Supreme Court Advocate Suggests How to Regulate Crypto in ...

Review and Prospect of Crypto Economy-Development and Evolution of Consensus Mechanism (2)

Review and Prospect of Crypto Economy-Development and Evolution of Consensus Mechanism (2)

https://preview.redd.it/a51zsja94db51.png?width=567&format=png&auto=webp&s=99e8080c9e9b1fb5e11cbd70f915f9cb37188f81
Foreword
The consensus mechanism is one of the important elements of the blockchain and the core rule of the normal operation of the distributed ledger. It is mainly used to solve the trust problem between people and determine who is responsible for generating new blocks and maintaining the effective unification of the system in the blockchain system. Thus, it has become an everlasting research hot topic in blockchain.
This article starts with the concept and role of the consensus mechanism. First, it enables the reader to have a preliminary understanding of the consensus mechanism as a whole; then starting with the two armies and the Byzantine general problem, the evolution of the consensus mechanism is introduced in the order of the time when the consensus mechanism is proposed; Then, it briefly introduces the current mainstream consensus mechanism from three aspects of concept, working principle and representative project, and compares the advantages and disadvantages of the mainstream consensus mechanism; finally, it gives suggestions on how to choose a consensus mechanism for blockchain projects and pointed out the possibility of the future development of the consensus mechanism.
Contents
First, concept and function of the consensus mechanism
1.1 Concept: The core rules for the normal operation of distributed ledgers
1.2 Role: Solve the trust problem and decide the generation and maintenance of new blocks
1.2.1 Used to solve the trust problem between people
1.2.2 Used to decide who is responsible for generating new blocks and maintaining effective unity in the blockchain system
1.3 Mainstream model of consensus algorithm
Second, the origin of the consensus mechanism
2.1 The two armies and the Byzantine generals
2.1.1 The two armies problem
2.1.2 The Byzantine generals problem
2.2 Development history of consensus mechanism
2.2.1 Classification of consensus mechanism
2.2.2 Development frontier of consensus mechanism
Third, Common Consensus System
Fourth, Selection of consensus mechanism and summary of current situation
4.1 How to choose a consensus mechanism that suits you
4.1.1 Determine whether the final result is important
4.1.2 Determine how fast the application process needs to be
4.1.2 Determining the degree to which the application requires for decentralization
4.1.3 Determine whether the system can be terminated
4.1.4 Select a suitable consensus algorithm after weighing the advantages and disadvantages
4.2 Future development of consensus mechanism
Last lecture review: Chapter 1 Concept and Function of Consensus Mechanism plus Chapter 2 Origin of Consensus Mechanism
Chapter 3 Common Consensus Mechanisms (Part 1)
Figure 6 Summary of relatively mainstream consensus mechanisms
📷
https://preview.redd.it/9r7q3xra4db51.png?width=567&format=png&auto=webp&s=bae5554a596feaac948fae22dffafee98c4318a7
Source: Hasib Anwar, "Consensus Algorithms: The Root Of The Blockchain Technology"
The picture above shows 14 relatively mainstream consensus mechanisms summarized by a geek Hasib Anwar, including PoW (Proof of Work), PoS (Proof of Stake), DPoS (Delegated Proof of Stake), LPoS (Lease Proof of Stake), PoET ( Proof of Elapsed Time), PBFT (Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance), SBFT (Simple Byzantine Fault Tolerance), DBFT (Delegated Byzantine Fault Tolerance), DAG (Directed Acyclic Graph), Proof-of-Activity (Proof of Activity), Proof-of- Importance (Proof of Importance), Proof-of-Capacity (Proof of Capacity), Proof-of-Burn ( Proof of Burn), Proof-of-Weight (Proof of Weight).
Next, we will mainly introduce and analyze the top ten consensus mechanisms of the current blockchain.
》POW
-Concept:
Work proof mechanism. That is, the proof of work means that it takes a certain amount of computer time to confirm the work.
-Principle:
Figure 7 PoW work proof principle
📷
https://preview.redd.it/xupacdfc4db51.png?width=554&format=png&auto=webp&s=3b6994641f5890804d93dfed9ecfd29308c8e0cc
The PoW represented by Bitcoin uses the SHA-256 algorithm function, which is a 256-bit hash algorithm in the password hash function family:
Proof of work output = SHA256 (SHA256 (block header));
if (output of proof of work if (output of proof of work >= target value), change the random number, recursive i logic, continue to compare with the target value.
New difficulty value = old difficulty value* (time spent by last 2016 blocks /20160 minutes)
Target value = maximum target value / difficulty value
The maximum target value is a fixed number. If the last 2016 blocks took less than 20160 minutes, then this coefficient will be small, and the target value will be adjusted bigger, if not, the target value will be adjusted smaller. Bitcoin mining difficulty and block generation speed will be inversely proportional to the appropriate adjustment of block generation speed.
-Representative applications: BTC, etc.
》POS
-Concept:
Proof of stake. That is, a mechanism for reaching consensus based on the holding currency. The longer the currency is held, the greater the probability of getting a reward.
-Principle:
PoS implementation algorithm formula: hash(block_header) = Coin age calculation formula: coinage = number of coins * remaining usage time of coins
Among them, coinage means coin age, which means that the older the coin age, the easier it is to get answers. The calculation of the coin age is obtained by multiplying the coins owned by the miner by the remaining usage time of each coin, which also means that the more coins you have, the easier it is to get answers. In this way, pos solves the problem of wasting resources in pow, and miners cannot own 51% coins from the entire network, so it also solves the problem of 51% attacks.
-Representative applications: ETH, etc.
》DPoS
-Concept:
Delegated proof of stake. That is, currency holding investors select super nodes by voting to operate the entire network , similar to the people's congress system.
-Principle:
The DPOS algorithm is divided into two parts. Elect a group of block producers and schedule production.
Election: Only permanent nodes with the right to be elected can be elected, and ultimately only the top N witnesses can be elected. These N individuals must obtain more than 50% of the votes to be successfully elected. In addition, this list will be re-elected at regular intervals.
Scheduled production: Under normal circumstances, block producers take turns to generate a block every 3 seconds. Assuming that no producer misses his order, then the chain they produce is bound to be the longest chain. When a witness produces a block, a block needs to be generated every 2s. If the specified time is exceeded, the current witness will lose the right to produce and the right will be transferred to the next witness. Then the witness is not only unpaid, but also may lose his identity.
-Representative applications: EOS, etc.
》DPoW
-Concept:
Delayed proof of work. A new-generation consensus mechanism based on PoB and DPoS. Miners use their own computing power, through the hash algorithm, and finally prove their work, get the corresponding wood, wood is not tradable. After the wood has accumulated to a certain amount, you can go to the burning site to burn the wood. This can achieve a balance between computing power and mining rights.
-Principle:
In the DPoW-based blockchain, miners are no longer rewarded tokens, but "wood" that can be burned, burning wood. Miners use their own computing power, through the hash algorithm, and finally prove their work, get the corresponding wood, wood is not tradable. After the wood has accumulated to a certain amount, you can go to the burning site to burn the wood. Through a set of algorithms, people who burn more wood or BP or a group of BP can obtain the right to generate blocks in the next event segment, and get rewards (tokens) after successful block generation. Since more than one person may burn wood in a time period, the probability of producing blocks in the next time period is determined by the amount of wood burned by oneself. The more it is burned, the higher the probability of obtaining block rights in the next period.
Two node types: notary node and normal node.
The 64 notary nodes are elected by the stakeholders of the dPoW blockchain, and the notarized confirmed blocks can be added from the dPoW blockchain to the attached PoW blockchain. Once a block is added, the hash value of the block will be added to the Bitcoin transaction signed by 33 notary nodes, and a hash will be created to the dPow block record of the Bitcoin blockchain. This record has been notarized by most notary nodes in the network. In order to avoid wars on mining between notary nodes, and thereby reduce the efficiency of the network, Komodo designed a mining method that uses a polling mechanism. This method has two operating modes. In the "No Notary" (No Notary) mode, all network nodes can participate in mining, which is similar to the traditional PoW consensus mechanism. In the "Notaries Active" mode, network notaries use a significantly reduced network difficulty rate to mine. In the "Notary Public Activation" mode, each notary public is allowed to mine a block with its current difficulty, while other notary public nodes must use 10 times the difficulty of mining, and all normal nodes use 100 times the difficulty of the notary public node.
Figure 8 DPoW operation process without a notary node
📷
https://preview.redd.it/3yuzpemd4db51.png?width=500&format=png&auto=webp&s=f3bc2a1c97b13cb861414d3eb23a312b42ea6547
-Representative applications: CelesOS, Komodo, etc.
CelesOS Research Institute丨DPoW consensus mechanism-combustible mining and voting
》PBFT
-Concept:
Practical Byzantine fault tolerance algorithm. That is, the complexity of the algorithm is reduced from exponential to polynomial level, making the Byzantine fault-tolerant algorithm feasible in practical system applications.
-Principle:
Figure 9 PBFT algorithm principle
📷
https://preview.redd.it/8as7rgre4db51.png?width=567&format=png&auto=webp&s=372be730af428f991375146efedd5315926af1ca
First, the client sends a request to the master node to call the service operation, and then the master node broadcasts other copies of the request. All copies execute the request and send the result back to the client. The client needs to wait for f+1 different replica nodes to return the same result as the final result of the entire operation.
Two qualifications: 1. All nodes must be deterministic. That is to say, the results of the operation must be the same under the same conditions and parameters. 2. All nodes must start from the same status. Under these two limited qualifications, even if there are failed replica nodes, the PBFT algorithm agrees on the total order of execution of all non-failed replica nodes, thereby ensuring security.
-Representative applications: Tendermint Consensus, etc.
Next Lecture: Chapter 3 Common Consensus Mechanisms (Part 2) + Chapter 4 Consensus Mechanism Selection and Status Summary
CelesOS
As the first DPOW financial blockchain operating system, CelesOS adopts consensus mechanism 3.0 to break through the "impossible triangle", which can provide high TPS while also allowing for decentralization. Committed to creating a financial blockchain operating system that embraces supervision, providing services for financial institutions and the development of applications on the supervision chain, and formulating a role and consensus ecological supervision layer agreement for supervision.
The CelesOS team is dedicated to building a bridge between blockchain and regulatory agencies/financial industry. We believe that only blockchain technology that cooperates with regulators will have a real future. We believe in and contribute to achieving this goal.

📷Website
https://www.celesos.com/
📷 Telegram
https://t.me/celeschain
📷 Twitter
https://twitter.com/CelesChain
📷 Reddit
https://www.reddit.com/useCelesOS
📷 Medium
https://medium.com/@celesos
📷 Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/CelesOS1
📷 Youtube
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1Xsd8wU957D-R8RQVZPfGA
submitted by CelesOS to u/CelesOS [link] [comments]

India: Blockchain And Data Privacy: An India Perspective

Link to Mondaq: https://www.mondaq.com/india/fin-tech/978488/blockchain-and-data-privacy-an-india-perspective

A. Introduction

As a sequel to the first paper of Blockchain & Law article series titled 'A New Digital Order - Unveiling the Interplay of Law & Blockchain Technology', this paper explores the inter-operability of India's data privacy regime and blockchain technology. In this regard, recording of a webinar conducted on 'Blockchain & Data Privacy: An India Perspective' by the AKS Partners can be viewed on YouTube here.

B. Data privacy in India

Constitution of India

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is a comprehensive, all-encompassing provision that inheres within itself basic, fundamental rights that are absolutely essential to the existence of a human being with dignity and personal liberty. In the judgment of K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India,1 a nine-judge bench of the Honourable Supreme Court of India held that the right to privacy falls within the contours of Article 21 and is incidental to life and personal liberty. This right to privacy includes the right to data protection and privacy.

Information Technology Act, 2000

In India, data privacy is governed by the Information Technology Act, 2000 ("IT Act") and the Information Technology (Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules, 2011 ("SPDI Rules"). Sections 43A (Compensation for failure to protect data) of the IT Act provides a statutory right to a data provider to claim compensation for unapproved disclosure of information (including in breach of a contract). Under Section 72A (Punishment for disclosure of information in breach of lawful contract) of the IT Act, wherever any person including an intermediary discloses information obtained under a lawful contract without consent shall be punished with imprisonment or with fine or both.

SPDI Rules

The SPDI Rules constitute a set of basic obligations to be adhered to in circumstances where sensitive data is being collected. It may be noted that the SPDI Rules apply only to 'Sensitive Personal Data or Information'.2 The SPDI Rules lay down guidelines for collection (Rule 5) and transfer of information (Rule 7) and also mandatorily require body corporates to adopt and implement a policy for privacy and disclosure of information (Rule 4).
On 24 August 2011, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology issued a clarification to the SPDI Rules ("Regulatory Clarification"). The Regulatory Clarification states that the SPDI Rules are applicable only to body corporates or persons located within India. Also, where a body corporate deals in data of any legal entity located within or outside India under a contractual arrangement, the SPDI Rules pertaining to collection (Rule 5) and disclosure of information (Rule 6) would not apply. It was also clarified that requirement to obtain written consent under Rule 5(1) of the SPDI Rules includes electronic consent as well.

The Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 ("Bill")

The Bill is inspired from and is in many ways a replica of the European Union's General Data Protection Regulations ("GDPR"). The Bill lays down several provisions including in relation to crossborder transfer of data, sandboxing, privacy by design and introduces a more robust set of obligations for entities handling sensitive personal data. The Bill is currently pending before a Joint Parliamentary Committee. The Bill applies to and categorises data into 'Personal Data', 'Sensitive Personal Data' and 'Critical Personal Data'.

Sectoral regulations

Regulated sectors such as telecom and financial services have separate obligations of confidentiality which restricts disclosure and transfer of customer personal information and mandates use of such information only in the manner agreed with the customer. Certain sectoral regulators (like Reserve Bank of India) also mandate data localisation.

