Bitcoin SV Price Top Performer on CMC Due to Craig Wright ...

Syscoin Platform’s Great Reddit Scaling Bake-off Proposal

Syscoin Platform’s Great Reddit Scaling Bake-off Proposal

https://preview.redd.it/rqt2dldyg8e51.jpg?width=1044&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=777ae9d4fbbb54c3540682b72700fc4ba3de0a44
We are excited to participate and present Syscoin Platform's ideal characteristics and capabilities towards a well-rounded Reddit Community Points solution!
Our scaling solution for Reddit Community Points involves 2-way peg interoperability with Ethereum. This will provide a scalable token layer built specifically for speed and high volumes of simple value transfers at a very low cost, while providing sovereign ownership and onchain finality.
Token transfers scale by taking advantage of a globally sorting mempool that provides for probabilistically secure assumptions of “as good as settled”. The opportunity here for token receivers is to have an app-layer interactivity on the speed/security tradeoff (99.9999% assurance within 10 seconds). We call this Z-DAG, and it achieves high-throughput across a mesh network topology presently composed of about 2,000 geographically dispersed full-nodes. Similar to Bitcoin, however, these nodes are incentivized to run full-nodes for the benefit of network security, through a bonded validator scheme. These nodes do not participate in the consensus of transactions or block validation any differently than other nodes and therefore do not degrade the security model of Bitcoin’s validate first then trust, across every node. Each token transfer settles on-chain. The protocol follows Bitcoin core policies so it has adequate code coverage and protocol hardening to be qualified as production quality software. It shares a significant portion of Bitcoin’s own hashpower through merged-mining.
This platform as a whole can serve token microtransactions, larger settlements, and store-of-value in an ideal fashion, providing probabilistic scalability whilst remaining decentralized according to Bitcoin design. It is accessible to ERC-20 via a permissionless and trust-minimized bridge that works in both directions. The bridge and token platform are currently available on the Syscoin mainnet. This has been gaining recent attention for use by loyalty point programs and stablecoins such as Binance USD.

Solutions

Syscoin Foundation identified a few paths for Reddit to leverage this infrastructure, each with trade-offs. The first provides the most cost-savings and scaling benefits at some sacrifice of token autonomy. The second offers more preservation of autonomy with a more narrow scope of cost savings than the first option, but savings even so. The third introduces more complexity than the previous two yet provides the most overall benefits. We consider the third as most viable as it enables Reddit to benefit even while retaining existing smart contract functionality. We will focus on the third option, and include the first two for good measure.
  1. Distribution, burns and user-to-user transfers of Reddit Points are entirely carried out on the Syscoin network. This full-on approach to utilizing the Syscoin network provides the most scalability and transaction cost benefits of these scenarios. The tradeoff here is distribution and subscription handling likely migrating away from smart contracts into the application layer.
  2. The Reddit Community Points ecosystem can continue to use existing smart contracts as they are used today on the Ethereum mainchain. Users migrate a portion of their tokens to Syscoin, the scaling network, to gain much lower fees, scalability, and a proven base layer, without sacrificing sovereign ownership. They would use Syscoin for user-to-user transfers. Tips redeemable in ten seconds or less, a high-throughput relay network, and onchain settlement at a block target of 60 seconds.
  3. Integration between Matic Network and Syscoin Platform - similar to Syscoin’s current integration with Ethereum - will provide Reddit Community Points with EVM scalability (including the Memberships ERC777 operator) on the Matic side, and performant simple value transfers, robust decentralized security, and sovereign store-of-value on the Syscoin side. It’s “the best of both worlds”. The trade-off is more complex interoperability.

Syscoin + Matic Integration

Matic and Blockchain Foundry Inc, the public company formed by the founders of Syscoin, recently entered a partnership for joint research and business development initiatives. This is ideal for all parties as Matic Network and Syscoin Platform provide complementary utility. Syscoin offers characteristics for sovereign ownership and security based on Bitcoin’s time-tested model, and shares a significant portion of Bitcoin’s own hashpower. Syscoin’s focus is on secure and scalable simple value transfers, trust-minimized interoperability, and opt-in regulatory compliance for tokenized assets rather than scalability for smart contract execution. On the other hand, Matic Network can provide scalable EVM for smart contract execution. Reddit Community Points can benefit from both.
Syscoin + Matic integration is actively being explored by both teams, as it is helpful to Reddit, Ethereum, and the industry as a whole.

Proving Performance & Cost Savings

Our POC focuses on 100,000 on-chain settlements of token transfers on the Syscoin Core blockchain. Transfers and burns perform equally with Syscoin. For POCs related to smart contracts (subscriptions, etc), refer to the Matic Network proposal.
On-chain settlement of 100k transactions was accomplished within roughly twelve minutes, well-exceeding Reddit’s expectation of five days. This was performed using six full-nodes operating on compute-optimized AWS c4.2xlarge instances which were geographically distributed (Virginia, London, Sao Paulo Brazil, Oregon, Singapore, Germany). A higher quantity of settlements could be reached within the same time-frame with more broadcasting nodes involved, or using hosts with more resources for faster execution of the process.
Addresses used: 100,014
The demonstration was executed using this tool. The results can be seen in the following blocks:
612722: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/6d47796d043bb4c508d29123e6ae81b051f5e0aaef849f253c8f3a6942a022ce
612723: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/8e2077f743461b90f80b4bef502f564933a8e04de97972901f3d65cfadcf1faf
612724: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/205436d25b1b499fce44c29567c5c807beaca915b83cc9f3c35b0d76dbb11f6e
612725: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/776d1b1a0f90f655a6bbdf559ff5072459cbdc5682d7615ff4b78c00babdc237
612726: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/de4df0994253742a1ac8ac9eec8d2a8c8b0a6d72c53d6f3caa29bb6c171b0a6b
612727: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/e5e167c52a9decb313fbaadf49a5e34cb490f8084f642a850385476d4ef10d70
612728: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/ab64d989edc71890e7b5b8491c20e9a27520dc45a5f7c776d3dae79057f59fe7
612729: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/5e8b7ecd0e36f99d07e4ea6e135fc952bf7ec30164ab6f4d1e98b0f2d405df6d
612730: https://sys1.bcfn.ca/block/d395df3d31dde60bbb0bece6bd5b358297da878f0beb96be389e5f0e043580a3
It is important to note that this POC is not focused on Z-DAG. The performance of Z-DAG has been benchmarked within realistic network conditions: Whiteblock’s audit is publicly available. Network latency tests showed an average TPS around 15k with burst capacity up to 61k. Zero-latency control group exhibited ~150k TPS. Mainnet testing of the Z-DAG network is achievable and will require further coordination and additional resources.
Even further optimizations are expected in the upcoming Syscoin Core release which will implement a UTXO model for our token layer bringing further efficiency as well as open the door to additional scaling technology currently under research by our team and academic partners. At present our token layer is account-based, similar to Ethereum. Opt-in compliance structures will also be introduced soon which will offer some positive performance characteristics as well. It makes the most sense to implement these optimizations before performing another benchmark for Z-DAG, especially on the mainnet considering the resources required to stress-test this network.

