Bitcoin accepted here Icon of Flat style - Available in ...

Bitcoin Cash exclusive Crowdsourcing marketplace (pre-launch)

About a month ago we asked our friends to post a link to our landing page and nobody believed us...
Anyway, we are pre-launching to those who have signed up at taskfuture.one! Slowly, in beta, as promised - about a month later.
From the same team that brought you https://freelanceforcoins.com
We are introducing the Bitcoin Cash exclusive Crowdsourcing marketplace Taskopus (think Mechanical Turk, but everyone is accepted, payouts are almost immediate and in BCH! The only way to interact inside is with Bitcoin Cash, because of the fees).
A few teaser screenshots:
(We are a very small team without an ICO or the venture funding, so please excuse our simple designs)
The landing page taskfuture.one was always meant to be a placeholder, hence the "future" in the name. That's why we've never registered taskfuture.com (.one was just cheaper).
The real name of the project is Taskopus, the website is https://taskopus.io and yes, it is still in closed beta.
Today we have invited first 30 users of those signed up on our landing page (taskfuture.one) to download the software and try it themselves and we are waiting for the first feedback.
Over the course of next few weeks we hope to let everybody in.
Ok, if you are feeling adventurous, you can kind of guess where the download is on https://taskopus.io site, it's not exactly secret, but it's not public either. We are still fixing the bugs we discover, so we aren't yet ready for 245192 readers of btc to sign up at once. :)
You can complete tasks, but if you want to create tasks - this function is currently enabled manually on case-by-case basis.
If you want to try it - contact me via PM or at [email protected]
The payments are peer-to-peer inside of Taskopus (hence the downloadable software - we wanted to make sure not to ever see your private key and seed phrase, so that in case we are hacked - your funds are safe on your computer). The Taskopus software is effectively a downloadable Bitcoin Cash wallet with additional functions.
The payments are immediate as soon as buyer is online.
There are a few mechanisms to prevent cheating, you can read about some of them here: https://docs.taskopus.io/w/projects_debt_quota.html
There is a big difference between us and other crowdsourcing sites, though (besides the fact that everybody is accepted, irregardless of age, country, social status, etc... and that all payouts are immediate and final and we don't ever keep your money) and that is with Taskopus you can have a longer relationship with a Worker.
Typical microjobs website treats Workers as completely interchangeable. Do one simple task if you fit our description and get out.
Taskopus is different in that regard. You can build a multi-step selection process for your employees, educate them and give them complex long higher-priced specialized tasks.
For example, say you are a SEO agency and you need to create guest posts on other sites. This involves having to contact many sites and trying to pitch them with your guest article. You can create a selection task to select about a hundred workers for $0.01 each that kind of maybe suit you. After that selection you can take this hundred of users and educate them via the YouTube video about how to do your task and again pay maybe $0.20 each for that. After that you can create a test task so that users can try to pitch some sites with some guest post.
The persistent 10 users who managed to do it can now continue to work for you. Those 10 can now earn maybe $20 for each successful placement, which could translate to maybe $40/hour for those workers. It's a win-win - an agency gets placement for $20 (which is quite cheap) and a worker gets paid like a highly qualified professional, even though he or she was just educated for this particular job (instead of having to have 10 years of experience).
What happens if you lose some of those 10 highly paid workers? Easy! You can just raise the limit on the original task of 100 workers to 200 and so that now you have 100 candidates more. The second task with the YouTube video and test task gets its limit raised to 20 and now you have 10 users more for $11 in total fees. Compare that with hiring and educating 10 people in real life and you should see the benefit immediately.
There is one more big difference - we are also data-driven, and if you want to understand it - you can go here and read the Example about classifying cities.
And there is more. We have JavaScript validation tasks, we have limits (daily, hourly), we have automated invoice payments for when you are offline, we have an REST API, WebHooks, aggregate WebHooks, profile questions, targeting of tasks to users... There's just way too much to explain even if the software looks quite simple.
So, we hope to explain more when we fully launch in some near time, but if for now you want to give our workers some tasks - please contact me via PM or at [email protected] and I'll be happy to provide you with a test access to Task creation functionality.
How are we going to make money? There is a 10% commission that the buyer pays for his task.
See you soon!
EDIT:
Some early feedback from first users:
Very intuitive, but lacking tasks atm.
Fairly good for early beta.
I am very impressed by the smoothness of the app!
great
I like it. The program is simple to use and the design is also simple and not too complicated. I will definitely keep using.
It looks clean. I wish it paid in paypal since I'm not savvy with all the coin stuff, but I'll manage. Also I did a task twice about "is this a city" where it asked the same questions both times, and it's still there, so I'm wary of doing it more in case it's an error.
The first ever platform of this kind that I actually enjoy. Can't wait till it grows more and we get to have some really nice gigs! Thanks for all that you're doing.
I like the intuitive UI of the application and that there are good number of tasks to complete. As someone who has been working online for a while I can say it is a promising project.
The fact that it has it's own software gives it an edge to sites for microwork and so far this has been incredibly easy to use and much more interesting. I'll have a bit of trouble with bitcoin cash since I haven't really used cryptocurrency but hey there's a first time for everything. Will be regularly on Taskopus from now on! Great job!
I love the system, is pretty clean and works great!, just hoping for more tasks!
submitted by FreelanceForCoins to btc [link] [comments]

We're Going Down To A Market Cap of ~$420bn (Volumetric Observations)

This is a very basic take from a volumetric analysis of Bitcoin. Data dates back from yesterday, but today's confirms this prediction.
DISCLAIMER: THIS IS NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. THIS IS JUST ME SHARING MY OWN. Hopefully to kill some of the unnecessary FUD out here.
I'll go briefly over the following points:
  1. How we call this prediction for BTC.
  2. Extrapolation to global market cap and other cryptos.
  3. What it means for the crypto space.
  4. Why this information should help you.
Note: I'm not a native english speaker so please forgive in advance any approximation in terminology. Hopefully you can correct my words rather than criticize (assume it's logically correct but using the wrong words, before bashing. I'll humbly accept any criticism too, the point is to discuss.)

1. Volumetric Analysis

Observe this chart, especially the horizontal volume bars on the right, relating to pricing: https://i.imgur.com/ePOS4Ag.png
(Source: Trader of Futures, Published on Jan 29, 2018 on YouTube, link at the bottom. You can watch the video if you want more details about volumetric charts).
Most people look at Technical Analysis from a price standpoint (candles, etc), but this is more backward-looking than forward. In essence it shows what has happened, not what is about to happen.
From a volume standpoint though, you can effectively characterize two very important aspects of a given value:
You can see very clearly that BTC is dull right now over January (horizontally), there's not much incentive to upset the current (downward) trend. Down moves are strong, comparatively to consolidations (horizontal/up moves).
You can also identify the following support levels:
Notice how the volume is much bigger below 8.4k than it is above: this is strong sign that many people are comfortable buying below 8.4k, indicating that there are little chances we go below (everything will be bought). This is currently the strongest next support level for BTC.
Notice also how it's much, much bigger below $5k: reasonably we can assume that BTC cannot move lower. If we break the 5k barrier, it will be bought almost instantly in the $4k-$5k range.
It's all intuition and sentiment, but given the current situation of cryptos (see 3. below), it is very likely that we will go down to 8.4k. It is also very likely that we'll pick back up after that.
Currently, there is resistance around $12k. To break above that level, we'd need volume (horizontally, a push up with enough weight). We'll see how it goes once this bear phase becomes bull again. It's hard to know when the shift back up will happen, but I'd expect in February, and breaking past $12k in March or so.

2. Extrapolation to global market cap and other cryptos (top 25)

Based on prices from yesterday, a dip to $8.44k for BTC would be about 0.85 its price when I took the values (9913 at the time).
It seems that the market is vastly correlated to BTC globally, so if we simply assume a linear move for the market globally, here's what we can expect:
https://i.imgur.com/nJb5Uiw.png
In blue, a 0.85 dip. In pink, a 0.51 dip down to $5k-ish.
Again, it's very likely we will hit the blue values. It's possible, although rather unlikely we'll hit the pink ones.
For any value that's not in this chart, just multiply your coin's current value ×0.85 to get a feel of how much lower it will likely go.
For a more thorough price prediction, we should look at volumes (in pricing, Y-axis) of each cryptocurrency. I don't have time to do that, but you can and would therefore identify the proper support levels for each coin. I assumed here that it's overall "about good enough" to get a feel.

3. The crypto space right now

This is the most subjective part of this post so I'll just echo general sentiment.

Some people have a clear interest for cryptos to go down temporarily

Now that the crypto market has been somewhat legitimized, more and more people want in. They're not willing to buy at ATH obviously, so many are waiting. Others already in are taking profits as they see/saw this bear coming. It's all normal and a factual expectation of any market soaring high, then pausing a bit before going much higher if the underlying fundamentals are good.
The crypto scene right now is a bit of both, good and bad fundamentals (from the tech which is good but mostly beta/alpha, to the use-cases and general legal environment which is uncertain for now and therefore more on the bad sides of things, until such time we clear these unknowns).
Basically, whales are now waiting for the right time to enter. This is our $8.4k support level, as long as there's no major event to upset it (war, stock market crash, basically any macroeconomic bomb).

The somewhat official Bitcoin (BTC) is currently falling out of favor

Versus other cryptos, BTC dominance over the market went from 66% to 33% in a month. It's a huge loss of dominance that it's very unlikely to recover. Many people are already predicting that Ethereum (ETH) will soon take it over.
People also realized that BTC was no more viable as a "peer-to-peer electronic cash system" (words taken from Satoshi Nakamoto in the white paper) and that many other cryptos could be valid candidate. The space is in tremendous innovation, it's a really before-early-adopter phase right now.
Internally regarding Bitcoin itself, there is also much controversy due to forks over fundamental disagreements (namely Bitcoin Cash BHC) and a questionable new direction taken by self-proclaimed official caretakers of BTC (namely "Blockstream").
This is the reason for the feud between Bitcoin (BTC) and btc (BCH). I won't go into it here, but let's just say that overall it's a bit of shitshow that doesn't reflect good upon any bitcoin fork right now, and that appearances can be very, very deceiving, willingly or not from their respective promoters. Personally, I've been flabbergasted at what I've discovered, and I'm pretty sure it will be a big bomb if it ever reaches the attention of major media (it probably won't though).
Basically, BTC is falling out of favor fast from the general public, and this is causing the general crypto market as a whole to pause, reflect, and probably evolve, but that's never as smooth as it seems.
My personal prediction is that the top 3 coins a year from now may possibly not include any bitcoin(s).

Tether, Bitgrail, Bitconnect: time to do some cleaning

These are just examples of FUD-inducing events (some would say with good reasons!) that keep nagging this space with pains that keep it volatile and uncertain.
It's not clear at all when the crypto market will become suitable enough for the real mainstream to enter, not even questioning its use cases for now. But there are thresholds in security, trust, compliance that we have yet to pass with flying colors.
Again, this is causing more uncertainty. Since it's very hard to pinpoint the exact reasons for a surge up or a fall down in value of crypto-values, market actors are taking a stance back before making their bigger moves. Ergo, wait, see what's what.

South Korea, China and the USA are to make big legal moves

We don't know yet what will the legal situation be 6 months from now. What's sure is that official authorities have taken a big deep look at cryptos now, and Asia is by far the biggest investor especially in the mainstream. We're nowhere near that level in the west, although the importance of the USA in the global economy amplifies its decisions from a media standpoint.
Europe is also making moves, although as usually these days, it's a bit of an old dwarf versus Asia and America; its rather conservative population is unlikely to make massive moves (a notable exception is Switzerland for its relative independence from the EU).
This is again more general uncertainty, especially in Korea and China, that begs investors to wait a bit before they move. Hence, the bear is making its run. Big money, the kind that has a clear interest for a lower price, isn't doing anything to stop that trend (see first point).

Big, real, good projects take time

If you look at the development roadmaps and expectations from big projects team members (ETH, NEO...), you'll see that they expect to meet certain very important milestones (notably in scaling) by 2019 or even 2020. We're not there yet for general mainstream VISA-threatening adoption, guys. We still have A LOT of work to do.
Did I already mention that this market needs time?

4. What this information all means for you, how does this help?

Obviously the most important parts were 1. and 2. regarding your investments.
You now have a clearer picture of where we're going, most likely. You can anticipate how much your values will drop if they keep going down. So you can now arm yourself with patience, knowing that it is to be expected.
A bear market sometimes makes casualties, in the form of values (coins, companies, entire sectors...) that had no solid-enough grounds. There are bankruptcies, some teams/projects get bought. Others earn their legitimacy, too.
Don't panic. Just rationalize your investments:
  • Are the projects you support solid? It's not about being big (top 25) or small (in the high hundreds on CMC...), it's about being good, realistic, solving problems. It's about having people that can deliver on their objectives (track record, experience, behavior with other actors and on social media). I have more confidence in some rank 1,000-ish cryptos in my portfolio than some top 25.
  • How deep are their pockets? Dedicated their team? Can they withstand a month or even year-long bear market? Can they keep the payroll going until there's money coming in, i.e. a valid product? How timely is their product versus the chances of adoption? (this is why I insisted on making part 3. above).
You can't necessarily know the real answer to all these questions unless you're an insider, but some projects are better than others at making these unknowns known. Trust your intuition. If something feels off to you, it probably is to some degree. Question is, how comfortable are you supporting them with your own money?

Final words

Expect the dip to continue.

Until you see a market cap of ~420 billions, it's just the natural continuation of current volumes. It's OK, you already know (now...) what it means in terms of numbers in your portfolio. You wouldn't be here in the first place if you weren't ready for dips in-between highs.
If we break below that, sub-$400bn, then chances are we'll be heading for a 50%-ish dip, down to ~250bn. It's OK, too. Don't panic sell. Just be brutally honest with yourself before that, to let go of projects that you don't really believe in (moonshots ICOs and over-hyped coins), remain confident as ever in the ones you trust to see the light eventually.
This is a long term game, we're before early adoption in terms of tech.
There will be many such dips before we get there.
But we'll get there, eventually. That's what we all believe. And we have solid grounds for that belief, it's not faith, it's an educated guess based on how this world and business works.

If you want to double in (buy more), look at volumes to get a general bearing on your favorites.

