling levels of h and (h+1)/2. This means that the price of bitcoin rises exponentially when a constant amount of new money buys bitcoin to hodl. I would illustrate this with a log-scale graph but I don’t know where to find one. It also means that the market capitalisation of a cryptocurrency gives very little idea about how much the cryptocurrency is worth. It is an impossibility for all hodlers to receive the Actual Money that they think their bitcoin is worth. Volatility People hoping to get rich and their buying and selling bitcoin is what causes bitcoin’s extreme volatility. Theoretically this could be stopped if there was a bank where hodlers could deposit their bitcoins and earn interest. However, for this to work would require the existence of a bitcoin bank which is not a Ponzi which seems like an unlikely outcome. Hodling Gold A quick digression into gold, but I suspect someone has already thought of what follows. We can consider gold like a conventional commodity with conventional supply and demand curves (the real world for all commodities is more complicated but this is going to be quick). But people also hodl gold. If hodlers decide to buy $100 million worth of gold produced in the year, then that will change the equilibrium price. The new price is such that the difference between the quantity demanded by non-hodlers and the quantity supplied at that price multiplied by the price is 100 million. If the overall level of hodling declines then the reverse happens. The hodlers sell an amount of gold, that amount is the difference between the amount supplied and demanded. The hodlers earn that amount multiplied by the new lower price. (I assumed people bought a fiat amount of gold and sold a volume of gold to make things easier). Without another hodler to take on the gold or an improvement in market conditions, the hodlers are guaranteed a loss. To make a profit hodling gold you need there to be hodlers to sell it on to (or an improvement in the underlying factors). It follows that all the gold hodled in the world today cannot be sold without causing the fundamentals of gold to collapse. With 40% of the gold produced in 2017 being hodled this will eventually become a significant issue. Full Reserve Banking Another place where we can consider the impact of hodling is full reserve banking. It is a form of banking where banks are required to have cash on hand equal to the full amount in all demand deposit accounts. The bank does not lend this money. This contrasts with the present system where banks are only required to have a certain fraction of this amount on hand, called fractional reserve banking. Money in a fractional reserve bank account is not being hodled (or is, but to a more limited degree) as it is being lent on to other people and it is generating income for the depositor. Deposits under full reserve banking are hodling. They are like cash stuffed under a mattress but have better security. In a recession people increase their saving rates. Much of this additional saving will be in liquid assets because of fears of economic trouble. This rise in deposits under full reserve is an increase in hodled cash which then causes deflation. This is a big problem in a recession. (Somebody else has probably already made this observation). Velocity and Value Consider the equation of bitcoin’s value again. Notice that the value increases when V decreases. Which means that the length of time to complete a transaction has increased. Bitcoin is an asset and a currency and its value as an asset increases as the length of time it takes to complete a transaction increases. This is a minor bit of stupidity which surprised me but seems obvious in retrospect as if bitcoins take longer to be processed then they must be worth more so that all transactions can happen. (This is assuming that a decrease in V does not also cause a decrease in Q which might be caused by drug buyers and sellers switching to a different cryptocurrency). Hodler Behavior With one exception which I might make in another post I make no assumptions about hodler behaviour. I think they are buying and selling with no rational basis. But there are two rational reasons why someone would expect the price of bitcoin to rise: increased economic activity using the cryptocurrency in the darknet markets or an increased level of hodling in the future. The DNM is an actual economic activity but due to its illegality knowing anything about the amounts involved is impossible for almost everyone as is predicting their trends. Future hodling levels are also impossible to predict, unless you run a pump and dump. We can’t expect any sort of rational behavior from hodlers. Nakamoto Scheme Preston Byrne developed the concept of a Nakamoto Scheme to describe cryptocurrencies because of how they differed from Ponzis and pyramid schemes. While bitcoin has been frequently called a Ponzi or pyramid scheme it is clearly something different. There are no “dividends” paid or any sort of organised structure. There are similarities, notably early adopters make their money at the expense of later adopters. Like in pyramid schemes hodlers try to convince new people to join in. It is best to consider bitcoin as a type of asset which is uniquely suited for a pump and dump. When hodlers buy bitcoin, and encourage others to do the same (the pump) the fundamental price of bitcoin really is raised by these actions which helps the pump. To add to Byrne’s work, we should put the properties of cryptocurrency assets at the centre of the scheme. A Nakamoto scheme works like this: first create a cryptocurrency and keep most of it for yourself. Then release it and try to get as many other people hodling as possible and try to get the darknet markets to adopt it (I’m looking at you Monero). This increases the fundamental value of the asset. Then