Cost Savings

Total cost for these 100k transactions: $0.63 USD
See the live fee comparison for savings estimation between transactions on Ethereum and Syscoin. Below is a snapshot at time of writing:
ETH price: $318.55 ETH gas price: 55.00 Gwei ($0.37)
Syscoin price: $0.11
Snapshot of live fee comparison chart
Z-DAG provides a more efficient fee-market. A typical Z-DAG transaction costs 0.0000582 SYS. Tokens can be safely redeemed/re-spent within seconds or allowed to settle on-chain beforehand. The costs should remain about this low for microtransactions.
Syscoin will achieve further reduction of fees and even greater scalability with offchain payment channels for assets, with Z-DAG as a resilience fallback. New payment channel technology is one of the topics under research by the Syscoin development team with our academic partners at TU Delft. In line with the calculation in the Lightning Networks white paper, payment channels using assets with Syscoin Core will bring theoretical capacity for each person on Earth (7.8 billion) to have five on-chain transactions per year, per person, without requiring anyone to enter a fee market (aka “wait for a block”). This exceeds the minimum LN expectation of two transactions per person, per year; one to exist on-chain and one to settle aggregated value.

Tools, Infrastructure & Documentation

Syscoin Bridge

Mainnet Demonstration of Syscoin Bridge with the Basic Attention Token ERC-20
A two-way blockchain interoperability system that uses Simple Payment Verification to enable:
  • Any Standard ERC-20 token to be moved from Ethereum to the Syscoin blockchain as a Syscoin Platform Token (SPT), and back to Ethereum
  • Any SPT to be moved from Syscoin to the Ethereum blockchain as an ERC-20 token, and back to Syscoin

Benefits

  • Permissionless
  • No counterparties involved
  • No trading mechanisms involved
  • No third-party liquidity providers required
  • Cross-chain Fractional Supply - 2-way peg - Token supply maintained globally
  • ERC-20s gain vastly improved transactionality with the Syscoin Token Platform, along with the security of bitcoin-core-compliant PoW.
  • SPTs gain access to all the tooling, applications and capabilities of Ethereum for ERC-20, including smart contracts.
https://preview.redd.it/l8t2m8ldh8e51.png?width=1180&format=png&auto=webp&s=b0a955a0181746dc79aff718bd0bf607d3c3aa23
https://preview.redd.it/26htnxzfh8e51.png?width=1180&format=png&auto=webp&s=d0383d3c2ee836c9f60b57eca35542e9545f741d

Source code

https://github.com/syscoin/?q=sysethereum
Main Subprojects

API

Tools to simplify using Syscoin Bridge as a service with dapps and wallets will be released some time after implementation of Syscoin Core 4.2. These will be based upon the same processes which are automated in the current live Sysethereum Dapp that is functioning with the Syscoin mainnet.

Documentation

Syscoin Bridge & How it Works (description and process flow)
Superblock Validation Battles
HOWTO: Provision the Bridge for your ERC-20
HOWTO: Setup an Agent
Developer & User Diligence

Trade-off

The Syscoin Ethereum Bridge is secured by Agent nodes participating in a decentralized and incentivized model that involves roles of Superblock challengers and submitters. This model is open to participation. The benefits here are trust-minimization, permissionless-ness, and potentially less legal/regulatory red-tape than interop mechanisms that involve liquidity providers and/or trading mechanisms.
The trade-off is that due to the decentralized nature there are cross-chain settlement times of one hour to cross from Ethereum to Syscoin, and three hours to cross from Syscoin to Ethereum. We are exploring ways to reduce this time while maintaining decentralization via zkp. Even so, an “instant bridge” experience could be provided by means of a third-party liquidity mechanism. That option exists but is not required for bridge functionality today. Typically bridges are used with batch value, not with high frequencies of smaller values, and generally it is advantageous to keep some value on both chains for maximum availability of utility. Even so, the cross-chain settlement time is good to mention here.

Cost

Ethereum -> Syscoin: Matic or Ethereum transaction fee for bridge contract interaction, negligible Syscoin transaction fee for minting tokens
Syscoin -> Ethereum: Negligible Syscoin transaction fee for burning tokens, 0.01% transaction fee paid to Bridge Agent in the form of the ERC-20, Matic or Ethereum transaction fee for contract interaction.

Z-DAG

Zero-Confirmation Directed Acyclic Graph is an instant settlement protocol that is used as a complementary system to proof-of-work (PoW) in the confirmation of Syscoin service transactions. In essence, a Z-DAG is simply a directed acyclic graph (DAG) where validating nodes verify the sequential ordering of transactions that are received in their memory pools. Z-DAG is used by the validating nodes across the network to ensure that there is absolute consensus on the ordering of transactions and no balances are overflowed (no double-spends).

Benefits

  • Unique fee-market that is more efficient for microtransaction redemption and settlement
  • Uses decentralized means to enable tokens with value transfer scalability that is comparable or exceeds that of credit card networks
  • Provides high throughput and secure fulfillment even if blocks are full
  • Probabilistic and interactive
  • 99.9999% security assurance within 10 seconds
  • Can serve payment channels as a resilience fallback that is faster and lower-cost than falling-back directly to a blockchain
  • Each Z-DAG transaction also settles onchain through Syscoin Core at 60-second block target using SHA-256 Proof of Work consensus
https://preview.redd.it/pgbx84jih8e51.png?width=1614&format=png&auto=webp&s=5f631d42a33dc698365eb8dd184b6d442def6640

Source code

https://github.com/syscoin/syscoin

API

Syscoin-js provides tooling for all Syscoin Core RPCs including interactivity with Z-DAG.

Documentation

Z-DAG White Paper
Useful read: An in-depth Z-DAG discussion between Syscoin Core developer Jag Sidhu and Brave Software Research Engineer Gonçalo Pestana

Trade-off

Z-DAG enables the ideal speed/security tradeoff to be determined per use-case in the application layer. It minimizes the sacrifice required to accept and redeem fast transfers/payments while providing more-than-ample security for microtransactions. This is supported on the premise that a Reddit user receiving points does need security yet generally doesn’t want nor need to wait for the same level of security as a nation-state settling an international trade debt. In any case, each Z-DAG transaction settles onchain at a block target of 60 seconds.