C. Blockchain technology and data privacy

For details on the working of a blockchain network, please refer to our previous paper here.
Coverage
The Bill defines 'Personal Data') as 'data about or relating to a natural person who is directly or indirectly identifiable'. This means where the origins of the data cannot be traced down to a natural person, the data would cease to be 'Personal Data'. Resultantly, storing the data in a manner where it cannot be traced to a natural person (including by introducing and implementing robust methods to address re-identification risks) may prove beneficial in reducing a blockchain network's interaction with data privacy regulations (such as by encryption or anonymisation of Personal Data).
Public v. Private Blockchain
Private blockchain which restricts and regulates network participation appears to be a more preferable fit when it comes to ensuring compliance with data privacy laws. Public blockchains with permissionless borders pose greater difficulty in procuring every participant to agree on and comply with relevant rules on protection of personal data.
Stakeholders
The Bill identifies three categories of stakeholders (similar to GDPR) viz. Data Principals, Data Fiduciary and Data Processor. The SPDI Rules only provides for data provider and body corporate or person collecting data. The term 'Processing' has been defined to include collection, storage, retrieval, adaptation, disclosure etc. (Section 3(31)). Accordingly, any data stored or transmitted on blockchain will amount to processing.
Blockchain network is a decentralised system with each node / miner (i.e. network participant) spread all over the world. There is no clear demarcation between a Data Principal and a Data Fiduciary or a Data Processor over a blockchain network. The way the network functions, no single person can be said to be in-charge of the network thereby making it all the more problematic for regulators to fix the compliance burden on a party. Accordingly, the question of determining the identity status and fixing liability of various participants attains significance and complexity over a distributed ledger network like blockchain.
Each node over the network functions as a Data Processor on account of participation in the verification of the data. At the same time one or more of such nodes may also be acting as a Data Principal. With respect to mining over the network while it is a single miner who is able to formulate a valid hash, all the other miners also participate in the mining activity when they attempt to arrive at the winning lottery number. Thus making such miner also a Data Processor. While fixing liability on a private blockchain network that restricts the number of network participants is comparatively less complex, the same would be quite challenging on a public blockchain network, such as Bitcoin. With regard to identifying the status and roles, the guidance issued by French data protection authority ("CNIL Guidance")3 in the context of GDPR is useful. The CNIL Guidance categorises blockchain actors into the following groups: (a) participants with full read and write access to the data; (b) participants with read only access; and (c) miners that validate the transactions.
Participants falling in category (a) above are Data Controllers (equivalent to a Data Fiduciary under the Bill) while categories (b) and (c) are not.
Collection and processing of data over a blockchain network
The Bill sets out a number of obligations that have to be performed by the Data Fiduciaries, some key compliances being, obtaining consent of the data principals, retaining the data only till absolutely necessary (Storage Limitation), providing notice to the Data Principals, ensuring data is used only for the purpose (which has to be specific, clear and lawful) for which it has been taken (Purpose Limitation). Rule 5 of the SPDI Rules also lays down similar obligations for collection of data. Key concerns that the inherent and intrinsic nature of the blockchain technology raises are as under:
Firstly, with respect to the Storage Limitation principle, the immutable nature of the technology prevents the data from being deleted once the purpose has been fulfilled.
Secondly, given the decentralised nature of blockchain, it becomes challenging to determine the exact purpose for which data is collected over such a widespread network and who is to keep a check that the data so collected is used only for such predefined purposes.
Thirdly, it is commonly argued that the network participants over a blockchain impliedly consent while sharing their data. This may not however fulfil the requirements under the Bill which requires consent to be clear, through an affirmative action. This gives birth to concomitant regulatory issues over a decentralised system as to who shall oblige with these compliances under the law and who should be made responsible / liable for any lapses in compliance.
Lastly, the Bill also proposes certain additional requirements such as transparent and fair processing and the Purpose Limitation. The blurred distinction in the status of identities in blockchain makes determining purpose and manner of processing challenging.
A detailed governance framework setting out roles and responsibilities, off-chain and on-chain personal data, may provide useful guidance towards addressing the aforementioned concerns.
Key rights of Data Principals

Right to Confirmation and Access

The Bill entitles the Data Principals to seek information regarding the types and nature of personal data stored with the Data Fiduciaries, or to ascertain the nature of processing activities that has been undertaken on his/her data, or seek a brief summary of processing activities undertaken. While enforcement of this right may not be technically difficult, however, blockchain networks may establish a proper governance framework that delineates a specific authority to pass over the requisite data to the data principal as and when asked for. The network may also consider laying out methods of searching and accessing the necessary information which may be de-encrypted with the use of the private key.

Right to Correction

Section 18 of the Bill and Rule 5 of the SPDI Rules provides the right to rectify or correct the data. Given the immutable nature of the decentralised ledger maintained on a blockchain, exercising this right may not be compatible. To accomplish alteration/correction of data would be a burdensome task since it will require a majority of nodes to come together to identify the data, alter and re-hash not just the concerned block but also all previous blocks as well. Alternatively, a new block with corrected information may be added once verified through the consensus mechanism.

Right to be Forgotten

The Bill introduces 'Right to be Forgotten' ("RTF"). RTF entitles data principals to request the removal of his/her personal data, without undue delay, from any business's storage. RTF has been in loggerheads with the inherent immutability of blockchain technology. Across jurisdictions the term 'forgotten' has been pegged with erasure and is construed in various senses in different jurisdictions, ranging from data anonymisation,4 destruction of hardware,5 putting data beyond use.6
Given the distinction within the types of blockchain, the modes for exercising RTF are uniform by and large. A widely discussed solution is the destruction of the private key, thereby rendering the data encrypted by a public key inaccessible.7 Owing to the setup of blockchain, a Data Principal may reach out to any entity in the chain that qualifies as a Data Fiduciary to enforce their rights. Similar
to the Google-Spain case,8 wherein data subject's action against Google remained unaffected by the fact that the data could have been removed by the newspaper's website itself.9 However, the nature of a public blockchain network that does not identify a central authority might prove somewhat problematic where the data principal seeks to enforce his/her right.
As countries are yet to formulate policies with respect to regulation of blockchains, some other alternatives for exercising RTF can be programming chameleon hashes, zero knowledge proofs or a censorable blockchain, as the same would be 'forgetful'.10
Cross-Border Transfer of Data
Chapter VII of the Bill, which deals with restrictions on cross-border transfer of data, requires a copy of the Sensitive Personal Data to be stored domestically while Critical Personal Data must exclusively be processed and stored in India. However, these clear demarcations blur when applied to a blockchain ecosystem where storage and processing of data can be universal. Transfer of Sensitive Personal Data, requires explicit consent and the transfer must be under a contract or an intra-group scheme approved by the data protection authority (envisaged to be established under the Bill). While both of these requirements may get fulfilled over a private blockchain easily, a public blockchain due to undefined groups and lack of a central entity / authority may find it more challenging to implement adequate safeguards on restricting such transfer. Over a private blockchain the central body may enter into e-contracts with any number of participants and also obtain their explicit consent.
Under the present regime, Rule 7 of the SPDI Rules provides that a transfer outside India may only be allowed where the country offers the same level of protection to the data. Again, enforcing this may be challenging over a public blockchain network comprising of thousands of nodes across borders. An in-built cross-border transfer consent clause in the governance framework or otherwise may also provide the needed legitimacy from the perspective of data privacy.

D. Jurisdictional Issues

The present uncertainty in law (including lack of adequate legal provisions) has resulted in jurisdictional issues concerning the domestic and transnational presence of the blockchain network. While Section 1(2) read with Section 75 of the IT Act accords limited extra-territorial applicability to the Act, the SPDI Rules, as mentioned in the Regulatory Clarification are applicable only to body corporates or persons located in India. Consequently, blockchain technology may need to comply with the IT Act to a certain extent, while, the mandate under the SPDI Rules will bind only the nodes/miners operating from India. As a result, the network participants operating outside India on the same blockchain will not be required to comply with the SPDI Rules or IT Act.
Section 2 of the Bill affords extra-territorial application but only in certain limited circumstances viz. where the processing which takes place outside India is in connection with any business in India, or which involves the profiling of individuals within India. This will result in a subjective assessment of blockchains and its purposes in order to ascertain the applicability of the provisions of the Bill.
The Civil-Commercial Courts in India, have applied the test as to whether a website is an 'interactive website'11 for determination of jurisdiction, in relation to websites that do not have a physical place of business in a jurisdiction.12 In other words, wherever a website facilitates or even intends to facilitate active trade / commercial transactions in jurisdictions where it does not have a physical place of business, in such cases cause of action, if any, arises in all such jurisdictions where the website operates interactively. However, applying such a test on a blockchain network may not be so straightforward. The intrinsic nature of the blockchain technology allows for processing and storage of data at multiple domestic and international jurisdictions simultaneously. Resultantly, in both domestic as well as international, identification of the place of cause of action becomes complex. The complexity increases as identification of the individuals processing and storing data (nodes) would require de-anonymisation.
The determination of applicable laws will also depend on the nature of a blockchain network. It is practically more difficult to regulate a public blockchain network than a private blockchain network. In a private blockchain the architect/controlling entity may determine the governing laws or the governance framework may provide for a governing law.
In light of the foregoing, it may come as a mammoth task for governments to enforce their respective data protection and cyber-security legislations against such transnational networks without consensus on a multi-national treaty suggesting a model law to regulate the use of blockchain networks. In the alternative, laws may promote self-regulation by merely identifying basic tenets of regulations like governing law, data privacy, certification etc. Non-compliance may include compulsory suspension/termination of participation rights of nodes or blocking access to blockchains which do not provide for adequate self-regulation.
The developers of blockchain networks may consider incorporating dispute resolution and regulatory mechanisms as integral parts of the networks. The developers may also consider coding networks with peer-to-peer decentralized courts such as 'kleros' or 'codelegit' as part of a network's dispute resolution process.

E. Way forward

Blockchain technology carries the potential of disrupting business operations right from supply, manufacturing, logistics and final consumption especially in a post Covid-19 era. Please refer to our previous article on use cases of blockchain here. Accordingly, it is crucial that data privacy laws (with adequate concessions, where necessary) be treated as an enabler and not inhibitor to continued adoption of blockchain technology. Certain additional rights like data portability and right to withdraw consent adds to the complexity of having a compliant blockchain network. Certain obligations like mandatory registration may also be problematic if the government notifies certain blockchain network as a significant data fiduciaries.
Set out below are few indicative measures towards harmonious application of data privacy laws and blockchain technology:
1) Every blockchain network must provide a detailed governance framework that is in alignment with the basic requirements under data privacy regulations. Such a framework would have to be binding on all participants over a blockchain network, stating all rights, obligations and duties of parties, including a detailed mechanism for communication, security measures, cross-border data transfer, and grievance redressal and may even set out applicable laws etc.
2) Such a self-governance framework could also include a privacy by design policy and provisions for Data Protection Impact Assessment (as set out in Chapter VI of the Bill).
3) 'Pruning' is used for situations where historical blocks of data beyond a certain timeline are deleted. Similarly, where data has to be altered or rectified, the same may be done by 'forking' where data is altered or deleted, the hash changed and a new fork is created. However, over a public blockchain Pruning and Forking can be challenging and may require a huge amount of computing consensus.
4) To ensure the safeguarding of right to privacy a Memory Optimized and Flexible Blockchain (MOF-BC) can be considered as an effective measure. It enables the IoT (Internet of Things) users and service providers to edit their transactions, thereby altering the details of data entry.13
submitted by BlockDotCo to u/BlockDotCo [link] [comments]

TkeyNet: switching to a new Protocol, testing, main theses

TkeyNet: switching to a new Protocol, testing, main theses

https://preview.redd.it/tmi7bp02h2f51.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=ac7124d584269772286a7bcfd2bb493efcf81ae9
In a series of publications: Coming TkeyNet and listing on exchanges and TkeyNet: release date, a brief analysis of the system, plans-revealed the General characteristics of the new TkeyNet system, which we will all switch to soon.
Given the volume of material, it was possible to miss the main theses or interpret them in their way, while the question ”why now“ was ignored.
Today we will review the main questions and tell you about the testing process of TkeyNet.

Why will the switching to TkeyNet take place this year, and not later, as planned?

Let’s look at the project history. The TKEY concept dates back to October 2017, and it was in the fourth quarter of 2017 that the distributed infrastructure concept was approved. In early 2018, the formation of the TkeyNet architecture began.
To make the whole course of events clear, we highlighted the main points and commented on them:
The projected development period for TkeyNet is 2.5–3 years.
This forecast was made in 2018 when the development of TkeyNet began.

The course of events that was part of our strategy

Core 1.0 launch and exchange
The company planned to launch a Protocol based on Core 1.0 and conduct a subsequent listing of the asset on the exchange in late 2018-in the first half of 2019. Depending on the completion of work on Core 1.0.
Why launch Core 1.0? There is a fixed practice in the market when a project starts on a ready-made blockchain, and then switches to its own, for example, EOS. This project was launched based on the Ethereum blockchain, and later the transition to its Protocol was made.
Our main task was to launch a Protocol with non-standard technical solutions for the market and enter the auction to expand the project audience and obtain liquidity for the asset.
With an increase in the asset price, the company would be able to increase its financial resources and reinvest them in the development of the project. Thus, the launch of a blockchain-based on Core 1.0 fully met these tasks.
In Core 1.0, new transaction models introduced and multi-blockchain support implemented. The first version of the Protocol supported the inclusion of 10 separate chains. The mechanics allowed you to change the number of parallel chains in the blockchain. To increase throughput, the team implemented PostgreSQL support, instead of the typical key-value database that is present in most cryptocurrencies.
Switching to Core 2.0 during trading and then switching to TkeyNet
Next, the plan was to upgrade the network to Core 2.0 and continuously modify it. The modification means the gradual implementation of functionality and standards from TkeyNet so that it is easy to make the transition from Core 2.0 to the new TkeyNet Protocol during trading on the exchange.
https://preview.redd.it/zcf5vnsgg2f51.png?width=1191&format=png&auto=webp&s=d5d5e41551ccc95f8a8a401f8fd2d081f1068939
In 2019, a Core 1.0 — based system launched. The year was simultaneously busy: the first presentation of TkeyNet at APA-2019, presence at IFC-2019, work on draft laws, and at the same time, the year was quite difficult for our company, which affected the timing shifts for products and all project plans in General. The listing did not take place.
Reasons for switching to TkeyNet
There is a silver lining. In the period from April to May, there was positive news from developers: work on TkeyNet will be completed much earlier than planned.
By the end of June, we were preparing to launch a test network based on TkeyNet, to start the final testing of all functions.
On June 22, 2020, the core 1.0 network suspended. For more information, see the link.
Shortly, we will be able to switch to TkeyNet and list the TKEY asset to crypto exchange.
Upon completion of the launch of TkeyNet, the official date of listing of TKEY on the trading platform will publish at the link: tkeycoin.com/start/;

What is TkeyNet?