Look at volumes on your coins. On the general market. Look how big people are moving, not just how high/low a given value is moving (it could be very low volumes and mean not much, if anything at all).
Don't be the sucker that only looks at candles. Spoiler: good traders don't really care for candles. Price analysis. TA. This is all just a reflection of the past. Volume is where it's at to anticipate moves, and you can only mix that with experience and intuition for the market. That's what investing on markets means.
You should never invest in something you don't understand, in a company or project you can't judge for yourself. For instance I understand tech, so I'm comfortable investing in Silicon Valley tech companies. But I know shit about retail even though I read Sam Walton's and Jeff Bezos biography. So I don't invest in those. If you invest in crypto, you should at least know a bit about crypto-tech itself, and you should know about the industry your particular projects are targeting.
None of this post is financial advice (I'm not qualified for that). But this is my only investing advice for you: know what these guys you're giving money to are doing. Be able to have an opinion about their goals, how it fits in the real world.
That's it, peeps. Already long enough I guess.
I'm hoping some nice fellow redditor can make a guide to volumetric analysis on tradingview.com or something.
Have a great day.
Link to the video that inspired me to make this post: https://youtu.be/DMFK6_gA_H4

EDIT: QUICK UPDATE 2018-02-02 10:44 UTC

We're now standing right above the support level for [email protected]$8.4K-ish (Y-axis volume profile). So far this estimation seems to be about right. [disclaimer: it's not just me, several people called this a month ago, I'm actually late to this party.]
  • Answering comments about graph analysis of any kind:
Remember, it's not only graph analysis: a good part of guesstimating markets is just that, guessing, based on intuition/sentiment/experience, whatever you call it. The news do matter, so do the fundamentals (the tech, the target market/sector's readiness for adoption of products (aka S-curve), the legal environment, etc.). Part 3 in this post is mostly why I drew such conclusions from the volume profile, and why I ultimately felt we were going down (and could still go lower). This doesn't change my general feeling that cryptos are here to stay and will be a major part of the economy in the 2020's. Nonetheless, volume profile is a strong indicator of future performance, unless major event —extrinsic (e.g. global crash/war etc.) or intrinsic (e.g. bad fork, legal issues, etc.), for a period about as long as the retracing (here, 4 months, so whatever you infer from these charts above could only go as far as April or so). I feel the market is too new and volatile to infer much further from graphs, after that it's only sentiment.
  • Back to our chart:
We broke below the average growth line from early October (white line + "!" on this graph). I don't think it's very significant, but some people would, so I included it. Notice we only have 2 strong lows to draw this, one (middle) is weak-ish.
There's a big buy wall underneath our current $8.4K support level, so chances are we'll rebound. If we do break below however, we're headed towards the yellow arrow/line ($5K, $250bn market cap or lower if other cryptos keep falling below BTC, and they very well might in average if this is a sanitizing event —which is very much needed for the sanity of this space, imho). Looking at the overall ordered volumes (horizontally), the current fall isn't very much sustained however, about average, indicating a dull movement upset only by previous volume profiles as we speak. An influx of good news could reverse it. Otherwise... brace yourselves.
Edit 2018-02-02 23:30 UTC: the market seems to have stabilized around $410 bn.
Edit 2018-02-07 13:05 UTC: We've hit a low of $270~280 bn, BTC tried the $6K level but bounced. News from the USA seems to have a positive effect, possible recovery ongoing (it's an integral part of the way we read these charts today). Volumes are stronger than ever on this rising trend. We may still see a bigger dip or two but general trend imho looks to be upwards.
We are currently testing a resistance level around $8500 for BTC. (Next one above is 12K-ish and then there's no foreseeable bound. Below we sit above a direct fall to $5.5K).
Edit 2018-02-09 01:50 UTC: We're not in the clear yet, imho. The sentiment is still bearish. There are signs of bulls waiting to come in but we're testing a rather strong resistance level kicking off around $8,400. Below the current $8K price, we do have to confirm or find a floor before we bull back up (last support on Feb 6th was at $6K, history shows a support level around 5,400 (from Nov 12) but volume profile suggests we could test slightly below, $5K support from mid Oct).
I am still observing this market before making another post. I'm about half confident that we're seeing the last bears.
Right now I don't have anything else to say to you other than what I'm personally doing: I'm holding, not buying this dip just yet; waiting to see a second confirmation of the support level in the $5K~6.5K range (i.e. support level). I want to make a most educated decision in the aftermath of this crash. I plan to buy in just after the bull market resumes, once I've had several (at least two) possible confirmations (might be RSI, might be volumes, might be some news/sentiment, might be just a textbook 'W' too).
On the way up, regardless of when it happens, we still have to retest several resistance levels: $12.2K, 13K, 14.6K. BTC is very uncomfortable for some reason around $12K, so I expect turmoil in these areas.
Here's my non-professional advice for crucial times: don't be too hasty. Don't panic over 20% when your end game is 200% or ten times that. Don't fear of missing out by a day or even a week when you're in for years... Many (educated) people still believe $30K~40K for BTC by year's end to be a rather conservative estimate. I concur. So who gives a f--k about $2K more or less now? ; )
Edit 2018-02-12 20:20 UTC:
This time, the volume profile I outlined 11 days ago was rather spot on.
I'm still observing the market honestly, we're in a bit of a horizontal move right now. We did stretch almost to $250bn in the dip, but it seems $420bn really is/was the consolidation average box. It's hard to predict which way it's gonna break out in the short term. (for more info, see "Bitraged" videos on YouTube, they really nail it in their current videos, lots of educational value too; I really like their channel).
What's sure is that, everyday we spend at this market cap is all the more ground to "validate" this $420bn value; in other words as we accumulate historical volume at this level, it means that the crypto market really is worth it (increasingly certainly not less). That's a reassuring sign imho.
I think the real consolidation will happen later this year, probably at a higher market cap, when "good" coins/projects start siphoning the "bad" ones. Big finance involvement (and their many audits, reports, evaluations, etc. destined to their major customers) will sort out the market hopefully more rationally than it is today. I expect this to slowly be reflected on rankings like CMC.
Regarding Q2-Q3, there are increasingly many more signs that the future looks bright overall. However I'm thinking that the involvement of big financial institutions (FI) will likely result in much more regulation and therefore the death of many not-so-fantastic projects/coins, and some exchanges as well. I hope this will truly be the year of decentralized exchanges, so that we have an alternative to big FI's exchanges (I personally would use both, for different purposes).
Personally I'm regrouping my assets around projects I really really trust, those with a promising basis and already established demand (e.g. fiat-to-crypto gates, or crypto management solutions for the mainstream), while planning on investing in some hot-shot ICOs during Q1.
Thanks again for all your comments and pms, I very much appreciate the discussion.
submitted by ikkei to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Searching for the Unicorn Cryptocurrency

Searching for the Unicorn Cryptocurrency
For someone first starting out as a cryptocurrency investor, finding a trustworthy manual for screening a cryptocurrency’s merits is nonexistent as we are still in the early, Wild West days of the cryptocurrency market. One would need to become deeply familiar with the inner workings of blockchain to be able to perform the bare minimum due diligence.
One might believe, over time, that finding the perfect cryptocurrency may be nothing short of futile. If a cryptocurrency purports infinite scalability, then it is probably either lightweight with limited features or it is highly centralized among a limited number of nodes that perform consensus services especially Proof of Stake or Delegated Proof of Stake. Similarly, a cryptocurrency that purports comprehensive privacy may have technical obstacles to overcome if it aims to expand its applications such as in smart contracts. The bottom line is that it is extremely difficult for a cryptocurrency to have all important features jam-packed into itself.
The cryptocurrency space is stuck in the era of the “dial-up internet” in a manner of speaking. Currently blockchain can’t scale – not without certain tradeoffs – and it hasn’t fully resolved certain intractable issues such as user-unfriendly long addresses and how the blockchain size is forever increasing to name two.
In other words, we haven’t found the ultimate cryptocurrency. That is, we haven’t found the mystical unicorn cryptocurrency that ushers the era of decentralization while eschewing all the limitations of traditional blockchain systems.
“But wait – what about Ethereum once it implements sharding?”
“Wouldn’t IOTA be able to scale infinitely with smart contracts through its Qubic offering?”
“Isn’t Dash capable of having privacy, smart contracts, and instantaneous transactions?”
Those thoughts and comments may come from cryptocurrency investors who have done their research. It is natural for the informed investors to invest in projects that are believed to bring cutting edge technological transformation to blockchain. Sooner or later, the sinking realization will hit that any variation of the current blockchain technology will always likely have certain limitations.
Let us pretend that there indeed exists a unicorn cryptocurrency somewhere that may or may not be here yet. What would it look like, exactly? Let us set the 5 criteria of the unicorn cryptocurrency:
Unicorn Criteria
(1) Perfectly solves the blockchain trilemma:
o Infinite scalability
o Full security
o Full decentralization
(2) Zero or minimal transaction fee
(3) Full privacy
(4) Full smart contract capabilities
(5) Fair distribution and fair governance
For each of the above 5 criteria, there would not be any middle ground. For example, a cryptocurrency with just an in-protocol mixer would not be considered as having full privacy. As another example, an Initial Coin Offering (ICO) may possibly violate criterion (5) since with an ICO the distribution and governance are often heavily favored towards an oligarchy – this in turn would defy the spirit of decentralization that Bitcoin was found on.
There is no cryptocurrency currently that fits the above profile of the unicorn cryptocurrency. Let us examine an arbitrary list of highly hyped cryptocurrencies that meet the above list at least partially. The following list is by no means comprehensive but may be a sufficient sampling of various blockchain implementations:
Bitcoin (BTC)
Bitcoin is the very first and the best known cryptocurrency that started it all. While Bitcoin is generally considered extremely secure, it suffers from mining centralization to a degree. Bitcoin is not anonymous, lacks smart contracts, and most worrisomely, can only do about 7 transactions per seconds (TPS). Bitcoin is not the unicorn notwithstanding all the Bitcoin maximalists.
Ethereum (ETH)
Ethereum is widely considered the gold standard of smart contracts aside from its scalability problem. Sharding as part of Casper’s release is generally considered to be the solution to Ethereum’s scalability problem.
The goal of sharding is to split up validating responsibilities among various groups or shards. Ethereum’s sharding comes down to duplicating the existing blockchain architecture and sharing a token. This does not solve the core issue and simply kicks the can further down the road. After all, full nodes still need to exist one way or another.
Ethereum’s blockchain size problem is also an issue as will be explained more later in this article.
As a result, Ethereum is not the unicorn due to its incomplete approach to scalability and, to a degree, security.
Dash
Dash’s masternodes are widely considered to be centralized due to their high funding requirements, and there are accounts of a pre-mine in the beginning. Dash is not the unicorn due to its questionable decentralization.
Nano
Nano boasts rightfully for its instant, free transactions. But it lacks smart contracts and privacy, and it may be exposed to well orchestrated DDOS attacks. Therefore, it goes without saying that Nano is not the unicorn.
EOS
While EOS claims to execute millions of transactions per seconds, a quick glance reveals centralized parameters with 21 nodes and a questionable governance system. Therefore, EOS fails to achieve the unicorn status.
Monero (XMR)
One of the best known and respected privacy coins, Monero lacks smart contracts and may fall short of infinite scalability due to CryptoNote’s design. The unicorn rank is out of Monero’s reach.
IOTA
IOTA’s scalability is based on the number of transactions the network processes, and so its supposedly infinite scalability would fluctuate and is subject to the whims of the underlying transactions. While IOTA’s scalability approach is innovative and may work in the long term, it should be reminded that the unicorn cryptocurrency has no middle ground. The unicorn cryptocurrency would be expected to scale infinitely on a consistent basis from the beginning.
In addition, IOTA’s Masked Authenticated Messaging (MAM) feature does not bring privacy to the masses in a highly convenient manner. Consequently, the unicorn is not found with IOTA.

PascalCoin as a Candidate for the Unicorn Cryptocurrency
Please allow me to present a candidate for the cryptocurrency unicorn: PascalCoin.
According to the website, PascalCoin claims the following:
“PascalCoin is an instant, zero-fee, infinitely scalable, and decentralized cryptocurrency with advanced privacy and smart contract capabilities. Enabled by the SafeBox technology to become the world’s first blockchain independent of historical operations, PascalCoin possesses unlimited potential.”
The above summary is a mouthful to be sure, but let’s take a deep dive on how PascalCoin innovates with the SafeBox and more. Before we do this, I encourage you to first become acquainted with PascalCoin by watching the following video introduction:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=F25UU-0W9Dk
The rest of this section will be split into 10 parts in order to illustrate most of the notable features of PascalCoin. Naturally, let’s start off with the SafeBox.
Part #1: The SafeBox
Unlike traditional UTXO-based cryptocurrencies in which the blockchain records the specifics of each transaction (address, sender address, amount of funds transferred, etc.), the blockchain in PascalCoin is only used to mutate the SafeBox. The SafeBox is a separate but equivalent cryptographic data structure that snapshots account balances. PascalCoin’s blockchain is comparable to a machine that feeds the most important data – namely, the state of an account – into the SafeBox. Any node can still independently compute and verify the cumulative Proof-of-Work required to construct the SafeBox.
The PascalCoin whitepaper elegantly highlights the unique historical independence that the SafeBox possesses:
“While there are approaches that cryptocurrencies could use such as pruning, warp-sync, "finality checkpoints", UTXO-snapshotting, etc, there is a fundamental difference with PascalCoin. Their new nodes can only prove they are on most-work-chain using the infinite history whereas in PascalCoin, new nodes can prove they are on the most-work chain without the infinite history.”
Some cryptocurrency old-timers might instinctively balk at the idea of full nodes eschewing the entire history for security, but such a reaction would showcase a lack of understanding on what the SafeBox really does.
A concrete example would go a long way to best illustrate what the SafeBox does. Let’s say I input the following operations in my calculator:
5 * 5 – 10 / 2 + 5
It does not take a genius to calculate the answer, 25. Now, the expression “5 \ 5 – 10 / 2 + 5”* would be forever imbued on a traditional blockchain’s history. But the SafeBox begs to differ. It says that the expression “5 \ 5 – 10 / 2 + 5”* should instead be simply “25” so as preserve simplicity, time, and space. In other words, the SafeBox simply preserves the account balance.
But some might still be unsatisfied and claim that if one cannot trace the series of operations (transactions) that lead to the final number (balance) of 25, the blockchain is inherently insecure.
Here are four important security aspects of the SafeBox that some people fail to realize:
(1) SafeBox Follows the Longest Chain of Proof-of-Work
The SafeBox mutates itself per 100 blocks. Each new SafeBox mutation must reference both to the previous SafeBox mutation and the preceding 100 blocks in order to be valid, and the resultant hash of the new mutated SafeBox must then be referenced by each of the new subsequent blocks, and the process repeats itself forever.
The fact that each new SafeBox mutation must reference to the previous SafeBox mutation is comparable to relying on the entire history. This is because the previous SafeBox mutation encapsulates the result of cumulative entire history except for the 100 blocks which is why each new SafeBox mutation requires both the previous SafeBox mutation and the preceding 100 blocks.
So in a sense, there is a single interconnected chain of inflows and outflows, supported by Byzantine Proof-of-Work consensus, instead of the entire history of transactions.
More concretely, the SafeBox follows the path of the longest chain of Proof-of-Work simply by design, and is thus cryptographically equivalent to the entire history even without tracing specific operations in the past. If the chain is rolled back with a 51% attack, only the attacker’s own account(s) in the SafeBox can be manipulated as is explained in the next part.
(2) A 51% Attack on PascalCoin Functions the Same as Others
A 51% attack on PascalCoin would work in a similar way as with other Proof-of-Work cryptocurrencies. An attacker cannot modify a transaction in the past without affecting the current SafeBox hash which is accepted by all honest nodes.
Someone might claim that if you roll back all the current blocks plus the 100 blocks prior to the SafeBox’s mutation, one could create a forged SafeBox with different balances for all accounts. This would be incorrect as one would be able to manipulate only his or her own account(s) in the SafeBox with a 51% attack – just as is the case with other UTXO cryptocurrencies. The SafeBox stores the balances of all accounts which are in turn irreversibly linked only to their respective owners’ private keys.
(3) One Could Preserve the Entire History of the PascalCoin Blockchain
No blockchain data in PascalCoin is ever deleted even in the presence of the SafeBox. Since the SafeBox is cryptographically equivalent to a full node with the entire history as explained above, PascalCoin full nodes are not expected to contain infinite history. But for whatever reason(s) one may have, one could still keep all the PascalCoin blockchain history as well along with the SafeBox as an option even though it would be redundant.
Without storing the entire history of the PascalCoin blockchain, you can still trace the specific operations of the 100 blocks prior to when the SafeBox absorbs and reflects the net result (a single balance for each account) from those 100 blocks. But if you’re interested in tracing operations over a longer period in the past – as redundant as that may be – you’d have the option to do so by storing the entire history of the PascalCoin blockchain.
(4) The SafeBox is Equivalent to the Entire Blockchain History
Some skeptics may ask this question: “What if the SafeBox is forever lost? How would you be able to verify your accounts?” Asking this question is tantamount to asking to what would happen to Bitcoin if all of its entire history was erased. The result would be chaos, of course, but the SafeBox is still in line with the general security model of a traditional blockchain with respect to black swans.
Now that we know the security of the SafeBox is not compromised, what are the implications of this new blockchain paradigm? A colorful illustration as follows still wouldn’t do justice to the subtle revolution that the SafeBox ushers. The automobiles we see on the street are the cookie-and-butter representation of traditional blockchain systems. The SafeBox, on the other hand, supercharges those traditional cars to become the Transformers from Michael Bay’s films.
The SafeBox is an entirely different blockchain architecture that is impressive in its simplicity and ingenuity. The SafeBox’s design is only the opening act for PascalCoin’s vast nuclear arsenal. If the above was all that PascalCoin offers, it still wouldn’t come close to achieving the unicorn status but luckily, we have just scratched the surface. Please keep on reading on if you want to learn how PascalCoin is going to shatter the cryptocurrency industry into pieces. Buckle down as this is going to be a long read as we explore further about the SafeBox’s implications.
Part #2: 0-Confirmation Transactions
To begin, 0-confirmation transactions are secure in PascalCoin thanks to the SafeBox.
The following paraphrases an explanation of PascalCoin’s 0-confirmations from the whitepaper:
“Since PascalCoin is not a UTXO-based currency but rather a State-based currency thanks to the SafeBox, the security guarantee of 0-confirmation transactions are much stronger than in UTXO-based currencies. For example, in Bitcoin if a merchant accepts a 0-confirmation transaction for a coffee, the buyer can simply roll that transaction back after receiving the coffee but before the transaction is confirmed in a block. The way the buyer does this is by re-spending those UTXOs to himself in a new transaction (with a higher fee) thus invalidating them for the merchant. In PascalCoin, this is virtually impossible since the buyer's transaction to the merchant is simply a delta-operation to debit/credit a quantity from/to accounts respectively. The buyer is unable to erase or pre-empt this two-sided, debit/credit-based transaction from the network’s pending pool until it either enters a block for confirmation or is discarded with respect to both sender and receiver ends. If the buyer tries to double-spend the coffee funds after receiving the coffee but before they clear, the double-spend transaction will not propagate the network since nodes cannot propagate a double-spending transaction thanks to the debit/credit nature of the transaction. A UTXO-based transaction is initially one-sided before confirmation and therefore is more exposed to one-sided malicious schemes of double spending.”
Phew, that explanation was technical but it had to be done. In summary, PascalCoin possesses the only secure 0-confirmation transactions in the cryptocurrency industry, and it goes without saying that this means PascalCoin is extremely fast. In fact, PascalCoin is capable of 72,000 TPS even prior to any additional extensive optimizations down the road. In other words, PascalCoin is as instant as it gets and gives Nano a run for its money.
Part #3: Zero Fee
Let’s circle back to our discussion of PascalCoin’s 0-confirmation capability. Here’s a little fun magical twist to PascalCoin’s 0-confirmation magic: 0-confirmation transactions are zero-fee. As in you don’t pay a single cent in fee for each 0-confirmation! There is just a tiny downside: if you create a second transaction in a 5-minute block window then you’d need to pay a minimal fee. Imagine using Nano but with a significantly stronger anti-DDOS protection for spam! But there shouldn’t be any complaint as this fee would amount to 0.0001 Pascal or $0.00002 based on the current price of a Pascal at the time of this writing.
So, how come the fee for blazingly fast transactions is nonexistent? This is where the magic of the SafeBox arises in three ways:
(1) PascalCoin possesses the secure 0-confirmation feature as discussed above that enables this speed.
(2) There is no fee bidding competition of transaction priority typical in UTXO cryptocurrencies since, once again, PascalCoin operates on secure 0-confirmations.
(3) There is no fee incentive needed to run full nodes on behalf of the network’s security beyond the consensus rewards.
Part #4: Blockchain Size
Let’s expand more on the third point above, using Ethereum as an example. Since Ethereum’s launch in 2015, its full blockchain size is currently around 2 TB, give or take, but let’s just say its blockchain size is 100 GB for now to avoid offending the Ethereum elitists who insist there are different types of full nodes that are lighter. Whoever runs Ethereum’s full nodes would expect storage fees on top of the typical consensus fees as it takes significant resources to shoulder Ethereum’s full blockchain size and in turn secure the network. What if I told you that PascalCoin’s full blockchain size will never exceed few GBs after thousands of years? That is just what the SafeBox enables PascalCoin to do so. It is estimated that by 2072, PascalCoin’s full nodes will only be 6 GB which is low enough not to warrant any fee incentives for hosting full nodes. Remember, the SafeBox is an ultra-light cryptographic data structure that is cryptographically equivalent to a blockchain with the entire transaction history. In other words, the SafeBox is a compact spreadsheet of all account balances that functions as PascalCoin’s full node!
Not only does the SafeBox’s infinitesimal memory size helps to reduce transaction fees by phasing out any storage fees, but it also paves the way for true decentralization. It would be trivial for every PascalCoin user to opt a full node in the form of a wallet. This is extreme decentralization at its finest since the majority of users of other cryptocurrencies ditch full nodes due to their burdensome sizes. It is naïve to believe that storage costs would reduce enough to the point where hosting full nodes are trivial. Take a look at the following chart outlining the trend of storage cost.

