The MtGox Bitcoin Scandal Explained - Splinter

Bitcoin (BTC) Latest Update: Resolution of Mt. Gox Exchange Bankruptcy Could Boost Value of Bitcoin (BTC) and Digital Currencies – BTC News Today – BTC/USD Price Today - Smartereum

Bitcoin (BTC) Latest Update: Resolution of Mt. Gox Exchange Bankruptcy Could Boost Value of Bitcoin (BTC) and Digital Currencies – BTC News Today – BTC/USD Price Today - Smartereum submitted by ulros to fbitcoin [link] [comments]

Lessons from Litecoin

Litecoin is a paradox: despite doing nil for advertising or development, LTC trading volumes and market cap demonstrate Litecoin is a relevant irrelevant coin. In this post, I'm going to draw the parallel between the early days of Litecoin — in which its community was in a frenzy over pumping Litecoin as the silver to Bitcoin's gold — and the present day state of Decred in which its community is in a frenzy over pumping Decred as an apparent "Chad Coin".
Many years ago, back in the heyday of MtGox, the Bitcoin exchange space was in a wild west phase. By sheer historical accident, I received an LTC balance on one of the many now-defunct exchanges from those days. Having become an accidental LTC holder, I decdied to analyse its investment potential.
At the time, the Litecoin community was in a frenzy about being the "silver to Bitcoin's gold", a dubious-at-best narrative that I never found personally convincing. I saw them frenzied up about the silver thing, and it just crushed me:
"Aren't these people concerned about developing their technology? About contributing to the overall space?"
As it turned out, they weren't. They were only concerned about positioning Litecoin as the silver to Bitcoin's gold using the Litecoin.org home page. Sound familiar?
Rather than developing Litecoin's technology, and rather than making any semblance of a substantive contribution to the world, the Litecoin community was enthralled with marketing.
"If only we could improve the website to make Litecoin seem more like The Silver To Bitcoin's Gold™", the community members cried.
But LTC sees trading volume and is valued the way it is not because it is "the silver to Bitcoin's gold" — but because it is the only other coin besides Bitcoin with an immaculate conception. It is a carbon copy of Bitcoin without a premine and without an agenda. This means, in the absence of all marketing, investors know they can hold LTC to maintain a stake in a vehicle which is a clone of Bitcoin.
Such a value proposition would never gain traction today, but because Litecoin was conceived at a time with little to no competition in the altcoin markets, exchanges listed LTC en masse, creating a sulf-fulfilling prophecy.
And you hear not a peep from the Litecoin community about its "silver" angle these days, because positioning Litecoin in that way never mattered. Sprucing up Litecoin.org to capture that positioning was always a waste of time. It was always just a distraction. Just like positioning Decred as chad coin is a waste of time and doesn't and will never matter.
LTC is perhaps the paragon of irrelevant, relevant coins. Litecoin's seemingly undeserved relevancy demonstrates better than anything else the fate of the coin is determined at its conception: cryptocurrency success is in large part hereditary.
"Why was this coin built, and how did they go about it?" — that is what people care about. Concentrated pump efforts are still possible, of course — I exited my LTC position at the same time a literal Chinese ponzi schemer was pumping it — but over time the coin's relevancy merges with its genetics.
You can't put lipstick on a pig and expect the public to be duped by it for a long period of time. Decred has the genetics to succeed: a phreaking censorship resistant treasury built by mad scientists.
"Chad Coin" is a long term non-viable pump tactic akin to "silver to Bitcoin's gold". Gets community members worked up into a frenzy but several years later it counts for nothing. I wish we could learn from history.
submitted by atweiden to decred [link] [comments]

Stakenet (XSN) - A DEX with interchain capabilities (BTC-ETH), Huge Potential [Full Writeup]

Preface
Full disclosure here; I am heavily invested in this. I have picked up some real gems from here and was only in the position to buy so much of this because of you guys so I thought it was time to give back. I only invest in Utility Coins. These are coins that actually DO something, and provide new/build upon the crypto infrastructure to work towards the end goal that Bitcoin itself set out to achieve(financial independence from the fiat banking system). This way, I avoid 99% of the scams in crypto that are functionless vapourware, and if you only invest in things that have strong fundamentals in the long term you are much more likely to make money.
Introduction
Stakenet is a Lightning Network-ready open-source platform for decentralized applications with its native cryptocurrency – XSN. It is powered by a Proof of Stake blockchain with trustless cold staking and Masternodes. Its use case is to provide a highly secure cross-chain infrastructure for these decentralized applications, where individuals can easily operate with any blockchain simply by using Stakenet and its native currency XSN.
Ok... but what does it actually do and solve?
The moonshot here is the DEX (Decentralised Exchange) that they are building. This is a lightning-network DEX with interchain capabilities. That means you could trade BTC directly for ETH; securely, instantly, cheaply and privately.
Right now, most crypto is traded to and from Centralised Exchanges like Binance. To buy and sell on these exchanges, you have to send your crypto wallets on that exchange. That means the exchanges have your private keys, and they have control over your funds. When you use a centralised exchange, you are no longer in control of your assets, and depend on the trustworthiness of middlemen. We have in the past of course seen infamous exit scams by centralised exchanges like Mt. Gox.
The alternative? Decentralised Exchanges. DEX's have no central authority and most importantly, your private keys(your crypto) never leavesYOUR possession and are never in anyone else's possession. So you can trade peer-to-peer without any of the drawbacks of Centralised Exchanges.
The problem is that this technology has not been perfected yet, and the DEX's that we have available to us now are not providing cheap, private, quick trading on a decentralised medium because of their technological inadequacies. Take Uniswap for example. This DEX accounts for over 60% of all DEX volume and facilitates trading of ERC-20 tokens, over the Ethereum blockchain. The problem? Because of the huge amount of transaction that are occurring over the Ethereum network, this has lead to congestion(too many transaction for the network to handle at one time) so the fees have increased dramatically. Another big problem? It's only for Ethereum. You cant for example, Buy LINK with BTC. You must use ETH.
The solution? Layer 2 protocols. These are layers built ON TOP of existing blockchains, that are designed to solve the transaction and scaling difficulties that crypto as a whole is facing today(and ultimately stopping mass adoption) The developers at Stakenet have seen the big picture, and have decided to implement the lightning network(a layer 2 protocol) into its DEX from the ground up. This will facilitate the functionalities of a DEX without any of the drawbacks of the CEX's and the DEX's we have today.
Heres someone much more qualified than me, Andreas Antonopoulos, to explain this
https://streamable.com/kzpimj
'Once we have efficient, well designed DEX's on layer 2, there wont even be any DEX's on layer 1'
Progress
The Stakenet team were the first to envision this grand solution and have been working on it since its conception in June 2019. They have been making steady progress ever since and right now, the DEX is in an open beta stage where rigorous testing is constant by themselves and the public. For a project of this scale, stress testing is paramount. If the product were to launch with any bugs/errors that would result in the loss of a users funds, this would obviously be very damaging to Stakenet's reputation. So I believe that the developers conservative approach is wise.
As of now the only pairs tradeable on the DEX are XSN/BTC and LTC/BTC. The DEX has only just launched as a public beta and is not in its full public release stage yet. As development moves forward more lightning network and atomic swap compatible coins will be added to the DEX, and of course, the team are hard at work on Raiden Integration - this will allow ETH and tokens on the Ethereum blockchain to be traded on the DEX between separate blockchains(instantly, cheaply, privately) This is where Stakenet enters top 50 territory on CMC if successful and is the true value here. Raiden Integration is well underway is being tested in a closed public group on Linux.
The full public DEX with Raiden Integration is expected to release by the end of the year. Given the state of development so far and the rate of progress, this seems realistic.
Tokenomics
2.6 Metrics overview (from whitepaper)
XSN is slightly inflationary, much like ETH as this is necessary for the economy to be adopted and work in the long term. There is however a deflationary mechanism in place - all trading fees on the DEX get converted to XSN and 10% of these fees are burned. This puts constant buying pressure on XSN and acts as a deflationary mechanism. XSN has inherent value because it makes up the infrastructure that the DEX will run off and as such Masternode operators and Stakers will see the fee's from the DEX.
Conclusion
We can clearly see that a layer 2 DEX is the future of crypto currency trading. It will facilitate secure, cheap, instant and private trading across all coins with lightning capabilities, thus solving the scaling and transaction issues that are holding back crypto today. I dont need to tell you the implications of this, and what it means for crypto as a whole. If Stakenet can launch a layer 2 DEX with Raiden Integration, It will become the primary DEX in terms of volume.
Stakenet DEX will most likely be the first layer 2 DEX(first mover advantage) and its blockchain is the infrastructure that will host this DEX and subsequently receive it's trading fee's. It is not difficult to envision a time in the next year when Stakenet DEX is functional and hosting hundreds of millions of dollars worth of trading every single day.
At $30 million market cap, I cant see any other potential investment right now with this much potential upside.
This post has merely served as in introduction and a heads up for this project, there is MUCH more to cover like vortex liquidity, masternodes, TOR integration... for now, here is some additional reading. Resources
TLDR; No. Do you want to make money? I'd start with learning how to read.
submitted by hotprocession to CryptoMoonShots [link] [comments]

Bob The Magic Custodian



Summary: Everyone knows that when you give your assets to someone else, they always keep them safe. If this is true for individuals, it is certainly true for businesses.
Custodians always tell the truth and manage funds properly. They won't have any interest in taking the assets as an exchange operator would. Auditors tell the truth and can't be misled. That's because organizations that are regulated are incapable of lying and don't make mistakes.