Syscoin Specs

Syscoin 3.0 White Paper
(4.0 white paper is pending. For improved scalability and less blockchain bloat, some features of v3 no longer exist in current v4: Specifically Marketplace Offers, Aliases, Escrow, Certificates, Pruning, Encrypted Messaging)
  • 16MB block bandwidth per minute assuming segwit witness carrying transactions, and transactions ~200 bytes on average
  • SHA256 merge mined with Bitcoin
  • UTXO asset layer, with base Syscoin layer sharing identical security policies as Bitcoin Core
  • Z-DAG on asset layer, bridge to Ethereum on asset layer
  • On-chain scaling with prospect of enabling enterprise grade reliable trustless payment processing with on/offchain hybrid solution
  • Focus only on Simple Value Transfers. MVP of blockchain consensus footprint is balances and ownership of them. Everything else can reduce data availability in exchange for scale (Ethereum 2.0 model). We leave that to other designs, we focus on transfers.
  • Future integrations of MAST/Taproot to get more complex value transfers without trading off trustlessness or decentralization.
  • Zero-knowledge Proofs are a cryptographic new frontier. We are dabbling here to generalize the concept of bridging and also verify the state of a chain efficiently. We also apply it in our Digital Identity projects at Blockchain Foundry (a publicly traded company which develops Syscoin softwares for clients). We are also looking to integrate privacy preserving payment channels for off-chain payments through zkSNARK hub & spoke design which does not suffer from the HTLC attack vectors evident on LN. Much of the issues plaguing Lightning Network can be resolved using a zkSNARK design whilst also providing the ability to do a multi-asset payment channel system. Currently we found a showstopper attack (American Call Option) on LN if we were to use multiple-assets. This would not exist in a system such as this.

Wallets

Web3 and mobile wallets are under active development by Blockchain Foundry Inc as WebAssembly applications and expected for release not long after mainnet deployment of Syscoin Core 4.2. Both of these will be multi-coin wallets that support Syscoin, SPTs, Ethereum, and ERC-20 tokens. The Web3 wallet will provide functionality similar to Metamask.
Syscoin Platform and tokens are already integrated with Blockbook. Custom hardware wallet support currently exists via ElectrumSys. First-class HW wallet integration through apps such as Ledger Live will exist after 4.2.
Current supported wallets
Syscoin Spark Desktop
Syscoin-Qt

Explorers

Mainnet: https://sys1.bcfn.ca (Blockbook)
Testnet: https://explorer-testnet.blockchainfoundry.co

Thank you for close consideration of our proposal. We look forward to feedback, and to working with the Reddit community to implement an ideal solution using Syscoin Platform!

submitted by sidhujag to ethereum [link] [comments]