* https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-cost-per-gigabyte/
As we can see, storage costs continue to decrease but the descent is slowing down as is the norm with technological improvements. In the meantime, blockchain sizes of other cryptocurrencies are increasing linearly or, in the case of smart contract engines like Ethereum, parabolically. Imagine a cryptocurrency smart contract engine like Ethereum garnering worldwide adoption; how do you think Ethereum’s size would look like in the far future based on the following chart?


https://i.redd.it/k57nimdjmo621.png

Ethereum’s future blockchain size is not looking pretty in terms of sustainable security. Sharding is not a fix for this issue since there still needs to be full nodes but that is a different topic for another time.
It is astonishing that the cryptocurrency community as a whole has passively accepted this forever-expanding-blockchain-size problem as an inescapable fate.
PascalCoin is the only cryptocurrency that has fully escaped the death vortex of forever expanding blockchain size. Its blockchain size wouldn’t exceed 10 GB even after many hundreds of years of worldwide adoption. Ethereum’s blockchain size after hundreds of years of worldwide adoption would make fine comedy.
Part #5: Simple, Short, and Ordinal Addresses
Remember how the SafeBox works by snapshotting all account balances? As it turns out, the account address system is almost as cool as the SafeBox itself.
Imagine yourself in this situation: on a very hot and sunny day, you’re wandering down the street across from your house and ran into a lemonade stand – the old-fashioned kind without any QR code or credit card terminal. The kid across you is selling a lemonade cup for 1 Pascal with a poster outlining the payment address as 5471-55. You flip out your phone and click “Send” with 1 Pascal to the address 5471-55; viola, exactly one second later you’re drinking your lemonade without paying a cent for the transaction fee!
The last thing one wants to do is to figure out how to copy/paste to, say, the following address 1BoatSLRHtKNngkdXEeobR76b53LETtpyT on the spot wouldn’t it? Gone are the obnoxiously long addresses that plague all cryptocurrencies. The days of those unreadable addresses will be long gone – it has to be if blockchain is to innovate itself for the general public. EOS has a similar feature for readable addresses but in a very limited manner in comparison, and nicknames attached to addresses in GUIs don’t count since blockchain-wide compatibility wouldn’t hold.
Not only does PascalCoin has the neat feature of having addresses (called PASAs) that amount to up to 6 or 7 digits, but PascalCoin can also incorporate in-protocol address naming as opposed to GUI address nicknames. Suppose I want to order something from Amazon using Pascal; I simply search the word “Amazon” then the corresponding account number shows up. Pretty neat, right?
The astute reader may gather that PascalCoin’s address system makes it necessary to commoditize addresses, and he/she would be correct. Some view this as a weakness; part #10 later in this segment addresses this incorrect perception.
Part #6: Privacy
As if the above wasn’t enough, here’s another secret that PascalCoin has: it is a full-blown privacy coin. It uses two separate foundations to achieve comprehensive anonymity: in-protocol mixer for transfer amounts and zn-SNARKs for private balances. The former has been implemented and the latter is on the roadmap. Both the 0-confirmation transaction and the negligible transaction fee would make PascalCoin the most scalable privacy coin of any other cryptocurrencies pending the zk-SNARKs implementation.
Part #7: Smart Contracts
Next, PascalCoin will take smart contracts to the next level with a layer-2 overlay consensus system that pioneers sidechains and other smart contract implementations.
In formal terms, this layer-2 architecture will facilitate the transfer of data between PASAs which in turn allows clean enveloping of layer-2 protocols inside layer-1 much in the same way that HTTP lives inside TCP.
To summarize:
· The layer-2 consensus method is separate from the layer-1 Proof-of-Work. This layer-2 consensus method is independent and flexible. A sidechain – based on a single encompassing PASA – could apply Proof-of-Stake (POS), Delegated Proof-of-Stake (DPOS), or Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) as the consensus system of its choice.
· Such a layer-2 smart contract platform can be written in any languages.
· Layer-2 sidechains will also provide very strong anonymity since funds are all pooled and keys are not used to unlock them.
· This layer-2 architecture is ingenious in which the computation is separate from layer-2 consensus, in effect removing any bottleneck.
· Horizontal scaling exists in this paradigm as there is no interdependence between smart contracts and states are not managed by slow sidechains.
· Speed and scalability are fully independent of PascalCoin.
One would be able to run the entire global financial system on PascalCoin’s infinitely scalable smart contract platform and it would still scale infinitely. In fact, this layer-2 architecture would be exponentially faster than Ethereum even after its sharding is implemented.
All this is the main focus of PascalCoin’s upcoming version 5 in 2019. A whitepaper add-on for this major upgrade will be released in early 2019.
Part #8: RandomHash Algorithm
Surely there must be some tradeoffs to PascalCoin’s impressive capabilities, you might be asking yourself. One might bring up the fact that PascalCoin’s layer-1 is based on Proof-of-Work and is thus susceptible to mining centralization. This would be a fallacy as PascalCoin has pioneered the very first true ASIC, GPU, and dual-mining resistant algorithm known as RandomHash that obliterates anything that is not CPU based and gives all the power back to solo miners.
Here is the official description of RandomHash:
“RandomHash is a high-level cryptographic hash algorithm that combines other well-known hash primitives in a highly serial manner. The distinguishing feature is that calculations for a nonce are dependent on partial calculations of other nonces, selected at random. This allows a serial hasher (CPU) to re-use these partial calculations in subsequent mining saving 50% or more of the work-load. Parallel hashers (GPU) cannot benefit from this optimization since the optimal nonce-set cannot be pre-calculated as it is determined on-the-fly. As a result, parallel hashers (GPU) are required to perform the full workload for every nonce. Also, the algorithm results in 10x memory bloat for a parallel implementation. In addition to its serial nature, it is branch-heavy and recursive making in optimal for CPU-only mining.”
One might be understandably skeptical of any Proof-of-Work algorithm that solves ASIC and GPU centralization once for all because there have been countless proposals being thrown around for various algorithms since the dawn of Bitcoin. Is RandomHash truly the ASIC & GPU killer that it claims to be?
Herman Schoenfeld, the inventor behind RandomHash, described his algorithm in the following:
“RandomHash offers endless ASIC-design breaking surface due to its use of recursion, hash algo selection, memory hardness and random number generation.
For example, changing how round hash selection is made and/or random number generator algo and/or checksum algo and/or their sequencing will totally break an ASIC design. Conceptually if you can significantly change the structure of the output assembly whilst keeping the high-level algorithm as invariant as possible, the ASIC design will necessarily require proportional restructuring. This results from the fact that ASIC designs mirror the ASM of the algorithm rather than the algorithm itself.”
Polyminer1 (pseudonym), one of the members of the PascalCoin core team who developed RHMiner (official software for mining RandomHash), claimed as follows:
“The design of RandomHash is, to my experience, a genuine innovation. I’ve been 30 years in the field. I’ve rarely been surprised by anything. RandomHash was one of my rare surprises. It’s elegant, simple, and achieves resistance in all fronts.”
PascalCoin may have been the first party to achieve the race of what could possibly be described as the “God algorithm” for Proof-of-Work cryptocurrencies. Look no further than one of Monero’s core developers since 2015, Howard Chu. In September 2018, Howard declared that he has found a solution, called RandomJS, to permanently keep ASICs off the network without repetitive algorithm changes. This solution actually closely mirrors RandomHash’s algorithm. Discussing about his algorithm, Howard asserted that “RandomJS is coming at the problem from a direction that nobody else is.”
Link to Howard Chu’s article on RandomJS:
https://www.coindesk.com/one-musicians-creative-solution-to-drive-asics-off-monero
Yet when Herman was asked about Howard’s approach, he responded:
“Yes, looks like it may work although using Javascript was a bit much. They should’ve just used an assembly subset and generated random ASM programs. In a way, RandomHash does this with its repeated use of random mem-transforms during expansion phase.”
In the end, PascalCoin may have successfully implemented the most revolutionary Proof-of-Work algorithm, one that eclipses Howard’s burgeoning vision, to date that almost nobody knows about. To learn more about RandomHash, refer to the following resources:
RandomHash whitepaper:
https://www.pascalcoin.org/storage/whitepapers/RandomHash_Whitepaper.pdf
Technical proposal for RandomHash:
https://github.com/PascalCoin/PascalCoin/blob/mastePIP/PIP-0009.md
Someone might claim that PascalCoin still suffers from mining centralization after RandomHash, and this is somewhat misleading as will be explained in part #10.
Part #9: Fair Distribution and Governance
Not only does PascalCoin rest on superior technology, but it also has its roots in the correct philosophy of decentralized distribution and governance. There was no ICO or pre-mine, and the developer fund exists as a percentage of mining rewards as voted by the community. This developer fund is 100% governed by a decentralized autonomous organization – currently facilitated by the PascalCoin Foundation – that will eventually be transformed into an autonomous smart contract platform. Not only is the developer fund voted upon by the community, but PascalCoin’s development roadmap is also voted upon the community via the Protocol Improvement Proposals (PIPs).
This decentralized governance also serves an important benefit as a powerful deterrent to unseemly fork wars that befall many cryptocurrencies.
Part #10: Common Misconceptions of PascalCoin
“The branding is terrible”
PascalCoin is currently working very hard on its image and is preparing for several branding and marketing initiatives in the short term. For example, two of the core developers of the PascalCoin recently interviewed with the Fox Business Network. A YouTube replay of this interview will be heavily promoted.
Some people object to the name PascalCoin. First, it’s worth noting that PascalCoin is the name of the project while Pascal is the name of the underlying currency. Secondly, Google and YouTube received excessive criticisms back then in the beginning with their name choices. Look at where those companies are nowadays – surely a somewhat similar situation faces PascalCoin until the name’s familiarity percolates into the public.
“The wallet GUI is terrible”
As the team is run by a small yet extremely dedicated developers, multiple priorities can be challenging to juggle. The lack of funding through an ICO or a pre-mine also makes it challenging to accelerate development. The top priority of the core developers is to continue developing full-time on the groundbreaking technology that PascalCoin offers. In the meantime, an updated and user-friendly wallet GUI has been worked upon for some time and will be released in due time. Rome wasn’t built in one day.
“One would need to purchase a PASA in the first place”
This is a complicated topic since PASAs need to be commoditized by the SafeBox’s design, meaning that PASAs cannot be obtained at no charge to prevent systematic abuse. This raises two seemingly valid concerns:
· As a chicken and egg problem, how would one purchase a PASA using Pascal in the first place if one cannot obtain Pascal without a PASA?
· How would the price of PASAs stay low and affordable in the face of significant demand?
With regards to the chicken and egg problem, there are many ways – some finished and some unfinished – to obtain your first PASA as explained on the “Get Started” page on the PascalCoin website:
https://www.pascalcoin.org/get_started
More importantly, however, is the fact that there are few methods that can get your first PASA for free. The team will also release another method soon in which you could obtain your first PASA for free via a single SMS message. This would probably become by far the simplest and the easiest way to obtain your first PASA for free. There will be more new ways to easily obtain your first PASA for free down the road.
What about ensuring the PASA market at large remains inexpensive and affordable following your first (and probably free) PASA acquisition? This would be achieved in two ways:
· Decentralized governance of the PASA economics per the explanation in the FAQ section on the bottom of the PascalCoin website (https://www.pascalcoin.org/)
· Unlimited and free pseudo-PASAs based on layer-2 in the next version release.
“PascalCoin is still centralized after the release of RandomHash”
Did the implementation of RandomHash from version 4 live up to its promise?
The official goals of RandomHash were as follow:
(1) Implement a GPU & ASIC resistant hash algorithm
(2) Eliminate dual mining
The two goals above were achieved by every possible measure.
Yet a mining pool, Nanopool, was able to regain its hash majority after a significant but a temporary dip.
The official conclusion is that, from a probabilistic viewpoint, solo miners are more profitable than pool miners. However, pool mining is enticing for solo miners who 1) have limited hardware as it ensures a steady income instead of highly profitable but probabilistic income via solo mining, and 2) who prefer convenient software and/or GUI.
What is the next step, then? While the barrier of entry for solo miners has successfully been put down, additional work needs to be done. The PascalCoin team and the community are earnestly investigating additional steps to improve mining decentralization with respect to pool mining specifically to add on top of RandomHash’s successful elimination of GPU, ASIC, and dual-mining dominance.
It is likely that the PascalCoin community will promote the following two initiatives in the near future:
(1) Establish a community-driven, nonprofit mining pool with attractive incentives.
(2) Optimize RHMiner, PascalCoin’s official solo mining software, for performance upgrades.
A single pool dominance is likely short lived once more options emerge for individual CPU miners who want to avoid solo mining for whatever reason(s).
Let us use Bitcoin as an example. Bitcoin mining is dominated by ASICs and mining pools but no single pool is – at the time of this writing – even close on obtaining the hash majority. With CPU solo mining being a feasible option in conjunction with ASIC and GPU mining eradication with RandomHash, the future hash rate distribution of PascalCoin would be far more promising than Bitcoin’s hash rate distribution.
PascalCoin is the Unicorn Cryptocurrency
If you’ve read this far, let’s cut straight to the point: PascalCoin IS the unicorn cryptocurrency.
It is worth noting that PascalCoin is still a young cryptocurrency as it was launched at the end of 2016. This means that many features are still work in progress such as zn-SNARKs, smart contracts, and pool decentralization to name few. However, it appears that all of the unicorn criteria are within PascalCoin’s reach once PascalCoin’s technical roadmap is mostly completed.
Based on this expository on PascalCoin’s technology, there is every reason to believe that PascalCoin is the unicorn cryptocurrency. PascalCoin also solves two fundamental blockchain problems beyond the unicorn criteria that were previously considered unsolvable: blockchain size and simple address system. The SafeBox pushes PascalCoin to the forefront of cryptocurrency zeitgeist since it is a superior solution compared to UTXO, Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG), Block Lattice, Tangle, and any other blockchain innovations.