dump your hodlings. Pocket the actual money. This is probably legal right now. But I’m not a law-knowing person. For the hodler the Nakamoto scheme is like going to a party. You arrive and leave later on. If there are more people at the party when you leave compared to when you arrived then you’ve made a profit. There is also drug dealing going on at the party. The change in the level of drug dealing also impacts your profits. You have to try and get more people to come to the party and be careful of everyone else at the party who have the exact same incentives as you. It is a weird new form of scam. Lower bound on price While the price of bitcoin can theoretically be infinitely high there is a lower bound on the price when the hodling ratio is zero. For given levels of Q, V and M the value of bitcoin can never go below Q/[V*M] (the highest possible price for bitcoin is when 1 satoshi is equal to the value of a transaction). Some bitcoins have been permanently lost due to people losing their wallet keys or bitcoins being sent to the wrong address. If we suppose that H is the proportion of coins that have been permanently lost then the actual lower bound is Q/[V*(1-H)*M]. Note that a hodler losing their coins does not change the present fundamental value of bitcoin. What could cause bitcoin’s price to go lower? Besides a mass hodler sell-off the obvious reason is a permanent decline in Q. What could cause this? Law enforcement have successfully shut down many darknet markets but others have replaced them quickly. What could really hurt darknet markets is increased government scrutiny of exchanges. When governments realise that bitcoin has no use beyond criminal transactions and speculation they might decide to treat every bitcoin transaction as inherently suspicious and regulate exchanges heavily. This will make bitcoin much harder to use for criminal transactions and thus greatly decrease Q and the value of bitcoin. Previous work This post is not entirely original. Satoshi himself said that if a bitcoin user wanted to give a donation to everyone else then they should delete the keys to their wallet and increase the value of everybody else’s bitcoins. I realised that someone who hodled a bitcoin would temporarily have the same effect. More significantly Joseph C Wang came up with a formula very similar to mine. A significant difference is that he thought increased economic activity with bitcoin would not cause an increase in bitcoin’s value but an increase in its velocity. My model has nominal prices of drugs in bitcoin falling when Q increases. Wang has prices remaining the same and the velocity of bitcoin increasing to handle the extra transactions. I developed my formula before I became aware of Wang’s work. Further Topics This post is over 4000 words so I have not gone into depth on a few subjects like the costs of block rewards (higher than you think), shocks like darknet market shutdowns, why bitcoin can’t fall to a liquidity trap, how to value a cryptocurrency that isn’t being used for economic transactions and why it makes sense that bitcoin and bcash had a higher combined value at the time of the fork compared to bitcoin alone. If there is demand I’ll put together a second post which will cover these issues.
I work for a Bank in NZ and was asked to write an article on Crypto
Our internal social media site had a couple of negatively-toned articles on Bitcoin and the state of Crypto-Currencies, which as a crypto-enthusiast irked me a little. I posted a comment on one of these articles arguing a more favourable point of view, to which the editors were intrigued and in return asked me to write a follow up article on it, expressing a different side of the debate. It received plenty of interest from staff who'd only ever heard the topic discussed in a negative light, so I thought I'd share it here for you all to read too. Let me know what you think :) IN DEFENCE OF CRYPTO-CURRENCIES Working for a Bank, I can’t help but feel uncomfortable publicly discussing my interest in crypto-currencies; it feels almost counter-productive, as the very ambition of these coins is to rewire the foundations on which the industry I work for is built. That being said, we live in an age now where disruptive technologies are being openly considered, if not welcomed - and so they should, regardless of any ‘threat’ it may pose to an established system or industry. Both crypto-currencies and the underlying ‘Blockchain’ technology they’re built on serve many purposes and can benefit both consumers and corporations alike. The media attention on the former is mostly negative, while the latter is discussed halfheartedly and not as thoroughly as it deserves. THE CRIMINAL ARGUMENT For those who heard about Bitcoin before its recent claim to fame when it crossed that psychological milestone of $10,000 USD in late 2017, you probably first remember its use as a digital payment method for drug dealers on the dark-web site, Silk Road. The main argument against Bitcoin at this time was that it facilitated the exchange of goods and services on the black market, allowing criminals to use an anonymous currency to purchase narcotics, weapons and other illegal products. This has since been debunked, as the Blockchain that Bitcoin is built on is entirely traceable – every single transaction that has ever been made on the decentralised Blockchain ledger, is not only public but immutable; it cannot be deleted or altered. For criminals, this is by no means ideal, and so they have since turned to ‘privacy coins’ such as Monero and Z-Cash. Further to the argument that crypto-currencies are an enabler for criminal activities, I would argue that this is testament to the Blockchain technology that Crypto coins are built on. This technology transcends borders, regulations, financial monopolies and in some