First, some background. Here is a summary of how custodians make us more secure:

Previously, we might give Alice our crypto assets to hold. There were risks:

But "no worries", Alice has a custodian named Bob. Bob is dressed in a nice suit. He knows some politicians. And he drives a Porsche. "So you have nothing to worry about!". And look at all the benefits we get:
See - all problems are solved! All we have to worry about now is:
It's pretty simple. Before we had to trust Alice. Now we only have to trust Alice, Bob, and all the ways in which they communicate. Just think of how much more secure we are!

"On top of that", Bob assures us, "we're using a special wallet structure". Bob shows Alice a diagram. "We've broken the balance up and store it in lots of smaller wallets. That way", he assures her, "a thief can't take it all at once". And he points to a historic case where a large sum was taken "because it was stored in a single wallet... how stupid".
"Very early on, we used to have all the crypto in one wallet", he said, "and then one Christmas a hacker came and took it all. We call him the Grinch. Now we individually wrap each crypto and stick it under a binary search tree. The Grinch has never been back since."

"As well", Bob continues, "even if someone were to get in, we've got insurance. It covers all thefts and even coercion, collusion, and misplaced keys - only subject to the policy terms and conditions." And with that, he pulls out a phone-book sized contract and slams it on the desk with a thud. "Yep", he continues, "we're paying top dollar for one of the best policies in the country!"
"Can I read it?' Alice asks. "Sure," Bob says, "just as soon as our legal team is done with it. They're almost through the first chapter." He pauses, then continues. "And can you believe that sales guy Mike? He has the same year Porsche as me. I mean, what are the odds?"

"Do you use multi-sig?", Alice asks. "Absolutely!" Bob replies. "All our engineers are fully trained in multi-sig. Whenever we want to set up a new wallet, we generate 2 separate keys in an air-gapped process and store them in this proprietary system here. Look, it even requires the biometric signature from one of our team members to initiate any withdrawal." He demonstrates by pressing his thumb into the display. "We use a third-party cloud validation API to match the thumbprint and authorize each withdrawal. The keys are also backed up daily to an off-site third-party."
"Wow that's really impressive," Alice says, "but what if we need access for a withdrawal outside of office hours?" "Well that's no issue", Bob says, "just send us an email, call, or text message and we always have someone on staff to help out. Just another part of our strong commitment to all our customers!"

"What about Proof of Reserve?", Alice asks. "Of course", Bob replies, "though rather than publish any blockchain addresses or signed transaction, for privacy we just do a SHA256 refactoring of the inverse hash modulus for each UTXO nonce and combine the smart contract coefficient consensus in our hyperledger lightning node. But it's really simple to use." He pushes a button and a large green checkmark appears on a screen. "See - the algorithm ran through and reserves are proven."
"Wow", Alice says, "you really know your stuff! And that is easy to use! What about fiat balances?" "Yeah, we have an auditor too", Bob replies, "Been using him for a long time so we have quite a strong relationship going! We have special books we give him every year and he's very efficient! Checks the fiat, crypto, and everything all at once!"

"We used to have a nice offline multi-sig setup we've been using without issue for the past 5 years, but I think we'll move all our funds over to your facility," Alice says. "Awesome", Bob replies, "Thanks so much! This is perfect timing too - my Porsche got a dent on it this morning. We have the paperwork right over here." "Great!", Alice replies.
And with that, Alice gets out her pen and Bob gets the contract. "Don't worry", he says, "you can take your crypto-assets back anytime you like - just subject to our cancellation policy. Our annual management fees are also super low and we don't adjust them often".

How many holes have to exist for your funds to get stolen?
Just one.

Why are we taking a powerful offline multi-sig setup, widely used globally in hundreds of different/lacking regulatory environments with 0 breaches to date, and circumventing it by a demonstrably weak third party layer? And paying a great expense to do so?
If you go through the list of breaches in the past 2 years to highly credible organizations, you go through the list of major corporate frauds (only the ones we know about), you go through the list of all the times platforms have lost funds, you go through the list of times and ways that people have lost their crypto from identity theft, hot wallet exploits, extortion, etc... and then you go through this custodian with a fine-tooth comb and truly believe they have value to add far beyond what you could, sticking your funds in a wallet (or set of wallets) they control exclusively is the absolute worst possible way to take advantage of that security.

The best way to add security for crypto-assets is to make a stronger multi-sig. With one custodian, what you are doing is giving them your cryptocurrency and hoping they're honest, competent, and flawlessly secure. It's no different than storing it on a really secure exchange. Maybe the insurance will cover you. Didn't work for Bitpay in 2015. Didn't work for Yapizon in 2017. Insurance has never paid a claim in the entire history of cryptocurrency. But maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe your exact scenario will buck the trend and be what they're willing to cover. After the large deductible and hopefully without a long and expensive court battle.

And you want to advertise this increase in risk, the lapse of judgement, an accident waiting to happen, as though it's some kind of benefit to customers ("Free institutional-grade storage for your digital assets.")? And then some people are writing to the OSC that custodians should be mandatory for all funds on every exchange platform? That this somehow will make Canadians as a whole more secure or better protected compared with standard air-gapped multi-sig? On what planet?

Most of the problems in Canada stemmed from one thing - a lack of transparency. If Canadians had known what a joke Quadriga was - it wouldn't have grown to lose $400m from hard-working Canadians from coast to coast to coast. And Gerald Cotten would be in jail, not wherever he is now (at best, rotting peacefully). EZ-BTC and mister Dave Smilie would have been a tiny little scam to his friends, not a multi-million dollar fraud. Einstein would have got their act together or been shut down BEFORE losing millions and millions more in people's funds generously donated to criminals. MapleChange wouldn't have even been a thing. And maybe we'd know a little more about CoinTradeNewNote - like how much was lost in there. Almost all of the major losses with cryptocurrency exchanges involve deception with unbacked funds.
So it's great to see transparency reports from BitBuy and ShakePay where someone independently verified the backing. The only thing we don't have is:
It's not complicated to validate cryptocurrency assets. They need to exist, they need to be spendable, and they need to cover the total balances. There are plenty of credible people and firms across the country that have the capacity to reasonably perform this validation. Having more frequent checks by different, independent, parties who publish transparent reports is far more valuable than an annual check by a single "more credible/official" party who does the exact same basic checks and may or may not publish anything. Here's an example set of requirements that could be mandated:
There are ways to structure audits such that neither crypto assets nor customer information are ever put at risk, and both can still be properly validated and publicly verifiable. There are also ways to structure audits such that they are completely reasonable for small platforms and don't inhibit innovation in any way. By making the process as reasonable as possible, we can completely eliminate any reason/excuse that an honest platform would have for not being audited. That is arguable far more important than any incremental improvement we might get from mandating "the best of the best" accountants. Right now we have nothing mandated and tons of Canadians using offshore exchanges with no oversight whatsoever.

Transparency does not prove crypto assets are safe. CoinTradeNewNote, Flexcoin ($600k), and Canadian Bitcoins ($100k) are examples where crypto-assets were breached from platforms in Canada. All of them were online wallets and used no multi-sig as far as any records show. This is consistent with what we see globally - air-gapped multi-sig wallets have an impeccable record, while other schemes tend to suffer breach after breach. We don't actually know how much CoinTrader lost because there was no visibility. Rather than publishing details of what happened, the co-founder of CoinTrader silently moved on to found another platform - the "most trusted way to buy and sell crypto" - a site that has no information whatsoever (that I could find) on the storage practices and a FAQ advising that “[t]rading cryptocurrency is completely safe” and that having your own wallet is “entirely up to you! You can certainly keep cryptocurrency, or fiat, or both, on the app.” Doesn't sound like much was learned here, which is really sad to see.
It's not that complicated or unreasonable to set up a proper hardware wallet. Multi-sig can be learned in a single course. Something the equivalent complexity of a driver's license test could prevent all the cold storage exploits we've seen to date - even globally. Platform operators have a key advantage in detecting and preventing fraud - they know their customers far better than any custodian ever would. The best job that custodians can do is to find high integrity individuals and train them to form even better wallet signatories. Rather than mandating that all platforms expose themselves to arbitrary third party risks, regulations should center around ensuring that all signatories are background-checked, properly trained, and using proper procedures. We also need to make sure that signatories are empowered with rights and responsibilities to reject and report fraud. They need to know that they can safely challenge and delay a transaction - even if it turns out they made a mistake. We need to have an environment where mistakes are brought to the surface and dealt with. Not one where firms and people feel the need to hide what happened. In addition to a knowledge-based test, an auditor can privately interview each signatory to make sure they're not in coercive situations, and we should make sure they can freely and anonymously report any issues without threat of retaliation.
A proper multi-sig has each signature held by a separate person and is governed by policies and mutual decisions instead of a hierarchy. It includes at least one redundant signature. For best results, 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7.