THE UNICORN

Author: Tyler Swob
submitted by Kosass to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

A Lost Gem In A Sea Of Shitcoins

What’s up everyone!
 
Yeah, it’s another one of “those”. But honestly, after being in the game for long enough, you end up developing an eye for the good coins. Not the “good” ones, the GOOD ones. Believe it or not, research and common sense is the name of the game!
 
A little bit more about me: I come from a business & logistics management background. I started investing in cryptocurrencies and trading a little more than six months ago. As a person, I am very detail oriented and I’ve been researching all kinds of cryptos, for hours a day, for the past six months. The more I researched, the more I learned, the more I became hungry for knowledge, and therefore the more i researched. From trading to cryptocurrency basics, their economics, their political implications, the technology revolution they represent, the human psychology aspect as well as emotional trading behaviours (FOMO, FODO, etc.), all of it!
 
I’ve purchased Ethereum at 150$ (when I first started in crypto). Then NEO back when it was still AntShares and trading under 3$. Gas (Antcoin back then) at 30c, OMG when it was sub-1$, and ETP at exactly a dollar (selling it later at 5$). This was all before I even knew how to do a basic margin trade & was still in the process of learning about crypto (and while tether still had a “reasonable” market cap! LOL)
 
My approach is pretty simple when it comes to crypto. I split coins into seven main categories:
 
-Store of Value (BTC)
-Payment (DASH, BCH, LTC)
-Pure Anonymity and/or Evil Stuff (XMR)
-Platform/platform’ish (ETH, NEO, LISK, CARDANO, ETP, Iota, Factom and the likes)
-Shitcoins (99% of ERC20 tokens)
-Absolute Shitcoins (Boolberry, Embercoin et al.)
-Fee Split / Dividend Coins
 
That last category is my favorite. While I do strongly believe in diversification (10% store of value, 10% payment, 5% anonymity, 25% platform in my case), I always have a “lean” towards coins that make business sense. Coins that derive their value directly from the amount of usage the platform gets (Factom, for example). Coins such as NEO, BNB, Kucoin, Coss, ICN, TenX and the likes, basically coins that either have a direct “dividend-paying” property (NEO generating gas, Kucoin/Coss awarding holders with a % of the exchange’s trading fees) or an indirect “dividend paying” property such as BNB, ICN, TenX using quarterly profits to buy back their own coins and burn them, thus raising the value of the rest of the coins in circulation over time.
 
Now let’s look at market caps of these direct and indirect “dividend” coins.
 
Neo: 2.3B
TenX: 246M
Binance: 200M
Iconomi: 155M
Kucoin: 44M (68M at ath, not too long ago)
Coss: 5M
 
You see that odd one there with only 5M market cap? Yeah. That’s the great buy right now. That’s the x10, x20 or even x30 that most people haven’t realized yet. That’s also the “dividend coin” you can scoop a ton of while it’s on the cheap, and make massive recurring revenue from as the exchange solidifies and evolves.
 
What is COSS? COSS stands for Crypto One Stop Solution. They’re a Singapore based cryptocurrency exchange with an amazing team that’s currently expanding. They aim at becoming the “One Stop” solution for crypto, meaning A) an exchange, B) a payment gateway for merchants to accept crypto payments, and probably sometime in the future C) crypto debit/credit cards. They offer their own coin (COSS coin), and holders of this coin receive 50% of the trading fees generated by the exchange (more on this later).
 
Now, what a lot of people still don’t realize in crypto, you don’t invest in the bigger market cap coins expecting to make a killing (“the moonshot”). Sure, they’ll bring you nice long term growth as the whole market matures, and that’s where you want to diversify and solidify your portfolio, solid coins with a purpose. But what if you want more thrill? An actual opportunity to “moon”? You find a project that makes business sense, that has at least a working product, and a good team. Buying NEO at 2.5B market cap? You missed the boat, it was a dollar a few months ago and already went x60 (“mooned”), and now stabilized at roughly x38. OMG had it’s x10-15 already. BNB as well. Their market caps are big, and a lot of buying needs to happen to even double in price.
 
Antshares (NEO) back then was a steal at 1, 2 and 3$. It was a huge risk, with huge rewards. They didn’t even have a product other than their blockchain. No dApp running or even being built on it, no english resources to even figure out how to code on it and deploy a smart contract, no marketing, hell we didn’t even know if Da Hongfei was still alive. All it was is a Chinese based smart contract platform, with an innovative dBFT concensus algorithm. It was a 100M market cap coin that early adopters believed in, and essentially invested in when it was not much more than a website and a blockchain. Look where it’s at now, with more than a dozen dApps being built on it, a solid team of roughly 10 devs, with the NEO council also funding City of Zion (team of 20+ NEO devs). NEO has grown into an incredible community, and is now launching coding dApp contests left and right, with the latest one in partnership with Microsoft china & offering half a million dollar’s worth in prizes.
 
NEO holders get rewarded with GAS on a daily basis. When NEO gets further adoption, all fees such as registering an asset, deploying a contract, changing an asset, etc. will be redistributed to NEO holders as well on a pro rated basis. Only transaction fees are not, as those will go out to MasterNodes. If you got yourself a thousand NEO’s back when they were a dollar or two a piece, you’re now generating 7 gas per month. That’s roughly 161$ USD per month, on a recurring basis, at current gas prices, out of a 1000$ investment. That’s a whopping 16.1% PER MONTH on original investment, and not even counting the fact that you pretty much made 37000$ profit on the NEO’s themselves. Today? Well, you gotta dish out 38000$ to buy a thousand neos and make 161$ per month, basically bringing you 0.4% per month on original investment.
 
Same with bitcoin. Early adopters that got it at pennies. It just hit $10K USD a piece. For every 30 cent spent purchasing bitcoin in 2009, you’d have $10K USD in the bank account. Invested 3$? 100K. Invested 30$? 1M.
 
Ethereum? From a dollar to half a grand now.
 
Moral of the story? Early adoption pays off. History repeats itself, and it will continue to do so. Bitcoin was digital money for nerds, ethereum was a cool project that nobody really gave a crap about until they got EEA which showed credibility (early adopters of eth had a great vision, I’ll give them that!). Neo was chinese vaporware. What do they all have in common? Their.Early. Adopters. Made. A. Killing.
 
Look where they stand now. Look where a lot of coins stand now. Even a lot of ERC20 tokens that don’t even really have a reason to exist have market caps over 100M. And for what? They don’t reward you with anything other than price increasing because more people buy (greater fool theory)? They don’t reward you with dividends from the project/platform itself? Their value isn’t derived directly from the amount of usage it gets (a la Factom, PaulSnow you genius.)? They still don’t even have a minimum viable product to show? When you ask yourself why does it need a coin, and the answer is either “uhh…” or “oh it grants you voting rights” (that nobody gives a crap about, let’s be honest), you should reconsider your investment strategy. Cause I can tell you a lot of people don’t know what the hell they’re doing, and they’d be better off diversifying in the top 5 or 10 coins and holding than investing in the shitcoinfest that crypto has become.
 
And that’s why COSS is a pretty buy right now. You’re investing in a platform that’s already up and running, not a whitepaper or vaporware. Hell even Eth and Neo were riskier investments for early adopters. Let’s go over the cons first:
 
It’s ugly. The UI sucks.
It doesn’t have API’s yet, meaning there’s no bots to create liquidity, and therefore low volume.
It’s been fudded to death by KuCoin shills (and their referral links you’ve seen everywhere a month ago).
Charts are horrible
 
That’s about it. Whenever you read up about coss, those are the cons you’ll find. But what about the pros? Well, all of this is in the process of being fixed, as we speak.
 
Singapore has lax laws about cryptocurrencies and issued a statement it does not feel the need to regulate them.
It’s securing exclusive ICO’s already despite being a tiny exchange, and has mentioned being able to secure from 4 to 6 per month.
The team listens to the community’s feedback and takes it seriously. This is Gold. One of the first things they were criticized about was trying to do too many things at once (an exchange, a payment gateway, a full one-stop solution for crypto, etc.) and they’ve taken the community’s advice and decided to focus solely on the exchange for now and build it properly, before branching out to the rest. “Better excel at one thing and build from there, than be mediocre at multiple things at once”
Also following community feedback, they are implementing trading promotions “a la Binance”.
Part of the total supply of COSS tokens will be donated to charities (the community votes to who they go). First of all, that’s just plain nice. Secondly, I find it pretty damn cool that we donate this for good causes, and they basically keep “generating” income from it. It’s basically like a “perpetual donation” on behalf of COSS and all of its users, and definitely will make a lot of people feel good about using the exchange. Thirdly, this pretty much guarantees millions of COSS tokens are going to be in perpetual “HODL” mode, essentially taking them off the market.
They will be implementing a FIAT gateway sooner than later. We all know FIAT gateways are game changers.
They are constantly hiring. The team growing is definitely a good sign.
They are revamping the overall UI and charts, once again following the community’s advice, and the proposed new look is fantastic! Check it out here, as well as other great announcements: https://medium.com/@runeevensen/coss-io-7379b7628d93 EDIT: It has been brought to my attention that there is a UI upgrade scheduled for tomorrow (Dec. 3rd), although it isn't clear if it's a minor one or the actual major overhaul, might wanna keep an eye out on that!
They are upgrading the matching engine and releasing API’s soon to allow bots to create liquidity and significantly raise the trading volume.
Unlike KuCoin, the revenue split (COSS token holders) will always receive 50% of the fees, whereas kucoin will start decreasing it in 4-6months and it will bottom out at 10-15%
The revenue split from trading fees is controlled by a DAO, meaning the COSS team cannot arbitrarily decide to change it later down the line, unlike KuCoin where the control over the fee split is centralized and they decrease it as they please.
The DAO model also avoids it being labeled a security. First of all, those aren’t really “dividends” as dividends would require them to calculate income minus expenses to determine profit, and then distribute this profit to shareholders, and obviously that’s a legal nightmare. With the DAO model, you don’t get a percentage of the “profits”, you get a revenue split from the exchange fees, and it’s done by clicking a “distribute” button which makes a call to the smart contract and distributes your coins. COSS itself is not giving you anything
COSS is still in Beta. It has a tiny market cap. Now’s the time to pick it up, not when it’s out of beta and has become successful, or you’ll be in another Antshares/NEO situation. A ridiculously small move from 5M to 50M in Mcap and that’s x10, a move from 5M to 150M (still under binance levels) and that’s x30.
In the long run, COSS aims to be more than just an exchange. Holders of the token, who currently get 50% of the exchange’s trading fees, will also get 50% of other fees charged from coss. This includes their eventual payment gateway. Merchants around the world wishing to accept crypto payments will be able to use COSS’s gateway and COSS will charge a 0.75% fee per transaction. We, as COSS holders, also get 50% of that. You believe crypto is the future and going mainstream? Well your COSS will entitle you to the revenue generated by tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of businesses accepting crypto payments via COSS Point-Of-Sale.
COSS also mentioned that all other COSS “fee generating” products to come will all be subject to the same DAO/50% split. Logically, If they have 1) The trading platform, and 2) the payment gateway, then the third step is solving the problem of spending the crypto in places that don’t accept direct crypto payment, AKA a crypto credit/debit card. Well, guess what? Users of such cards will be charged a small fee as well when their crypto is being converted to fiat in real time for payment at a gas station. We as COSS holders are, again, getting 50% of that fee. As you can see, this is a coin that makes business sense to invest in. Unless you really, reaaaaaally care about a coin being the “Future of decentralized prediction markets” or “the future of decentralized dating” or the “decentralized gambling coin” and whatnot.
Smart money is smart. It's only a matter of time before savvy investors discover this coin.
 
What do the dividends look like (credits to lickmypussy28):
 
Here’s an excel showing the Yearly %ROI based on the COSS exchange volume and your COSS token buy-in price: https://i.imgur.com/XKjjCbZ.png
 
Here’s another one showing how much you’d make in USD per year based on how many COSS tokens you own, again all relative to the volume on the left: https://i.imgur.com/p15DKAr.png
 
Lastly, here’s another showing the exact same as above but on a weekly basis: https://i.imgur.com/ezp5FCV.png
 
ALTHOUGH, keep in mind, the calculations above take into consideration an average trading fee of 0.2% and while this fee is accurate right now, it will most likely average 0.1% once API’s are released and liquidity/market maker bots start operating on the platform. Also, the calculations above do NOT take into consideration that in 4 years from now, there will be 200M (hard cap) COSS tokens on the market. HOWEVER, these calculations also do not take into consideration that by then, COSS will have a fully up and running payment gateway, crypto credit cards, and other revenue-generating products such as a crowdfunding platform, smart contract deployment platform, etc. that are also generating revenue for COSS holders.
 