We have already talked about TkeyNet in the previous article: TkeyNet-release date, a brief analysis of the system, further plans, gave examples of how the use of technology, told what products can be created based on TkeyNet, all this covered in General terms.
https://preview.redd.it/olp8lviig2f51.png?width=7418&format=png&auto=webp&s=9403b97e8bd2080fb8678530dbb418053db317c3
In this publication, we share some theses so that you will gradually develop an objective picture of the new TkeyNet system and its capabilities, which many of you will be able to apply in the future in business or everyday life.
From the very beginning of development, — TkeyNet was intended to improve the existing financial system, not to replace it.
From a technical point of view, the system and its functionality entirely based on blockchain technology. However, this is not a classic variation, as, for example, with bitcoin, but the new implementation of It — more secure, more suitable for global use, more perfect. In simple words, our developers took the best from Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, and other market leaders, combined their pros, eliminated their cons, and modified existing solutions on the market, resulting in new technology with new features.
For the user, TkeyNet is a fast payment network that allows you to store, use, and move various assets in the payment network, such as currencies, shares, real estate, and precious metals, etc. Businesses will be able to legally conduct international transfers in seconds and significantly save on transactions.
For developers and startups, this means best practices, infrastructure, liquidity, and access to ready-made solutions that can complete in their products.
Among competitors, TkeyNet is much faster than its predecessors, more profitable, and cheaper in terms of transactions.
For businesses and financial institutions, it is an infrastructure that will significantly improve existing financial processes, from payment routing to multi-level exchange and clearing operations.
If we compare the giants of the financial industry-banks, and the new paradigm — distributed payment systems, we will notice a significant difference. The total market capitalization of cryptocurrencies estimated at ≈340 billion US dollars and the capitalization of 10 world banks is 2 trillion dollars. A significant difference, don’t you agree?
http://www.outsourcingportal.eu/en/bitcoin-would-rank-as-8th-largest-bank-globally-with-169-billion-in-market-capitalization
You can’t argue with the numbers, and we must understand that banks remain vital objects of the financial system. Banks help us send funds within the country and abroad, and provide a lot of services, such as loans, deposits, and a lot of other services.
Anyway, using cryptocurrency, users actively exchange it for Fiat currencies to pay for any formed needs. Therefore, TkeyNet will serve as a bridge between fiat and digital currencies, providing its users with best practices and tools through which we will all have access to various digital and cash at any time and anywhere in the world.
The Asian Parliamentary Assembly actively raised the issue of trust and the development of financial products in underdeveloped countries. The problem in such countries is total state control of property registers. Citizens prefer to dispose of their funds in informal settings because they do not consider state systems reliable.
The representatives of the senior management of the TKEY group of companies — Pavel Yakimov (the Director of Information Technologies) and Maxim Yakimov attended these discussions. Both of them recommended several approaches to develop a digital framework that can combat money laundering, and also illustrated open investment platforms, security, and data exchange systems that are based on TKEY distributed solutions. © — businessinsider.com
According to the World Bank alone, about 1.7–1.8 billion people do not have accounts in any financial institution, and about 47% of them located in developing countries. The problem of interaction between a person and a financial institution consists of three main reasons: poverty, trust issues, and geographical difficulties. With systems such as TkeyNet, it is possible to connect people and financial institutions with a single source of trust. With the use of such systems, a person does not need anything other than access to the Internet.
https://www.statista.com/chart/18497/countries-with-the-highest-share-of-adults-without-a-bank-account-in-2017/

The investments that bring us all together

On the other hand, the audience of the TKEY project is quite diverse: our investors represent a variety of professions, a variety of cities, and a variety of age groups. However, one thing, nevertheless, unites us all — this thing is an investment. And therefore, some of the users may not be interested in technical details or the difference between 1.0, 2.0, or TkeyNet. But at least the thesis, the main message, must be understood by absolutely everyone.
The more popular the company’s products are on the market, the stronger it is and the development. Due to the reliability of the company, the prices of its assets grow.
Whether you are interested in technology or not, the company’s development will directly affect the reliability of its assets. Each of us knows that any cooperation, any news is a reason to move on the stock exchange. TkeyNet opens up these opportunities to us, provides several strategically profitable, and importantly — stable partnerships with financial institutions. The number of users in the digital payments segment expected to reach 4,636,34 million by 2024.

https://www.statista.com/outlook/295/100/fintech/worldwide#market-revenue
https://www.statista.com/statistics/647231/worldwide-blockchain-technology-market-size/

Testing the TkeyNet system

From 22 to 24 July, the test network TkeyNet was successfully launched.
Our team is currently actively testing the entire network and conducting a security audit. Developers are testing the network with different scenarios: security, reliability of the full system, as well as individual modules and functions.
Given the different number of similar-looking formulations, but at the same time completely different from each other, some users wondered what is the difference between such concepts: Mainnet, Testnet, and TkeyNet.
Testnet should consider as a demonstration network for testing, testing concepts, new features, experiments, and debugging without the risk of losing any data. Testnet is a polygon for the development team that used to improve the system and introduce new features.
Mainnet (Main Network) this is a complete product, ready to use.
TkeyNet is the name of the infrastructure, the entire system that we are developing, and Testnet and Mainnet are technical concepts within this system.
After testing the system is complete, TkeyNet will launch. We will issue instructions on how to upgrade to the new Protocol and new software, respectively.
Testing takes place without any excesses, and the launch of TkeyNet is just around the corner.
Thank you for being with us! Follow the project news to stay up to date. If you missed the latest news, you read the notification on the site: https://tkeycoin.com/en/news/.
submitted by tkeycoin to Tkeycoin_Official [link] [comments]

Is All Cryptocurrency Mining Harmful to Our Environment?

Is All Cryptocurrency Mining Harmful to Our Environment?

https://preview.redd.it/bl0g74xrwm651.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=13a69a7971ef9dc39dd3c571687331f77c6b52c1
Blockchain technology is now widely adopted in many fields, including banking, finance, administration, legal affairs, and investments. It can also be used for health and environment, and it shows its potential as it is utilized more and more worldwide. In the case of FLETA, we have developed a blockchain-based eCRF system, a clinical trial data collection tool, that helps people manage clinical trial data and contribute to the healthcare industry.
However, at the same time, blockchain technology is blamed for its harmful influence on the environment. The reason for it is cryptocurrency mining. It is known that Bitcoin and many other cryptocurrencies are not entirely eco-friendly.
The only way to create Bitcoins, since there is no central bank that issues the digital asset, is through miners. The miners solve cryptographic problems by using software specially designed for mining. Of course, energy is used when miners use the software to mine those cryptocurrencies.
In the case of Bitcoin, only the fastest miner who solves the mathematical problem gets the mining reward, and miners compete to be the one. As the price of Bitcoin has increased, more people have participated in mining. This phenomenon caused severe competition among the miners, and the problems miners have to solve became much more complicated. As a result, miners need high-performance mining equipment that requires more energy than before to win the competition. Moreover, an increased number of miners and difficulty of problems also provoke a large amount of electricity consumption. Cryptocurrency miners are responsible for solving provided math problems, which is obtained using software specially designed to solve cryptographic problems. Of course, energy is used when miners use software for mining those cryptocurrencies.
In the case of Bitcoin, only the fastest miner who solves the mathematical problem gets the mining reward, and miners compete to be the one. As the price of Bitcoin has increased, more people have participated in mining. This phenomenon caused severe competition among the miners, and the problems miners have to solve became much more complicated. As a result, miners need high-performance mining equipment that requires more energy than before to win the competition. Moreover, an increased number of miners and difficulty of problems also provoke a large amount of electricity consumption.

How much electricity is used for Bitcoin mining?

According to Digiconomist, it estimates that currently, the electricity expenditure in Bitcoin mining exceeds that of countries such as Denmark, Bulgaria, and Belarus, and accounts for more than 25% of Holland’s energy consumption, 15% of Australia or 10% of the United Kingdom.
For example, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA), cryptocurrency is positioned as one of the businesses that consume the most electricity worldwide. If these cryptocurrencies were a country, they would be ranked 41st nation that consumes much power annually, according to Digiconomist.

So How Can We Use The Technology to Solve Our Problem?

As mentioned, cryptocurrency mining consumes a lot of energy, which inevitably harms the environment. Then, how can we prevent this problem from the blockchain industry?
One of the solutions is choosing one of the many alternatives to the traditional Proof of Work consensus protocol. Proof of Stake, for instance, is far more eco-friendly since mining equipment is unnecessary.

How is FLETA Contributing to Saving the Planet

FLETA is a platform created for the deployment of decentralized applications. FLETA does not use a proof of work consensus algorithm as it has created its own. Proof of Formulation (PoF) is a new consensus model that replaces the traditional PoW. This new consensus protocol eliminates the possibility of unnecessary forks and allows blocks to be generated in a designated order.
This consensus algorithm does not require a lot of electricity, similar to Proof of Stake that is eco-friendly.
FLETA is not only infinitely scalable but also offers a high transaction processing speed using its original block design. The ability to infinitely scale is achieved through a multi sub-chain system. Whenever a DApp is created on top of FLETA, a new sub-chain is also deployed, which means that every single dApp can be operated independently and without affecting other DApps.

Conclusion

FLETA also has created an eco-friendly consensus algorithm Proof of Formulation that allows the platform to be more scalable and efficient. Developers can easily build their DApps on top of FLETA and enjoy all the benefits of the platform like higher transaction speed, scalability, and being able to operate independently.
submitted by fleta-official to fletachain [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Halving and Consensus Algorithm

Bitcoin Halving and Consensus Algorithm

https://preview.redd.it/xbmsd5ir8ix41.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=609d506b0c6c90e467b95da2510fef27fcfcfcdd

Bitcoin Halving and Its Affects

Every 210,000 blocks, or approximately once every four years, Bitcoin undergoes a halving event where the mining rewards are cut in half. The current block reward is 12.5 BTC/block, and the next halving is expected to take place on 12 May 2020. From block number 630,001, the block rewards will be reduced to 6.25 Bitcoin. This process is supposed to continue until the last Bitcoin has been mined.
Halvings are done to preserve the value of Bitcoin through the laws of supply and demand. If Bitcoins are mined too quickly, and there is insufficient market demand, their value will drop. Historically, the halvings have always positively affected the price of Bitcoin in the months and years following the event when Bitcoin reached new all-time-highs.

What is Bitcoin Mining and How Does it Work?

Bitcoin is a decentralized currency. It doesn’t use the services of a bank or another central institution to transfer the assets. Instead, Bitcoin has a blockchain and its transaction records are stored for eternity.
The people who store these transactions on the blockchain are called miners. Miners are financially incentivized to confirm transactions. The confirmations are done by solving complex computational problems. Whoever solves the problem receives a fixed reward in Bitcoin.
Likewise, Bitcoin relies on a Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus algorithm. It bets on the strength and efficiency of the underlying hardware. PoW coins are mostly mined through GPUs and ASIC miners. In the past, Bitcoin could be mined with your PC’s CPU. The mining network wasn’t big, and the rewards were appealing. That is no longer the case. The mining difficulty has increased and today, mining is handled via countless expensive ASIC miners.
PoW mining is, therefore, profitable only to those who have made substantial hardware investments and not to the ordinary man. PoW consumes much electricity, and the Bitcoin network generates a block every 10 mins on average, which makes it more difficult for ordinary miners to get block rewards.

What is Proof of Formulation?

In the case of FLETA, it utilizes its own consensus algorithm: Proof-of-Formulation (PoF). This algorithm consists of 2 main actors:
  • Formulators — the block generators, the equivalent of PoW miners.
  • Observer Nodes — validate, confirm, and sign transactions in real-time, and prevent forks and double-spending.

Formulators

In contrast to PoW, where better hardware equipment is equal to bigger rewards, in PoF, all Formulators take part in block generation according to a pre-determined order. Once everyone has had their turn, a new mining phase starts, and all Formulators are arranged according to a new random sequence. No competition and equal mining opportunities for everyone!
To become a formulator, a user needs to register and stake 200,000 FLETA tokens at the FLETA Formulator Portal or FLETA Wallet. There is a maintenance fee to be paid every month. The mining is performed through FLETA cloud mining, and the user doesn’t need to set up a server on his own. Formulators can be upgraded for more efficiency and better performance. This is explained in more detail here.

Observer Nodes

Observers secure the network and prevent DDoS attacks. 5 Observers are assigned to each Formulator group. At least 3 of them are required to sign the transactions and include them in the blockchain. This system makes a fork impossible because the first block with three signatures will be included in the blockchain.

In the End

Proof-of-Formulation is fast, fair, and secure, thanks to the watchful eyes of the Observer Nodes, and their bond with Formulators. The results show that PoF allows 14,000 transactions/second and a block creation time of only 0.5 seconds/block.
submitted by fleta-official to fletachain [link] [comments]

What are the benefits of Crypto Mining?

What are the benefits of Crypto Mining?

https://preview.redd.it/q6xfuxvtmjv41.png?width=875&format=png&auto=webp&s=b092bca718f6cba3ae8c327a54952f4e65c7ed25
If you’ve ever heard the word cryptocurrency, then you’ve probably heard about the mining as well. If you still don’t know what cryptocurrency mining is and about profitable, keep reading!
In order to understand crypto mining, you need to fully understand what a cryptocurrency is first. Unlike traditional currencies (aka fiat currency), a cryptocurrency is a digital asset that works in a decentralized way; it does not require a bank or a third-party to operate. Someone can send someone else a cryptocurrency directly without any third-party involved.
The first ever cryptocurrency created was Bitcoin.
Every single cryptocurrency has a blockchain, which is an immutable digital ledger. A single transaction is recorded on the blockchain permanently, which no one can edit or delete it randomly.
A blockchain works by incentivizing miners to confirm the authenticity of each transaction. A person who confirmed the authenticity of the transaction, get the cryptocurrency as a reward.
Since the cryptocurrencies are based on cryptography, the miners need to solve extremely complicated mathematical problems to verify each transaction. They are incentivized to do it because they are rewarded for it.
Anyone can participate in mining from anywhere in the world as long as they have a computer. When the number of miners increases, it allows cryptocurrencies to be more secure. Even if an attacker would want to attack the blockchain network, somehow, an attacker needs to know 51% or more miners. Since the miners are spread around the world, this task is close to impossible and most likely not economically viable.