History has demonstrated over and over again the risk of hot wallets even to highly credible organizations. Nonetheless, many platforms have hot wallets for convenience. While such losses are generally compensated by platforms without issue (for example Poloniex, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Gatecoin, Coincheck, Bithumb, Zaif, CoinBene, Binance, Bitrue, Bitpoint, Upbit, VinDAX, and now KuCoin), the public tends to focus more on cases that didn't end well. Regardless of what systems are employed, there is always some level of risk. For that reason, most members of the public would prefer to see third party insurance.
Rather than trying to convince third party profit-seekers to provide comprehensive insurance and then relying on an expensive and slow legal system to enforce against whatever legal loopholes they manage to find each and every time something goes wrong, insurance could be run through multiple exchange operators and regulators, with the shared interest of having a reputable industry, keeping costs down, and taking care of Canadians. For example, a 4 of 7 multi-sig insurance fund held between 5 independent exchange operators and 2 regulatory bodies. All Canadian exchanges could pay premiums at a set rate based on their needed coverage, with a higher price paid for hot wallet coverage (anything not an air-gapped multi-sig cold wallet). Such a model would be much cheaper to manage, offer better coverage, and be much more reliable to payout when needed. The kind of coverage you could have under this model is unheard of. You could even create something like the CDIC to protect Canadians who get their trading accounts hacked if they can sufficiently prove the loss is legitimate. In cases of fraud, gross negligence, or insolvency, the fund can be used to pay affected users directly (utilizing the last transparent balance report in the worst case), something which private insurance would never touch. While it's recommended to have official policies for coverage, a model where members vote would fully cover edge cases. (Could be similar to the Supreme Court where justices vote based on case law.)
Such a model could fully protect all Canadians across all platforms. You can have a fiat coverage governed by legal agreements, and crypto-asset coverage governed by both multi-sig and legal agreements. It could be practical, affordable, and inclusive.

Now, we are at a crossroads. We can happily give up our freedom, our innovation, and our money. We can pay hefty expenses to auditors, lawyers, and regulators year after year (and make no mistake - this cost will grow to many millions or even billions as the industry grows - and it will be borne by all Canadians on every platform because platforms are not going to eat up these costs at a loss). We can make it nearly impossible for any new platform to enter the marketplace, forcing Canadians to use the same stagnant platforms year after year. We can centralize and consolidate the entire industry into 2 or 3 big players and have everyone else fail (possibly to heavy losses of users of those platforms). And when a flawed security model doesn't work and gets breached, we can make it even more complicated with even more people in suits making big money doing the job that blockchain was supposed to do in the first place. We can build a system which is so intertwined and dependent on big government, traditional finance, and central bankers that it's future depends entirely on that of the fiat system, of fractional banking, and of government bail-outs. If we choose this path, as history has shown us over and over again, we can not go back, save for revolution. Our children and grandchildren will still be paying the consequences of what we decided today.
Or, we can find solutions that work. We can maintain an open and innovative environment while making the adjustments we need to make to fully protect Canadian investors and cryptocurrency users, giving easy and affordable access to cryptocurrency for all Canadians on the platform of their choice, and creating an environment in which entrepreneurs and problem solvers can bring those solutions forward easily. None of the above precludes innovation in any way, or adds any unreasonable cost - and these three policies would demonstrably eliminate or resolve all 109 historic cases as studied here - that's every single case researched so far going back to 2011. It includes every loss that was studied so far not just in Canada but globally as well.
Unfortunately, finding answers is the least challenging part. Far more challenging is to get platform operators and regulators to agree on anything. My last post got no response whatsoever, and while the OSC has told me they're happy for industry feedback, I believe my opinion alone is fairly meaningless. This takes the whole community working together to solve. So please let me know your thoughts. Please take the time to upvote and share this with people. Please - let's get this solved and not leave it up to other people to do.

Facts/background/sources (skip if you like):



Thoughts?
submitted by azoundria2 to QuadrigaInitiative [link] [comments]

Madbyte News - October 1, 2020


What was Bitcoin's value over the last several years on October 1st? In 2012 it was super low at $11 USD, with the first halving only 2 months away. In 2013 it was at $127 and the Cyprus banking crisis hit the financial markets. Also, during 2013 was the first time Bitcoin passed the price of gold for a brief moment.
In 2014 it was valued at $387. By the end of the year it was given the title by The Guardian as the worst investment of the year. Mt.Gox exchange had failed and Ethereum did its ICO (Initial Coin Offering) and the silk road website was taken down. Tim Draper bought a good chunk of Bitcoins at auction and was predicting it to go to $10,000.
In 2015 it was lower at $238 but in 2016 the price was at $614 with the second halving having happened. During 2017 it reached a lofty $4404. 2017 also was when ICOs became popular with a few blockchain projects raising over $200 million. In 2018 Bitcoin was at $6601 and the ICO frenzy died. During 2019 it was $8334 and some exchanges continued to get hacked. Bakt opens futures trading and bitcoiners are talking about the third halving in 2020. And so today bitcoin is valued at about $10,600.
Most of those years saw massive changes up and down in value. For example, in 2013, there was a massive rise of 10,250% from $12 to $961 but in 2014 it dropped 52%. If you look at Bitcoin valuations from the October 1st lens it seems like a great time to buy especially after a halving.
We continue to see Bitcoin as the number one crypto for a portfolio even though almost every week we see another new cryptocurrency pop up. Some of them even hit the top 10 on Coinmarketcap very quickly. For example, UNI (Uniswap) is up over 2700% on Binance since it was listed on Sept.17, 2020. But history shows that most altcoins over the long term are not very successful.
Be careful of FOMO but happy investing, From the Madbyte Team.
-- In summary, Bitcoin, on October 1st was: 2020 - $10600 2019 - $8334 2018 - $6601 2017 - $4404 2016 - $614 2015 - $238 2014 - $387 2013 - $127 2012 - $11
submitted by cryptocronix to madbyte [link] [comments]

XT.COM CEO Weber was invited to attend Hacken’s online AMA Event

XT.COM CEO Weber was invited to attend Hacken’s online AMA Event
At 10:00 on the evening of September 24, XT.COM CEO Weber WOO and Haken, the world's leading cyber security consulting company, launched an online AMA with the theme of "Future Development of XT.COM". Weber talked about XT.COM's history, team, business development and attitude towards the development of the blockchain industry. When talking about the future market trend of XT.COM, Weber said, "XT will continue to explore markets in Europe, Southeast Asia, South Asia and South America in the future, and further strengthen XT's international market."
The community members actively presented their questions following the event. Congratulations to the four users u/Nos Tha u/brucelee199 u/DanielleStelle u/brunoiat, getting rewards for putting up questions.

https://preview.redd.it/dp6zmy7fv8p51.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=e76a3bb2da20084b5074ee077347ab0446d5e430
For those missing the broadcast, Mr.XT has compiled the content for everyone~ Let’s get a review~
Host: Dyma Budorin | Hacken CEO
Guest: Weber WOO | XT.COM CEO
Dyma:Please introduce yourself a little.Where are you from?When were you involved in crypto?
Weber:Hello Hackeners. I am Weber Woo from the XT.COM exchange. I am glad to be invited here to share something about the XT exchange, XT team, and also myself. I am from Shanghai, China. When I was studying MBA at school in 2012, I read an article in Business Week about Bitcoin being very popular in Iran. Because of sanctions, many Iranians bought bitcoin to transfer their assets to overseas. That was the first time I heard about crypto.
Dyma:What experience do you have in crypto? Trading? Mining? Investing? Holding? Only positive experience or negative, too?
Weber:I will talk about my experience in Blockchain, and also my team.
In 2013, after my friends involved in Bitcoin, I also started to pay more attention to it. We began to mine Bitcoin.
From 2013-2016, we are more focused on mining and trading. We have 100,000 mining machines in our mining factory, located in Yunnan, Sichuan province in China. Of course, most of them are owned by our customers.
At the end of 2016, we started our mining pool business. Our mining portfolio included BTC, ETH, ETC, ZEC, SC, DCR. We had 5%of ETH computing power at the peak.
At the beginning of 2017, we invested a crypto exchange in China. But it was stopped in September 2017, because of China's new policies.
In the middle of 2018, we started the XT exchange in Seychelles, headquartered in HongKong.
Dyma:Have you ever been hacked?
Weber:I've never been hacked directly But lost my Bitcoin from the MT. Gox hack in 2014. That taught me a lot to keep crypto-assets safe.
The MT. Gox incident also reminded our team and me to take security measures very seriously when running the XT exchange.
Business
1.We know that XT has more than 1 millionn global users. You might have a big team. How many people? What idea does unite them?
Currently, XT has more than 80 employees comprised of the C-level team, technical developers, marketers, and business developers. More than 40% of our team have Postgraduate educational background. Our team comes from previous companies like Alibaba, Tencent, China Unicoin, Bosch, LG, and more.
Everyone on the team has a high level of understanding of what opportunities blockchain can and does provide for the world.
2.XT was introduced in 2018 — just in the beginning of crypto winter. Was it hard to start in such conditions? How did you motivate yourself and your colleagues?
Since XT started in a bear market, it was easier for us than other exchanges to stay agile and motivated.
We continued to grow our team and focus on building an exchange that protects its users and listens to what they want.
Understanding that just like any market, crypto goes through market cycles too. We stayed motivated and focused on being ready for the next bull market.
We already spend seven years in the blockchain industry. The bear market is an excellent opportunity to start a new business to save costs and talent recruits.
3.Is it really hard to be a Chinese crypto exchange nowadays?
As I said before, the XT exchange was registered in Seychelles, headquartered in HongKong. We are not officially a Chinese crypto exchange.
Half of our users are from other global markets than China. We are the most popular in Korea and Japan.
Of course, Crypto is still very popular in China, especially recently, with the rise of DeFi. Investors are smarter than 2017, but everyone is excited about all the new blockchain space developments.