All in all, if all goes as planned, the payment gateway/cards/other products will negate the additional COSS tokens released in the market as well as the average trading fee of 0.1%, and therefore the numbers presented in the excel docs will remain sensibly the same. Also, if crypto really takes off in the mainstream, then the revenue split to coss holders from the payment gateway & credit card spending could very well double, triple or quadruple all the numbers you’re seeing in these excel sheets, and that’s on the low end. Remember, the exchange only charges 0.2% (0.1% average once we have bots) out of which we get half, but the payment gateway on the other hand charges a flat 0.75% (7.5x the what the exchange’s fee), out of which COSS holders get half. This could be a massive revenue driver, easily surpassing the exchange itself, and honestly if at that point in time this coin is NOT valued at 3B+ (I mean, even ethereum classic is over that right now..), then I’ll just give up on the whole notion of logical thinking.
 
Quick example, assuming in 4 years 50M in gateway processing daily (18B yearly), 0.375% of that would be 187.5K USD daily for COSS holders. With 200M Coss tokens total supply, if you hold 10K coss you’d generate 9.375$ per day (65$ per week, 282$/mo.), and that’s purely from the gateway (totally excluding the exchange revenue, crowdfunding revenue, credit card revenue, etc.).
 
If you have 100K coss you’d generate 93.7$/day, 650$/week, 2820$/mo, again purely from the gateway.
 
If you’d rather assume more conservative figures (let’s say 25M in daily gateway processing on COSS, all around the globe, or 9B yearly), then simply divide these figures by half. If you wanna go balls to the walls, double them (100M daily, 36B yearly). Play around, have fun with the numbers! To keep things in perspective, square has processed 50B’s worth of transactions in 2016. Therefore I believe using 9B, 18B and 36B for our calculations isn’t too far fetched, and actually pretty reasonable.
 
Anyway, to sum this up, no matter how you look at it, COSS is an extremely promising project with huge potential, and actually has working math (and a working beta!) behind it. It’s only a matter of a month or two before they’re out of their Beta, have upgrades to their UI and engine, and start really growing from there. The team listens to the community, which is super important, and they’re working on a multitude of revenue streams, out of which not only them, but all coss holders will benefit from, fifty fifty.
 
Their crowdfunding platform will be a competitor to indiegogo, gofundme, kickstarter, and they’ll have a small percentage fee (50% of which goes to COSS holders). The crypto Point-Of-Sale will be a competitor to Square and the likes (50% revenue to COSS holders). The crypto credit card (also 50% revenue to COSS holders). It is truely an admirable project. Shovel manufacturers made a killing during the gold rush, and COSS is positioning itself as the shovel manufacturer in the crypto adoption gold rush. This is a coin that makes sense to invest in, it is ultra tangible, and will give greater returns than any type of “decentralized [insert function here]” type coins.
 
On a personal note: Honestly, I believe this is the proper way to ICO, by NOT giving people worthless tokens that only go up in value due to speculation (looking at you, 99% of ERC20 tokens). Let investors guide you, let them reap 50% of the rewards as THEY are the ones funding you. This’ll keep the investors interested in the project, and every single one of them will have a direct incentive to vouch for your product. It’s only right for the investors to get rewarded with something tangible, I’d take that any day over a speculative shitcoin who’s only purpose was to put money in the project’s founders pockets
 
Oh, and cherry on the sundae: they are planning on launching massive marketing campaigns as soon as UI and trading engine are ready, Q1 2018, as you can see in Rune’s Nov 27th update. I suggest you read it, it puts us up to date on a lot of exciting new things: https://medium.com/@runeevensen/coss-io-update-november-27th-fa74f1237062
 
Quoted directly from said link: “For those that are most interested in discussions regarding the trading price of COSS. Please have in mind that when we entered our token sale, our clear sales message was a 3–5 year road-map, and not a 3–5 months pump and dump. We are a small team, doing our utmost to deliver and all we ask is for you to continue to give us feedback and also for you to give us some time to deliver. *That being said. We still aim to be out of BETA as soon as possible with a new engine for the exchange in Q1 2018. New UI should be in place well before that.** Once we feel we have this in place we will roll out massive marketing campaigns to attract users and increased volume. So although we have a 3–5 year road-map ahead, you should expect to see 2018 being “our year”. The 3–5 year plan is more on the complete roadmap when we proudly can call ourselves a one-stop solution. For now it is all about the exchange, and there we will see rapid changes over the coming weeks/months.”*
 
All in all, i’d like to thank the COSS team for actually caring about their investors, keeping them in the loop, listening to their feedback and giving them a unique and tangible opportunity. I’d also like to thank all the other COSS investors, who see a huge potential in this project and support the team, and lastly, all of you crypto-heads for reading through!
 
Happy hodling, and hopefully see you all at 500M+ market cap by late 2018 :)
 
-Some random guy on Reddit.
 
PS: Not investment advice. Always do your due diligence. Also, if you’d like, you can join the discussion at /cossIO
 
Friendly reminder: ETH is the quickest way to get your funds on the COSS exchange, and COSS/ETH pair has 4x the volume of the COSS/BTC pair.
submitted by globetrotter_s14 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

FUD Copy Pastas

**Last updated: May 30, 2018: Updated wallet info with release of Trinity.
This 4 part series from the IOTA foundation covers most of the technical FUD centered at IOTA.
https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
Also the official IOTA faq on iota.org answers nearly all of these questions if you want to hear the answers directly.
Purpose of Writing
Since posting FUD is so ridiculously low-effort in comparison to setting the record straight, I felt it necessary to put a log of copy-pastas together to balance the scales so its just as easy to answer the FUD as it was to generate it. So next time you hear someone say "IOTA is centralized", you no longer have to take an hour out of your day and spin your wheels with someone who likely had an agenda to begin with. You just copy-paste away and move on.
It's also worth mentioning IOTA devs are too damn busy working on the protocol and doing their job to answer FUD. So I felt a semblance of responsibility.
Here they are. These answers are too my understanding so if you see something that doesn't look right let me know! They are divided into the following categories so if you are interested in a specific aspect of IOTA you can scroll to that section.
1) WALLET
2) COMMUNITY
3) INVESTING
4) TECHNICAL

WALLET

IOTA was hacked and users funds were stolen!

First, IOTA was not hacked. The term “hacked” is thrown around way too brazingly nowadays and often used to describe events that weren’t hacks to begin with. Its a symptom of this space growing way too fast creating situations of the blind leading the blind and causing hysteria.
What happened:
Many IOTA users trusted a certain 3rd party website to create their seed for their wallets. This website silently sent copies of all the seeds generated to an email address and waited till it felt it had enough funds, then it took everyones money simultaneously. That was the ”hack”.
https://blog.iota.org/the-secret-to-security-is-secrecy-d32b5b7f25ef
The lesson:
The absolute #1 marketed feature of crypto is that you are your own bank. Of everything that is common knowledge about crypto, this is at the top. But being your own bank means you are responsible for the security of your own funds. There is no safety net or centralized system in place that is going to bail you out.
For those that don’t know (and you really should if you’ve invested in anything crypto), your seed is your username-pw-security question-backup email all rolled into one. Would you trust a no-name 3rd party website to produce your username+pw for your bank account? Because thats essentially what users did.
The fix:
Make your seed offline with the generators in the sidebar or use dice. This is outlined in the “how to generate wallet and seed” directly following.
The trinity and carriota wallets will have seed generators within them upon their release.

How to generate wallet and seed

1) Download official trinity wallet here
2) follow the instructions on the app.
3) Do not run any apps in conjunction with the trinity app. Make sure all other apps are completely closed out on your device.

Are you sure a computer can’t just guess my seed?

An IOTA seed is 81 characters long. There are more IOTA seed combinations than atoms in the universe. All the computers in the world combined would take millions billions of years just to find your randomly generated one that’s located somewhere between the 0th and the 2781st combination. The chance for someone to randomly generate the exact same seed as yours is 1 / (2781).
If you can’t fathom the number 27 ^ 81, this video should help:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8YIdmwcubc

Why is Trinity wallet taking so long!!??

Trinity is out. https://trinity.iota.org/

COMMUNITY

IOTA introduction video to share with family

https://youtu.be/LyC04NrJ3yA

Tangle visualizers

http://tangle.glumb.de/

How to setup a full node

Download Bolero and run! Bolero is an all-in-one full node install package with the latest IOTA IRI and Nelson all under a one-click install!
https://github.com/SemkoDev/bolero.fun/releases
"If you want to help the network then spam the network. If you really want to help the network then create a full node and let others spam you!"

No questions or concerns get upvoted, only downvoted!

That’s just the nature of this business. Everyone in these communities has money at stake and are extremely incentivized to keep only positive news at the top of the front page. There is nothing you're going to do about that on this subreddit or any crypto subreddit. It's just a reddit fact of life we have to deal with. Everyone has a downvote and everyone has an upvote. But what can be done is just simply answer the questions even if they are downvoted to hell. Yea most people wont' see the answers or discussion but that one person will. every little bit counts.
I will say that there are most certainly answers to nearly every FUD topic out there. Every single one. A lot of the posts I'm seeing as of late especially since the price spike are rehashed from months ago. They are often not answered not because there isn't an answeexplanation, but because regulars who have the answers simply don't see them (for the reason listed above). I can see how it's easy for this to be interpreted (especially by new users) as there not being an answer or "the FUDsters are on to something" but thats just not the case.

Developer's candidness (aka dev's are assholes!)

http://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7obyyx/serious_talk_about_pr_system_iota_and_david/ds8ouvc
http://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7obyyx/serious_talk_about_pr_system_iota_and_david/ds8rega
http://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7oi9g8/why_is_everyone_so_critical_of_david_this_has_to/ds9rtbb
https://i.redd.it/qb0ik4tgny401.jpg
Lastly and to no surprise, David conducts himself very professionally in this interview even when asked several tough questions about the coordinator and MIT criticism.

IOTA Devs do not respond appropriately to criticism

When critiquers provide feedback that is ACTUALLY useful to the devs, then sure they'll be glad to hear it. So far not once has an outside dev brought up something that the IOTA devs found useful. Every single time it ends up being something that was already taken into consideration with the design and if the critiquer did an ounce of research they would know that. Thus you often find the IOTA devs dismissing their opinion as FUD and responding with hostility because all their critique is really doing is sending the message to their supporters that they are not supposed to like IOTA anymore.
Nick Johnson was a perfect example of this. The Ethereum community was co-existing [peacefully]with IOTA’s community (as they do with nearly all alt coins) until Nick wrote his infamous article. Then almost overnight Ethereum decided it didn’t like IOTA anymore and we’ve been dealing with that shit since. As of today, add LTC to that list with Charlie’s (even admitting) ignorant judgement of IOTA.
12/17/2017: Add John McAfee (bitcoin cash) and Peter Todd (bitcoin) to the list of public figures who have posted ignorantly on IOTA.

A lot of crypto communities certainly like to hate on IOTA...

IOTA is disrupting the disrupters. It invented a completely new distributed ledger infrastructure (the tangle) that replaces the blockchain and solves all of its fundamental problems (namely fees and scaling). To give you an idea of this significance, 99% of the cryptocurrencies that exist are built on a block chain. These projects have billions of dollars invested into them meaning everyone in their communities are incentivized to see IOTA fail and spread as much FUD about it as possible. This includes well known organizations, public figures, and brands. Everyone commenting in these subreddits and crypto communities have their own personal money at stake and skin in the game. Misinformation campaigns, paid reddit posters, upvote/downvote bots, and corrupt moderators are all very real in this space.

INVESTING

How do I buy IOTA

https://medium.com/@fuo213/how-to-buy-iota-the-complete-guide-for-crypto-dummies-e63560caf921

What is the IOTA foundation?

IOTA foundation is a non-profit established in Germany and recognized by the European Union. Blog post here: https://blog.iota.org/iota-foundation-fb61937c9a7e

How many companies and organizations are interested, partnered or actively using IOTA?

A lot, and often too many to keep up with.
https://reddit.com/Iota/comments/7f3dmx/list_of_known_iota_partnerships_corporate/

How was IOTA distributed?

All IOTAs that will ever exist were sold at the ICO in 2015. There was no % reserved for development. Devs had to buy in with their personal money. Community donated back 5% of all IOTA so the IOTA foundation could be setup.

No inflation schedule? No additional coins? How is this sustainable?

Interestingly enough, IOTA is actually the only crypto that does not run into any problems with a currency cap and deflationaryism. Because there are zero fees, you will always be able to pay for something for exactly what it's worth using IOTA, no matter how small the value. If by chance in the future a single iota grows so large in value that it no longer allows someone to pay for something in fractions of a penny, the foundation would just add decimal points allowing for a tenth or a hundreth or a thousandth of an iota to be transacted with.
To give you some perspective, if a single IOTA equals 1 penny, IOTA would have a 27 trillion dollar market cap (100x that of Bitcoin's today)

IOTA is not for P2P, only for M2M

With the release of the trinity wallet, it's now dead simple for anyone to use IOTA funds for P2P. Try it out.

Companies technically don’t have to use the IOTA token

Yes they do
Worth clarifying that 0 iota data transactions are perfectly fine and are welcomed since they still provide pow for 2 other transactions and help secure the network. In the early stages, these types of transactions will probably be what give us the tps/pow needed to remove the coordinator and allow the network defend 34% attacks organically.
But... if someone does not want to sell or exchange their data for free (0 IOTA transaction), then Dominic is saying that the IOTA token must be used for that or any exchange in value on the network.
This is inherently healthy for the ecosystem since it provides a neutral and non-profit middle ground that all parties/companies can trust. If one company made their own token it wouldn’t be trusted since companies are incentivized by profits and nothing is stopping them from manipulating their token to make them more money. Thus, the IOTA foundation will not partner with anyone who refuses to take this option off the table.

All these companies are going to influence IOTA development!!

These companies have no influence on the development of IOTA. They either choose to use it or they don’t.

Internet of things is cheap and will stay cheap

Internet of things is one application of IOTA and considered by many to be the 4th industrial revolution. Go do some googling. IOTA having zero fees enables M2M for the first time in history. Also, if a crypto can do M2M it sure as shit can do M2P and P2P. M2M is hard mode.

IOTA surpassing speculation

IOTA, through the data marketplace and [qubic](qubic.iota.org), will be the first crypto to surpass speculation and actually be used in the real world for something. From there, it will branch out into other use cases, such as P2P. Or maybe P2P use of IOTA will grow in parallel with M2M, because why not?
https://blog.iota.org/iota-data-marketplace-cb6be463ac7f
12/19/17 update: Bosch reinforces IOTA's break-out from speculation by buying IOTA tokens for its future use in the data marketplace. https://i.redd.it/8e5b8bi9ov401.png
http://www.bosch-presse.de/pressportal/de/en/robert-bosch-venture-capital-makes-first-investment-in-distributed-ledger-technology-137411.html

Investing in a new project barely off the ground

Investing in a project in its early stages was something typically reserved for wealthy individuals/organizations before ICO’s became a thing. With early investing comes much less hand holding and more responsibility on the user to know what they are doing. If you have a hard time accepting this responsibility, don’t invest and wait for the technology to get easier for you. How many people actually knew how to use and mine bitcoin in 2009 before it had all its gui infrastructure?
IOTA is a tangle, the first of its kind. NOT a copy paste blockchain. As a result wallets and applications for IOTA are the first of their kind and translating the tangle into a nice clean user-friendly blockchain experience for the masses is even more taxing.

Why is the price of my coin falling?!