Types of Crypto Mining

Bitcoin was the first cryptocurrency to introduce the Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus algorithm, where users have to solve complex mathematical problems in order to process transactions and secure the whole network.
Bitcoin was quite easy to mine at first, and you could do it with your CPU, there was no need for special equipment, and the rewards were huge. However, today, Bitcoin’s mining difficulty has increased considerably, and users need specialized and expensive equipment to mine it.
There are four main types of mining when it comes to the PoW algorithm. There is a CPU, GPU, ASIC, and Cloud mining.
The first three are essentially the same, but they use different parts of your computer. There are some cryptocurrencies specifically created to be mined only through CPU and to be ASIC resistant. Other cryptocurrencies can be mined through all three methods.
Cloud mining, on the other hand, is a process where a user basically pays to rent out a mining machine somewhere else. You don’t have to buy the equipment physically but it is wise to carry out due diligence and research into who and what you are paying for.

Proof of Stake ‘Mining’

With the introduction of the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus algorithm, cryptocurrency mining changed forever. In this case, users don’t have to solve computationally intensive puzzles. In PoS-based cryptocurrencies, the creator of blocks is chosen via random selection or wealth.
Validators in the PoS consensus have to lock up some of their coins as a ‘stake’ and will get rewarded for it.
There are many benefits over the traditional PoW like lower cost and more energy efficiency. Additionally, because PoS encourages users to hold the coin in the wallet, it stabilizes the price a bit more than conventional cryptocurrencies.
Today, you can find plenty of exchanges that support staking, including the most popular exchange, Binance. The safest option, however, is always going to be staking using your own private wallet.

Proof of Formulation ‘Mining’

FLETA has developed the most innovative and newest consensus algorithms known as Proof-of-Formulation (PoF).
This PoF consensus algorithm uses something called the ‘Synchronization Group’, which allows all of the miners to mine in an orderly manner. The generating block time only takes 0.5 seconds, and the observer node checks the irregular blocks in real-time, which prevents the fork and double-spending. Furthermore, FLETA’s PoF algorithm is currently undergoing the patent process through the United States Patent Office (Application Number: 62717695).
The users can easily create a FLETA formulator through the official FLETA wallet. The minimum amount to create a single Formulator is 200,000 FLETA. The blockchain network is operated by FLETA and requires a 6-core CPU or higher.
As you created at least four Formulators, you will be able to upgrade it, which allows you to get 1.3 times more rewards.
Besides creating a Formulator, users can contribute to mining with a minimum amount of 100 FLETA.

Conclusion

Today, various mining methods exist, each with their pros and cons. However, cryptocurrency miners are still craving more convenient (and less costly) ways to earn rewards.
FLETA’s Proof-of-Formulation consensus is not only fast, but it is also highly secure the added layer of protection between observer nodes, formulator, and the synchronization group.
With plenty more to come, in terms of DApp development, games and partnerships, FLETA’s PoF is increasingly becoming the preferred consensus of many developers due to the speed, security and convenience of the platform.
**
submitted by fleta-official to fletachain [link] [comments]

Customers of the bitcoin exchange lost all the money because its head died

For almost a year, the story with one of Canada's largest cryptocurrency exchanges, Quadriga CX, has been going on. In early 2019, the company announced the death of the head of the company — 30-year-old Gerald Cotten. She added that only he knew the passwords and keys to the wallets where tens of thousands of users ' bitcoins are stored. This was ostensibly his security measure, but because of this, Quadriga CX cannot refund customers.
Such an unusual situation, as well as mysterious details from the past and the circumstances of Cotten's death, have led to theories that the head of the exchange actually fabricated his death to hide with users ' cryptocurrency-that's $ 160 million.
By December 2019, suspicions had reached such a stage that Quadriga CX depositors demanded the exhumation of the body. All to make sure that Gerald Cotten is really dead and not hiding with their bitcoins.
One person for all passwords
Cotten's death was announced in January 2019, with 9 December 2018 as the date of death. According to Quadriga CX, the CEO of the company died from complications of Crohn's disease on the way to the opening of an orphanage in India. And his death was not the only tragedy-the exchange's customers learned that only he had access to their bitcoins.
We are talking about "cold" wallets without access to the Internet, which are considered one of the most reliable means to store cryptocurrency. Passwords from them and encryption keys knew only Cotten, according to Quadriga CX, as he wanted to ensure maximum security.
As a result, the cryptocurrency savings of more than 75 thousand people were in limbo. That's about $ 160 million.
The wife of the deceased Jennifer Cotten said she tried to find recovery codes, but "repeated intensified searches" came to nothing. "My husband did most of his business from his encrypted laptop, but I don't know the password," she said. According to Jennifer, over the hacking of the laptop fought several experts and one managed to crack email. But the messages there are supposedly not just encrypted, but self-destruct.
On January 28, the Quadriga CX website went offline, and representatives of the company almost stopped communicating with customers. Then there was speculation on Reddit: what if Gerald Cotten faked his death to appropriate the money for himself? And together with journalists, they began their investigation.
Reasons for doubt
The doubts of Quadriga CX customers can be understood: there are many suspicious factors in the story. It all started with the cause of death-Crohn's disease, a chronic inflammatory bowel disease that rarely ends in death.
According to Reddit users, Cotten "died extremely well" in India, where there are more opportunities to fake a death than in Canada. The wife of the head of Quadriga CX published the death certificate as evidence, but she was no longer believed.
Further-more. Cotten had changed his will two weeks before his trip to India, leaving his wife a large inheritance. Among the items in the will: two houses in different regions of Canada, two cars, a yacht and a small Cessna 400 plane. Cotten's total assets are nearly $ 10 million.
At the same time, Quadriga CX experienced financial problems throughout 2018. The crypto exchange entered the market in 2013 and became one of the local leaders, but since the beginning of 2018 it has been "at war" with The canadian Imperial Bank (CIBC), which froze $ 22 million without an established owner. At the same time, customers began to complain that they could not access the cryptocurrency.
According to the publication Decrypt, the popularity of the platform gradually fell, and Cotten blamed the traditional banking system of Canada, which put a spoke in the wheels of the cryptocurrency community. In early December, representatives of Quadriga CX announced that the problems with CIBC were solved-a few days before the death of the head of the company.
In February, the Nova Scotia Supreme court appointed audit firm Ernst & Young to review all financial transactions of the cryptocurrency exchange. The Agency's investigation revealed "significant problems and irregularities" in the management of the Quadriga CX.
According to experts Ernst & Young, those encrypted" cold " wallets were not 160 million dollars, but several hundred thousand. Presumably, Cotten transferred large amounts of client deposits to his personal accounts, hidden behind pseudonyms.
The widow Cotten disavowed her husband's actions, saying she knew nothing about it. Auditors managed to track down and return a small part of the funds to customers, another part was paid by Jennifer Cotten. But thousands of crypto investors were still left without their deposits. Quadriga CX started the procedure of bankruptcy.
Skeletons in the closet
The most active clients of the cryptocurrency exchange, confident that Cotten is still alive, organized an investigative Telegram chat "Quadriga Uncovered". The number of participants in the chat numbered 500 people, periodically there were journalists and even FBI agents who were also interested in the story. In total, according to media reports, four different services from different countries are involved in the case.
Internet detectives began to study Cotten's youth and discovered that as early as 2003 He was an active user of the TalkGold forum, where "high-yield investment projects"were shared and discussed. Most of them are classic financial pyramids. Cotten supposedly launched at least a few similar projects, promoting them on the forum. He was 15 years old.
At some point, Cotten met Michael Patrin, with whom They later founded Quadriga CX. Representatives of the canadian cryptocurrency industry recalled that Patrin appeared in the community suddenly: "It quickly became clear that he is not who he claims to be. Sometimes he introduced himself as Michael from India, sometimes as Michael from Pakistan, sometimes as Michael from Italy. But he knew what he was doing."
Canadian media claim that Michael Patrin is the pseudonym of Omar Danani, and he used to live in California. Danani was found guilty of fraud and money laundering, he spent 18 months in prison. He was linked to the website Shadowcrew, where stolen credit cards and Bank card numbers were traded.
In 2007, Omar was released, after which he allegedly moved to Canada and changed his name. Initially he was Omar Patrin, and a year later he became Michael Patrin. The co-founder of Quadriga CX has denied this information several times.
To dig and prove
The story of the cryptocurrency exchange has been going on for more than a year. Quadriga CX users have filed a class action lawsuit against the platform, but it is already considered bankrupt. During this time, journalists and Internet detectives have formulated three main versions of what could happen to 160 million dollars in cryptocurrency.
Cotten did die, but his death was used to hide the fact that the Quadriga CX had no money. The company was experiencing financial difficulties, the head of the company transferred money to himself, and the startup itself could "burn out" on unsuccessful cryptocurrency trading. Perhaps, after Cotten's death, the management decided that it was possible to cover their tracks with a story about passwords from wallets;
Quadriga CX-originally a fraudulent firm through which Cotten and Omar Danani (aka Michael Patrin) engaged in money laundering. This is indicated by details from the past of both co founders of the company;
The failure of the Quadriga CX is simply the result of terrible management of the company. As the business grew, Cotten failed. There are approximately 215 cryptocurrency exchanges in the world. 36 exchanges closed for various reasons. Perhaps the story of Quadriga CX is just another failure in the cryptocurrency market.
Many interlocutors of canadian journalists from employees of cryptocurrency companies, as well as doctors specializing in Crohn's disease, believe that Gerald Cotten died for real. But if so, depositors are unlikely to get their money and bitcoins back. So it's probably easier for them to believe in a conspiracy.
In December 2019, users of the Quadriga CX demanded that Cotten's body be exhumed. Law firm Miller Thomson, representing the interests of investors, justified this "questionable circumstances" of the death of the head of the company. Cotten's widow and former Quadriga CX management oppose the grave opening. The decision on exhumation will be made by the spring of 2020
More https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmYpavSD9aALIt_lhde2Ewg?view_as=subscriber
submitted by chapikla to u/chapikla [link] [comments]

Bottos 2020 Research and Development Scheme

Bottos 2020 Research and Development Scheme

https://preview.redd.it/umh8ivbsua841.png?width=554&format=png&auto=webp&s=5c16d9d9e61503e4c9d44212eecd176eda11550a
As 2020 is now here, Bottos has solemnly released its “2020 Research and development scheme”. On one hand, we adhere to the principle of transparency so that the whole community can comprehend our next step as a whole, but more importantly, it also helps our whole team to think deeply about the future and reach consensus. It is strongly believed that following these consistent follow-ups will help us to in order to achieve the best results.
Based on the efficient development of Bottos, the team’s technical achievements in consensus algorithms and smart contracts are used to deeply implement and optimize the existing technical architecture. At the same time using the community’s technical capabilities, horizontal development, expanding new functional modules and technical directions it stays closely integrated with the whole community.
In the future, we will keep on striving to achieve in-depth thinking, comprehensive planning, and flexible adjustment.


Overview of Technical Routes

https://preview.redd.it/rk9tpg2uua841.png?width=554&format=png&auto=webp&s=77e607b81f31c0d20feaa90eca81f09a23addca4
User feedback within the community is the driving force behind Bottos progress. In the development route of the community and industry we have formulated a roadmap for technical development, pointing out the right path for the team towards the right direction among the massive routes of modern technology.
As part of our 2020 research and development objective we have the following arrangements:
1. Intensifying enormous number of smart contracts and related infrastructures
After many years of development, smart contracts have gradually become the core and standard function in blockchain projects. The strength of smart contracts, ease of use, and stability represent the key capabilities of a blockchain project. As a good start, Bottos has already made great progress in the field of smart contracts. In smart contracts we still need to increase development efforts, making the ease of use and stability of smart contracts the top priority of our future development.
Reducing the barriers for developers and ordinary users to use, shortening the contract development cycle and saving users time is another important task for the team to accomplish. To this end, we have planned an efficient and easy-to-use one-stop contract development, debugging, and deployment tool that will provide multiple access methods and interfaces to the test network to support rapid deployment and rapid debugging.
2. Establishing an excellent client and user portal
The main goal here is to add an entrance point to the creation and deployment of smart contracts in the wallet client. To this end, the wallet needs to be transformed, a local compiler for smart contracts must be added, and an easy-to-use UI interface can be provided for the purpose of creating, deploying, and managing contracts to meet the needs of users with a single mouse click only.
3. Expanding distributed storage
Distributed storage is another focus of our development in the upcoming year. Only by using a distributed architecture can completely solve the issue of performance and scalability of stand-alone storage. Distributed storage suitable for blockchain needs to provide no less than single machine performance, extremely high availability, no single point of failure, easy expansion, and strong consistent transactions. These are the main key points and difficulties of Bottos in field of distributed storage in the upcoming days.
4. Reinforcing multi party secured computing
Privacy in computing is also a very important branch to deal with. In this research direction, Bottos has invested a lot of time and produced many research results on multi-party secured computing, such as technical articles and test cases. In the future, we will continue to give efforts in the direction of multi-party secured computing and apply mature technology achievements into the functions of the chain.

2020 Bottos — Product Development

Support for smart contract deployment in wallets
The built-in smart contract compiler inside the wallet supports compilation of the smart contracts in all languages provided by Bottos and integrates with the functions in the wallet. It also supports one-click deployment of the compiled contract source code in the wallet.
When compiling a contract, one can choose whether to pre-execute the contract code. If pre-execution is selected, it will connect to the remote contract pre-execution service and return the execution result to the wallet.
When deploying a contract, one can choose to deploy to the test network or main network and the corresponding account and private key of the test network or main network should be provided.