cases offers near flawless privacy. Sure, this is attractive to criminals, but historically criminals will always use the most advanced technology to fuel their motives. The internet wasn't widely understood when it first arrived, and the same argument was applied, suggesting that the Web was a haven for pedophiles & drug dealers – now look at us, completely dependent on the very same technology in our day-to-day lives. The point here is that just because a new technology can be utilised by criminals, it doesn’t mean it should be banned outright, as doing so would only stifle innovation, forcing criminals to continue their business and habits through other means. We should celebrate new technology and adapt to it, accepting that any detrimental aspects are part-in-parcel of growth, and can always be overcome through other creative solutions. THE BITCOIN OBSESSION Almost every article written in the mainstream media, is usually headlined with and focused on Bitcoin. This is understandable – Bitcoin was the first crypto-currency, and whose founder is curiously shrouded in mystery. Satoshi Nakamoto (the creator’s pseudonym) also created Blockchain, a very simple technology in theory, but a system of which could revolutionise all other industries, solving complex issues by means that are simple and effective. Satoshi, whoever he or she is, and depending on whether they are even still alive, would now be one of the richest people on the planet. Bitcoin has made unlikely millionaires and even billionaires out of people who wouldn’t have achieved this from attempting to game the traditional finance system. Its price has risen from literally a fraction of a cent when it first become tradable 7 years ago, to an all-time high in late 2017 where it topped $20,000 USD on some exchanges. And while other crypto-currencies are starting to be discussed in more depth, BTC is still the main trading pair for which the purchase of all other crypto-currencies is made possible. With the crypto market having such a dependence upon Bitcoin’s success, it’s only natural that it’s given so much attention. But in 2018, this will all change. Sure, Bitcoin’s price will continue to rise, providing that more fiat money is flowing inward rather than outward - with its limited supply of 21 million coins, the simple law of supply & demand guarantees an increase in value. But with a limited number of human beings to invest, and the possibility that interest in it will eventually decline, this growth will reach a tipping point and eventually stifle, whether that’s 6 months off or 50 years away. We've seen Bitcoin’s crypto market dominance drop from between 80% - 90% over a year ago, to as low as 35% recently. As new money flows into Bitcoin, investors are inevitably exposed to the other crypto-currencies traded on these exchanges, and eventually find themselves delving into the rabbit hole, alongside millions of others, learning about these different coins on sites such as YouTube, Reddit, Facebook groups and other online forums. This influx of money into ‘alt’ coins will continue to surge in 2018, and as a result, the discussion will no longer be so obsessed with the ‘King’, Bitcoin. THE BUBBLE I will be the first to admit that the amount of ‘shut up & take my money!’ investors flooding the market right now is concerning. When your mother expresses interest in cryptos over Christmas dinner, when your normally conservative father asks you to help him invest, or when your hairdresser starts talking about Bitcoin with a tone of authority, you know that the market is beginning to look a little bubble-esque. While I want financial freedom for all, and I also want friends and family to be able to invest in something whose returns are unbeatable, I agree that the current market is based purely on speculation, and this isn’t sustainable. People easily fall into the ‘get rich quick’ trap, but with an understanding of risk and having a patient attitude, many have become and will continue to get very rich from these alternative currencies. I do believe that eventually investor confidence and interest will inevitably plummet, as a result of either a slowing of market returns, persistent negative attention in the media, government attempts to regulate the market, or a combination of all of the above. REGULATIONS & CONSUMER PROTECTION With a recent market cap high of close to $800 Billion USD, it’s clear that we’re now dealing with big money – both institutional, and millions of small investors, innocent and gleeful. This is where big Banks and governments must be very careful of regulations if they are truly concerned about protecting the consumer. With so much market manipulation, both by ‘whales’ (investors with enormous balances) and by trading bots, some form of regulation surely can’t hurt. But if a group of governments came together to ban the trading of crypto-currencies and make crypto exchanges illegal, this would only hurt the consumer. Firstly, crypto-currencies will still be able to be traded outside the normal tracking process of traditional banking, as by nature they are decentralised. This will simply drive the use of the currencies underground even more for those who desire to keep using them. For those who are less educated or are less resistant to risk and change, they will panic sell before the ban, driving the price down and down until a huge portion of investors are now at a loss – all of this completely influenced by the stroke of a pen from the big cats of government, who as a result become responsible for the investment losses of the very citizens they were supposedly trying to protect. MAINSTREAM MEDIA BIAS In the above hypothetical scenario, the media will post headlines… “Bitcoin now valueless after govt regulations” and social media commenters will laugh, bragging that they saw this