This may be the most asked question on any crypto subreddit but it's also the easiest to explain. The price typically falls when bad things happen to a coin or media fabricates bad news about a coin and a portion of investors take it seriously. The price increases when good things happen to a coin, such as a new exchange listing or a partnership announced etc.. The one piece that is often forgotten but trumps all these effects is something called "market forces".
Market forces is what happens to your coin when another coin gets a big news hit or a group of other coins get big news hits together. For example, when IOTA data marketplace released, IOTA hit a x5 bull run in a single week. But did you notice all the other alt coins in the red? There are a LOT of traders that are looking at the space as a whole and looking to get in on ANY bull action and will sell their other coins to do so. This effect can also be compounded over a long period of time such as what we witnessed when the bitcoin fork FOMO was going on and alt coins were squeezed continuously to feed it for weeks/months.
These examples really just scratch the surface of market forces but the big takeaway is that your coin or any coin will most certainly fall (or rise) in price at the result of what other coins are doing, with the most well known example being bitcoin’s correlation to every coin on the market. If you don't want to play the market-force game or don't have time for it, then you can never go wrong buying and holding.
It's also important to note that there are layers of investors. There's a top layer of light-stepping investors that are a mixture of day traders and gamblers trying to jump in and jump out to make quick money then look for the next buying (or shorting) opportunity at another coin. There's a middle layer of buyers and holders who did their research, believe in the tech and placing their bets it will win out in the long run. And the bottom layer are the founders and devs that are in it till the bitter end and there to see the vision realized. When a coin goes on a bull run, always expect that any day the top layer is going to pack up and leave to the next coin. But the long game is all about that middle layer. That is the layer that will be giving the bear markets their price-drop resistance. That is why the meme "HODL" is so effective because it very elegantly simplifies this whole concept for the common joe and makes them a part of that middle layer regardless if they understand whats going on or not.

TECHNICAL

How is IOTA free and how does it scale

IOTA is an altruistic system. Proof of work is done in IOTA just like bitcoin. Only a user’s device/phone must do pow for 2 other transactions before issuing one of its own. Therefore no miners and no fees. And the network becomes faster the more transactions are posted. Because of this, spamming the network is encouraged since they provide pow for 2 other transactions and speed up the network.

IOTA is centralized

IOTA is more decentralized than any blockchain crypto that relies on 5 pools of miners, all largely based in China. Furthermore, the coordinator is not a server in the dev’s basement that secretly processes all the transactions. It’s several nodes all around the globe that add milestone transactions to show the direction of the IF’s tangle within the DAG so people don’t accidentally follow a fork from a malicious actor. Anyone with the know-how can fork the tangle right now with a double-spend. But no one would follow their fork because the coordinator reveals which tangle is the legit IF one. If the coordinator wasn’t there (assuming low honest-transaction volume), there would be no way to discern which path to follow especially after the tangle diverges into forks of forks. Once throughout of honest transactions is significant enough, the “honest tangle” will replace the coordinated one and people will know which one to follow simply because it’s the biggest one in the room.
Referencing the coordinator is also optional.
Also, if you research and understand how IOTA intends to work without the coordinator, it’s easier to accept it for now as training wheels. I suggest reading pg 15 and on of the white paper analyzing in great depth how the network will defend different attack scenarios without a coordinator. For the past several months, IOTA foundation has been using St Petersburg college’s super computer to stress test IOTA and learn when they can turn the coordinator off. There will likely be a blog about the results soon.
This is another great read covering double spends on IOTA without a coordinator: www.tangleblog.com/2017/07/10/is-double-spending-possible-with-iota/
This too: http://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7eix4a/any_iota_guru_that_can_explain_what_this_guy_is/dq5ijrm
Also this correspondence with Vitalik and Come_from_Beyond https://twitter.com/DavidSonstebo/status/932510087301779456
At the end of the day, outstanding claims require outstanding evidence and folks approaching IOTA with a “I’ll believe it when I see it” attitude is completely understandable. It’s all about your risk tolerance.

Can IOTA defend double spend attacks?

99% of these “but did they think about double spend attacks?” type questions could just be answered if people went and did their own research. Yes of course they thought about that. That’s like crypto101…
www.tangleblog.com/2017/07/10/is-double-spending-possible-with-iota/

Will IOTA have smart contracts?

Yes - qubic.iota.org

Trinary vs binary?

"By using a ternary number system, the amount of devices and cycles can be reduced significantly. In contrast to two-state devices, multistate devices provide better radix economy with the option for further scaling"
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep36652
https://www.reddit.com/CryptoCurrency/comments/6jgbvb/iota_isnt_it_the_perfect_cryptocurrency/dje8os2/

Bitcoin with lightning network will make IOTA obsolete.

If you want lightning network, IOTA already released it. Called flash channels.
https://blog.iota.org/instant-feeless-flash-channels-88572d9a4385

IOTA rolled its own crypto!

https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
This is why: https://blog.iota.org/the-transparency-compendium-26aa5bb8e260
Cybercrypt has been hired to review and audit it. IOTA is currently running SHA-3/KECCAK now until Curl is ready.

MIT said bad things about IOTA

https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
And for official formal closure that MIT was completely wrong:
https://www.reddit.com/CryptoCurrency/comments/7svr8mit_media_lab_dci_allegations_proven_wrong_iotas/
https://blog.iota.org/curl-disclosure-beyond-the-headline-1814048d08ef
https://medium.com/@comefrombeyond/cfbs-comments-on-https-www-media-mit-edu-posts-iota-response-5834c7f8172d

Nick Johnson says IOTA is bad!

Nick Johnson is an ethereum dev who is incentivized to see IOTA fail, see CFBs twitter responses here.
https://mobile.twitter.com/nicksdjohnson/status/912676954184323073?lang=en
And this
https://t.co/1HgfPhg2lP
And this
https://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/72lly0/comment/dnjk9f5?st=JB2VKUBB&sh=a2892548
And this
https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2

IOTA is not private!

Masked authenticated messages exist right now so data can be transferred privately. Very important for businesses.

Coin privacy

Centralized coin mixer is out that foundation runs. Logs are kept so they can collect data and improve it Folks can copy the coin mixer code and run it themselves. Goal is for mixer to be decentralized and ran by any node.

How do nodes scale? How on earth can all that data be stored?

Full nodes store, update and verify from the last snapshot, which happens roughly every month. Its on the roadmap to make snapshotting automatic and up to each full node’s discretion.With automatic snapshots, each full node will act as a partial perma-node and choose when to snapshot its tangle data. If someone wants to keep their tangle data for several months or even years, they could just choose not to snapshot. Or if they are limited on hard drive space, they could snapshot every week.
Perma-nodes would store the entire history of the tangle from the genesis. These are optional and would likely only be created by companies who wish to sell historical access of the tangle as a service or companies who heavily use the tangle for their own data and want to have quick, convenient access to their data’s history.
Swarm nodes are also in development which will ease the burden on full nodes. https://blog.iota.org/iota-development-roadmap-74741f37ed01

Node discovery is manual? Wtf?

Nelson is fixing has fixed this:
https://medium.com/deviota/carriota-nelson-automatic-peer-discovery-for-iota-bdca9b8b8750
https://medium.com/deviota/carriota-nelson-in-a-nutshell-1ee5317d8f19
https://github.com/SemkoDev/nelson.cli

IOTA open source?

https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
IOTA protocol is open source. The coordinator is closed source open source.
https://imgur.com/a/xWQUp

Foundation moved user's funds?

https://blog.iota.org/official-iota-foundation-response-to-the-digital-currency-initiative-at-the-mit-media-lab-part-1-72434583a2
https://blog.iota.org/claims-and-reclaims-finalization-e692844c505a
https://www.reddit.com/Iota/comments/7mmimu/claims_and_reclaims_is_processing/drv63d5/

My IOTA donation address:

9PZFQNPLVDUNGAOYYMMXFWMGNPMNAJWZKTYOOMCYQTZQA9RPVVN9SE9KGOL9HWZFJBXKQGEOY9JJYDXB9TY9FLQPXB
submitted by mufinz2 to Iota [link] [comments]

The Ark Coin's Value

Hey, everyone. We know there has been a lot of FUD and confusion over what exactly the Ark coin does lately. So to add on to our post 6 months ago outlining The Ark Team's Vision, we're going to go into what exactly your red triangles will do for you and to address some of the questions people raised that caused a lot of FUD.

Quick refresher

What will the coin be used for?
Firstly, fees on the Ark blockchain must be paid in Ark. That's the case for most cryptos. If you make a transaction on Blockchain A, the transaction fee is denoted in Blockchain A's coins. Since the Ark blockchain is meant to be used as a "highway" to transmit messages between blockchains, the demand for Ark coins will increase as more blockclains join the Ark Ecosystem.
Why would anyone connect their blockchain to Ark?
You've all heard this before and it's outlined in The Ark Team's Vision. But as a refresher, the Ark software stack makes it stupidly simple to launch and customize your own blockchain. Right out of the box, developers get access to Ark's ecosystem of plugins to customize their network (like the ArkVM), a mobile wallet that's in both the Android and iOS store, a desktop wallet that works on Windows, OSX, and Linux, and a beautiful explorer. It just works with a single click of a button in the upcoming Pushbutton Deployable Blockchains feature.
Here is what led to a lot of anxiety
Will these pushbutton deployed chains be relying on Ark?
No. Not inherently. Not like how ERC20s rely on the Ethereum blockchain where fees (gas) are paid in ether. Ark's scalability plan works by segregating dapps into their own blockchains as to not bog down the main Ark chain. This also has the effect of decoupling the dapp/bridgechain's coin from the Ark coin.
Doesn't this mean the Ark coin is useless then?
No. Every chain deployed using the Ark stack will be automatically integrated with the greater Ark Ecosystem out of the box. Of course they can always choose not to and modify their core codebase to be incompatible with the Ark protocol while getting the codebase, plugins, fancy wallets, and explorer for free.
What if every bridgechain decides to do that?
The same risk exists for every crypto project because they're all open source! But there is greater incentive for them not to for Ark or any incumbent player because of the network effect and preexisting infrastructure. A competitor would have to get the same $200M in funding that the Ark team has, build out their own ACES marketplace or trustless swap infrastructure, and convince people to leave the Ark community to join them. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? Not in our opinion.
Feasibility of economics aside, bridgechains will also get instant liquidity by being able to exchange their coins for Ark without having to wait to get listed on an exchange. This also means people are incentivized to have their bridgechain ICO accept Ark and set aside a portion of that to provide liquidity for their investors and to facilitate communication with the Ark blockchain.
What if a bridgechain becomes really popular? Why wouldn't I just hold their coin instead of Ark?
This was brought up on Slack and Matthew_DC answered it but probably wasn't clear due to how hectic it got in there.
Think of it this way: Yes, you can just hold Persona if all you use and plan on using in the future is the Persona blockchain. That would be akin to living off Amazon giftcards in real life.
Ark is like cash. You can use it for every chain in the ecosystem. Cash is inherently more valuable to more people which is why you usually see giftcards on sale for less than its fiat value.
It's also possible that the bridgechain will outperform Ark, but then you could just hedge your bets and swap your Ark for that coin then swap back later. The relationship between Ark and bridgechain coins will be similar to Bitcoin and altcoins.
What do you mean I can use Ark on other chains?
Here's a visual representation
  1. Imagine a single universal Ark Ecosystem wallet holding ARK that has a nice UI with a list of dapps in the ecosystem.
  2. You select a dapp in the wallet.
  3. You send a tx from the wallet using Ark with instructions in the Smartbridge field.
----Everything below this line is transparent to the user----
  1. The Ark gets converted to dappCoin via an intermediary like ACES or some other node network to facilitate swaps
  2. The intermediary node receives Ark and uses the dappCoin on the dapp chain to do whatever it is the user wanted to do using the instructions in the Smartbridge field.
  3. The dappchain responds to the request to the intermediary.
  4. The intermediary sends an Ark tx with the results of the dapp computation/action in the smartbridge field.
----Everything above this line is transparent to the user----
  1. After 8+ seconds, user's wallet shows them the result of their interaction with the dapp bridgechain.
This is where the Ark coin will deliver the most value for holders. The Ark coin will be a universal "omni-coin" that will instantly shapeshift into bridgechain coins to interact with the bridgechain dapp.
Holders will want Ark to interact with dapps. Developers will want Ark to build out their bridgechains and to fund their ICOs.
Can't someone just clone Ark, make some improvements, and use their coin as the omnicoin?
Yes. There is nothing stopping anyone from doing that.
There is also nothing stopping anyone from making some improvements to Ethereum, porting all the existing erc20s and dapps and trying to supplant Ethereum. They can do all of that but the chances of them succeeding in converting enough users over to them are slim.
For someone to supplant the Ark blockchain and Ark coin, they would need orders of magnitude better technology (users won't switch for marginal improvements), set up their own coin swap infrastructure, compete against a preexisting community, and have at least as much funding as the Ark team has right now. And any marginal tech improvements they make can just be merged into the Ark codebase because everything is open source.
We hope this addresses everyone's concerns and is easier to read than the meandering slack log that was posted yesterday. Feel free to ask any questions you may have and we'll try our best to answer them.
submitted by biz_classic to ArkEcosystem [link] [comments]