2020 Bottos-Technical Research

https://preview.redd.it/x2k65j7xua841.png?width=553&format=png&auto=webp&s=a40eae3c56b664c031b3db96f608923e670ff331
1. Intelligent smart contract development platform (BISDP)
The smart contract development platform BISDP is mainly composed of user-oriented interfaces, as well as back-end compilation and deployment tools, debugging tools, and pre-execution frameworks.
The user-oriented interface provides access methods based on WEB, PC, and mobile apps, allowing developers to quickly and easily compile and deploy contracts and provide contract template management functions. It can also manage the contract remotely by viewing the contract execution status, the consumed resources and other information.
In the compilation and deployment tool a set of smart contract source code editing, running, debugging, and deployment solutions as well as smart contract templates for common tasks are provided, which greatly reduces the threshold for developers to learn and use smart contracts. At the same time, developers and ordinary users are provided with a smart contract pre-execution framework, which can check the logical defects and security risks in smart contracts before actual deployment and promptly remind users a series of problems even before the smart contracts are actually run.
In the debugging tool, there are built-in local debugging and remote debugging tools. Multiple breakpoints can be set in the debugging tool. When the code reaches the breakpoint, one can view the variables and their contents in the current execution stack. One can also make conditional breakpoints based on the value of the variable. The code will not execute until the value reaches a preset value in memory.
In the pre-execution framework, developers can choose to pre-execute contract code in a virtual environment or a test net, checking out problems in some code that cannot be detected during compilation time and perform deeper code inspection. The pre-execution framework can also prompt the user in advance about the time and space resources required for execution.
2. Supporting Python and PHP in BVM virtual machine for writing smart contracts
We have added smart contract writing tools based on Python and PHP languages. These languages can be compiled into the corresponding BVM instruction set for implementation. These two reasons are used as the programming language for smart contracts.
For the Python language, the basic language elements supported by the first phase are:
- Logic control: If, Else, Eli, While, Break, method calls, for x in y
- Arithmetic and relational operators: ADD, SUB, MUL, DIV, ABS, LSHIFT, RSHIFT, AND, OR, XOR, MODULE, INVERT, GT, GTE, LT, LTE, EQ, NOTEQ
-
Data structure:
- Supports creation, addition, deletion, replacement, and calculation of length of list data structure
- Supports creation, append, delete, replace, and calculation of length of dict data structure
Function: Supports function definition and function calls
For the PHP language, the basic language elements supported by the first phase are :
- Logic control: If, Else, Eli, While, Break, method calls
- Arithmetic and relational operators: ADD, SUB, MUL, DIV, ABS, LSHIFT, RSHIFT, AND, OR, XOR, MODULE, INVERT, GT, GTE, LT, LTE, EQ, NOTEQ
Data structure:
- Support for creating, appending, deleting, replacing, and calculating length of associative arrays
Function: Supports the definition and calling of functions
For these two above mentioned languages, the syntax highlighting and code hinting functions are also provided in BISDP, which is very convenient for developers to debug any errors.
3. Continuous exploration of distributed storage solutions
Distributed storage in blockchain technology actually refers to a distributed database. Compared with the traditional DMBS, in addition to the ACID characteristics of the traditional DBMS, the distributed database also provides the high availability and horizontal expansion of the distributed system. The CAP principle of distributed system reveals that for a common distributed system there is an impossible triangle, only two of them can be selected among its three directions, consistency, availability, and partition fault tolerance. Distributed databases in China must require strong consistency. This is due to the characteristics of the blockchain system itself, because it needs to provide reliable distributed transaction capabilities. For these technical issues, before ensuring that the distributed storage solution reaches 100% availability, we will continue to invest more time and technical strength, do more functional and performance testing, and conduct targeted tests for distributed storage systems.
4. Boosting secured multi-party computing research and development
Secured multi-party Computing (MPC) is a cryptographic mechanism that enables multiple entities to share data while protecting the confidentiality of the data without exposing the secret encryption key. Its performance indicators, such as security and reliability are important for the realization of the blockchain. The transparent sharing of the data privacy on the distributed ledger and the privacy protection of the client wallet’s private key are truly essential.
At present, the research and development status of the platform provided by Bottos in terms of privacy-enhanced secured multi-party computing is based on the BIP32 / 44 standard in Bitcoin wallets to implement distributed management of client wallet keys and privacy protection.
Considering the higher level of data security and the distributed blockchain account as the public data of each node, further research and development are being planned on:
(1) Based on RSA, Pailliar, ECDSA and other public key cryptosystems with homomorphic attributes, as well as the GC protocol, OT protocol, and ZKP protocol to generate and verify transaction signatures between two parties;
(2) Introduce the international mainstream public key system with higher security and performance, national secret public key encryption system, and fewer or non-interactive ZKP protocols to achieve secured multi-party computing with more than two parties, allowing more nodes to participate Privacy protection of ledger data.

Summary

After years of exploration, we are now full of confidence in our current research and development direction. We are totally determined to move forward by continuous hard work. In the end, all members of Bottos also want to thank all the friends in the community for their continuous support and outstanding contributions. Your certainty is our greatest comfort and strongest motivation.

Be smart. Be data-driven. Be Bottos.
If you aren’t already in our group, please join now! https://t.me/bottosofficial
Join Our Community and Stay Updated!
Bottos Website | Twitter |Facebook | Telegram | Reddit
submitted by BOTTOS_AI to Bottos [link] [comments]

UK Crypto Regulation Is Changing, Recognition Looming at Long Last

UK Crypto Regulation Is Changing, Recognition Looming at Long Last
https://preview.redd.it/r03lp3ztgcg31.jpg?width=2000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9e373dc7eb48f48e0f0b41997b504c1104730e6b
The United Kingdom has long been a financial mecca. Ever since the Big Bang and the arrival of Thatcherism in the ‘80s, Britain has cultivated a finance-friendly environment revolving around the city of London, with deregulation inviting a wave of foreign investment and trading activity. However, while it has even been suggested that London will overtake San Francisco as the fintechunicorn capital of the world, the U.K. has been less welcoming of crypto than it has of traditional finance.
As industry bodies like CryptoUK as well as other commentators have complained, the lack of regulatory clarity and the presence of suspicion toward cryptocurrency has been holding back the U.K.'s crypto industry. However, the situation has slowly begun to change in recent months, with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) updating its guidelines on cryptocurrencies, and with a series of consultations on crypto regulation due to begin toward the end of the year.
While these are only preliminary steps, they will most likely go a long way in establishing the kind of standardized, rule-bound environment that will provide investors and the general public with the confidence that crypto is safe.

Cryptocurrency and the U.K.

At the moment, the U.K. probably sits somewhere between the middle and upper ranges of the international leaderboard for cryptocurrency regulations. It hasn't produced any specific crypto-focused legislation as of yet, but it nonetheless has taken a fairly lenient approach to crypto, despite most officials having nothing but bad things to say about Bitcoin (BTC) and other digital currencies. Most obviously, it hasn't banned crypto in general or any kinds of coins/tokens (e.g., privacy coins) in particular, while it also doesn't apply any existing financial laws too stringently to cryptocurrencies.
Related: Differences Between Tokens, Coins and Virtual Currencies, Explained
For the most part, the U.K.’s government, the Bank of England and other institutions haven't seen it fit to come down heavily on crypto simply because none of them — at least, not until recently — have really believed that the industry has been big enough to warrant dedicated measures. For instance, Bank of England Governor Mark Carney declared in March 2018 that the market for cryptocurrencies isn't a threat to U.K. financial stability:
"At present, in my view, crypto-assets do not appear to pose material risks to financial stability. Looking ahead, financial stability risks could rise if retail participation significantly increased or linkages with the formal financial sector grew without material improvements in market integrity, anti-money laundering standards and cyber defenses.”
And just as British authorities and lawmakers haven't been particularly scared by the rise of crypto, the government and Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (i.e., the British equivalent of the IRS) have been comfortable taxing the proceeds of cryptocurrency trading and crypto-related business according to the current tax regime.
For businesses, for example, income tax is chargeable to the profits and losses that arise from transactions involving cryptocurrencies, while the U.K. also charges capital gains tax to anyone who makes a profit via crypto trading of over 12,000 British pounds (about $14,500). Added to this, a value-added tax (VAT) is also chargeable if anyone sells goods or services in the U.K. for cryptocurrency.

Gaps and uncertainties

Still, even though the cryptocurrency industry has been able to gain an initial foothold in the U.K. within the present legislative environment, industry groups and figures believe that specific crypto-focused regulation needs to be introduced, in order to provide greater clarity and support for anyone operating an exchange in the U.K. or holding an initial coin offering (ICO). Toward the end of July, CryptoUK wrote an open letter to the newly installed Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sajid Javid, in which the trade body's chairman, Iqbal Gandham, cited three reasons why the U.K.'s crypto industry was "falling behind other countries."
The first of these was the difficulty crypto exchanges and other platforms have encountered in opening bank accounts in the U.K., which derives largely from the fact that many aren't currently licensed by any regulatory body (there are a handful of exceptions, however). Gandham wrote in the letter:
"In our recent survey of crypto businesses, we found that 73% of firms have opened a bank account in another country due to complications with banking in the UK. More than half of those who tried to open an account have been rejected, with half receiving no reason from the bank."
Most significantly for the viability of the U.K.'s cryptocurrency sector, there is also the aforementioned lack of regulatory certainty, given that no specific regulations or laws have been introduced that directly address digital currencies. Gandham continued on:
"Secondly, we need a proportionate, well-designed regulatory regime for crypto assets in the UK to support the sector’s growth. Whilst the UK Government has made positive noises, other countries such as Japan and Switzerland have grasped the initiative more strongly. As the Government seeks to compete on the global stage post-Brexit, we urge you to take the lead in attracting crypto companies to base themselves here in the UK."
Lastly, Gandham ended CryptoUK's letter by urging Javid and the British government simply to be more proactive in nurturing the crypto and blockchain industry. And while Gandham reaffirmed that the industry "needs regulatory certainty to reach its full potential in future," he nonetheless told Cointelegraph that several positive developments have occurred in recent months, beginning with the FCA's July guidance on crypto assets.
In these new guidelines, the financial regulator confirmed that it wouldn't be regulating Bitcoin and Ethereum as assets and securities, although it would be regulating security tokens and some utility tokens as such, since they often confer investor rights comparable to shares and debt instruments. Gandham told Cointelegraph:
"The FCA’s recent update to its guidance on cryptoassets is broadly a step in the right direction. Following last year’s Cryptoassets Taskforce report, CryptoUK called for additional clarity to be added to the FCA’s taxonomy and a more comprehensive explanation of how the existing regulatory perimeter applies. We were pleased to see that the regulator’s updated guidance reflected our call for a separate category to cover tokens which constitute e-money under existing regulation."
Individual members of CryptoUK are also in agreement that the new guidelines are, in general, a welcome step forward. CEO and founder of the U.K.-based CEX.io exchange, Oleksandr Lutskevych, explained to Cointelegraph that industry players were involved in formulating the FCA's latest advice, saying:
"The current guidance implements the experience and knowledge gathered by crypto businesses from the international market over the last few years and represents the position of the major cryptocurrency businesses in the UK. It lays well on top of the existing financial regulations."
Encouragingly, Lutskevych also stated that the FCA was open to suggestions from the industry itself, and that it is listening to figures within it and trying to act on their advice. According to Lutskevych:
“When CEX.IO was consulting the FCA on possible ways to classify digital tokens, our experts proposed putting crypto assets meeting the definition of e-money into a separate category called ‘e-money tokens’ and placing them in the regulatory perimeter. We highlighted this in our submissions to the FCA and in consultations on crypto assets. We are delighted that the latest version of the guidance reflects our recommendation in full.”

More work ahead

Still, as with CryptoUK as a whole, CEX.io believes that more work needs to be done to improve the regulatory situation for cryptocurrency businesses. Because even with the new guidance, the environment is still confused and complicated for exchanges, platforms and other related businesses, with Lutskevych suggesting that the industry has been neglected in the understandable push to protect consumers:
"To us, 'fair' regulation protects customers and clears obstacles to crypto businesses who proactively cooperate with regulators and obey the rules. So far, the FCA has done a great job protecting customers. We are expecting the next steps to help businesses.”
Lutskevych also argues that some areas of the cryptocurrency industry are being neglected by recent advances, particularly those areas that relate to token sales and ICOs:
"While security and e-money tokens and the operators that deal with them can now play according to known rules provided by the MiFID (Market and Financial Instruments Directive) and EMD (e-money directive), there are components of the industry for which regulation must be rethought from the ground up. For example, we think it would be bad practice to apply crowdfunding regulations to ICOs."
But while the U.K. cryptocurrency industry is still being hobbled by an absence of supportive legislation and/or regulation, there is general agreement that, even beyond the latest FCA guidelines, things would appear to be slowly improving. The European Union and its member states will begin enforcing the fifth Anti‑Money Laundering Directive beginning in January 2020. While it's likely that the U.K. won't be a member of the EU by this time, it will still abide by the directive, with exchanges and other crypto-processing firms being required to register with the FCA and submit suspicious activity reports. The directive would introduce regulations for crypto wallet and exchange firms, forcing them to register with their local authorities.
This would go a long way in helping U.K.-based exchanges apply for bank accounts. At the same time, Gandham points out that several consultations on cryptocurrencies are due to take place in the U.K. toward the end of this year, which could ultimately also make the situation for crypto-related businesses considerably easier. Gandham added:
"This will determine the outlines of future crypto regulation and is the opportunity to ensure this is done in a way which is proportionate, fair and future-proofed. We would expect to see this lead to a Regulated Activity Order to specify cryptoassets as a new regulated activity, introduced through secondary legislation."