Logs of yesterday's dev meeting

 Dev meeting?  Would say so, yes  The people are still exhausted from the payment ID meeting :)  Guess we could ping some people  vtnerd, moneromooo, hyc, gingeropolous, TheCharlatan, sarang, suraeNoether, jtgrassie  Anyone up for a meeting?  Yep I'm here  Here  o/  Perhaps we should just start and people will eventually hop in?   oof   sorry guys, I'm working on the new FFS and I forgot all about this. Got a couple of new volunteers.   This literally might be able to launch tomorrow.  I know that. It's called "flow" :)  I could run if you're out of time?   go for it dEBRUYNE   you guys are going to like this new FFS. We're like 99% done.  Hi  rehrar: someone else do the milestone thing already?  All right, jtgrassie, perhaps you'd to start w/ briefly describing your most recent PR? https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/5091   oneiric, xiphon did everything   like....everything  As far as I can see, it allows the user to push his transaction over I2P, thereby masking the origin IP of the sendeuser  great  And it hooks into vtnerd's PR right?  Sure. It basically just builds on vtnerds Tor stuff.  sorry dEBRUYNE  Really not much added.  I have it running and tested.  From the perspective of the user, what needs to be configured exactly?  Nice  Assuming the PR is included in the release binaries  I'm using knacccs i2p-zero duirng testing but will of course work with any i2p setup   sorry dEBRUYNE <= Np  Looks a little like dams breaking, now that we have some dark clouds over Kovri and people take matters into their own hands ...  User needs to run i2p, expose a socks service and and inbound tunnel.  Basically same as Tor  Okay, so should be reasonable as long as we write proper documentation for it (e.g. an elaborate guide)  rbrunner, yes, knaccc credit for jumping on i2p-zero really  dEBRUYNE: documentation monero side is kindof done. i2p side is very much implementation specific.  I suppose we could write some guides for the most popular implementations?  e.g. i2p-zero aims to be zero conf, but i2pd or Kovri would be differnet.  I see, great  vtnerd___: Do you want to add anything?  could amend the current kovri guide for monero use from --exclusive-peer to the new proxy support  Now I have i2p-zero running and tested with the #5091, I plan to jump back over to helping knaccc on getting that polished.  I added support for socks proxy in the basic wallets  ^ excellent  Yes vtnerd___ I havent tested it yet but looks sweet.  So connections to `monerod` over Toi2p are possible within wallet cli and wallet rpc  Awesome  This also implies auth+encryption even if ssl is not in use (when using an onion or i2p address)  All right  moneromooo: are you here? If so, could you perhaps share what you've been working on?  I am.  I revived the SSL PR, more stuff on multi sender txes, an implementation of ArticMine's new block size algorithm.  I presume a multi sender tx works similar to multisig insofar as the senders have to exchange data before the transaction can be performed right?  Yes.  There are 2 SSL PRs. What's the diff?  Theoretically this would also allow the sender to provide an output right? Which would be kind of similar to Bitcoin's P2EP  The second one adds some things like selecting a cert by fingerprint.  Yes.  (for the first sentence)  All right, awesome  For anyone reading, this breaks the assumption of the inputs belonging to a single sender, which makes analysis more difficult  Nice side-effect.  Much work coming for the various wallets to support that  rbrunner: Anything you'd like to share in the meeting btw?  Yes, just a little info  I have started to seriously investigate what it would mean to integrate Monero into OpenBazaar  I have already talked with 2 of their devs, was very interesting  In maybe 2 or 3 weeks I intend to write a report  Too early to tell much more :)  Soon^tm I guess :)  Yep  Currently wrestling with Go debugging  whole new world  moneromooo: Has pony recently shared any insights regarding the upcoming 0.14 release btw?  No.  All right  I would love to see the tor & i2p PR's merged sooner rather than later so we can get more testing done.  ^ +1  Isn't that famous early code freeze already on the horizon?  fluffypony, luigi1111 ^  I suppose I could provide a little update regarding the GUI btw  As always, lots of bug fixes and improvements :-P  selsta has recently added a feature to support multi accounts  dsc_ has revamped the wizard and will now start working on implementing the different modes and a white theme  dsc_ is working fulltime on the GUI already?  yes  :)   dsc_ is bae  In light of the recent payment ID discussion, we've also, by default, disabled the option to add a payment ID unless the user explicitely activates the option on the settings page  rehrar ^  nice   I spoke about this yesterday at the coffee chat, this is not a good decision.  How does it handle integrated addresses? The same way?  rehrar ?   For the next many months, we are still stuck with PAyment IDs in the ecosystem. Making it harder for people to access them will make Monero suck so hard to use for the average person for many months.  i agree with rehrar   Remove the option of Payment IDs when we remove Payment IDs  rehrar: The new GUI release won't be live until probably mid march though  Which is a few weeks in advance of the scheduled protocol upgrade   Payment ID removal comes in October   right, but Payment IDs are not removed in March  Did we not have loose consensus on removing the old, unencrypted payment IDs in march?   they are removed in October  We had discussed a deprecation in March  and a ban in October   ok, then if we are going to do that, we have to commit to it and contact the exchanges like Binance that use them and get rid of them in the next few months  (of unencrypted)   Binance is huge, and if they still use them, then people will be very upset that they can't deposit or use Payment IDs easily   I'm just speaking from a UX perspective.  I thought it was unencrypted in April and possibly encrypted in October  Yes I do agree  Timeline and notes: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/299  impossible to remove them for march, many exchanges still use them  We can defer it to the 0.15 release if needed  Well, that wasn't the impression for them log that I just read today  This was all discussed in the earlier meeting linked above   We have to force the ecosystem off of Payment IDs before we remove them from the UI, is all I'm saying  Remove != make difficult to use  ... or make them more difficult there, right?  ping sgp_   sarang, I understand, and I agreed with you during that meeting. But then I started thinking of it as a UX person, which I am.   And that huge massive problem leapt out at me  i think making them difficult to generate is a good idea but making them difficult to consume and use is a bad idea  well, maybe not a good idea, but a better idea   ^  If we defer the decision to depriciate long payment IDs to october, won't we have the same issue then?  The UI can gave an expandable payment ID field like MyMonero and we can still call it deprecated   It is foolhardy to remove an option that the ecosystem uses. So I suggest we keep the Payment ID in the UI until October when they are completely banned.   no dEBRYUNE, because they will be banned via consensus  sgp_ imo it may be a misdirection of dev resources to add that since things are proceeding in the short term rather than long term  but this is a relatively minor point  Nothing matters til exchanges change  All right   The issue is that consensus will still have them in April, and exchanges won't upgrade because they are still allowed. Thus they must still be in the UI.  endogenic these changes are already merged in the GUI to hide it like you do  ok   But when they are banned, exchanges are forced to upgrade or stop using Monero, so we can remove them safely because they won't be in use  rehrar: that's a strong assumption   sarang that they will upgrade?  yes   if they don't, then they can't use Monero  If exchanges require pid, users need a way to set a pid. Making it hard for the user in the interim is just going to be a nightmare.   we have decided to take our "stand" in October  A way that is not too hard, then  To be clear, we still intend to deprecate long encrypted payment IDs in April right? But no enforcement until October   the term "deprecated" doesn't mean much if it's still allowed, and used in popular places   yes, as far as I understand it   jtgrassie, exactly  True I suppose  dEBRUYNE: we need to be more specific when talking about deprecation   the person who suffers is the user  There are two proposals for GUI deprecation:  1. Hide it in the send screen with a simple option to expand (currently merged iirc)  2. Hide it completely in the send screen unless users enable the field in advanced settings (PR'd but not merged yet iirc)  What are the arguments for 2?   Both are poor options, but 1 is better than 2 by a long shot   Well the people who need to be made to "suffer" are the exchanges. And I don't see a way to make exchanges "suffer" other than by having their suffering customers complain to them constantly that they need to update.  ^  CLI has something similar where users need to set a manual payment ID transfer mode. Not sure if it's merged yet   the way to make the exchanges suffer is when we ban PIDs. They either upgrade or don't use Monero.  exact;y  Agree with rerahr here  have exchanges been provided with clear, practical, sufficient technical upgrade plans for supporting what they're doing with PIDs but with subaddrs?    Both are poor options, but 1 is better than 2 by a long shot <= I wouldn't call 1. a poor option. Have you actually checked how it looks?  Because it states "Payment ID" and a user has to click on the + to expand the field  endogenic: yes the email when out. Blog post coming soon, but contains the same info as the email  also the exhcnages' users are often using wallets that don't support subaddresses  ok great   as well, it should be noted that the timeline for exchanges to upgrade is September, not October when the fork is.  Which wallets are that?  Rehrar: I don't see option 1. causing any issues/confusion  i guess it doesnt matter too much if withdrawing as a personal user the main address should suffice   Because September is when the new versions will be coming out without PIDs in the UI  If there's opposition to 2, 1 is fine. We can still call it deprecated which is the optics we need anyway   exchange users are often just using other exchanges lol. No wallets involved.   dsc_ dEBRUYNE, ok, I trust you guys here then  rbrunner: i was thinking mymonero last i heard  Ok  pigeons: rbrunner yes receiving on subaddresses won't be supported yet  sending to them has been possible though  and yes as learnandlurkin says often they withdraw to other systems like exhcnages that also dont yet support subaddresses  I really can't come up with any good argument for 2. right now  endogenic: seems not much of an issue then. Exchanges will typically support withdrawals to both subaddresses and plain addresses (especially if we are going to force them to use subaddresses)  For deposits, MyMonero works properly if the user sends to a subaddress  Actually the second solution was already merged: https://github.com/monero-project/monero-gui/pull/1866  Maybe not enough eyes watching :)   The important thing is to have done something to justify having a big "DEPRECATED IN APRIL" stamp on PIDs to spook exchanges in the interim  This was for solution 1: https://github.com/monero-project/monero-gui/pull/1855   The Monero Community Workgroup will start making noise everywhere we can to exchanges, and everywhere else that will listen. Try to get on those garbage news sites also.   So everyone knows that deprecated in April, and banned in September  Hey, for solution 1, write "Payment ID (optional, deprecated)" or similar there  rbrunner: noted  rehrar: probably wait until the blog post, but it should only be a few days   Maybe a Reddit sticky post would be useful?   With the blog post   If people are over freaking out about the hashrate  or terabyte blockchain :)  sigh  Any questions for the MRL side?  Is someone checking ArticMine's block size changes for weird behaviour in some cases etc ?  How would such testing work? Private blockchain?  I'm waiting on cost information from ArticMine to complete the model  Or just simulations?  Also, smooth suggested a mean rather than median for the 100000 block op. It would indeed be much nicer if it doesn't make the change worse.  You mean computationally or what?  Nicer ? Yes.  no sorting needed for mean  I'll add a separate sim for that  Well, just nicer. Forger the much.  Forger the Much sounds like the formal name of a Lord of the Rings character  :)  To close the payment ID discussion, in essence, we agree that we shouldn't make it difficult for the user to add a payment ID right (until 0.15 is released)  ?  I don't. I did make it harder.  In the CLI, somewhat other story, I would say  than the GUI  People there are used to juggle with options and CL parameters  rehrar: I recommend opening another issue to reverse 1866 and we can gather feedback on it there  Sounds good, to me at least   Dudes, if I do a Jitsi stream right now to show the new FFS in action, would you guys be interested in watching it?  I'd watch it, if the meeting is formally done  sure  yeah, can I start one and record it?   I'll give it in like fifteen minutes   I'll let you all know, stand by  I have a question on tx_extra if no one else has anything to talk about  People have said you can put arbitrary data in there in whatever format you want as long as you're willing to pay for it. However, do you need to mine the transaction for it to be included? I didn't think nodes would block transactions with arbitrary tx_extra data  It'll be in nodes' txpool when you relay it. A wallet could see it before it's mined.  moneromooo: will it be mined though?  by others  Is it valid ?  assume it's otherwise valid  Does it have a high enough fee ?  assume it does yes  I ran into conflicting information here: https://monero.stackexchange.com/a/3627/42  Then it will probably be mined.  I once had the idea to put "my" MMS messages in there, looked at the code, and found no hard blocks for tx_extra data  That answer looks incorrect.  It is incorrect  If it will be mined, then that meets my assumption. There seems to be some misconception that people will not mine transactions with arbitrary tx_extra. I can add some comments there  And please don't spam it, and don't put fingerprintable stuff in it. It's meant to be here for *useful* stuff that's "uniform" enough.  It will be mined, whether a wallet *displays* the tx_extra is a different question.  I don't think any wallet currently displays that  it soes if its a pid  I think  Yeah, of course :)  Great, that answers my question 
submitted by dEBRUYNE_1 to Monero [link] [comments]