Slack log of AIP19 discussion - 16-08-18

Please find below the slack log for discussion relating AIP19 as presented here https://github.com/ArkEcosystem/AIPs/issues/26
I will try to write a blog post explaining in further detail the AIP19 for non-technical individuals however due to current obligations it will be delayed and finish some time in September.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew_DC [3:43 PM]
I think AIP 18/19 has some merit and I had a chance to look at it before he published. He gave Francois and I a chance to review the idea as he was hesitant to post it publicly in fear that a competitor might steal it, which I can appreciate. There are a lot of things in there that I find interesting. The proposal in AIP18 makes a lot of sense and would solidify the price discovery and help create a streamlined system for the wallet for token swaps. We can make it intuitive and easy to use. The AIP19 proposal is where I think we all need to slow down and seriously consider both the impact it would have on ARK and what ARK is trying to accomplish, as well as the complications that might arise from the system. For starters, AIP19 turns ARK into a decentralized delegate services network. In other words, Consensus-As-A-Service (CAAS). This is something we actually discussed at Crypti and had a model for, which I believe Lisk is still planning on implementing. That model looks very similar to what Komodo has already tried to implement in regards to storing data on the main chain (hashes) relevant to the sidechain as an added security layer. I'm not sure that solution is the best model and I think there is a major problem that needs solved, which AIP19 is partially trying to address. That problem is the security of early stage bridge chains who have yet to build a strong following. Finding a way to use the "hash power", or in this case, vote based security, of the main chain, is something I've been very interested in and would love to find a proper solution for. What needs to be considered is the impact that the system has on up-time and reliability of the network (for starters). Let's say I'm an attacker and I want to just really hose up the works. If I create a script that moves large chunks of voting wait all over the place consistently for multiple blocks or rounds, how will that impact the delegates assignments, will they all switch to the appropriate network in time, will blocks be missed as the transition occurs, etc. Consider that every 1-2 cent change in price could drastically move delegates between networks and if you couple that with voter swings, you are looking at a lot of moving parts. For all of that complexity, what added security do you really gain? New bridge chains will still be very low on the list for delegates due to price which makes them easy targets. However, for an attacker, it would potentially randomize the order of delegates to a point where it would make it very hard to put yourself in position to take over a network which would add a lot of difficulty to an attack. To try and gauge exactly the amount of votes, the price of the token, and what 27 spots you would need to control would be almost impossible.
The complicated part would be smoothing out the delegate transitions in a way that doesn't cause total constant chaos among delegates as votes, prices, and registrations are constantly changing. Imagine 5 years from now if there are 100 bridge chains, some with 101 delegates, some with 501, some with 51, etc. What if someone comes in and registers a network with 1,000,000,000 delegates, does it shut down the system? How does it react? There are a lot of things like that which have to be considered before you can move forward with something like this.
I'm not saying it's a bad idea and I think it's a really intriguing use of the system, especially for DPoS, but there is a lot that has to be mapped out.
You can't just start coding it and hope for the best.
cj (azek) [3:55 PM]
@Matthew_DC ++
Matthew_DC [4:12 PM]
On a side note, I think that the CAAS model fits directly with the desire to have the ARK core technology power startups and enterprises blockchain solutions while providing a strong avenue for the public decentralized applications to take hold and grow. By keying their consensus and security into one main chain, it does provide added security and allow for a use case other than "currency" for the main net, but it does do it at the cost of some decentralization. Part of why ARK is being developed to allow bridged but separate chains is to avoid one central point of failure (the point of all of this). By making so many systems globally dependent on the ARK main chain for their consensus mechanism to function, you do sacrifice decentralization for security in this case. If the ARK network were to end up with a critical bug or suffer from some kind of attack, etc, it could cause all subsequent reliant network to stop forging as well. This is something we are always thinking about.
vdeurzen (blockport) [4:20 PM]
joined #trading_altcoins.
bangomatic [4:23 PM]
order books finally on Delta.
:allthethings:
Jarunik [4:38 PM]
For AIP18 I have my doubts concerning price finding. Free market will likely beat a stable coin formula. I would rather see each token valued individually. Didn‘t analyse the formulas in detail but looks like a weak point. A market based pricing would be more interesting.
Blazeron [4:39 PM]
why wouldn't it just use the market value automatically?
Jarunik [4:39 PM]
Because there is none
Check persona as example
Whats the Ark-Prs market rate?
tk0n (thefoundry) [4:43 PM]
price is also susceptible to manipulation
bangomatic [4:43 PM]
polymath making some BIG announcements today. www.twitter.com/polymathnetwork
Blazeron [4:48 PM]
hmm true, it wouldn't work with very small tokens that aren't widely listed
Matthew_DC [5:11 PM]
That's the same problem you have right now with any exchange. There are hundreds of tokens you could spike by 200% in 5 mins for like $200
The point isn't whether or not all of his math is perfect or whether or not his formula is even the one that gets used, its about whether or not it is a good idea to create "liquidity gates" for atomic swaps and separately, should they be used for price discovery
even if an AIP isn't taken and implemented wholesale, it may provide value through some of the ideas involved
Obviously, the system he proposes in AIP19 doesn't work without proper price discovery and some kind of oracle
Keep in mind, he specifically proposes a stable coin formula as an example as well as an exponential priced ICO token wherein the creator would be using it as a system to fund an ICO, but that doesn't mean you wouldn't have free market price discovery through some form of order book function.
pieface [5:19 PM]
Would AIP19 deem the ArkVM chain as not needed anymore?
Matthew_DC [5:20 PM]
To avoid major shuffling issues it almost makes sense to have a superblock either every round or x number of rounds with a longer block time to allow the delegate system to perform averages on price/position of bridge chains for delegate assignment and allow a longer period of adjustment
pieface [5:20 PM]
One of the benefits of the ArkVM chain is that you don't have to find delegates to run your chain, AIP19 sounds like it solves the same problem in a different way
Matthew_DC [5:21 PM]
It would be a completely separate consideration from VM and VM would still be something we want/need
Jarunik [5:22 PM]
If we need super blocks ... then it will slow down the mainnet the more sidechains we have. Wouldn't it be better to use decentralized ACES?
Matthew_DC [5:25 PM]
You could probably do it with 1 longer block at the end of each round to allow time for the shuffling. So one longer block every 7 mins or so. That's just a random thought and is something that would have to be tested. In some sense, this system IS ACES, just upgraded to take into account the added features of v2/AIP11 like webhooks, multi-sig, time locks, etc
just re-organized into a dex with some form of order book and then used for price discovery
Jarunik [5:26 PM]
yes ... but it should run outside of the Ark mainnet and just connect to it
Matthew_DC [5:26 PM]
Well, like I said above, in his proposal, you exchange decentralization for security/valuation
Which is one of the considerations (edited)
It's the same argument we've been having all along
brodinson [5:27 PM]
I'd like some extra security and valuation :evil:
Matthew_DC [5:27 PM]
Do you potentially sacrifice principal for token valuation?
Security would be for bridge chains
Jarunik [5:28 PM]
it will increase the risk for the main chain ...
brodinson [5:28 PM]
That's fine too right
Matthew_DC [5:28 PM]
At some point, you have to ask are you just recreating the current financial system with you as the central bank
brodinson [5:28 PM]
I mean ark being an ecosystem and all
Want all that good security stuffs for the bridgechains
Jarunik [5:29 PM]
I am against Ark being the "master" chain. :slightly_smiling_face:
brodinson [5:29 PM]
Also extra reasons for a higher valuation can only attract more investors and thus more attention.
Matthew_DC [5:29 PM]
The more bridge chains that rely on the ARK main chain for security and in order for their applications to work, the more you risk incentivizing collusion and extortion by the delegates and increase their personal power over people's money (edited)
Jarunik [5:30 PM]
If you do something directly for "high valuation" ... then you will take that profit from someone else ...
Who will lose ?
brodinson [5:30 PM]
Find countermeasures to possible collusion?
Jarunik [5:30 PM]
Unlikely to work.
brodinson [5:30 PM]
Maybe some random factors?
Jarunik [5:30 PM]
Power corrupts
Matthew_DC [5:30 PM]
I mean, at the end of the day, what he is suggesting, and what AIP19 boils down to, is turning the ARK Main Chain into a decentralized Delegate Marketplace for ARK Bridge Chains.
It's a pivot for the purpose of the main chain for sure.
Jarunik [5:31 PM]
And my point is that a bridgechain not good enough to create a delegate incentive and market is not good enough anyway.
Matthew_DC [5:32 PM]
The delegate marketplace was always meant to be a completely open free market system where people could find delegates for their bridge chains and make offers/promote their chains, but never force tie-in to the ARK main chain and 100% exclusively rely on it for security and validation.
Jarunik [5:32 PM]
If the bridge chain does offer utility and functionality ... then it will be no problem to pay the delegates.
Matthew_DC [5:33 PM]
He doesn't shy away from it in the proposal and outright says that a large motivating factor for the proposal is to create valuation for the ARK token and a use case.
Jarunik [5:33 PM]
So this kind of ark mainchain market place sounds like a concept to push up "unhealthy" sidechains for higher valuation (similar like shittokens of eth)
spghtzzz(ark.party is not a website) [5:33 PM]
ARK already has those
Matthew_DC [5:34 PM]
If it were me personally and only me and I wasn't relying on the ARK token to make me rich and I could make decisions based on my fundamentals and what was right in staying true to the nature of ARK and decentralization, I would whole heartedly say no way.
But the delegates decide what happens to the network in the end, not me.
vela_nova [5:34 PM]
No it sound like a way to incentivize adoption
Matthew_DC [5:34 PM]
There are lots of driving forces and for many, that driving force is token valuation, whether we like it or not.
Having every delegate for every bridge chain be required to register and receive payment on the main chain isn't really adoption in the way we want it. (edited)
spghtzzz(ark.party is not a website) [5:35 PM]
Marketplaces seem like a good idea, but I think ARKVM will probably stop people from having to delegate every single function they want to create, using tokens and leveraging someone elses blockchain as a service.
Jarunik [5:36 PM]
we already have a delegate market place ... if you offer good enough incentives and a convincing project ... easy to find dpos delegates.
pieface [5:38 PM]
Couldn't there be a compromise somewhere?
Continue with the Ark Mainchain like now.
An ArkVM chain which the Arkcoin is pegged to
An ArkDM (Ark delegate marketplace) chain which the Ark coin is also pegged to. (edited)
Matthew_DC [5:38 PM]
The truth is, a large part of the valuation and use of the token relies on our ability to create easy swapping mechanisms for ARK->Bridge Chains so that we can incorporate easy, simple to use, GUI driven interaction with bridge chains without anyone ever needing to own the other token. That involves ACES or something like AIP18, it involves creating multi-sig and time lock style transactions, that allow the network to use something similar to liquidity gates (for the sake of argument) to allow the ARK wallet or application store to carry out the bridge chain functions with the ARK balance, invisible to the user.
@pieface There is nothing to stop someone from creating any possible use case, whether that be a delegate marketplace or 3 or 4 VM focused chains with different flavors and incentives, etc
vela_nova [5:44 PM]
You can’t expect potential clients to identify a use case, the actors involved, and where that use case starts and ends without some kind of built in framework and enough momentum/adoption to ensure dependability. (edited)
Matthew_DC [5:45 PM]
This is the tricky part of decentralized business and a decentralized world, you have to come to consensus. It's why there are so many forks out there. If we asked every delegate, odds are it would be split on AIP19
If a potential client hasn't identified a use case then how are they a client? We absolutely can expect a potential client to identify a use case or they have no business. That's step #1. As far as finding delegates, we had always planned a marketplace, just not tied to the ARK main chain in the way described in AIP19. As far as examples and frameworks, we are building out new documentation and have some partners who will be helping us do just that.
vela_nova [5:55 PM]
It sounds like you’re relying too much on an audience that has already accepted ark as a solution to their needs. That’s problematic when it comes strengthening the ecosystem and encouraging adoption.
I look forward to this new documentation though (edited)
zebedee [5:57 PM]
lol Lisk up 30% , mainnet pump
vela_nova [6:02 PM]
:shrugs:
vela_nova [6:15 PM]
So the lisk community is convinced that their resources are dedicated to a productive cause. Maybe we could use some positive speculation too for a change. A little shade is one thing, but y’all are some walking palm trees :palm_tree: up in here. This culture of scrutinizing lisk or any other project but the one one we’re here for is ironically weakening the ark.
SuperCool (The Golden Horde) [6:16 PM]
The we already have a market place argument is an inside argument imo. From the ‘outside’ aip19 would sound really nice. While there is some truth in the ‘shitcoin argument’ I feel it almost the same as the ‘bitcoin is used by criminals’ argument
Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [6:16 PM]
What's the golden horde ?
SuperCool (The Golden Horde) [6:17 PM]
Our marketing failed :cripes:
Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [6:17 PM]
If it was on Reddit, I'm sorry. I don't follow the Reddit much because of the time Ark Tribe takes.
tk0n (thefoundry) [6:17 PM]
you have marketing?
SuperCool (The Golden Horde) [6:18 PM]
@Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) Colby made a really nice introduction: https://medium.com/the-golden-horde-blog/the-golden-horde-announces-ark-delegation-merchandise-business-e3f1a4162a60?source=linkShare-b6b32376193e-1534436290
Medium
The Golden Horde Announces Ark Delegation & Merchandise Business
After being in the Ark community for more than a year, we have seen a lot of great people coming together and discussing all things…
Reading time
6 min read
Jul 26th
https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1200/1*HOBm_aB5iJ4XUCV5y9Ls7g.png
SuperCool (The Golden Horde) [6:19 PM]
replied to a thread:
This is really offensive, we should remove tk0n
vela_nova [6:20 PM]
Ya little too much behind closed doors for my taste.
SuperCool (The Golden Horde)
The we already have a market place argument is an inside argument imo. From the ‘outside’ aip19 would sound really nice. While there is some truth in the ‘shitcoin argument’ I feel it almost the same as the ‘bitcoin is used by criminals’ argument
Posted in #trading_altcoinsToday at 6:16 PM
Highjhacker (The Golden Horde) [6:20 PM]
replied to a thread:
DELETE :angry:
arkenstone [6:39 PM]
Slack outage
This message was deleted.
tk0n (thefoundry) [6:41 PM]
You can take away my GIFs but you can never take away my freedom :allthethings:
SuperCool (The Golden Horde)
This is really offensive, we should remove tk0n
From a thread in #trading_altcoinsToday at 6:19 PM
arkenstone [6:43 PM]
This was strange ..was on officia slack .. they said servers were down ..was getting error messages when sending text ..
SuperCool (The Golden Horde) [6:44 PM]
Yeah slack was down for me aswell
I wanted to ad to my argument that aip19 or a similar solution would make ‘push click blockchain’ a real thing
Msk [6:55 PM]
joined #trading_altcoins.
Matthew_DC [6:58 PM]
I had a reply but couldn't post it and now I forgot :shrugs:
SuperCool (The Golden Horde) [7:04 PM]
Haha
I also wrote that a lot smarter the first time
mak [7:14 PM]
Thanks for the feedback @Matthew_DC. Some of the points you mention up have been brought up in the last week by @skeuo as well. Such as someone changing votes frequently in order to mess with the system and someone creating a chain with 10,000 delegates. For the first problem I suggested that vote recount could happen every few hours instead of every block but it's possible there is a better way to handle this. In the second case I think a bridgechain with so many delegates wouldn't be able to sustain any significant token value since the blockreward would be diminished so much or would be unable to pay out because the liquidity gate ran out of ark. I agree these are technical hurdles related to implementation that we need to consider but I don't see them as critical issues.
Regarding your last point i.e someone breaking ark main chain would break the entire ecosystem I acknowledge that it is a concern. Which is why the token economic incentive is useful to make it more difficult to execute a 51% attack on the main chain. On the other hand since the bridgechains depend on the main chain's security for theirs, it makes the bridge chains more secure. In the end I see this as a mechanism design problem where the best approaches can be proven mathematically using game theory and if there's a better way to achieve the same effects then I'd be glad to check them out.
Matthew_DC [7:18 PM]
You also have to consider the consensus mechanisms and individual components and modules used by bridge chains. A given bridge chain may require a specific set of modules for their applications purpose. In that sense, their node software may be vastly different for providing consensus when compared to the ARK core model. In this case, let's say delegates ABC are providing consensus for Bridge Chain X and after vote re-shuffle, ABC are now required to provide consensus for the use case of Bridge Chain Y. This may require a completely different software package for the node and you have to determine a model for those delegates to not just re-shuffle to new peers for consensus, but also potentially download and implement new modules or entire new packages in order to provide consensus for the given bridge chain to which they are assigned. (edited)
Jarunik [7:19 PM]
Did anyone check the sidechain forging from mainchain that blockpool is developing?
Matthew_DC [7:20 PM]
I haven't
mike [7:20 PM]
I like the proposals but prefer pie's approach of implementing them on bridged chains. The main chain needs to be simple and reliable like TCP/IP. We then build on top of in modular fashion, like adding email and http on top of TCP/IP instead of adding them to it.
Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [7:23 PM]
@mike the point was to make Ark the reward system, if they're on the bridged chain how would they receive Ark as the token reward for their forging chain?
It was also meant as an incensitive for non-forging node, as for now, they're running a node for free.
Matthew_DC [7:24 PM]
Maybe instead you do a dual voting system that somehow ties into a core delegate market network or the ARK Main Chain that allows for voting on a given bridge chain using a bridge chain ID# and Delegate# and every ARK accounts gets 1 vote per bridge chain and then that holds 60% weight and the bridge chain votes hold 40% and the bridge chain has a mechanism built into their node through a module that pulls votes from main net
So you provide additional security without the main net delegates providing consensus so packages aren't an issue and it's not as susceptible to being completely taken down by ark main net going down as a secondary voting system exists (bridge chain votes) (edited)
mak [7:25 PM]
That was also one of the suggestions that @skeuo came up with but from what I could work up it would have adverse effects on scaling since all main chain delegates now need to have a full node running for every bridgechain in order to know bridgechain only delegates (edited)
However if we could provide hard SPV guarantees then maybe it's possible
Matthew_DC [7:27 PM]
OK, no need to map that out further I think you know what I'm saying on that one and it sounds like it was mentioned.
Well, how do you trust any values from any network truly.
If you want to vote on a bridge chain, then your wallet has to connect to a relay or node on that network
through the same way we do now on ARK
no need to download the entire chain necessarily
goldenpepe [7:28 PM]
How does one provide SPV guarantees in dpos?
mak [7:30 PM]
the block headers leading up to the required transaction are provided though I'm not sure if the chance of correctness in DPoS is the same as in PoW (edited)
Matthew_DC [7:30 PM]
Delegates on the bridge chain could still convert and payout forging rewards to main net voters with a little work to the scripts
JayCrypto [7:32 PM]
You guys need a new white paper
Matthew_DC [7:33 PM]
Way to break the flow
mak [7:34 PM]
the main issue IMO would be with main chain delegates accepting the threshold signatures
if some of the delegates have been selected only on the bridgechain
then the main chain can't know for certain about them without SPV or a fullnode
and like I mentioned I don't have the expertise to figure out how reliable SPV is in a DPoS system
JayCrypto [7:35 PM]
Why does it matter
Why can't the nodes run their own delegates (edited)
mak [7:36 PM]
the bridge chain could either go 100% delegates voted on their own chain or 100% delegates voted on main chain but not a mixture of both
JayCrypto [7:37 PM]
Why
mak [7:37 PM]
it would require main chain delegates to run full nodes for all bridgechains
not scalable
you run into the same situation that ethereum has currently
JayCrypto [7:41 PM]
I'm not a tech person but I always envisioned ark as bridge chains not connected to main chain but able to communicate with them through arkVM or some aces module. I never thought the bridge chains would need the security of ark. As for ICO, I was under the impression that through arkVM or aces, companies can raise money through ark/Eth/btc... And eventually some arkVM Dex would be available to trade between tokens
Matthew_DC [7:41 PM]
Maybe I'm being naive here, but why does the main chain care? It's up to the bridge chain to properly implement the dual voting for the added security and to require voting from main net to impact their voting mechanism. Main net should just store a vote value. If it's 60/40 main chain voting to bridge chain voting to determine delegates, then you still have a ton of added security. IF the bridge chain isn't properly implementing it, then people should consider whether or not they really want to put their money into the token/bridge chain. It would require the bridge chain delegates run an ARK node but that's better for us and creates a larger ARK main network by adding more relays.
Sorry, maybe I'm missing something and I'm just thinking out loud while doing a bunch of other stuff
mak [7:42 PM]
main chain needs to approve/disapprove remote liquidity gate transactions based on it's knowledge of current bridgechain delegates
Matthew_DC [7:42 PM]
I'm not talking about the liquidity gate right now
mak [7:42 PM]
can't have AIP18 working without it
Matthew_DC [7:42 PM]
I'm talking about dual voting chains for added security
and then we don't need price discovery for vote shuffles
JayCrypto [7:43 PM]
What's a liquidity gate
mak [7:43 PM]
@JayCrypto please read the AIP 18 :slightly_smiling_face: https://github.com/ArkEcosystem/AIPs/issues/25
GitHub
AIP 18: On chain price discovery using liquidity gates · Issue #25 · ArkEcosystem/AIPs
AIP: 18 Title: Token price discovery and creating high liquidity decentralized exchange in the Ark ecosystem using instant crosschain atomic swaps Authors: Moazzam Abdullah Khan Status: Draft Type:...
Matthew_DC [7:44 PM]
and it provides utility because the voting from main chain provides security to side chain and also potentially if main chain accounts get 1 vote on every bridge chain it provides for additional forging rewards exponentially as the network grows
but without adding a bunch of complex activity on the main chain
just more voting transactions really
mak [7:44 PM]
We could make it so that the bridgechain only delegates aren't part of the k-threshold signature for the liquidity gate
that way it would work
Matthew_DC [7:45 PM]
ark tokens wouldn't dilute bridge chain circulation as they aren't actual tokens, but they provide for voting to expand capability and security of bridge chain through their use
mak [7:45 PM]
but then those delegates are 2nd class delegates that don't share the full responsibility
Matthew_DC [7:45 PM]
and voters on main chain could be paid out from converted forging rewards
Aren't they though?
ARK main net provides 100% of security of its main chain and 60% of all bridge chains that implement, bridge chains hold 40% of responsibility which is reasonable but allows for much more expensive 51% attacks if main net votes are being used on bridge chains providing added security for new chains just spinning up
mak [7:47 PM]
how do you propose we create the threshold signatures to control liquidity gates when the delegates are split like this?
Maybe I'm missing something here
Matthew_DC [7:47 PM]
I'm not concerned at all with liquidity gates right now
I'm talking about a system in which bridge chains get added security, main chain gets added utility, by adding very little to main chain bloat and using vendor field
then you are back to the idea of just having a decentralized exchange for swaps, atomic swaps, and traditional methods of moving funds between
for that matter, any DPoS chain could tie in to the main chain for added security using that method by registering a chain and allowing voting
mak [7:49 PM]
Let me ask you this then. Do you agree that the bridgechain's delegates should be responsible for handling it's liquidity gate? You have to keep in mind there are potentially billions of dollars worth of tokens stored in them.
I think that delegates should be responsible for it because the community trusted them with their votes.
Matthew_DC [7:50 PM]
just create an atomic swap marketplace
mak [7:51 PM]
can't have price discovery without liquidity gates though. So there would be no rank ladder to figure out delegate-bridgechain match
Matthew_DC [7:51 PM]
no ladder necessary
no convoluted hot swapping delegates
main chain accounts choose who they want to vote for
and can register 1 vote per bridge chain
mak [7:52 PM]
well then you have the same issue of delegates speculating on future token price and negotiating with team to become a delegate
too much social friction
Matthew_DC [7:53 PM]
I disagree. People said our version of DPoS wouldn't work because of social this and that and bribes and blah blah
Delegates can't negotiate with the team for votes if the main chain votes outweigh the bridge chain funds 60/40
mak [7:54 PM]
Ohh I think it works. Just that there is a lot of unnecessary headache involved which can be taken out completely. (edited)
JayCrypto [7:54 PM]
@Matthew_DC are you saying that ark holders can vote on bridhechain delegates even though they have no bridhechain tokens?
Matthew_DC [7:54 PM]
you are creating checks and balances on manipulation by the team in a sense
@JayCrypto yes, as an added security measure for the bridge chain to avoid 51% attacks in their infant stages
you would essentially have to take over ARK main chain, plus a % of bridge chain tokens to gain control
JayCrypto [7:55 PM]
Or you could issue 1 trillion of your own tokens
Is there a yes no option for this
Matthew_DC [7:56 PM]
It doesn't matter if % is 60/40 in delegate appointment 60% of weight from ARK main net and 40% from bridge chain net voting
mak [7:56 PM]
"you are creating checks and balances on manipulation by the team in a sense"
I disagree with that assessment. I am creating a decentralized protocol that manages the financial layer across multiple chains. The team should only have to worry about their product and not about convincing delegates to join them by offering rewards outside of the blockrewards.
Matthew_DC [7:56 PM]
so no matter how many tokens you make, it still holds in the calculation
They aren't offering outside rewards of any kind
JayCrypto [7:57 PM]
Is there a yes no option for this
Cos I wouldn't want it
Matthew_DC [7:57 PM]
They build their product, delegates need to worry about convincing people to vote for them
yes or no option for what?
mike [7:57 PM]
Implementing AIP18 and 19 on a bridge chain would make a lot of sense. It can operate with a 2 way peg to ark even, so delegate rewards would be the same, and convertible to Ark, or let the market decide the conversion rate, or use a liquidity gate. Many of the same delegates would operate on it, as has been the case with Persona.
mak [7:57 PM]
Eventually it's going to happen. Why would a delegate want to run the 100th chain in the ark ecosystem when it's expected market cap would never reach a million dollars.
JayCrypto [7:58 PM]
For this 60 034'3!5 thing
Matthew_DC [7:58 PM]
Why would anyone run as a delegate on any network
JayCrypto [7:58 PM]
Percent
Matthew_DC [7:58 PM]
at some point the team has to do some form of work
Crypto needs to get away from this entitlement stage
mak [7:58 PM]
@mike it could be done that way for convenience but it's functionally equivalent to having the voting on main ark chain.
Matthew_DC [7:58 PM]
if your product is stupid and no one believes it will ever have value and you aren't making any progress or building anything
then your network SHOULD die
mike [7:59 PM]
also, Rob has set up multiple chains to run on the same servers, so lower volume chains can be run very cost effectively.
Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [8:00 PM]
But then again, even with a great product, starting isn't always easy, so this marketplace of delegate could enable great project effectively.
mike [8:00 PM]
yes, mainchain voting could be mirrored over to the bridged aip19 chain.
Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [8:00 PM]
It would reduce risks for delegates too when they actually help a starting project, before they decide if they will run a full delegate on the chain or not.
Matthew_DC [8:01 PM]
AIP19 doesn't solve the "I don't want to be a delegate on a useless network" problem either
why would someone sit in spots 1,000-2,000 and run a node at a loss?
same problem
mike [8:01 PM]
i've never seen a new project having problems recruiting delegates, but they do sometimes have a problem retaining them if interest in the project fades due to failure to execute.
Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [8:02 PM]
@mike but so far there isn't many projects.
mak [8:02 PM]
I think you misunderstood my point @Matthew_DC. I think delegates are service providers that get paid to ensure decentralization to your bridgechain. They may or may not provide additional services to remain competitive but that's irrelevant for now. What I'm saying is that we can streamline the back and forth that is required currently to get delegates and keep them running (look at KAPU).
Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [8:02 PM]
When the number multiplies, there will be much more to chose from, and this might become another kind of trouble.
mak [8:03 PM]
However if you don't agree with that perspective then that's fine. Someone will eventually come in and implement AIP19 on their forked chain and we will let the market decide if it's useful or not.
vela_nova [8:03 PM]
Dunno ark the product can have everything but a driving purpose and still fail economically
Matthew_DC [8:03 PM]
You just need a central place for delegates to market themselves and their services and for projects to find them
Master [8:03 PM]
What’s the debate :eyes:
vela_nova [8:03 PM]
That is why I like what mak is getting at
Matthew_DC [8:03 PM]
You can do that without massive changes to the ARK Main net
JayCrypto [8:03 PM]
I'm just shocked that ark bridgechains have to use ark main chain delegates
Jarunik [8:04 PM]
A normal website is enough as delegate market place. I would have to run different servers for different chains anyway ... no need to integrate delegate operation into one mainchain.
Matthew_DC [8:04 PM]
And I agree the market should decide so you won't find any argument there. I would love to see multiple models challenge one another because in the end it makes the winner much stronger
Jarunik [8:05 PM]
More delegate tools that come out of the box and are easy to port over would help though.. :wink:
Matthew_DC [8:05 PM]
but anyone struggling to find delegates right now, it is most likely because their idea just sucks
Jarunik [8:06 PM]
Let's first have a good and stable payment solution for all bridge chains without the need for every delegate to code some script himself ... will already make delegate recruitement easier.
Matthew_DC [8:06 PM]
That's not going to happen. Delegate payouts won't be coded into the network itself by us at any point.
Jarunik [8:06 PM]
Things like that are much easier to implement and much less invasive.
I didn't say that ...
Brian already made a good plugin.
Matthew_DC [8:07 PM]
That I'm fine with
Djenny Floro (Ark Tribe) [8:07 PM]
@Jarunik something like that implemented in the Ark Commander?
Matthew_DC [8:07 PM]
but no baking it into the network core itself
Jarunik [8:07 PM]
If that becomes well tested and easy to use ... will help all bridge chains
Matthew_DC [8:07 PM]
for previously stated reasons
Jarunik [8:07 PM]
i don't want anything in the core :stuck_out_tongue:
i love the bare bone approach of v2
Matthew_DC [8:07 PM]
shit guys, I'm really enjoying this but I was supposed to leave 7 minutes ago to take my kids somewhere
try to capture some of the convo if you can and post a pastebin link in the github maybe
just for the sake of saving it
Jarunik [8:08 PM]
complex stuff tends to fail too easily
mak [8:08 PM]
have fun :slightly_smiling_face:
I think I've laid out all of my points. It's upto the delegates to decide if the idea holds merit and should be implemented.
JayCrypto [8:09 PM]
Is this 60/40 thing a slider which new bridgechains can use @Matthew_DC
spghtzzz(ark.party is not a website) [8:09 PM]
I always thought the ArkVM was meant to address this, if a person who is starting a new bridge does not **need** to change any node code, or **want** to run any delegates they can just create a token. Perhaps I am wrong though.
mike [8:09 PM]
i think implementing aip19 on a forked chain is best approach, and let market decide. i think there are some very good ideas to try in aip18 and 19, which is the advantage of ark's modular approach. ideas like this can be tried without risking the main chain, or having to hardfork it to add them in. By allowing a token swap or doing an airdrop, ark holders can have a stake in its success if it really does take off.
mak [1 hour ago]
If there's a 1:1 peg with ark on the new chain then there's no economic incentive for people to hold the new chain. However it will split the votes so it would be easier to attack the new network that's hosting the bridgechain delegate voting system.
mak [1 hour ago]
So if we want to experiment with it then we can't have the peg there.
mike [1 hour ago]
so you can mirror the voting from the main chain, just ignore votes for delegates that aren't running on the bridged chain.
mak [1 hour ago]
At that point is it a different chain anymore?
submitted by moazzam2k to ArkEcosystem [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Cash News With Jason & Corbin - Inflation Bug on Bitcoin Core! Wikipedia Accept BCH & More Charlie Lee APPROVED! Square Wins Patent + Filecoin & Social SEND Updates - Today's Crypto News Crypterio - ICO and Cryptocurrency WordPress Theme - StylemixThemes 'Bitcoin' Supporters Choose Credit Cards Over Bitcoin?! Bitcoin Cash ICO Raises $30 Million & more