Recognition

For the crypto industry, those planned consultations cannot come soon enough. It's hard to say how such consultations — such asone regarding a ban on the retail sale of crypto derivatives — will pan out, but given the emergence of Facebook's Libra, it's likely that U.K. authorities will now proceed with extra impetus and resolve. Gandham hopes regulations come soon so that the U.K. would not lag behind the rest:
"The launch of business models with the scale and ambition of Libra illustrates why it is so important for jurisdictions like the UK to get crypto regulation right now, to create the right environment for encouraging innovation and protecting consumers, rather than attempting to regulate later in a retroactive way."
Likewise, Lutskevych agrees that the entry of massive corporations like Facebook into the crypto industry has convinced U.K. regulators that crypto is not only big, but will get bigger with every passing month and year. According to Lutskevych:
"If launched, Libra would have enormous implications on global finance, and local governments cannot ignore this. As a result, regulators at all levels are likely to adopt more specific rules on digital assets for organizations like Facebook. For example, the US already reviews a proposal to ban big tech companies from issuing digital money."
Related: Reasons Why US Government Won’t Ban Libra Cryptocurrency
Taken together, such developments indicate that the days of crypto being largely unregulated in the U.K. are severely numbered. To take another example, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs recently began requiring crypto exchanges operating in the U.K. to provide it with user data so that it could crack down on potential cases of tax evasion involving cryptocurrencies.
If nothing else, this underlines how the British government has begun recognizing crypto as a significant and substantial presence in the U.K.'s financial landscape, one that could, at the very least, make a difference to the nation's tax receipts. And assuming that the cryptocurrency industry continues its steady rise to mainstream prominence, it's only a matter of time before crypto in the U.K. receives the regulation it has long demanded.
submitted by Rajladumor1 to omgfin [link] [comments]

Is Genesis Mining worth it? I created a Genesis Mining profitability calculator in Google sheets to find out.

TL;DR: I attempt to overcome the pitfalls of forecasting genesis mining contract profitability for Ethereum, Monero, and Zcash.
The original Medium post can be found here: https://medium.com/@spreadstreet/is-genesis-mining-worth-it-a-genesis-mining-profitability-calculator-youll-actually-use-a06d916bf7bc
BitPay is on pace to process over $1B annually in bitcoin payment acceptance and payouts, and has already grown their payments dollar volume 328% year-over-year, according to a recent blog post on the BitPay website.
The very nature of cryptocurrencies requires transactions to be verified by miners. What does this mean?
  1. Cryptocurrency transactions are verified by a network of nodes, then recorded in a publicly distributed ledger known as a “blockchain”, which authenticates the coins as monetary units of measurement – or money.
  2. Cryptocurrency mining refers to coins created as a reward in which the users of the network verify and record transactions on this very blockchain. Users who are able to successfully verify the transactions receive fees and rewards in the form of brand new coins.
And Genesis Mining stands as the largest cryptocurrency cloud mining company in the world.
A user can rent "hashing power" in the form of a two-year contract from Genesis for a one-time, upfront fee.
In turn, they receive daily payouts of whatever specific cryptocurrency they purchased the contract for.

THE PROBLEM

While Genesis Mining has done a great job breaking down a complex problem into an easy-to-understand business model, users consistently have one big question:
"How profitable is {x} contract?" - Everybody, ever
While the user is able to see the upfront cost, they are unable to get an idea of how many coins they will receive by the end of the contract.

WHY THE PROBLEM EXISTS

The problem exists, because of two major uncertainties surrounding cryptocurrencies:
  1. Where the price of the currency will fluctuate over time
  2. Where the network hashrate (aka, the mining power of the entire network) will fluctuate over time
Both of these inputs are extremely volatile, and have a huge degree of uncertainty in the near and distant future.
What I will attempt to do in this exercise, is build a profitability calculator for Ethereum, Monero, and Zcash. Each of these cryptocurrencies is currently available on the website as of 11/7/2017.
Each cryptocurrency has three contracts, and I will formulate 4 different scenarios to try and capture a profitability "range".
Note: Do not take any of the words in this post as financial advice or recommendations. These are merely simulations that have their own issues and pitfalls, and are not to be used as the end-all, be-all decision.

THE ASSUMPTIONS

Due to the difficulty in forecasting both price and nethash, I was forced into a few assumptions:
  1. The forecasted price method is a Monte Carlo simulation using a geometric Brownian Motion ran 1,000 times. I covered the full methodology in a prior blog post
  2. The base network hashrate follows along very closely with the movements in price. This assumption I am the least confident about, as network hash has been shown to deviate at certain times
  3. I attempt to cover the shortfall in network hash rate with two different scenarios (shown below).
  4. I assume we hold all coins until the end of the contract, and assign a value to the portfolio based on $USD
  5. I do not run any scenarios of converting a currency into another currency
  6. I do not account for any significant changes to the underlying algorithm, such as the "Casper" Ethereum update (see 'THE DIFFICULTY BOMB' below)
Obviously any slight change could drastically alter these assumptions, but let's take a look at the different scenarios.

THE SCENARIOS

Description of Scenarios
Instead of calculating just a base scenario (which every other calculator on the web does) I wanted to come up with different scenarios to get an idea of what could be.
  1. Base - Assume no change in price or network hashrate for the duration of the contract
  2. Median - Run a full 1,000 trial simulation of prices and network hash rate, and use the median values for each
  3. Conservative - The same as Median, but instead use a price forecast that is 1 standard deviation below the median price
  4. Aggressive - The same as Median, but instead use a price forecast that is 1 standard deviation above the median price

APIs USED

  1. Spreadstreet Google Sheets Add-in
  2. Bitfinex API - To pull in historical data for each currency
  3. WhatToMine API - For nethash statistics
  4. CoinMarketCap - Updated prices

ETHEREUM

The only way to utilize Ethereum is with the product from mining.
But this shortchanges the additional value of mining Ether. It is also absolutely required for securing the Ethereum network as it creates, verifies, publishes, and propagates blocks in the blockchain.
The overall term "Ethereum Mining" is the process of mining Ether. Ether is an absolute essential, as it serves as fuel for the smooth running of the Ethereum platform.
Ether is used as an incentive to motivate developers to create top notch applications.

THE DIFFICULTY BOMB

Sometime in the future (we can't be certain when), ethereum will likely switch from its proof-of-work consensus algorithm to Casper, a proof-of-stake system its developers are now in the throes of completing.
From Blockonomi:
As opposed to the PoW consensus protocol, the PoS protocol achieves consensus through stakers—sometimes referred to as minters, too—who “stake” their coins by locking them down in specialized wallets.
With these stakers at work, mining will become redundant, meaning the Ethereum network post-Casper will rely on stakers and staking pools instead of miners for its operability.
Genesis Mining has a prelim plan in place for this scenario:
The Ethererum Mining plans will run for a maximum of 24 months, however, should Ethereum (“ETH”) switch to proof-of-stake before the end of the term, we will use the leased hardware on a best-effort basis to mine the most profitable coin with that hardware for you.
Very simply put, this changes the economics of contract profitability significantly. We are going to ignore that update for now, but it may make sense to stay away from the contracts in the short-term.

THE CONTRACTS

Ethereum Mining Contracts Comparison

ONE-YEAR PRICE FORECAST

Ethereum One Year Price Simulation
Here we can see one of 1,000 price simulations run to inform our forecast for the Median, Conservative, and Aggressive scenarios.
*Why is the price so high? This is what happens when you have a volatile currency in a simulation that does not have changes in said volatility. When a currency can move 20% in one day, it is not uncommon to see price movements like this. I mean, shit, Ethereum grew 25x in one year.

RETURN ON INVESTMENT

Ethereum Profit and ROI Comparison

VERDICT

Base performance ranges from 30% to 39% ROI, and is higher than the Median scenario by ~10%.
The conservative scenario shows a loss of between 59-62%, and the aggressive scenario shows a gain between 318% and 347%.
Difficulty bomb in the near-future presents tremendous uncertainty.

MONERO

From Cryptocompare:
Monero (XMR) is a Cryptonote algorithm based cryptocurrency, it relies on Ring Signatures in order to provide a certain degree of privacy when making a transaction. Monero is a Proof of Work cryptocurrency that can be mined with computational power from a CPU or GPU. There are currently no ASICs for Monero, which means that anyone with a computer can mine it.

THE CONTRACTS

Monero Mining Contracts Comparison

ONE-YEAR PRICE FORECAST

MoneroOne Year Price Simulation
We run the same Monte Carlo simulation to inform our forecast for the Median, Conservative, and Aggressive scenarios.
Why is the price so high? See Ethereum up above.
How is it possible for the "Conservative" scenario to be higher than the base price? Good question, and i'm glad you brought it up. The Monero currency has been not only really volatile, but drifting upwards at a pretty high rate.
The results are also being skewed by a recent uptick on November 6th where the price jumped by ~18%.
This may represent an opportunity for contract investment, but more analysis is needed.

RETURN ON INVESTMENT

Monero Profit and ROI Comparison

VERDICT

Base performance ranges from 87% to 95% ROI, with performance in the Median scenario lower by 5-6%.
The conservative scenario shows a loss of between 63-64%, and the aggressive scenario shows a gain between 795% and 832%.
To reiterate, the aggressive scenario is very much influenced by the recent uptick in volatility, so be weary of those high numbers.

ZCASH

ZCash uses Equihash as an hashing algorithm, which is an asymmetric memory-hard PoW algorithm based on the generalized birthday problem (I don't know what the hell this means, but it sounds fancy).
It relies on high RAM requirements to bottleneck the generation of proofs and making ASIC development unfeasible, much like Ethereum.

THE CONTRACTS

Zcash Mining Contracts Comparison

ONE-YEAR PRICE FORECAST

Zcash One Year Price Simulation
Here we can see one of 1,000 price simulations run to inform our forecast for the Median, Conservative, and Aggressive scenarios.
*Why is the price so high? See: Ethereum up above.

RETURN ON INVESTMENT

Zcash Profit and ROI Comparison

VERDICT

Base performance ranges from 51% to 65% ROI, and surprisingly lags the Median scenario by 4-6%.
The conservative scenario shows a loss of between 56-60%, and the aggressive scenario shows a gain between 490% and 540%.

CONCLUSION

The initial upfront costs and potential profitability are hidden when investing in hashing power contracts like Genesis Mining.
However with some robust analysis, we can get a better idea of how to assess the potential profitability of a two-year deal.
As we continue to evolve our thinking, better methods and analysis will eventually surface. Hopefully this industry can become a great avenue for side income.
If you want your own copy of the analysis and calculations, you can find it here:
Genesis Mining Profit Calculator
Cheers, and happy hunting!

RELATED POSTS

How to Create an Ethereum Mining Calculator from Start to Finish
10 Statistical Price Predictions for 10 Cryptocurrencies
Bitcoin Madness: How to Simulate Bitcoin Prices in Google Sheets

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

John Young is the founder of Spreadstreet.io, former Financial Analyst for a big-ass company, and runner-up in the 6th grade spelling bee. He would have invested in Google if he knew about it...and had any money.
He is the author of the Spreadstreet blog, which has over 3 readers (not a typo). He hopes to hit 10, but honestly writing is a lot of work.
submitted by 1kexperimentdotcom to EtherMining [link] [comments]

GAW Miners - Liars, Frauds - A brief recap of what we know.