Weekly Dev Update #19

THORChain Weekly Dev Update for Week 19–02 Nov 2019

Overview

1 Rune Fee

Reasoning about gas costs on networks with non-deterministic fee schedules (such as Bitcoin) becomes unnecessarily complex. The issue is that the final gas cost cannot be known ahead of time so the system must cover any variability in the gas cost so that the user can be charged a flat rate. If the user is not charged anything, then the system can be depleted of funds, passing the cost back to stakers. Additionally, swaps below 1 Rune bring negligible economic value to the network and saturate the mempool with low value transactions. As such the solution is to charge a flat 1 Rune fee (or 1 Rune equivalent) on all outgoing transactions (swap and withdrawals). This 1 Rune fee is moved into the Protocol Reserve and increases the network’s future income. When the nodes report on the final transaction, they include the observed transaction fee. This transaction fee is then reimbursed back to the pool that paid for it ( BNB.BNB, BTC.BTC, ETH.ETH etc). There are cases that the outgoing transaction fee may exceed 1 Rune (Bitcoin in high use), but more than likely 1 Rune will be more than sufficient to cover the costs and ensure the network grows its reserves. Additionally, it sets a floor on the minimum transaction that the network will process. A swap of less than 1 Rune will end up becoming a donation to the network.

THORChain Development

The team are working on 4 parallel streams of effort. Cross-chain infrastructure has now been merged into a single repo called “THORNode”. * THORChain * Midgard Public API * Threshold Signature Scheme implementation * Front-end Integration for BEPSwap

THORChain

Much work has been done to refactor and clean up the codebase which will make public audits easier. This includes splitting up the keeper, separating out the events module and more. Smoke tests have been fully-integrated into the test schedule. Safer subtraction and division methods were added to prevent the likelihood of panic events. * [refactor] split keeper funcs/interface into separate files * [tests] use gow * [refactor] Redo how get key works in keeper * [security] require no signers on tx ins * Resolve “ADD: 1 Rune Fee on all Swaps” * [bug] fix smoke tests * [ADD] semantic versioning * [Refactor] Keeper chains * [Refactor] Events Keeper * Resolve “Adds a SafeSub method” * [Refactor] Last Height Keeper * [Refactor] keeper liquidity fees * FIX: Issue 208 * [ISSUE] Get smoke tests to 100%

Midgard Public API

Midgard is now ready for integration into the FrontEnd. The manner in which USD price of assets in now updated to source only from internal pool pricing. This includes BNB.BUSD, BNB.TUSD, BNB.USDS. ROI endpoints are now added. * Fix : Updated our mock data to include a correct BNB address. * Add: Return the date a staker first staked. * Add: Previously missing implementations for pool data (24hr and 12m). * Fix: Several potential query issues. Updates to return the TX date as a UNIX timestamp. * Fix: Additional query updates/fixes. * Fix: Build system * Add: Filtering implementation for TxID and Asset. * Added missing import. * Fix/build issues * Fixed issue with my auto refactor * Add: Filtering updates. DB Config fix. * Add: Missing Staker methods for ROI and earnings. * Added fix to enabled timescale extension * Fix: Added build config for rpc_host * Add: Support to Calculate USD price of an asset. * Added: Health check for mainnet to test that we still have a db connection… * Add: Tests for the recent endpoints work. * jq syntax fix. * Additional jq fixes. * [ADD] Manage docker image on gitlab

Threshold Signature Scheme

The Binance Go TSS library is now fully implemented and deploys in a four-node chain. integrate with new go-tss * 212-issue export private key thus we can use it to start tss * 214-issue consolidate tss keygen and tss keysign config, with our new go-tss… * [ADD] Setup go-tss in genesis docker * [ADD] Have CI run smoke tests on a four node chain with TSS

Frontend Implementation

The frontend makes some final tweaks on the interface, before integrating the Midgard APIs. * Resolve “Update stake page share panel” * Resolve “UPDATE: Network Dropdown Titles” * Resolve “ADD: Sorting of columns in pool list” * Resolve “ADD: Sorting of columns in pool list” * Resolve “FIX: Close token selection drop down when clicking outside” * Resolve “Add redux saga for midgard apis” * Resolve “Update protect price UI” * Resolve “Update wallet drawer”

Timelines

The next milestone is: ChaosNet: 03 January 2020 on-time

Community

To keep up to date, please monitor community channels, particularly Telegram and Twitter: Twitter: https://twitter.com/thorchain_org Telegram Community: https://t.me/thorchain_org Telegram Announcements: https://t.me/thorchain Reddit: https://reddit.com/thorchain Github: https://github.com/thorchain Medium: https://medium.com/thorchain
submitted by thorchain_org to THORChain [link] [comments]

Blackcoin ROLL CALL!

Hey all,
Its been a while and I have been neglecting the community here on reddit. A lot of things are new, I'll try to keep it as brief as possible.

"My client is saying something about an 'IBO' wtf is this shit? Is Blackcoin DOOMED?!"
Well, fear you not. Blackcoin is still going forward, but as Blackcoin Lore. The IBO message is relating to rat4's new project of which he is working towards. I wish him all the best on that. The #1 question that I get though, "Should I burn my BLK?" I will give a suggestion that I hope others will find fair.
Blacknet is experimental, not yet released, not yet proven, so if you are willing to risk some of your BLK to be a part of something new, then go do so. Should you expect that it gets released? To a degree, yes. Rat4 always has done well. For me personally, I hadn't burnt my BLK as I am skeptical on the distribution and community upon release. However, I do not want to deter anyone from not participating if they can afford the risks associated with new technology.

"What in the fak is going on with development? Is Blackcoin DOOMED!?"
Janko departed to work on some exclusive blockchain projects of which he had told me about. I'm excited for him and again, wish him all the best. He handed me the title of Lore to continue. Now at the time, I hadn't expected rat4 to also call it off. Lateminer and myself have taken up development under "Lore".

"What does that mean for the original wallet? Is Blackcoin DOOMED!?"
No, not at all. So this maybe a little confusing but bear with me. Rat4's client will continue as Blackcoin Lore. This is the same as how Bitcoin Core treated Bitcoin upon Satoshi's departure. There will be two identities of Blackcoin. The protocol, and the software. The protocol always and will always belong to you, the community. That will always be shaped in the way that holders of BLK will believe is best for BLK. However Lore will be under direction of us to maintain consistency.