https://preview.redd.it/91rmlsidv8p51.png?width=693&format=png&auto=webp&s=debd3e9f3c6bd5efad4b58589fe5e988179d7e19
4.Are your developers working on some new features? What should we expect?
Currently, XT is working on bringing new features to the exchange.
XT is the first social infused exchange that launched a Group Trading function in the BiYong App. BiYong is a social application focused on the Chinese market.
BiYong has more than 5 million users in total. We are the only partner for BiYong in Group trading. Users can trade within the social chatting app together as a collective.
I want to share some benefits for Group Trading.

https://preview.redd.it/4ephtzbcv8p51.png?width=753&format=png&auto=webp&s=191ca9c7e4d294159347d549b6ecd8cdb66ebbfe
This is how Group Trading typically works.

https://preview.redd.it/50opietbv8p51.png?width=753&format=png&auto=webp&s=aaddfb7071da6cb75f249927bbd8ae3591b39793
XT.com is launching a DEX.
We will launch DEX in quarter four this year. The product is still developing, so I cannot share more about it. We are glad to share it when it's ready.
Crypto future
1.Do you think the crypto winter is over?
With everything going on in the world currently, it is difficult to predict the future. I believe we are now in a bull market cycle, but things can change very quickly. We see different lengths of bear markets in the space as it grows. We must all pay attention to the trends and proceed accordingly.
2.Do you believe in the DeFi’s potential to make mass adoption closer? Why do you think it is so popular today?
The rise of DeFi has been incredible this year. Projects like LINK, UNI, YFI caught the attention of millions. The technology for real use cases has been implemented, and there is a real opportunity to get in on the ground floor for eager investors.
With the recent airdrop from Uniswap with their new token, UNI has only driven interest within the DeFi space. I believe it will take time, but DeFi is here to stay regardless if the market decides to cycle again.
We can see DeFi Locked Value in the past three years in the following pic. It's popular and here to stay.
https://preview.redd.it/utk4j4aav8p51.png?width=753&format=png&auto=webp&s=6a9d785c7e854ecc258c2c75f2458b5eceff20ac

3.What could you advise your users? What are the main risks in trading and investing today?
I advise anyone trading or investing in crypto to be smart.
The crypto market is a very volatile place. Using good risk management is critical to ensure the security of their funds.
Do not put all your eggs and one basket and only invest what you are willing to lose would be my recommendation, especially when it comes to altcoins.
I think that Bitcoin and Etheruem are the best low-risk long term investment options.
So I suggest you can divide your investment into 3 sections. For example, 40% in BTC and ETH, 30% for Top 50 altcoins, and 30% for HIGH risk projects if you are willing to take the risk.
We can see the risk from this picture.
https://preview.redd.it/8j9hvng5v8p51.png?width=753&format=png&auto=webp&s=e2ea47fa1cae0940e80048405d064d7726e6c6dc
4. What are your and your company long-term plans? Where will you be in 5 years?
Regarding the market, XT will continue to grow as we expand to more world markets like Europe, SE Asian, South Asian, and South America.
For compliance, we already had our MSB license approved in the US and will apply for more in different markets in the future.
On the business side, we will still focus on mining and the exchange. Of course, our CEX and DEX will be our primary focus in the years to come.
About Hacken
Hacken is a premier cybersecurity consulting company with an essential focus on cryptocurrency exchanges and blockchain security.
Website: https://hacken.io/
About XT.COM
XT.COM is the world's first social infused exchange. Users can chat in communities while knowing the market trend to invest. In XT communities, users explore valuable coins together.
XT.COM is building towards garnering loyalty and bring new potential for the development of the entire blockchain industry. To achieve better development, it is necessary to break the tradition with a fresh model.
XT Exchange not only empowers the blockchain industry but leads the industry with its innovation.
submitted by okoAlderman to XTExchange [link] [comments]

A Deep Dive Into IRS Crypto Audits (Podcast & Highlights)

Hey all - the newest episode of The BitcoinTaxes Podcast is live. For anyone unfamiliar, it's a podcast where I interview experts in the crypto/blockchain/fintech spaces. In this episode I speak with a tax controversy lawyer about how to handle a CI agent showing up at your door about your crypto, and what to do to avoid getting to that point.
Full disclosure, I work for BitcoinTaxes and also host this podcast. I typically post my interviews to our own subreddit and one or two other subreddits (not trying to spam people). This subreddit's community seems to enjoy/engage with the episodes when I post them. If there's any issue with me posting here please let me know, otherwise I hope you guys enjoy this episode and gain some valuable knowledge. Feel free to hit me with any questions and I can relay them to Alex.
----
Links:
Podcast Page Link
Audio Only

Brief Summary:
This episode's guest is Alex Kugelman. Alex is a tax controversy lawyer with expertise in cryptocurrency and IRS audits. Alex is a frequent guest on this podcast - back in July 2019 he came on the show to discuss the IRS Educational Letters that were being sent out. Before that, in May, he shared some excellent information about IRS cryptocurrency audits. Today, he elaborates on these topics and goes in-depth about what could happen in a potential crypto audit.
Alex provides tips in the case of an IRS CI agent showing up at your door, revisits compliance post-2019 IRS FAQ update, and gives us his take on the effect of COVID-19 in taxes and crypto.

Some good quotes:
"In the past year, what I've seen, the single common element of all IRS criminal investigations relating to cryptocurrency is that there is evidence that there have been sales of cryptocurrency and it cannot be reconciled to the tax return." (07:10)
"I think it's very likely that exchanges are providing information to the government if it's requested, especially U S based exchanges that are trying to be in the good graces of regulators." (09:44)

EPISODE HIGHLIGHTS AND DISCUSSION

Don't Under-Estimate Over-Reporting (03:12)

Alex: I'm a big believer of over-reporting, which means give as much detail as you possibly can. I think a lot of people get into trouble. They go: “Oh, I reported my transactions”... and you look at the tax return and it's a single line that says “cryptocurrency” and the net number. You have to think through objectively. I've not seen an issue where the IRS has taken a really hard position on lost records as long as you're making reasonable assumptions and using fair market value data.

A CI Agent's M.O. (10:30)

Alex: CI's agents are fairly sophisticated. If they have some information, and they can see these different transfers to different exchanges or wallets - they can piece it together and there's nothing to stop them from going and getting that data at that point as well. That's why I think it's really important that people...try to do the most reasonable good faith effort because it's hard to make a criminal case out of an accounting error. It's much easier to make a criminal case when someone's sold hundreds of thousands of dollars of cryptocurrency and then transferred that fiat into a U S bank account.

Unmatched Trades and Missing Data (12:16)

Alex: The more transactions that you have...with missing information...could lead to more questions. The question becomes where or how did you obtain this cryptocurrency and why is it that you don't have records?
A very common example is Mt. Gox. The exchange goes down, the records go down. That's really common. If that's the story, I wouldn't be worried about it. But, if you were being paid in cryptocurrency for a couple of years, never reported it as income, and now you're selling it - that's more problematic. It could lead to issues down the line.

CI Agents Paying You A Visit (14:35)

Alex: A lot of times when a CI agent shows up it's meant to catch people off guard. If a CI agent is showing up at your door regarding cryptocurrency, it means they already have information that they believe there was a crime and that would lead to a conviction of a crime. So you're not going to explain that away in an hour long conversation in your living room. It's not going to happen. That's not the way it works.
There's always going to be two agents, because one is going to be a witness for this conversation. You just need to remember: decline the interview. There's nothing wrong with that. Get a card and: “my counsel will contact you”. That's it.
The other thing to keep in mind that's really important is that you don't want to start doing things that are new crimes. You don't want to go in and start destroying records or erasing emails. Taking those kinds of steps is only going to make it worse.

Coronavirus, Audits, and Amended Returns (31:05)

Alex: The IRS is, for the most part, shutdown. That means that they're not really issuing new audits right now. It also means that the forced collections, when you owe money to the IRS and they levy your bank account or issue liens - that’s not going on right now. So for clients or for taxpayers who owe the IRS money...if they are currently in an installment agreement with the IRS, then actually they can forego those monthly payments right now.
The IRS is already an underfunded agency, and it was affected by the government shutdown recently. There's really a big backlog to begin with. I mean it's hard to estimate how much this [virus] is going to affect the administration of tax compliance. I think it's a great time to amend a tax return or to get into compliance.
submitted by Sal-BitcoinTax to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

ETX officially announced to change the algorithm, here is a straightforward analysis about the influence

ETX officially announced to change the algorithm, here is a straightforward analysis about the influence
More dispersed computing power, which means that the coins will be further dispersed, and the value will be less controlled and influenced by a few people who controlled many coins. From the above examples of Monero and Monero Classic , we can see that changing the algorithm is a great positive signal for ordinary community users
According to the latest announcement on the official website of Ethereumx·NET (ETX), "Notice about the upcoming change of ETX algorithm and the opening of the testnet '', ETX will change the algorithm within the next 1-2 months. The reason is that the current large computing power miners pose a threat to ETX's long-term ecological planning in the future, because the large computing power mining has caused a very high concentration of chips. This can be seen through the blockchain browser. The future It may take time to balance the number of head coin holders and slowly digest with price space and time.

https://preview.redd.it/xtfbx9wbe6b51.png?width=624&format=png&auto=webp&s=386ccbcb51a658db2db07609152406df1c0927e3
Just like Bitcoin, there were only a few people digging with a computer at the beginning. Later, as the market slowly became aware, and then derived the ASIC algorithm mining machine, as the price increased, some head currency holders slowly reduced their holdings, and slowly reduced the threat they posed to Bitcoin. But even so, there are still an unsolved 200,000 bitcoins in MtGox. Some people even predict that when MtGox closes the case, it will be the crash day of Bitcoin.
It’s impossible for a new currency to go the way which Bitcoin had passed. The market competition environment today is completely different. There are endless new currencies appearing every day, so at the appropriate time to avoid the risk of expanding and taking the lead is necessary. This may be the reason why the ETX development team decided to change the algorithm.
There are many currencies that have changed the algorithm, and most of the results are relatively good. For example, Monero (XMR), Monero should be the most successful currency to resist the ASIC algorithm. In the process of fighting with ASIC repeatedly, without exception, the mining machine manufacturers were expelled from the door, ensuring many communities. But Monroe Classic has retained the ASIC-friendly algorithm because it has not changed the algorithm, and almost no one is interested today. We can get a glimpse of their straightforward price performance in the chart below.