EDIT: I was asked by a GAW staff member to compile a list of questions the community has with/about GAW, Paybase, etc. Please provide any questions you have below and I'll have them forwarded
EDIT 2: It seems Josh is working on answering the questions I've asked and compiled. We'll see what happens when answers are released.
Hello, in the midst of this public uprising against GAW I'd like to present some facts for those of you who either:
a. Don't know who/what "GAW" is and why they're a scam,
b. Are brainwashed by Garza; those of you who genuinely believe in Paycoin and GAW Miners,
c. Don't quite have all of the information.
Note that I don't have every possible snippet of information out there, I'll just bring up some of the main points and complaints.
Pre-GAW
Ten months ago Garza was first introduced to the Bitcoin community in this post and this post.. From these posts we learn quite a bit of information regarding Garza's past; he offered false business deals to eBay sellers to partner with him. In the first article, we see that after he offered this couple "20% of his total profit" from his mining company and the couple asked for a reasonable counter-offer of $5k/month to pay their bills since they were unemployed, Garza filed a false Significantly Not As Described case on eBay, causing the couple to quite a bit of money and seriously affected their finances. The couple did some research about Garza and found this:
After looking at their old facebook profile, we saw that they were originally DirectTV salesman preying on small rural towns around New England offering people high-speed, internet and other telecom services that these people weren't able to get for whatever reason before. GAW was able to coerce MBI (Massachusetts Broadband Institute) to donate $40,000 to them for helping to bring services to everyone in the communities. Garza promised to build towers and other bullshit in these towns to help provide services, but they never did. At some point even when community leaders (one was David Kulp) repeatedly tried to get in touch with them, they never heard back.
So, it seems Garza has a knack for deceptive practices 'eh? Since the posts are so long and there's a lot to discuss, I'll let you read them and formulate your opinion on Garza. (Thanks to DidHeJust for the links to those threads).
-Early Phases
Originally, GAW showed NO proof of mining at all (not an address, block, pictures of mining hardware, pool usernames, nothing). Later on, during the Hashpoint 'mining' phase, he purchased 5 PH/s worth of mining equipment from Bitmaintech. For the short amount of time Paycoin was available for proof-of-work mining, there were tons of people renting mining rigs in order to get a cut of the "$20 Paycoins." Since the difficulty was fairly low, the prices per TH/s of these miners were very high, making it extremely easy to ROI on them. I'd be willing to bet that GAW rented out a lot of their hashpower for profit. They're currently selling the hardware they have left from this on oneminer.com.
There was also a brief period of time where you were able to purchase hardware from GAW and have it point to a pool of your choosing; however, this didn't account for too large of a portion of the hashpower they claim to have sold.
-Forums
GAW Miners owns a forum created them them, Hashtalk. This forum is heavily censored; if you attempt to inquire about some of GAW's deceptive practices, broken promises, or Paycoin design you'll either be outright banned or shadow banned (your account will remain useable to you, but nobody will be able to see any of your posts). This led to this uncensored discussion thread on Bitcointalk.
- Broken Promises
Promise 1: *"Always Profitable"**
GAW Miners claims that their Hashlets would always remain profitable and the $0.08 fee per MH/s would go down overtime. You know what GAW did instead? They kept their fees the same even when people were receiving only 1 satoshi. That's hardly profitable at all, as it's the minimum amount that they can really pay. So, they decided to move to mining Hashpoints for Paycoin (another broken promise, explained later).
Promise 2: *"Paycoin would launch with a $20 floor"**
This one is interesting. For the three months or so Hashpoint mining was available, Garza claimed that Paycoin would have a $20 floor (essentially that GAW would buy up any coin sold below $20 to keep the market place there or higher). Now, however, they've purged their censored forum of such claims so all that remains are screenshots as proof. Here's a few: https://i.imgur.com/YFXJiKB.png and https://i.imgur.com/HnotyMB.png Paycoin was traded at about $20 for a very brief period of time, but since then it's been dropping steadily, trading at just above $6/ea currently. Garza has done nothing to rectify the situation since.
Promise 3: *Large merchant support on launch**
From this thread we see that Garza promises that:
That’s right, you will be able to shop with Paycoin on the Amazon, Target, Walmart, Macy*s and Best Buy’s online stores.
A journalism website, coinfire.cf, contacted Amazon and the other companies claimed to be partnered with GAW. These companies all denied being affiliated with GAW, Amazon even threatened legal action if this continued. Once the article was published, the coinfire website was mysteriously hacked and the day after GAW threatened legal action. Read more about it here:
https://coinfire.cf/2014/11/22/is-gaw-miners-lying-about-partnerships/ and http://www.scribd.com/doc/248372603/Coinfire-Cease-and-Desist
-Censorship [Developing!!!]
At the moment GAW is taking down videos they've posted where they've made a certain "statement" on their mining.
-Paycoin
Ah, Paycoin. An altcoin plagued by delays and broken promises. Originally set to launch at $20 per coin, falsely leading people into investing money into Hashpoint miners for profit. The things Josh is doing and has done to get people to use Paycoin are laughable, I'd consider it treason against the Bitcoin community. He purchased the domain btc.com for $1,000,000 only to have it redirect to Paybase. Fun stuff 'eh? He's also claimed that his coin would be better than Bitcoin, denouncing it in order to promote his own coin. From code snippets we've seen, Paycoin's "Prime Nodes," part of the PoS system to generate new coins, has the ability to generate coins at a 350% interest rate. These wallets/stakers/controllers/nodes are only able to be controlled by GAW, of course. The code:
int64 nSubsidy = 0; int64 nRewardCoinYear = 0; // creation amount per coin-year if (primeNodeRate == 0) nRewardCoinYear = 5 * CENT; else if (primeNodeRate == 10) nRewardCoinYear = 10 * CENT; else if (primeNodeRate == 20) nRewardCoinYear = 20 * CENT; else if (primeNodeRate == 100) nRewardCoinYear = 100 * CENT; else if (primeNodeRate == 350) nRewardCoinYear = 350 * CENT; nSubsidy = nCoinAge * nRewardCoinYear * 33 / (365 * 33 + 8); if (fDebug && GetBoolArg("-printcreation")) printf("GetProofOfStakeReward(): primeNodeRate=%d create=%s nCoinAge=%"PRI64d"\n", primeNodeRate, FormatMoney(nSubsidy).c_str(), nCoinAge); return nSubsidy; 
Paycoin started off as a coin with a 13,000,000 coin market cap, with two stages. A Proof of Work and Proof of Share. Check this out: https://twitter.com/gawceo/status/532173907718332417 - Garza claims that he "mined" for the 12,000,000 coins he gained, although block one was programmed to give him that much... hah!
Credits to https://gist.github.com/jyap808/3f99de084df18ce325a7 for this;
Block 1. 12 million premine.
343,196 XPY mined during Proof of Work period.
343,196 - 56,889 = 286,307 XPY not mined by GAW Miners
12,343,196 XPY coins mined Total at the end of Proof of Work including pre-mine.
100 - (343196.0 / 12343196 * 100) = 97.22% Premined at the end of Proof of Work
It also seems like Garza stole the logo for Paycoin from https://www.gopago.com/. If you compare it with what's on https://paybase.com/ they're identical.
-Current and Recent Events
It's also known that there was a massive security/data breech during the Paybase launch, which allowed users to see other's balances and personal information https://coinfire.cf/2014/12/31/massive-security-breach-at-paybase/ which is being blamed on a "Cloudflare Caching Issue," however, that excuse makes very little sense.
Currently, people are having trouble withdrawing their Paycoins from Paybase, which GAW is blaming on Authy. Authy's services are functioning fine for all other services, which leads us to believe that it isn't Authy's fault.
When Hashtakers were sold, they would've only been really profitable at the $20 per Paycoin mark. With the current price people are losing money on their investment.
Note: This is somewhat unfinished and I'd like to hear feedback on what I should add and revise.
submitted by iTipBitcoin to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

1 on 1 With Achains founder Cui Meng.