To further confuse things, and I'm sorry, Lore previously meant Blackcoin stuff on later Bitcoin. This hasn't been a direction that I had agreed with. Sure the core is stable to that of Bitcoin, but you also share the vulnerabilities. I really do believe that the direction is going forward with rat4's old client and having BLK adapt to it's own challenges. Therefore, Lore is becoming Blackcoin "More" and rat4's client is becoming "Blackcoin Lore". Both of which will be developed by the same team. Consider More as a temporary bridge while Lore goes forward as I understand that there are some serious updates that BLK needs that More provides right now.

"I keep up to date and have known about this for the past month or so! What is really going on?"
Well, I and others need to eat and build ourselves before we can work on projects such as BLK, especially taking over development which is massive. Lateminer has been working every evening on fixing up More while I had to take a break on updating rat4's client to be more 'modern' and with it. The project shift couldn't of come at a worse time for myself as I have been trying to launch a product for my business and couldn't delegate more time than I'd like to. But, delegating time I am.
So updates on this:- Lateminer is pushing a new Blackcoin More release this week.- The new Blackcoin Lore wallet, continuation of the old wallet, has a massive new build and RPC API overhaul.- The RPC API isn't complete yet, I just need to finish it off, then we should expect a new release of BLK Lore.
Things are still happening. But thats just development, you can't focus on development and not anything else.

"Is Blackcoin going to be delisted from X? Is Blackcoin DOOMED!?"
No, likely not. We have strong ties to the best leaders in the industry of which we are currently on.

"Why no Binance?"
Well though I do see that Binance is vastly popular, we have to consider legalities of platforms. Binance doesn't have a jurisdiction of which they are lawful to. We don't know where their servers are at. Their employees are mostly private. Those raise red flags to me. That doesn't mean that I am against it. I wouldn't mind putting in a request however, I'm not ready to stick to a strict weekly update that they require until my company's project is launched and new Lore and More is out. At that point, we will update them weekly as well as provide them all information that they require on a regular basis of which we do for every other service of which we are on.

"But the ranking of BLK! WTF!?"
Yeah, I get that. Honestly, I'm not surprised. BLK really nose dived after China called it quits on crypto. 80% of our volume was there and we had the strongest ties with that community. It was devastating and heart breaking to see it collapse almost overnight. The QQ group and Wechat group is still around, still have some die hards. I'm not surprised it had happened.

"We have not heard from you where had you been!?"
Well, I had wanted to walk away from BLK a few times. Usually if there is a team taking care of the project, I feel as if I can focus more on my company. Yet, hadn't left. Mostly everyone else left, I'm still here. I have been keeping the twitter and other things going and as well as established the Proof of Stake Alliance with other projects such as PIVX, Peercoin, Komodo, Navcoin, BitBay, Particle, Phore etc. and we all keep regularly in touch almost every day.

"So what does the Proof of Stake Alliance do?"
Well, all the devs can pool resources together to make the core technology even more sound. While we believe that 3.0 is safe and doesn't have any serious flaws, we do want to improve on it. We are working on a sort of PoS 3.1 which will be basically a total overhaul of the structure of PoS instead of actually changing the security of it.

"PoS 3.1??! Sounds exciting!"
Yes, we originally were running with the name of PoS 4.0 but, since it isn't a security upgrade, but still massive, we decided not to call it that unless there actually is a reason to update the security to ensure that the coin is protected.

"I have a question!"
Leave it below.

I really don't want to let anyone down, or left feeling insecure with their choice on Blackcoin. Its been a rough few months, but we will all pull through.

- Gritt N. Auld
submitted by Grittenald to blackcoin [link] [comments]

Getting DigiByte listed on Binance - Progress update

There’s been a bunch of requests lately to get DigiByte listed on Binance. I’m here to confirm today that the hold-up in doing-so is not due to anything in our control.
Let me set the scene for you: We have been listed on approx 2x exchanges per week, every week, for the last few months. This has been in part due to some of the Foundation and some incredibly dedicated community members, again keeping in mind none of this is paid work. I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the many hours that these people put in, filling out forms, chasing exchanges, getting information and technical details to them.
Then, we find out there are other exchanges that we’re listed on, without our knowledge. Again, that’s fantastic, and because we are a decentralized blockchain with the source-code open and freely available on Github, this means there’s nothing preventing Exchanges from doing this. Because the DigiByte Core Wallet has it’s basis on the Bitcoin Core Wallet, if an Exchange has integrated Bitcoin or Litecoin, they have the technical know-how to integrate DigiByte, and it’s not a difficult task.
Back to Binance.
There is a form that Binance request new sign-ups complete. A pretty standard practice, basically to weed out the time-wasters and brand new ICO’s that aren’t worth anything at all. Totally cool, and so this was filled out earlier last year, and again just one day after Christmas. No problems there.
Since then, Binance have requested the completion of a NDA form. Unfortunately this NDA form is completely not applicable to DigiByte, as we are not a central company, we're not an ICO that raised funds, nor do we take any percentage of each newly minted block as other coins do.
I’m sure you’re all well aware that DigiByte relies on the donation of time of all its Foundation Members, as none of us have been given any DigiByte by anybody to survive on, and once the Foundation has been fully established then down the line decisions will be made regarding how those funds are best spent. For now though, everything is done from the generosity of the hearts of those in the Foundation and community, because we believe in this project, it’s merits, and what it stands for.
So this NDA form, we can’t in good faith sign it, as it’s not applicable to us and legally there’s no point in putting ourselves into a situation where things aren’t clear. However, it begs the question: Why is there an NDA form required at all? Anybody can list DigiByte on their own Exchange, and it doesn’t require us to be made privy to any technical or financial details about a company. They basically download the wallet, as you and I would, integrate it into their Exchange through RPC calls to the digibyted, and that’s about it. The RPC / P2P port details are all in the BitcoinTalk thread. No NDA required, and the listing can be completely done without any input / help from the DigiByte Foundation, community or developers.
It gets better though:
On the application form (Keep in mind this has been completed twice now), there are a number of things such as:
You accept that Binance reserves the right to de-list your coin at any time, for any reason, solely at Binance's discretion. * With the answer options being: - Yes, I agree. - No, no need to hit the submit button.
That’s fair, there is no problem with them de-listing DigiByte if they want, Exchanges do it all the time for coins and ICO’s that have a very small volume. DigiByte however has done a few thousand BTC daily volume just on Bittrex alone (Just using them for comparison). Even with the admirable 0.1% fees that Binance charges, that’s still a few BTC every single day in trading-fees alone, which makes it seem like DigiByte would be a worthwhile investment for them to add on their own accord.
So the problem with us accepting donations from the community as an attempt to pay a listing fee to get on to Binance, they could still de-list DigiByte at any time for no good reason, we have to agree to that before they’ll actually accept the submission. On top of this even if we do pay the “Listing fee”, DigiBytes acceptance on to the Exchange is not guaranteed. We would have no come-back for that, no repercussions, nothing that we can do to prevent it. The CEO even states in his “Tips for getting listed”:
High fee does not guarantee listing, but it may increase your review priority. If you don't want to pay a listing fee, simply put 0. Free market will determine the rest.
It gets better,
On top of the NDA requirement, there is no TOS or similar at Binance. While in my eyes this doesn’t prevent DigiByte from being listed (DigiByte is on a few Exchanges without terms of service thanks to their own initiative), it does mean that this isn’t an ideal scenario. Why is this not an ideal scenario? Because there is no legal recourse for any of the users, no obligation to help them, and if they were to take the “Listing fee”, they can literally just take it and run.
I don’t think it would be very responsible of the DigiByte Foundation to arrange crowd-sourcing the funding, for a venture such as this, where there are absolutely no guarantees at all.
While we admire the enthusiasm of the community and your willingness to assist, the last thing we want is for it to all be for nothing. If the community is really keen on donating to a project, we would recommend donating to the recent development that has been undertaken on the iOS wallet, headed up by a community members company. This will be a big step forwards for DigiByte and fills a gaping hole in our arsenal (See: https://github.com/Racecraft/digibytewallet-ios for donation link at the bottom of the page)
In the mean time, we are still pursuing avenues to get us listed, while maintaining true to our honor and integrity, and doing all that we can to look out for the community.
Besides, Binance would make more than this within a few days worth of listing us, based on trading-fees alone, so the "requirement" of a listing fee just does not make sense.
Edit: Made a poor attempt at fixing the formatting coz apparently I still suck at the markup required here to make it look pretty
submitted by Chilling_Silence to Digibyte [link] [comments]