  1. Monero with repeated algorithm changes

XMR's price with frequent algorithm changes, data source Coinmarketcap

  1. Asic algorithm-friendly (unchanged algorithm) Monero Classic

XMC’s price with no algorithm changes, data source Coinmarketcap
More decentralized computing power means that the coins are further dispersed, and the value can be less controlled and influenced by a few people. From the examples of Monroe and Monroe Classic above, we can see that changing the algorithm is a great positive signal to the ordinary community users. And the announcement on the official website mentioned that the testnet will be launched before the end of this month, and anyone who’s interested can go to have a look.
ETX developers take precautionary measures ahead of time, which is a manifestation of responsibility for all community users.
Refer to
Ethereumx·NET " Notice about the upcoming change of ETX algorithm and the opening of the testnet "
Coinmarketcap
Monero: GetMonero
*There are risks in the market, this article is not intended as investment advice
submitted by BitRay2077 to u/BitRay2077 [link] [comments]

Crypto-Powered: Understanding Bitcoin, Ethereum, and DeFi

Crypto-Powered: Understanding Bitcoin, Ethereum, and DeFi
Until one understands the basics of this tech, they won’t be able to grasp or appreciate the impact it has on our digital bank, Genesis Block.
https://reddit.com/link/ho4bif/video/n0euarkifu951/player
This is the second post of Crypto-Powered — a new series that examines what it means for Genesis Block to be a digital bank that’s powered by crypto, blockchain, and decentralized protocols.
---
Our previous post set the stage for this series. We discussed the state of consumer finance and how the success of today’s high-flying fintech unicorns will be short-lived as long as they’re building on legacy finance — a weak foundation that is ripe for massive disruption.
Instead, the future of consumer finance belongs to those who are deeply familiar with blockchain tech & decentralized protocols, build on it as the foundation, and know how to take it to the world. Like Genesis Block.
Today we begin our journey down the crypto rabbit hole. This post will be an important introduction for those still learning about Bitcoin, Ethereum, or DeFi (Decentralized Finance). This post (and the next few) will go into greater detail about how this technology gives Genesis Block an edge, a superpower, and an unfair advantage. Let’s dive in…
https://preview.redd.it/1ugdxoqjfu951.jpg?width=650&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=36edde1079c3cff5f6b15b8cd30e6c436626d5d8

Bitcoin: The First Cryptocurrency

There are plenty of online resources to learn about Bitcoin (Coinbase, Binance, Gemini, Naval, Alex Gladstein, Marc Andreessen, Chris Dixon). I don’t wanna spend a lot of time on that here, but let’s do a quick overview for those still getting ramped up.
Cryptocurrency is the most popular use-case of blockchain technology today. And Bitcoin was the first cryptocurrency to be invented.
Bitcoin is the most decentralized of all crypto assets today — no government, company, or third party can control or censor it.
Bitcoin has two primary features (as do most other cryptocurrencies):
  1. Send Value You can send value to anyone, anywhere in the world. Nobody can intercept, delay or stop it — not even governments or financial institutions. Unlike with traditional money transfers or bank wires, there are no layers of middlemen. This results in a process that is much more cost-efficient. Some popular use-cases include remittances and cross-border payments.
  2. Store Value With nothing but a smartphone, you can become your own bank and store your own funds. Nobody can seize your assets. The funds are digital and stored on a blockchain. Your money no longer needs to be stored at a bank, in a vault, or under your mattress. I covered a few inspiring use-cases in a previous post. They include banking the unbanked, protecting assets from government seizure, mitigating the risk of a bank run, and protection against hyperinflation (like what recently happened in Venezuela).
The fact that there are so few things one can do with Bitcoin is one of its greatest strengths.
Its design is simple, elegant, and focused. It has been 10+ years since Satoshi’s white paper and no one has been able to crack or hack the Bitcoin network. With a market cap of $170B, there is plenty of incentive to try.
https://preview.redd.it/bizndfpkfu951.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=456c53b798248e60456a65835a33c69b2fe8daf0

Public Awareness

A few negative moments in Bitcoin’s history include the collapse of Mt. Gox — which resulted in hundreds of millions of customer funds being stolen — as well as Bitcoin’s role in dark markets like Silk Road — where Bitcoin arguably found its initial userbase.
However, like most breakthrough technology, Bitcoin is neither good nor bad. It’s neutral. People can use it for good or they can use it for evil. Thankfully, it’s being used less and less for illicit activity. Criminals are starting to understand that transactions on a blockchain are public and traceable — it’s exactly the type of system they usually try to avoid. And it’s true, at this point “a lot more” crimes are actually committed with fiat than crypto.
As a result, the perception of bitcoin and cryptocurrency has been changing over the years to a more positive light.
Bitcoin has even started to enter the world of media & entertainment. It’s been mentioned in Hollywood films like Spiderman: Into the Spider-Verse and in songs from major artists like Eminem. It’s been mentioned in countless TV shows like Billions, The Simpsons, Big Bang Theory, Gray’s Anatomy, Family Guy, and more.
As covid19 has ravaged economies and central banks have been printing money, Bitcoin has caught the attention of many legendary Wall Street investors like Paul Tudor Jones, saying that Bitcoin is a great bet against inflation (reminding him of Gold in the 1970s).
Cash App already lets their 25M users buy Bitcoin. It’s rumored that PayPal and Venmo will soon let their 325M users start buying Bitcoin. Bitcoin is by far the most dominant cryptocurrency and is showing no signs of slowing down. For more than a decade it has delivered on its core use-cases — being able to send or store value.
At this point, Bitcoin has very much entered the zeitgeist of modern pop culture — at least in the West.
https://preview.redd.it/dnuwbw8mfu951.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=6f1f135e3effee4574b5167901b80ced2c972bda

Ethereum: Programmable Money

When Ethereum launched in 2015, it opened up a world of new possibilities and use-cases for crypto. With Ethereum Smart Contracts (i.e. applications), this exciting new digital money (cryptocurrency) became a lot less dumb. Developers could now build applications that go beyond the simple use-cases of “send value” & “store value.” They could program cryptocurrency to have rules, behavior, and logic to respond to different inputs. And always enforced by code. Additional reading on Ethereum from Linda Xie or Vitalik Buterin.
Because these applications are built on blockchain technology (Ethereum), they preserve many of the same characteristics as Bitcoin: no one can stop, censor or shut down these apps because they are decentralized.
One of the first major use-cases on Ethereum was the ability to mint and create your own token, your own cryptocurrency. Many companies used this as a way to fundraise from the public. This led to the 2017 ICO bubble (Initial Coin Offerings). Some tokens — and the apps/networks they powered — were fascinating and innovative. Most tokens were pointless. And many tokens were outright scams. Additional token reading from Fred Ehrsam, Balaji, and Naval.
https://reddit.com/link/ho4bif/video/b5b1jh9ofu951/player

Digital Gold Rush

Just as tokens grew in popularity in 2017–2018, so did online marketplaces where these tokens could be bought, sold, and traded. This was a fledgling asset class — the merchants selling picks, axes, and shovels were finally starting to emerge.
I had a front-row seat — both as an investor and token creator. This was the Wild West with all the frontier drama & scandal that you’d expect.
Binance — now the world’s largest crypto exchange —was launched during this time. They along with many others (especially from Asia) made it really easy for speculators, traders, and degenerate gamblers to participate in these markets. Similar to other financial markets, the goal was straightforward: buy low and sell high.
https://preview.redd.it/tytsu5jnfu951.jpg?width=600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe3425b7e4a71fa953b953f0c7f6eaff6504a0d1
That period left an embarrassing stain on our industry that we’ve still been trying to recover from. It was a period rampant with market manipulation, pump-and-dumps, and scams. To some extent, the crypto industry still suffers from that today, but it’s nothing compared to what it was then.
While the potential of getting filthy rich brought a lot of fly-by-nighters and charlatans into the industry, it also brought a lot of innovators, entrepreneurs, and builders.
The launch and growth of Ethereum has been an incredible technological breakthrough. As with past tech breakthroughs, it has led to a wave of innovation, experimentation, and development. The creativity around tokens, smart contracts, and decentralized applications has been fascinating to witness. Now a few years later, the fruits of those labors are starting to be realized.