coming all along. This would further uproot investor confidence, and next thing we would see a massive crash that was entirely avoidable had these bullying tactics and unnecessary bans not been imposed. Mainstream media post an article every single time there’s a dip in the market, as if to prove a point, but rarely discuss the incredibly impressive returns that override these dips each time. They will call ‘Breaking News’, stating that South Korea, for example, is drafting legislation to ban crypto-currencies when this was incorrect as a result of a mistranslation, but refuse to exercise journalistic integrity by editing and correcting their articles. Governments, Banks and the media need to take a more mature approach to crypto-currencies - accept that they’re here, that they come with risks, but also exhibit technology that they themselves can benefit from. Acknowledge the legitimate concerns of investors losing money from market volatility, but understand the need to tread carefully when considering how to resolve this issue. SUMMARY Let’s move away from the Bitcoin-bashing articles that scoff at investors who’re falling for the supposed ‘bubble’ that they’ve been saying is going to pop for 5 years now. Let’s stop using the issue of Bitcoin mining taking up so much energy as a reason for it being banned, but rather start discussing the other cryptos such as Ethereum that are moving towards, or have already implemented a ‘Proof of Stake’ validation system that requires little to no energy at all. Let’s stop knocking Bitcoin itself as it struggles with huge network congestion, high fees and slow transaction times, but rather explore the other coins that have already solved this problem, and celebrate ones that are solving real-world issues such as the speed and cost with international SWIFT payments, or providing a viable alternative to the national currencies in Venezuela & Zimbabwe, which have been plagued with unhealthy inflation. Ultimately, we should start to focus on the positive side of Crypto & Blockchain tech; it’s unique, offers financial freedom to those in countries without it, and it showcases the most innovative, revolutionary disruption to the status-quo not seen since the inception of the internet. This technology is new and it’s not perfect, but can we at least try to build on it and see where it takes us? Can we work to see how it could be utilised to benefit our institutions, as opposed to outright dismissing it just because the majority of us don’t yet understand it? Crypto-currencies and Blockchain technology are here to stay in one form or another. Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan-Chase initially called those who invested in Bitcoin ‘stupid’, and then later (suspiciously) changed his tune, admitting he regretted making this comment. Now his Bank is experimenting with Blockchain technology. Mark Cuban, multi-Billionaire investor who previously laughed at Bitcoin, now recommends that people hold a small percentage of it to maintain a well-diversified investment portfolio, and is now actively investing himself in ‘ICO’ crypto-currency crowd sales. Mark Zuckerberg, one of the wealthiest people on the planet publicly shared his favourable thoughts on crypto-currencies, and his interest in Blockchain technology to his 2 Billion Facebook users. Knowing now that it’s not just you’re run-of-the-mill geek in his mum’s basement that’s speaking out in favour of crypto, perhaps it’s time to join the conversation, alongside the many influential people in the world, just some of whom are listed above. So one day when your grandkids come home from History class asking what it was like to live through and experience the Blockchain/Crypto revolution, will you excitedly tell them how you embraced and benefited from it during its infancy, or regretfully explain that you were late to the party because of your apathy and disinterest?
The value of bitcoins has dropped after the closure of the clandestine Silk Road online marketplace. The FBI seized bitcoins worth approximately $3.6m (£2.2m) on Tuesday. The price of Bitcoin, the anonymous peer-to-peer digital currency, plummeted after the alleged founder of the online drugs marketplace Silk Road was arrested in San Francisco.. On Wednesday ... The original Silk Road marketplace has been shut down for well over seven years now and to this day, 444,000 bitcoin worth $4.8 billion is still missing. Just recently, a report focused on those ... The value of the Bitcoin dropped by about 20 percent Wednesday afternoon, following the news on Tuesday that the FBI arrested Ross Ulbricht, a 29-year-old who allegedly founded and operated the illicit online marketplace known as Silk Road. Given Bitcoin’s role in the Silk Road, it was expected that the shutdown might send the value of the virtual currency plummeting but despite an initial drop, the price of Bitcoins has largely ...
1 Oz Pure +999 Copper Round Bitcoin Silk Road Edition Copper Bullion Round UNPACKAGING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Please Subscribe to My YouTube Channel Hunt for BitCoin & Silk Road Users http://rt.com/news/silk-road-bitcoins-us-britain-934/ http://www.peacefreedomprospe... 1 Oz Pure +999 Copper Round Bitcoin Silk Road Edition Copper Bullion Round UNPACKAGING!!!!! Filmed on a Sony FS700 https://amzn.to/2VSgT1m When the government shut down Silk Road, everyone said that Dark Markets were over, and that Bitcoin was dead. What has happened post Silk Road? The Bitcoin Group #55 - Silk Road 2.0 Shutdown - Crypto Equity Crackdown - Lawsky Keynote World Crypto Network. Loading... Unsubscribe from World Crypto Network? Cancel Unsubscribe. Working ... Silk Road- the eBay for illegal things and more - has been shut down by the feds and the FBI is accused of taking millions of dollars in Bitcoins from site u...