Top 10 of The Biggest Cryptocurrency Hacks and Scams Ever

If you have been around the cryptocurrency industry long enough, you will know that one of the biggest risks faced by users is the loss of funds through hacks on cryptocurrency wallets and exchanges.
Online exchanges are prime targets for hackers and thieves on the internet. This is mainly because of the amount of funds that are kept on these platforms. For hackers that have succeeded in stealing funds from such platforms, the amounts are usually huge.
As much as individual users try to play their roles in securing their accounts by using personal passwords, PINs and codes, there is a higher layer of security that lies in the hands of the platform providers. Once this is breached, the individual security efforts become irrelevant.
Over the years, exchanges and wallets appear to have improved in terms of security as the frequency of hacks and platform breaches have reduced. What used to be a common occurrence in the industry has become a rare development, with hacks now few and far between.
Let’s take a look at the top 10 of the biggest cryptocurrency hacks and scams ever.

10. Bitcoin Gold ($18 Million)

In May 2018, the theoretical 51% attack possibility was proven in a heist that saw a breach in Bitcoin Gold which cost the protocol $18 million.
In this heist, hackers used 51% raw computing power to seize control of the network and carry out their ulterior plans effectively. Ciphertrace and other security outfits in the ecosystem believe that the algorithm weaknesses in Bitcoin Gold’s Proof of Work (PoW) transaction verification may have enabled the success of the theft.

9. Geth ($20 Million)

In June 2018, the Ethereum client Geth was hacked and ETH worth $20 million was stolen. This incidence was reported by blockchain security firm, Cyphertrace. During the hack, JSON-RPC port 8545 was exploited. This is the port that initiates ETH send transactions.
All the ETH wallets that were affected by this breach was drained by the thieves, accumulating to the quoted $20 million equivalence based on the price of ETH at that time.

8. Bancor ($23.5 Million)

In July 2018, about one month after the Geth incident, decentralized cryptocurrency exchange, Bancor was hacked and $23.5 million worth of crypto stolen. This particular event raised some eyebrows in the cryptocurrency industry, redefining the general opinion of decentralized exchanges being prone to hacking.
The process involved the exploitation of a security flaw in a wallet that was used to update some of the smart contracts on the exchange. Bancor, which was one of the most successful ICOs of 2017, raising $153 million during its token sale, was forced to shut down after the hack.

7. Coinrail ($40 Million)

Coinrail was hacked in June 2018, and $40 million was stolen from the exchange. The South Korean exchange which ranked among the top 100 exchanges by volume, suspended its services shortly after the hack.
According to sources from the exchange, the tokens that were stolen included NPXS tokens from the Pundi X project, ATC from Aston and the NPER project’s NPER token.
  1. Binance ($40.7 Million)
Binance exchange was hacked in May 2019 and 7,000 Bitcoins were stolen from the platform. The value of the Bitcoins stolen at the time was about $40.7 million.
To achieve their aim, hackers were able to steal API keys, two-factor codes and some other key information to access the wallets. According to the exchange, the incident impacted only about 2% of its total Bitcoin holdings as all other wallets are secure.
Affected wallets were promised a refund through the exchange’s Secure Asset Fund for Users (SAFU) arrangement. This is a policy that the exchange uses to prepare for rainy days. A portion of fees charged on the exchange is set aside in order to ensure that platform users do not bear the brunt during occurrences such as this.

5. Zaif ($60 Million)

Japan-based cryptocurrency exchange Zaif was hacked in September 2018 and $60 million was stolen in the process. The theft was possible after hackers gained authorised access into the exchanges hot wallets, making away with huge amounts of Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and MonaCoin.
The exchange’s asset reserve could not cover the loss, therefore it reached an agreement with a Japan-listed firm called Fisco to receive a $44.5 million investment in exchange for a major share of ownership.

4. Bitfinex ($77 Million)

The Bitfinex hack of August 2016 was a popular event that rocked the entire cryptocurrency industry. The hack occurred at a time when cryptocurrencies appeared to be shifting gears in terms of awareness and development. As a matter of fact, the aftermath of the event saw the Bitcoin price drop by 20%.
After the hack, Bitfinex issued cryptographic tokens to its users that were affected by the hack, all of which the exchange announced to have bought back by April 2017.

3. BitGrail ($187 Million)

$187 million worth of Nano tokens were stolen from BitGrail in February 2018. The reported theft was announced weeks after the unauthorized transfer was initiated. This information was from evidence retrieved from the Nano blockchain explorer by skeptics.
While BitGrail recognized the concerns of it users, it however stated that it is impossible for it to refund the stolen amount.

2. Mt. Gox ($460 Million)

The Mt. Gox scandal remains one of the biggest stains on the cryptocurrency industry. In February 2014, Mt. Gox was hacked and as much as $460 million was stolen from the exchange. In the wake of this, the exchange’s CEO, Mark Karpeles issued a statement that accepted responsibility on behalf of his company.
“We had weaknesses in our system, and our bitcoins vanished. We’ve caused trouble and inconvenience to many people, and I feel deeply sorry for what has happened, “ he said.
At the time, Mt. Gox was the world’s largest Bitcoin exchange that looked impressive from the outside, but many who claimed to know about the internal workings accused the company of a messy combination of poor management, neglect, and raw inexperience.
The size of this event left a huge dent on the reputation of Bitcoin and the crypto industry at large. It took a long time before the market picked up again, and for users to regain confidence in the industry. The exchange has since gone down and ceased to exist.

1. Coincheck ($500 Million)

The biggest theft in the history of the cryptocurrency industry happened in January 2018, when Japan-based cryptocurrency exchange, Coincheck was hacked. A total of NEM tokens worth $500 million were stolen in the process.
A statement from the exchange accepted the blame and took responsibility for the breach. According to reports, rather than storing its customers’ assets in offline wallets, the assets were stored in hot wallets that were connected to the internet. Coincheck also reportedly failed to protect the wallets with standard multi-signature security protocols.
Having traced the destination of the stolen funds, NEM developers created a tracking tool that would allow exchanges to automatically reject stolen funds.