DeFi: Decentralized Finance

So as a reminder, tokens are cryptocurrencies. Cryptocurrencies can carry value. And value is a lot like money. Because tokens are natively integrated with Ethereum, it’s been natural for developers to build applications related to financial services — things like lending, borrowing, saving, investing, payments, and insurance. In the last few years, there has been a groundswell of developer momentum building in this area of financial protocols. This segment of the industry is known as DeFi (Decentralized Finance).
https://preview.redd.it/f0sjzqspfu951.png?width=461&format=png&auto=webp&s=8e0a31bf29250fc624918fbd8514b008762f379e
In Q2 of 2020, 97% of all Ethereum activity was DeFi-related. Total DeFi transaction volume has reached $11.5B. The current value locked inside DeFi protocols is approaching $2 Billion (double from a month ago). DeFi’s meteoric growth cannot be ignored.
Most of that growth can be attributed to exciting protocols like Compound, Maker, Synthetix, Balancer, Aave, dYdX, and Uniswap. These DeFi protocols and the financial services they offer are quickly becoming some of the most popular use-cases for blockchain technology today.
https://preview.redd.it/wn3phnkqfu951.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=02f56caa6b94aa59eadd6e368ef9346ba10c7611
This impressive growth in DeFi certainly hasn’t come without growing pains. Unlike with Bitcoin, there are near-infinite applications one can develop on Ethereum. Sometimes bugs (or typos) can slip through code reviews, testing, and audits — resulting in loss of funds.
Our next post will go much deeper on DeFi.

Wrap Up

I know that for the hardcore crypto people, what we covered today is nothing new. But for those who are still getting up to speed, welcome! I hope this was helpful and that it fuels your interest to learn more.
Until you understand the basics of this technology, you won’t be able to fully appreciate the impact that it has on our new digital bank, Genesis Block. You won’t be able to understand the implications, how it relates, or how it helps.
After today’s post, some of you probably have a lot more questions. What are specific examples or use-cases of DeFi? Why does it need to be on a blockchain? What benefits does it bring to Genesis Block and our users?
In upcoming posts, we answer these questions. Today’s post was just Level 1. It set the foundation for where we’re headed next: even deeper down the crypto rabbit hole.
---
Other Ways to Consume Today's Episode:
We have a lot more content coming. Be sure to follow our channels: https://genesisblock.com/follow/
Have you already downloaded the app? We're Genesis Block, a new digital bank that's powered by crypto & decentralized protocols. The app is live in the App Store (iOS & Android). Get the link to download at https://genesisblock.com/download
submitted by mickhagen to genesisblockhq [link] [comments]

A Deep Dive Into IRS Crypto Tax Audits (Podcast and Highlights)

Hey all - the newest episode of The BitcoinTaxes Podcast is live. For anyone unfamiliar, it's a podcast where I interview experts in the bitcoin/blockchain/fintech spaces. In this episode I speak with a tax controversy lawyer about how to handle a CI agent showing up at your door about your crypto, and what to do to avoid getting to that point.
Full disclosure, I work for BitcoinTaxes and also host this podcast. I typically post my interviews to our own subreddit and one or two other subreddits (not trying to spam people). I've not really posted past episodes to this subreddit, but I thought it would be a pretty interesting listen for bitcoin/crypto enthusiasts and traders. If there's any issue with me posting here please let me know, otherwise I hope you guys enjoy this episode and gain some valuable knowledge. Feel free to hit me with any questions and I can relay them to Alex.
----
Links:
Podcast Page Link
Audio Only (~35 mins)

Brief Summary:
This episode's guest is Alex Kugelman. Alex is a tax controversy lawyer with expertise in cryptocurrency and IRS audits. Alex is a frequent guest on this podcast - back in July 2019 he came on the show to discuss the IRS Educational Letters that were being sent out. Before that, in May, he shared some excellent information about IRS cryptocurrency audits. Today, he elaborates on these topics and goes in-depth about what could happen in a potential crypto audit.
Alex provides tips in the case of an IRS CI agent showing up at your door, revisits compliance post-2019 IRS FAQ update, and gives us his take on the effect of COVID-19 in taxes and crypto.

Some good quotes:
"In the past year, what I've seen, the single common element of all IRS criminal investigations relating to cryptocurrency is that there is evidence that there have been sales of cryptocurrency and it cannot be reconciled to the tax return." (07:10)
"I think it's very likely that exchanges are providing information to the government if it's requested, especially U S based exchanges that are trying to be in the good graces of regulators." (09:44)

EPISODE HIGHLIGHTS AND DISCUSSION

Don't Under-Estimate Over-Reporting (03:12)

Alex: I'm a big believer of over-reporting, which means give as much detail as you possibly can. I think a lot of people get into trouble. They go: “Oh, I reported my transactions”... and you look at the tax return and it's a single line that says “cryptocurrency” and the net number. You have to think through objectively. I've not seen an issue where the IRS has taken a really hard position on lost records as long as you're making reasonable assumptions and using fair market value data.

A CI Agent's M.O. (10:30)

Alex: CI's agents are fairly sophisticated. If they have some information, and they can see these different transfers to different exchanges or wallets - they can piece it together and there's nothing to stop them from going and getting that data at that point as well. That's why I think it's really important that people...try to do the most reasonable good faith effort because it's hard to make a criminal case out of an accounting error. It's much easier to make a criminal case when someone's sold hundreds of thousands of dollars of cryptocurrency and then transferred that fiat into a U S bank account.

Unmatched Trades and Missing Data (12:16)

Alex: The more transactions that you have...with missing information...could lead to more questions. The question becomes where or how did you obtain this cryptocurrency and why is it that you don't have records?
A very common example is Mt. Gox. The exchange goes down, the records go down. That's really common. If that's the story, I wouldn't be worried about it. But, if you were being paid in cryptocurrency for a couple of years, never reported it as income, and now you're selling it - that's more problematic. It could lead to issues down the line.

CI Agents Paying You A Visit (14:35)

Alex: A lot of times when a CI agent shows up it's meant to catch people off guard. If a CI agent is showing up at your door regarding cryptocurrency, it means they already have information that they believe there was a crime and that would lead to a conviction of a crime. So you're not going to explain that away in an hour long conversation in your living room. It's not going to happen. That's not the way it works.
There's always going to be two agents, because one is going to be a witness for this conversation. You just need to remember: decline the interview. There's nothing wrong with that. Get a card and: “my counsel will contact you”. That's it.
The other thing to keep in mind that's really important is that you don't want to start doing things that are new crimes. You don't want to go in and start destroying records or erasing emails. Taking those kinds of steps is only going to make it worse.

Coronavirus, Audits, and Amended Returns (31:05)

Alex: The IRS is, for the most part, shutdown. That means that they're not really issuing new audits right now. It also means that the forced collections, when you owe money to the IRS and they levy your bank account or issue liens - that’s not going on right now. So for clients or for taxpayers who owe the IRS money...if they are currently in an installment agreement with the IRS, then actually they can forego those monthly payments right now.
The IRS is already an underfunded agency, and it was affected by the government shutdown recently. There's really a big backlog to begin with. I mean it's hard to estimate how much this [virus] is going to affect the administration of tax compliance. I think it's a great time to amend a tax return or to get into compliance.
submitted by Sal-BitcoinTax to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

BitcoinTaxes Podcast: A Deep Dive Into IRS Crypto Audits

Hey all - newest episode of The BitcoinTaxes Podcast is live! Full disclosure, I work for BitcoinTaxes and also host this podcast.
Our guest today is Alex Kugelman. Alex is a tax controversy lawyer with expertise in cryptocurrency and IRS audits. Alex is a frequent guest on this podcast - back in July 2019 he came on the show to discuss the IRS Educational Letters that were being sent out. Before that, in May, he shared some excellent information about IRS cryptocurrency audits. Today, he elaborates on these topics and goes in-depth about what could happen in a potential crypto audit.
Alex provides tips in the case of an IRS CI agent showing up at your door, revisits compliance post-2019 IRS FAQ update, and gives us his take on the effect of COVID-19 in taxes and crypto.
Podcast Page Link
Audio Only
Some good quotes:
"In the past year, what I've seen, the single common element of all IRS criminal investigations relating to cryptocurrency is that there is evidence that there have been sales of cryptocurrency and it cannot be reconciled to the tax return." (07:10)
"I think it's very likely that exchanges are providing information to the government if it's requested, especially U S based exchanges that are trying to be in the good graces of regulators." (09:44)
EPISODE HIGHLIGHTS AND DISCUSSION

Don't Under-Estimate Over-Reporting (03:12)

Alex: I'm a big believer of over-reporting, which means give as much detail as you possibly can. I think a lot of people get into trouble. They go: “Oh, I reported my transactions”... and you look at the tax return and it's a single line that says “cryptocurrency” and the net number. You have to think through objectively. I've not seen an issue where the IRS has taken a really hard position on lost records as long as you're making reasonable assumptions and using fair market value data.

A CI Agent's M.O. (10:30)

Alex: CI's agents are fairly sophisticated. If they have some information, and they can see these different transfers to different exchanges or wallets - they can piece it together and there's nothing to stop them from going and getting that data at that point as well. That's why I think it's really important that people...try to do the most reasonable good faith effort because it's hard to make a criminal case out of an accounting error. It's much easier to make a criminal case when someone's sold hundreds of thousands of dollars of cryptocurrency and then transferred that fiat into a U S bank account.