Link: http://www.gameres.com/799228.html
English Translation: With the rapid development of the blockchain industry in 2017, “Million Chains Together” is the immediate trend. At present, there are not many projects that have a real technical capacity to develop a public chain. A chain is one of the more low-key ones. Founder Cui Meng started an official blockchain business starting in 2015. In 2017, he took the Achain from his predecessor Xinhe Heyun and Guorenbao. Born out of the family to complete the transition from the company system to the community.
Technological bottlenecks and breakthroughs are fair to all projects, and how to build their own ecology becomes a ticket to “China Ethereum”. A few days ago, the blockchain catcher had an in-depth exchange with Cui Meng. This time he shared the logic of the Achain to create its ecology and his understanding of the community. It is worth taking a look at it.
  1. Business Logic
Blockchain Catcher: How many projects are there on the Achain?
Cui Meng: There are 84 contracts that have been written and run on the Achain. The number of contracts can be found directly on our browser.
Blockchain Catcher: Some voices on the Internet may feel that most of Achain's internal incubation or linked projects?
Cui Meng: Actually, we have been doing blockchain since 2014, and it is considered to be one of the earliest startup teams in the domestic blockchain. I can say responsibly that now there are really projects in the bottom of the blockchain in China, many of which are built by our former employees and employees. I can often see our former employees on Github, so the code contribution is certainly there.
For us, we took the investment of traditional VC very early. At the time, it was a sense of integrity in the circle. But then there were too many team members, and one after another, there were 6,700 people. I will interview no less than 400 people. Many of them have started their own businesses. They may be based on trust in us, or on the support of domestic brands. They choose to do it based on Achain. We do know these people, but we have nearly 100 contracts on the platform. We also know that Not so much.
Blockchain Catcher: Horizontal comparison, what are your advantages as a public chain platform?
Cui Meng: Our TPS will be higher, and the three-digit number on the market is now very high. I really think that four-digit numbers, which can be used commercially, do not yet exist, and now, like EOS, it does not actually achieve what it says. Like Ethereum, it is difficult to change the bottom layer to PoS. Because it is mature and has many historical problems. We will not have these historical problems as latecomers, but we also lack market and awareness. The advantages, so have their own advantages.
In addition, our technology is more pragmatic, there are not so many technical concepts, all can be made or have been made.
Blockchain Catcher: Why did you do an RDPoS algorithm yourself?
Cui Meng: We divide the blockchain into two types. One is the currency category, such as Bitcoin and Litecoin. It cannot write logic and send contracts; the second is platform type, such as Ethereum and BTS. Above can send items, write contracts.
The previous DPoS did not support the contract, but we have to issue a contract above, so it has a lot of problems in the confirmation path. We are doing RDPoS for the platform class, which is to use the smart contract system to optimize the confirmation path. Consensus algorithm. It is also not trying to innovate. If it is experiencing difficulties, it is necessary to solve the problem.
Blockchain Catcher: What technical means to ensure its stability and security?
Cui Meng: There are mainly three angles. First, we have a sandbox mechanism that is fully tested before going online. Second, we still have a virtual machine mechanism that is similar to removing the contract from the main chain network. It will not affect other people, so it can also improve some security and stability; Third, we have added a Cache mechanism, similar to a large buffer, until now the biggest bottleneck of the blockchain is the amount of concurrent The problem, so we do some buffering, pre-processing in the buffer, eventually re-compress or control the rhythm to the blockchain, reduce the impact, so that the limited blockchain network can accept more capacity.
Blockchain Catcher: Achain White Paper mentions that the last thing to do is to interact with the data in the chain and under the chain. What is the consideration?
Cui Meng: From our philosophy, we are not decentralized for decentralization, nor do we think blockchain is better than traditional solutions. Because I'm a product originator, all of them consider issues from the perspective of solving problems and demands. Therefore, we believe that the technical structure of blockchains and traditional technology architectures have their own advantages. They must be combined to better solve problems. problem. Based on this concept, we are developing a value exchange protocol for VEP, which is to allow interaction between the data in the chain and the chain. As for what problems can be solved, developers need to explore for themselves.
Blockchain Catcher: In August 2017, you proposed a bifurcation theory. What is the role of bifurcation?
Cui Meng: Bifurcation is to meet different business demands, because the blockchain needs to fit the application scenario in the end, but the public chain itself does not fit any scene. Achain is equivalent to an experimental field. After the experiment can prove that the chain as a certain industry or a chain of application scenarios can solve some specific problems, we are equivalent to provide them with the underlying technical support.
Blockchain Catcher: You did not recognize the fork, why did you propose a bifurcation theory?
Cui Meng: The bifurcation theory actually originated from a regular brainstorming session. At that time everyone discussed what the next direction of our network development was. At that time we had the concept of a Goku network. The main point is that many of the so-called blockchain projects are actually just a Token. They are not blockchain projects because they do not have chains.
But many teams eventually use blockchain technology to try to solve problems, and many of them don't have the technical capabilities of the blockchain, so we want to encourage these people to do more technology, and we can think of based on our master. Chain networks do bifurcations, which allows them to quickly have customized blockchains. I think this kind of innovation in ideas and methods can make a lot of people really use blockchain to do some experiments, not just send a Token.
Blockchain Catcher: What are the next steps after the fork?
Cui Meng: Next we want to link these chains, because they are based on our main chain or community to diverge, everyone's technical ideas, standards and interface similarities are high, it is easier to connect, we You can also add some interfaces and protocols to them so that you can connect them all together.
Blockchain Catcher: What kind of bifurcation is ABTC?
Cui Meng: It actually combines the features of Bitcoin and Achain, similar to the original bifurcation of unisexual reproduction, ABTC is bisexual reproduction, in fact, is an innovation, but also an attempt, we want to try two The characteristics of the three projects cannot be combined to produce new things. But ABTC is an independent project, not ours, and they should have some new disclosures later.
Blockchain Catchers: You have planned three stages of development in the White Paper, Singularity, Galaxies, and the Universe, and feel that you have to make a big goal in the end.
Cui Meng: The development of this industry is changing with each passing day. Like Ethereum, everyone thinks that it is very powerful. When we first came out, we did not buy it. We felt we could not do it, but we dared to dare to do it. This is also the experience we have learned. Our realizable nature is actually very high, that is, a logic based on forking and reuniting, and eventually reaching a blockchain interoperable state.
Blockchain Catcher: How is the progress now?
Cui Meng: It is a bit slow, but it has been steadily progressing and development tasks are scheduled for next year.
Blockchain Catcher: Is it because developers are not enough?
Cui Meng: Many people in this industry are useless. Someone needs to understand it for a problem. It takes time to embarrass, because there is nothing that can be learned from, and it has to be created. It belongs to the process from zero to one.
We used to do a lot of blockchains. There was no digital currency at that time. We tried every single link. We did everything like the exchange, core technology, and code. Now we still have some problems in the development to solve, but the main environment is not very good, many people send a Token will be finished, do not want to continue to do the chain.
  1. Community Construction
Blockchain Catcher: It is relatively early for you to start working on the Achain, but why did it not come online in August 2017?
Cui Meng: Because we have undergone some ideological changes, from the corporate system to the community, this is actually a life-changing task, and the challenge is still quite big. We are very glad that we have passed this level and many have not passed this before. The relevant blockchain companies are now gone.
Blockchain Catcher: Does Achain have a profit model?
Cui Meng: I personally understand that the blockchain itself is not a business. The end of its organizational behavior is the result of the completion of its ecological construction. It has sufficient funds in the early stages, mainly for the construction of the project. Do not need to be profitable. This is different from traditional businesses.
Blockchain Catcher: What if the money is spent and the ecology hasn't been built yet?
Cui Meng: Before that day, we are spending a lot of money, spending less, and we must do it. This industry is still too early. There is really no way to do it, but it will certainly happen later because there are too many projects now. Many of them don’t have this concept. They emphasize the profit model and start raising money to make money. my own.
Blockchain Catcher: So no business model exists?
Cui Meng: Accurately speaking, the business model is more suitable for explaining the profit model of a particular institution. The blockchain is to build an open community. Everyone can become a member of this organization. It does not profit from selling specific products and services, but instead pays more attention to creating, sharing, and exchanging. Compared to companies and institutions, its structure is looser and there is no performance assessment. The symbol of stable operation of the community is self-sufficiency and the number of community members is sufficient and active. This is a goal pursued by the blockchain community, so it may not be appropriate to describe it in a business model.
Blockchain Catcher: You said that your position is a community administrator. What needs to be done to manage the community?
Cui Meng: To manage the community is to do a good reward and punishment system, distribution system, and then tilt resources to some basic, ecological projects. It is very important to allocate the benefits to those who really serve the community.
Blockchain Catcher: You mentioned before that Achain has no CTO. What's going on?
Cui Meng: Actually it is mainly community-based. There is no such concept, but there are core technical personnel.
Blockchain Catchers: How many technical developers are there now?
Cui Meng: There are nearly 100 code contributors. There are full-time and part-time employees. Full-time, we also serve as community contributors. People who recognize this idea leave behind. People who don't recognize leave and work hard.
Blockchain Catcher: Will this slow down development?
Cui Meng: I don't think so. Sometimes the tighter you can get, the faster he can run. Some people get paid for you. But he doesn't serve the whole thing wholeheartedly. He doesn't have a common goal with the entire team. In many cases, it is not necessary to be so true. People are treated more openly. Others will treat you more openly, although there may be exceptions, but overall it will be.
Blockchain Catcher: What do you think are essential to the success of a blockchain project?
Cui Meng: Since the core of the blockchain project is not the company but the community, it is a loosely organized form. Therefore, the key to its success is people. This person must be able to have more goals and methods to bring together more people.
In the future, the technological community must be the commanding heights. There is no basic ecology. There is no such community. Someone believes in the technical community in the future that one thing can be started.
Blockchain Catcher: Will there be a person who contributes the same code in different communities?
Cui Meng: I think the spirit of blockchain sharing and collaboration is beyond simple technical value. The technical community is a group of people who are really willing to communicate together. They will prove that I am doing better than you. My solution is more perfect, not just making money. The real community should be mobilized to this extent.
Blockchain Catcher: How is Achain now open source?
Cui Meng: At least 99%, because of some security issues, so the PC wallet has not yet opened.
Blockchain Catcher: Some people think that the money in the blockchain industry is the most important, but first, the money can be added up slowly?
Cui Meng: I think it is not. The spirit should be more important because the industry is not difficult to finance, but it is not easy to have ideas. To formulate rules to constrain themselves, we must not melt hundreds of millions of dollars, and spend tens of thousands of dollars to do one thing. To deal with it is over, and we must do a good job of self-discipline at the spiritual level.
Many reliable technical teams are not able to attract money. It is important to be able to have an equal dialogue with the developer. If the cattle blow too much, whether or not someone picks up is also a problem. No matter how good market expectations are recognized at the beginning, the future will be full of challenges. If the code level cannot fulfill the promise at that time, the market will return to rationality.
With the rapid development of the blockchain industry in 2017, “Million Chains Together” is the immediate trend. At present, there are not many projects that have a real technical capacity to develop a public chain. A chain is one of the more low-key ones. Founder Cui Meng started an official blockchain business starting in 2015. In 2017, he took the Achain from his predecessor Xinhe Heyun and Guorenbao. Born out of the family to complete the transition from the company system to the community.
Technological bottlenecks and breakthroughs are fair to all projects, and how to build their own ecology becomes a ticket to “China Ethereum”. A few days ago, the blockchain catcher had an in-depth exchange with Cui Meng. This time he shared the logic of the Achain to create its ecology and his understanding of the community. It is worth taking a look at it.
  1. Business Logic
Blockchain Catcher: How many projects are there on the Achain?
Cui Meng: There are 84 contracts that have been written and run on the Achain. The number of contracts can be found directly on our browser.
Blockchain Catcher: Some voices on the Internet may feel that most of Achain's internal incubation or linked projects?
Cui Meng: Actually, we have been doing blockchain since 2014, and it is considered to be one of the earliest startup teams in the domestic blockchain. I can say responsibly that now there are really projects in the bottom of the blockchain in China, many of which are built by our former employees and employees. I can often see our former employees on Github, so the code contribution is certainly there.
For us, we took the investment of traditional VC very early. At the time, it was a sense of integrity in the circle. But then there were too many team members, and one after another, there were 6,700 people. I will interview no less than 400 people. Many of them have started their own businesses. They may be based on trust in us, or on the support of domestic brands. They choose to do it based on Achain. We do know these people, but we have nearly 100 contracts on the platform. We also know that Not so much.
Blockchain Catcher: Horizontal comparison, what are your advantages as a public chain platform?
Cui Meng: Our TPS will be higher, and the three-digit number on the market is now very high. I really think that four-digit numbers, which can be used commercially, do not yet exist, and now, like EOS, it does not actually achieve what it says. Like Ethereum, it is difficult to change the bottom layer to PoS. Because it is mature and has many historical problems. We will not have these historical problems as latecomers, but we also lack market and awareness. The advantages, so have their own advantages.
In addition, our technology is more pragmatic, there are not so many technical concepts, all can be made or have been made.
Blockchain Catcher: Why did you do an RDPoS algorithm yourself?
Cui Meng: We divide the blockchain into two types. One is the currency category, such as Bitcoin and Litecoin. It cannot write logic and send contracts; the second is platform type, such as Ethereum and BTS. Above can send items, write contracts.
The previous DPoS did not support the contract, but we have to issue a contract above, so it has a lot of problems in the confirmation path. We are doing RDPoS for the platform class, which is to use the smart contract system to optimize the confirmation path. Consensus algorithm. It is also not trying to innovate. If it is experiencing difficulties, it is necessary to solve the problem.
Blockchain Catcher: What technical means to ensure its stability and security?
Cui Meng: There are mainly three angles. First, we have a sandbox mechanism that is fully tested before going online. Second, we still have a virtual machine mechanism that is similar to removing the contract from the main chain network. It will not affect other people, so it can also improve some security and stability; Third, we have added a Cache mechanism, similar to a large buffer, until now the biggest bottleneck of the blockchain is the amount of concurrent The problem, so we do some buffering, pre-processing in the buffer, eventually re-compress or control the rhythm to the blockchain, reduce the impact, so that the limited blockchain network can accept more capacity.
Blockchain Catcher: Achain White Paper mentions that the last thing to do is to interact with the data in the chain and under the chain. What is the consideration?
Cui Meng: From our philosophy, we are not decentralized for decentralization, nor do we think blockchain is better than traditional solutions. Because I'm a product originator, all of them consider issues from the perspective of solving problems and demands. Therefore, we believe that the technical structure of blockchains and traditional technology architectures have their own advantages. They must be combined to better solve problems. problem. Based on this concept, we are developing a value exchange protocol for VEP, which is to allow interaction between the data in the chain and the chain. As for what problems can be solved, developers need to explore for themselves.
Blockchain Catcher: In August 2017, you proposed a bifurcation theory. What is the role of bifurcation?
Cui Meng: Bifurcation is to meet different business demands, because the blockchain needs to fit the application scenario in the end, but the public chain itself does not fit any scene. Achain is equivalent to an experimental field. After the experiment can prove that the chain as a certain industry or a chain of application scenarios can solve some specific problems, we are equivalent to provide them with the underlying technical support.
Blockchain Catcher: You did not recognize the fork, why did you propose a bifurcation theory?
Cui Meng: The bifurcation theory actually originated from a regular brainstorming session. At that time everyone discussed what the next direction of our network development was. At that time we had the concept of a Goku network. The main point is that many of the so-called blockchain projects are actually just a Token. They are not blockchain projects because they do not have chains.
But many teams eventually use blockchain technology to try to solve problems, and many of them don't have the technical capabilities of the blockchain, so we want to encourage these people to do more technology, and we can think of based on our master. Chain networks do bifurcations, which allows them to quickly have customized blockchains. I think this kind of innovation in ideas and methods can make a lot of people really use blockchain to do some experiments, not just send a Token.
Blockchain Catcher: What are the next steps after the fork?
Cui Meng: Next we want to link these chains, because they are based on our main chain or community to diverge, everyone's technical ideas, standards and interface similarities are high, it is easier to connect, we You can also add some interfaces and protocols to them so that you can connect them all together.
Blockchain Catcher: What kind of bifurcation is ABTC?
Cui Meng: It actually combines the features of Bitcoin and Achain, similar to the original bifurcation of unisexual reproduction, ABTC is bisexual reproduction, in fact, is an innovation, but also an attempt, we want to try two The characteristics of the three projects cannot be combined to produce new things. But ABTC is an independent project, not ours, and they should have some new disclosures later.
Blockchain Catchers: You have planned three stages of development in the White Paper, Singularity, Galaxies, and the Universe, and feel that you have to make a big goal in the end.
Cui Meng: The development of this industry is changing with each passing day. Like Ethereum, everyone thinks that it is very powerful. When we first came out, we did not buy it. We felt we could not do it, but we dared to dare to do it. This is also the experience we have learned. Our realizable nature is actually very high, that is, a logic based on forking and reuniting, and eventually reaching a blockchain interoperable state.
Blockchain Catcher: How is the progress now?
Cui Meng: It is a bit slow, but it has been steadily progressing and development tasks are scheduled for next year.
Blockchain Catcher: Is it because developers are not enough?
Cui Meng: Many people in this industry are useless. Someone needs to understand it for a problem. It takes time to embarrass, because there is nothing that can be learned from, and it has to be created. It belongs to the process from zero to one.
We used to do a lot of blockchains. There was no digital currency at that time. We tried every single link. We did everything like the exchange, core technology, and code. Now we still have some problems in the development to solve, but the main environment is not very good, many people send a Token will be finished, do not want to continue to do the chain.
  1. Community Construction
Blockchain Catcher: It is relatively early for you to start working on the Achain, but why did it not come online in August 2017?
Cui Meng: Because we have undergone some ideological changes, from the corporate system to the community, this is actually a life-changing task, and the challenge is still quite big. We are very glad that we have passed this level and many have not passed this before. The relevant blockchain companies are now gone.
Blockchain Catcher: Does Achain have a profit model?
Cui Meng: I personally understand that the blockchain itself is not a business. The end of its organizational behavior is the result of the completion of its ecological construction. It has sufficient funds in the early stages, mainly for the construction of the project. Do not need to be profitable. This is different from traditional businesses.
Blockchain Catcher: What if the money is spent and the ecology hasn't been built yet?
Cui Meng: Before that day, we are spending a lot of money, spending less, and we must do it. This industry is still too early. There is really no way to do it, but it will certainly happen later because there are too many projects now. Many of them don’t have this concept. They emphasize the profit model and start raising money to make money. my own.
Blockchain Catcher: So no business model exists?
Cui Meng: Accurately speaking, the business model is more suitable for explaining the profit model of a particular institution. The blockchain is to build an open community. Everyone can become a member of this organization. It does not profit from selling specific products and services, but instead pays more attention to creating, sharing, and exchanging. Compared to companies and institutions, its structure is looser and there is no performance assessment. The symbol of stable operation of the community is self-sufficiency and the number of community members is sufficient and active. This is a goal pursued by the blockchain community, so it may not be appropriate to describe it in a business model.
Blockchain Catcher: You said that your position is a community administrator. What needs to be done to manage the community?
Cui Meng: To manage the community is to do a good reward and punishment system, distribution system, and then tilt resources to some basic, ecological projects. It is very important to allocate the benefits to those who really serve the community.
Blockchain Catcher: You mentioned before that Achain has no CTO. What's going on?
Cui Meng: Actually it is mainly community-based. There is no such concept, but there are core technical personnel.
Blockchain Catchers: How many technical developers are there now?
Cui Meng: There are nearly 100 code contributors. There are full-time and part-time employees. Full-time, we also serve as community contributors. People who recognize this idea leave behind. People who don't recognize leave and work hard.
Blockchain Catcher: Will this slow down development?
Cui Meng: I don't think so. Sometimes the tighter you can get, the faster he can run. Some people get paid for you. But he doesn't serve the whole thing wholeheartedly. He doesn't have a common goal with the entire team. In many cases, it is not necessary to be so true. People are treated more openly. Others will treat you more openly, although there may be exceptions, but overall it will be.
Blockchain Catcher: What do you think are essential to the success of a blockchain project?
Cui Meng: Since the core of the blockchain project is not the company but the community, it is a loosely organized form. Therefore, the key to its success is people. This person must be able to have more goals and methods to bring together more people.
In the future, the technological community must be the commanding heights. There is no basic ecology. There is no such community. Someone believes in the technical community in the future that one thing can be started.
Blockchain Catcher: Will there be a person who contributes the same code in different communities?
Cui Meng: I think the spirit of blockchain sharing and collaboration is beyond simple technical value. The technical community is a group of people who are really willing to communicate together. They will prove that I am doing better than you. My solution is more perfect, not just making money. The real community should be mobilized to this extent.
Blockchain Catcher: How is Achain now open source?
Cui Meng: At least 99%, because of some security issues, so the PC wallet has not yet opened.
Blockchain Catcher: Some people think that the money in the blockchain industry is the most important, but first, the money can be added up slowly?
Cui Meng: I think it is not. The spirit should be more important because the industry is not difficult to finance, but it is not easy to have ideas. To formulate rules to constrain themselves, we must not melt hundreds of millions of dollars, and spend tens of thousands of dollars to do one thing. To deal with it is over, and we must do a good job of self-discipline at the spiritual level.
Many reliable technical teams are not able to attract money. It is important to be able to have an equal dialogue with the developer. No matter how good market expectations are recognized at the beginning, the future will be full of challenges. If the code level cannot fulfill the promise at that time, the market will return to rationality.
submitted by Dirtybird204 to Achain_Official [link] [comments]

How to Calculate Bitcoin Difficulty Bitcoin Q&A: Why Can't Bitcoin Mining Difficulty Adjust a Little Quicker? Guide to Anki Intervals and Learning Steps - YouTube Mining Difficulty - Simply Explained - YouTube BITCOIN DIFFICULTY ALL-TIME HIGH ERREICHT - YouTube

For example, Bitcoin system now sets the difficulty of mining such that one block is generated every 10 minutes. Hence, a solo miner often has to wait 687 days in expectation to mine a block [4]. ... An Indian supreme court advocate has shared some thoughts on the kind of cryptocurrency regulation India can benefit from. The right regulatory framework "would ensure transparency, oversight and ... Bitcoin mining is the primary method of releasing cryptocurrency into circulation and is what brings additional bitcoins into existence. It is a system that was designed to be reliant on resources and is run with great intensity so that the amount of mined blocks maintain a steady pace in its creation, thereby controlling the monetary supply at a reasonable rate. In the murky bitcoin market, regulators are still figuring out the accounting and tax implications. By Abdul Razak Rahman. Bitcoin is an internet-based cryptocurrency or virtual money that allows anyone to transact with anyone else, anywhere at any time, instantaneously at marginal cost, with confidence and privacy, without friction nor censorship. Bitcoin’s innovative and distributedly maintained blockchain data structure hinges on the adequate degree of difficulty of so-called “proofs of work,” which miners have to produce in order ...

[index] [8289] [20890] [33920] [12395] [24035] [28407] [27371] [14951] [14689] [25197]

How to Calculate Bitcoin Difficulty

Bitcoin mining difficulty example. THIS IS CRAZY!! This is a great example of how fast the bitcoin community is upgrading their hardware and leaving my micro rig in the past. Sara administering to Baylen. This feature is not available right now. Please try again later. Learn how Anki calculates intervals and how you can modify settings to optimize your learning! NOTE: There is a mistake towards the end of the video when I w... A non-geeky explanation of what bitcoin mining difficulty is. This also shows how to keep your bitcoin take from diminishing over time. Bitcoin basics: What is the difficulty target and how does it adjust itself? - Duration: 7:12. Keifer Kif 4,486 views. 7:12. What is Crypto Mining Difficulty and How it Impacts YOUR Profits ...

#