Conclusion

Hacks and massive theft of cryptocurrencies have contributed to the setback experienced by the technology. Each of the events takes a hit on the confidence of investors and willing participants who may not be sure of how the affected exchanges will handle the situation.
The industry is however learning from past experiences, as the frequency of such hacks have reduced, while in some cases, modalities are being put in place to ensure that end users do not bear the brunt of such events, just like the case of Binance.
The NEM developers’ response to the Coincheck hack has a way of rendering stolen funds unspendable, as long as other members of the community comply. However, no one knows how long this will last, and if the hackers will be able to nullify the traceability of the stolen coins yet.
The action by the developers will discourage hackers and thieves, but is yet to restore value to the end users whose funds have been stolen.
For the industry to grow as it should and become stable, security of funds need to be established. Exchanges and developers are continuously making efforts to ensure that funds and transactions within the industry remain safe at all times.
http://bitcoinadvisor.info/top-10-of-the-biggest-cryptocurrency-hacks-and-scams-eve?fbclid=IwAR1aKdbjF1HQpFQq3jH6PQptxt7mhXHJWsABPnlN5ZEjmq07ByMEYWvVezM
submitted by OliAustin101 to TopBottomCrypto [link] [comments]

Binance Calls FAKE NEWS! Bitcoin Charting, and a Trade at the End BITCOIN To 6k!Whale Who Called 8k Says YES! When? We Figured Out How To Tell… Ripple Calls Bitcoin Old And Outdated, ICOs In South Korea And Binance Announces A New Exchange Binance's CZ: Binance US Adds New Coins, Bittrex Halts Service, Bitcoin Breakout & Crazy Bitcoin Prediction Bitcoin Ben  Binance Exchange will lead true price discovery! Moon! Ex. Binance: Bitcoin Rally & BTC & Ethereum Signal! - YouTube Bitcoin Options Trading  Crypto Options Trading By Binance - Hindi HUUGE CRYPTO NEWS  Bitcoin Halving 2020, Cardano, Tezos, Binance, Crypto.com, Vechain, Telos, Hive

Binance focuses on Internet, Finance, Financial Exchanges, Stock Exchanges, and Bitcoin. Their company has offices in Singapore and Malta. They have a very large team that's between 1001-5000 employees. To date, Binance has raised $10M of funding; their latest round was closed on September 2017. I transferred 0.2 ETH and 0.3 ETH in separate transfers from GDAX to Binance (GDAX does not charge a fee for this). Then, I transferred back from Binance to GDAX all 0.5 ETH, but since Binance ... bitcoin-core transaction-fees ethereum taxes exchange-fees. modified Aug 30 at 10:04. Community ♦ 1. 0. votes. 1answer 116 views BitcoinCore Ubuntu buiild error: ‘relative’ is not a member of ... Binance focuses on Internet, Finance, Financial Exchanges, Stock Exchanges, and Bitcoin. Their company has offices in San Francisco, Singapore, and Malta. They have a large team that's between 501-1000 employees. To date, Binance has raised $10M of funding; their latest round was closed on September 2017. Bitcoin Rpc Create Account! Bitcoind was created to be compatible across grow the bitcoin network to its full potential -- and now that you can Sep 19, 2017 - "Bitcoin Core's regression test mode (regtest mode) bitcoin rpc create account lets you instantly create a sudo apt-get bitcoin gold mining efficiency update sudo apt-get install docker-ce defaults for an executing container # Drop user ... Accounts explained • API calls list • API reference (JSON-RPC) • Block chain download • Dump format • getblocktemplate • List of address prefixes • Protocol documentation • Script • Technical background of version 1 Bitcoin addresses • Testnet • Transaction Malleability • Wallet import format Harmony. Ankr JSON-RPC Endpoint Pirate Chain, a self-described “digital currency that values privacy above all else. Since its inception in 2018, Pirate Chain has continued to deliver privacy focused ecosystem products ... Binance’s peer-to-peer platform allows you to buy Bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies with your local currency at 0 fees. On Binance P2P, you have the freedom to choose your preferred counterparties and payment methods for your trades, with the crypto assets escrowed by Binance.. As with all investments, there is also a risk when buying and selling cryptocurrency. As per Wright, 30 percent of Binance’s funds is used for these old as hills business directions. Craig Wright modestly avoided voicing statistics of how much Bitcoin SV is used to support global criminal activities, though. When offered to sue Wright for libel, Binance’s CZ refused, saying that CSW does not deserve that much attention. Bitcoin core console window. In the older version of Bitcoin client you should see the debug window under Help > Debug window where you can start entering bitcoin-cli commands. In the latest version drop down windows menu and open up console window. You should see the following warning. Welcome to the Bitcoin Core RPC console.

[index] [9496] [22278] [13096] [20944] [17582] [5763] [3929] [6484] [6698] [10829]

Binance Calls FAKE NEWS! Bitcoin Charting, and a Trade at the End

Ripple Calls Bitcoin Old And Outdated, ICOs In South Korea And Binance Announces A New Exchange ... Coinbase Prices, Bitcoin Car, BTC Halving Price & Binance Bundle - Duration: 28:07. The Modern ... Ex. Binance: Bitcoin Rally & BTC & Ethereum Signal! Rommel SK - Фокусы с Картами: Card Tricks by Sailor. Loading... Unsubscribe from Rommel SK - Фокусы с Картами: Card ... Download the VANYWHERE app, create an account and give me a video call! One on One video call! $10 dollars free towards the call!! All revenue goes towars the Bitcoin Ben Global Adoption Tour ... Goldman Sachs BTC Client Call LEAKED!! BULLISH INDIA NEWS 🚀 - Duration: 15:04. Crypto Zombie 28,965 views. New; 15:04 . Buy Bitcoin, Economic Turmoil, Binance US Listing 30 Coins & Massive ... 95% of Bitcoin exchange trading volume on CoinMarketCap.com is fake! So we decided to find out why and talked to the TIE’s co-founder Joshua Frank and Binance’s CZ to get to the truth. Bitcoin Halving 2020 in 15 days, Daedalus 1.0 Released by Cardano ADA, Truffle Teams Up With Tezos ZTX, Binance Chain Adds Ontology ONT pegged Assets, Withdraw on USD Crypto.com, Vechain VET ... Well, fake news has entered cryptocurrency now... Good thing CZ is a straight up gangster. We also chart bitcoin and sneak a trade at the end of this video. CRYPTO 99 FACEBOOK GROUP!: https://www ... BITCOIN में INVESTMENT करें या नहीं I Complete Analysis I Dr Vivek Bindra - Duration: 13:38. Dr. Vivek Bindra: Motivational Speaker 3,416,604 views Major Bitcoin Whale & former #1 trader on BitMEX, has made a call. Bitcoin is dropping to $6000, and that is when he will begin heavy accumulation. In late August, when Bitcoin was above $10,000 ...

#