Unmatched Trades and Missing Data (12:16)

Alex: The more transactions that you have...with missing information...could lead to more questions. The question becomes where or how did you obtain this cryptocurrency and why is it that you don't have records?
A very common example is Mt. Gox. The exchange goes down, the records go down. That's really common. If that's the story, I wouldn't be worried about it. But, if you were being paid in cryptocurrency for a couple of years, never reported it as income, and now you're selling it - that's more problematic. It could lead to issues down the line.

CI Agents Paying You A Visit (14:35)

Alex: A lot of times when a CI agent shows up it's meant to catch people off guard. If a CI agent is showing up at your door regarding cryptocurrency, it means they already have information that they believe there was a crime and that would lead to a conviction of a crime. So you're not going to explain that away in an hour long conversation in your living room. It's not going to happen. That's not the way it works.
There's always going to be two agents, because one is going to be a witness for this conversation. You just need to remember: decline the interview. There's nothing wrong with that. Get a card and: “my counsel will contact you”. That's it.
The other thing to keep in mind that's really important is that you don't want to start doing things that are new crimes. You don't want to go in and start destroying records or erasing emails. Taking those kinds of steps is only going to make it worse.

Coronavirus, Audits, and Amended Returns (31:05)

Alex: The IRS is, for the most part, shutdown. That means that they're not really issuing new audits right now. It also means that the forced collections, when you owe money to the IRS and they levy your bank account or issue liens - that’s not going on right now. So for clients or for taxpayers who owe the IRS money...if they are currently in an installment agreement with the IRS, then actually they can forego those monthly payments right now.
The IRS is already an underfunded agency, and it was affected by the government shutdown recently. There's really a big backlog to begin with. I mean it's hard to estimate how much this [virus] is going to affect the administration of tax compliance. I think it's a great time to amend a tax return or to get into compliance.
submitted by Sal-BitcoinTax to bitcointaxes [link] [comments]

This seat is occupied.

I’ve been in the ETH community since the very beginning. Hell, since before there even was a community. Pre pre-sale. I was around for the rise and fall of Mt.Gox, Bitcoinica, Havelock Investments, BTCT, Trenton Shavers, and the origination of ‘HODL’. I quit a lucrative job in late 2013 to work at a bitcoin startup, and in 2015 I made a personal transition from BTC to ETH and have been here since. I’m as much of a True Believer as you’re likely to find.
I’m writing this to share my view on where I see this space going and why, like the title alludes, I refuse to give up my seat on this rocket.
After my "lightbulb moment" with the blockchain, I had a simple thesis: given what I saw as the foundations of the technology, it seemed likely that this experiment was going to have a binary outcome: either it was foundational, earth-shaking tech worth untold sums, or it was mostly nonsense. And I resolved to seeing one of those two ends. I think the curious child in me wanted to see what happened when the ignition button was pushed. Whether that resulted in a detonation on the launchpad or a liftoff into orbit. Whatever was going to happen, I’d be there.
So that’s what I’ve done. And will continue to do. That’s not to say I haven’t taken profits, I have - but mostly to salvage some semblance of responsibility as I saw the portion of my net worth held in magic internet money grow. Not because I lost confidence in the technology or its potential. Broadly speaking though, I don't believe we're close to seeing the complete fallout from pushing that button. The reaction is still in-progress and will take years to complete.
As I’ve watched this industry grow, and contract, it remains clear that the genie isn’t going back in the bottle. Crypto truly is a brain virus. Once educated, people understand the value of a scarce, programmable, permissionless, non-sovereign asset and I submit society won’t stop seeing value in this. Now, I believe there's ample evidence to suggest that speculative markets move in cycles. And having been through the peaks and valleys of previous crypto cycles, I am confident we’re in a valley. I’m also confident there will be a future peak. The market is utterly manic, for better or worse.
So I see that a 2017 Ethereum — when app/protocol composability was pure theory, there were no DeFi products whatsoever, enterprise interest was cursory, and the largest, most public demonstration of the tech was collectible digital cats — had people tripping over themselves trying to buy at prices almost 10x higher than they are today. I can’t help but think: if the 2017 fundamentals provided enough of a platform to support the speculative rise we saw to peak prices, what will it look like when the price gets out ahead of current fundamentals? Where we’re in the midst of a Cambrian Explosion of composable apps/protocols, a serious (and growing) portion of total supply locked in DeFi, PoS right around the corner poised to gobble up even more supply, more money legos, more devs, more mindshare. We are in an entirely different realm where fundamentals are concerned.
Crypto peaked in 2017 at shy of $1T. If you don’t think the story so far points to crypto being a multi-trillion dollar asset class in the future, I’m not sure what story you’ve been reading. In comparison, the Dotcom bubble brought peak valuations to $6-7T (inflation adjusted.) This all in a silo’d market where the primary participants were those with access to US equities and early stage investment opportunities. Crypto is global. It’s unrestricted and has no minimums. And it has multiple narratives, which are ultimately additive, that all command their own monetary premium. The SoV aspect is independent from the need to pay for contract execution, yet both work in concert driving demand.
Unless the genie does retreat back into the bottle, I believe we will see prices move out in front of fundamentals yet again. Just like in 2011, 2013, and 2017. Thoughtful people are understandably reluctant to throw-in with what seem like pipe dream valuations. They sound too good to be true. Naive, even. I’ll be the first to admit, talking about returns using an ‘x’ instead of a ‘%’ should always be met with skepticism. But there are two factors at play which I feel are under-appreciated that can (and will) legitimately drive returns of those magnitudes:
Liquidity and reflexivity.
In comparison to other financial markets, crypto markets are extremely illiquid. Not necessarily for retail investors who can move a few hundred thousand around with minimal price slippage, but for the sovereign wealth funds, endowments, pension funds — aka Institutional Money™, it’s a different story. A lot of people talk about how crypto will only rise once institutional money arrives. The reality is that crypto needs to grow in order for institutional money to arrive. This transition from illiquid to liquid is a one-way street and will continue to be responsible for profound price moves as illiquidity is the primary reason crypto prices move as intensely as they do. Sellers are always trying to get the most value for their assets, so if you want Asset X right this minute, you’re going to pay out the nose for it if there isn't sufficient supply when you want it. And having that short time preference leads me to...
Reflexivity, which is especially pronounced in this industry because the two driving components, sentiment and trading based on that sentiment, now both move instantaneously. It’s like this cartoon, but everything moves at the speed of light. Once sentiment changes (which will inevitably happen if you believe in market cycles), the air will get sucked out of the room at a blistering pace. This is where FOMO really ramps up and it grips everyone from fund managers to middle-schoolers. Global fund managers to global middle-schoolers. The result is light-speed FOMO mixed with light-speed trading of an illiquid underlying asset, aka the perfect recipe for face-melting price moves.
Long story short, I think crypto is a gift to this generation. Do with this gift what you will. But when the music stops and the sentiment shifts, I hope you've found your seat. They'll go in a hurry.
submitted by Naviers_Stoked to ethfinance [link] [comments]

My first post on reddit

Hi everyone,
I created this reddit account a while ago for the sole purpose of what is finally starting today: my participation here at nanocurrency. I'd like to introduce myself:
I am a younger gen-X, investor and software developer, hence my nickname inv_dev. I invest using value principles mixed with some macro. I develop in Java. When I compare myself to others, I consider my edge to be much wider in investing vs. development, and my interest in the space has mostly been about making money by HODLing. It all started in 2015 when I found out bitcoin survived the Mt. Gox stuff and VCs are pursuing crypto more than ever. I went long bitcoin at that time.
During Q4 2017, a very respected colleague mentioned this thing called RaiBlocks so I bought a small amount which I still hold today (also hold a bit of xmr and bnb) and since then I've been lurking here to stay updated. I've watched all Nanocast episodes + interviews with Colin. I really like this project and am recently especially inspired by KAPPTURE and the progress in Ghana. On the other hand I also have many questions.
But before delving into any of that, and before experimenting with running a node, trying various applications in the Nano ecosystem etc, I want to place some in cold storage and change my representative. Back in 2015, HODLing btc using a paper wallet was considered a very common/legitimate cold storage option. With Nano I would like to do this but, reading through the posts here, I see people refer to paper wallets as a "fun way to introduce nano to your family" and no mention of using it to HODL. Is there a reason I should not HODL using a nano paper wallet? Is there a difference between using paper wallets for btc vs. those for nano (taking into account the mechanics of sending/receiving or other factors)?
Thanks.
submitted by inv_dev to nanocurrency [link] [comments]

I'm Mark Karpelès, ex-CEO of bankrupt MtGox. Ask me anything.