Best Free png HD bitcoin logo png images background, PNG png file easily with one click Free HD PNG images, png design and transparent background with high quality. This file is all about PNG and it includes bitcoin logo tale which could help you design much easier than ever before.; bitcoin logo png images background ,and download free photo png stock pictures and transparent background with ... Download Bitcoin Accepted Here Icon in Isometric style. Free & Premium icons available in SVG PNG EPS ICS and Icon fonts. Download Now! Best Free png bitcoin logo , HD bitcoin logo png images, PNG png file easily with one click Free HD PNG images, png design and transparent background with high quality. Explore and download Free HD PNG images, and transparent images Download Bitcoin accepted here Icon in Flat style. Free & Premium icons available in SVG, PNG, EPS, ICO, ICNS and Icon fonts. Download Now! Explore free Bitcoin png images & Bitcoin transparent images on vhv.rs. Download PNG image you need and share it via SNS.

[index] [38736] [33424] [46355] [29249] [21250] [27854] [9814] [50435] [38127] [33591]

Bitcoin Cash News With Jason & Corbin - Inflation Bug on Bitcoin Core! Wikipedia Accept BCH & More

Amazon to Accept Bitcoin? The 2X Hardfork Sucks ... ICO Review: Raiden Network (RDN) - Scalable Transfers for Ethereum - Duration: 10:02. Crush Crypto 9,789 views. 10:02. The Bitcoin Halving & The ... Bitcoin Cash growing Adoption Post on Yours.org shows: Over 90% of merchants who accept Bitcoin Core, accept Bitcoin Cash. Over the last year BCH has managed to match BTC’s 8 years of adoption. Visit our website: https://altcoinbuzz.io In this video, Mattie talks about filecoin and their recent announcement as well as gives you an update on Social Send what they have been up to lately ... Even wondered how you can accept Bitcoin Cash in your shop without having to entrust your employees. Bitcoin Cash Register App was made for that. It transfers the BCH straight into your wallet ... Crypterio is the best solution for ICO and Cryptocurrency WordPress Theme. It comes with premium WpBakery Page Builder and GDPR plugins Our demo: http://prev...

#