Dear community,
Many of you know or remember me, especially recently since the MtGox bankruptcy has been allegedly linked with Bitcoin price drops in December 2017 to February 2018. Since taking over the most active Bitcoin exchange in 2011, I ran MtGox until filing for civil rehabilitation on February 28th 2014 (which became bankruptcy less than 2 months later) because a large amount of Bitcoins went missing. Since then, four years have passed, and MtGox is still in bankruptcy today. I’ve been arrested, released under bail after a little less than one year, and am now trying to assist MtGox getting into civil rehabilitation.
I did my best trying to grow the ecosystem by running the biggest exchange at the time. It had big problems but still managed to hang in there. For a while. A quite long while, even, while the rest of the ecosystem caught up. At the end of the day, the methods I chose to try to get MtGox out of its trouble ended up being insufficient, insufficiently executed, or plain wrong.
I know I didn't handle the last, stressful days of the outdrawn and painful Gox collapse very well. I can only be humble about that in hindsight. Once again, I’m sorry.
Japanese bankruptcy law has a particularly nasty outcome here, and I want to address this up front. As creditors claims were registered, those claims were registered in the valuation of Japanese Yen on the bankruptcy date. That's the only way Japanese bankruptcy law can work (most bankruptcy laws around the world operate this way for that matter). This means that the claims can be paid back in full, and there will still be over 160,000 bitcoin and bitcoin cash in assets in the Gox estate. The way bankruptcy law works is that if there are any assets remaining after the creditors have been paid in full, then those assets are distributed to shareholders as part of the liquidation.
That's the only way any bankruptcy law can reasonably work. And yet, in this case, it produces an egregiously distasteful outcome in that the shareholders of MtGox would walk away with the value of over 160,000 bitcoin as a result of what happened.
I don't want this. I don't want this billion dollars. From day one I never expected to receive anything from this bankruptcy. The fact that today this is a possibility is an aberration and I believe it is my responsibility to make sure it doesn’t happen. One of the ways to do this would be civil rehabilitation, and as it seems most creditors agree with this, I am doing my best to help make it happen. I do not want to become instantly rich. I do not ask for forgiveness. I just want to see this end as soon as possible with everyone receiving their share of what they had on MtGox so everyone, myself included, can get some closure.
I’m an engineer at heart. I want to build things. I like seeing what I build being useful, and people being happy using what I build. My drive, from day one, has been to push the limits of what is technically possible, and this is the main reason I liked and have been involved with Bitcoin in the first place. When I took over MtGox, I never imagined things would end this way and I am forever sorry for everything that’s taken place and all the effect it had on everyone involved.
Hopefully, I can make what I’ve learned in this experience useful to the community as a whole, so there can at least be something positive in the end.
Ask me anything you like.
EDIT: With this coming to all there have been an overwhelming number of messages, questions etc. I will continue responding for a little while but probably won't be able to respond to new questions (it is starting to be late here and I've been spending the last few hours typing). Thank you very much to everyone.
submitted by MagicalTux to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A HODLer's dilemma - There are likely much fewer Bitcoin millionaires than you think

I first learned about bitcoin through a newsletter reporting a Mt Gox hack in 2011. After reading about its potential to be seriously disruptive, I still avoided making any purchases due to the limited (and shady) means of acquiring any.

But I kept my eye on it. I saw the small pattern of boom-bust cycles but there were too few at the time to consider this pattern to be normal.

I bought my first bitcoins in April 2013. I'd FOMO'ed the runup from $15 to $100 and finally bought in at $138. One of the only ways to buy bitcoin at the time was to deposit cash into some rando's bank account and cross your fingers that they'd actually send you bitcoin in return. I was lucky. They did.

Bitcoin continued to rally to $230. I'd nearly doubled my money in a few days. I finally applied for a Mt Gox account and was hooked.

It only took 3 more months to watch my initial investment be cut in half after the retrace to $66.

My point here is it took balls to invest in the chaotic sphere of crypto from a total bystander who's not a cypherpunk. I had a spare $500, my career was built on the industry Bitcoin was poised to disrupt, so I bought a few as a "hedge" in my mind.

So I hedl. The price eventually stabilized and slowly crept up to my initial buy in. I learned about coinbase and registered an account right before the second bull run of the year.

Bitcoin ran up to $1,100. I was amped. Bought in a ton more on the way up. Convinced buddies to buy in at over $1,000.

Then it tanked again. I praised friends who "called the top" and got out while I hedl.

But at that time I was a lot more convinced that long term growth was inevitable. I explained to my buddies that this is normal and that they should think of their money spent as a shitty night at the casino. They can pull it out now or just forget about it and see where it goes. They listened.

And I kept buying randomly. I set a DCA calendar event but rarely listened to it. I bought here and there with spare funds over the next few years as it traded sideways.

Overall, I spent about $15,000 over the course of 4 years. Who spends $15,000 on an unproven volatile asset with naysayers around every corner? Anyone with any financial sense would think I was insane to put that much money into the space.

Now I own 25 bitcoin and a decent number of the other top coins. I'm in a great position.

But I want you all to heed this story as a means to prepare yourselves for strong hands over the next boom/bust cycle.

I watched my $15k investment balloon to over $600k during the 2017 bull run. Then I watched my portfolio shrink $350k in like 6 weeks. Then another $150k over the following months.

It was painful. But I'm still hodling. I often wonder about how strong my hands can be when I finally see my crypto portfolio in the 8-figure range. I truly believe that Bitcoin stands to insanely disruptive and coexist on a massive level with the fiat powerhouses of today.

But how am I going to react when that valuation means I can retire at age 35? How am I going to react if it grows to unfathomable levels and the next bust sees me losing millions of dollars over a few short months?

I can't tell you. I don't know myself. I know I'll not be happy to sell out at 1MM if it climbs to 10MM in a few years. But I'll have reached a FIRE benchmark at an age that a very rare few can even dream of. It's an insane concept to be able to say you turned $15k into a million dollars. Even more so if it's multi-millions.

That's why I think a lot fewer bitcoin millionaires exist than you think. When reflecting on how much is made over such a little investment, the idea that it could go even higher simply escapes logic. Even if you truly believe that Bitcoin will cement itself as an alternative or replacement to currency/payments/store-of-value, there's still a huge risk it can all collapse at some point.

So. What would you do? How much will you be willing to put on the table once it's real? Once you literally have hundreds of thousands of dollars on the line?
submitted by anoriginstory to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Technical: A Brief History of Payment Channels: from Satoshi to Lightning Network

Who cares about political tweets from some random country's president when payment channels are a much more interesting and are actually capable of carrying value?
So let's have a short history of various payment channel techs!

Generation 0: Satoshi's Broken nSequence Channels

Because Satoshi's Vision included payment channels, except his implementation sucked so hard we had to go fix it and added RBF as a by-product.
Originally, the plan for nSequence was that mempools would replace any transaction spending certain inputs with another transaction spending the same inputs, but only if the nSequence field of the replacement was larger.
Since 0xFFFFFFFF was the highest value that nSequence could get, this would mark a transaction as "final" and not replaceable on the mempool anymore.
In fact, this "nSequence channel" I will describe is the reason why we have this weird rule about nLockTime and nSequence. nLockTime actually only works if nSequence is not 0xFFFFFFFF i.e. final. If nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF then nLockTime is ignored, because this if the "final" version of the transaction.
So what you'd do would be something like this:
  1. You go to a bar and promise the bartender to pay by the time the bar closes. Because this is the Bitcoin universe, time is measured in blockheight, so the closing time of the bar is indicated as some future blockheight.
  2. For your first drink, you'd make a transaction paying to the bartender for that drink, paying from some coins you have. The transaction has an nLockTime equal to the closing time of the bar, and a starting nSequence of 0. You hand over the transaction and the bartender hands you your drink.
  3. For your succeeding drink, you'd remake the same transaction, adding the payment for that drink to the transaction output that goes to the bartender (so that output keeps getting larger, by the amount of payment), and having an nSequence that is one higher than the previous one.
  4. Eventually you have to stop drinking. It comes down to one of two possibilities:
    • You drink until the bar closes. Since it is now the nLockTime indicated in the transaction, the bartender is able to broadcast the latest transaction and tells the bouncers to kick you out of the bar.
    • You wisely consider the state of your liver. So you re-sign the last transaction with a "final" nSequence of 0xFFFFFFFF i.e. the maximum possible value it can have. This allows the bartender to get his or her funds immediately (nLockTime is ignored if nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF), so he or she tells the bouncers to let you out of the bar.
Now that of course is a payment channel. Individual payments (purchases of alcohol, so I guess buying coffee is not in scope for payment channels). Closing is done by creating a "final" transaction that is the sum of the individual payments. Sure there's no routing and channels are unidirectional and channels have a maximum lifetime but give Satoshi a break, he was also busy inventing Bitcoin at the time.
Now if you noticed I called this kind of payment channel "broken". This is because the mempool rules are not consensus rules, and cannot be validated (nothing about the mempool can be validated onchain: I sigh every time somebody proposes "let's make block size dependent on mempool size", mempool state cannot be validated by onchain data). Fullnodes can't see all of the transactions you signed, and then validate that the final one with the maximum nSequence is the one that actually is used onchain. So you can do the below:
  1. Become friends with Jihan Wu, because he owns >51% of the mining hashrate (he totally reorged Bitcoin to reverse the Binance hack right?).
  2. Slip Jihan Wu some of the more interesting drinks you're ordering as an incentive to cooperate with you. So say you end up ordering 100 drinks, you split it with Jihan Wu and give him 50 of the drinks.
  3. When the bar closes, Jihan Wu quickly calls his mining rig and tells them to mine the version of your transaction with nSequence 0. You know, that first one where you pay for only one drink.
  4. Because fullnodes cannot validate nSequence, they'll accept even the nSequence=0 version and confirm it, immutably adding you paying for a single alcoholic drink to the blockchain.
  5. The bartender, pissed at being cheated, takes out a shotgun from under the bar and shoots at you and Jihan Wu.
  6. Jihan Wu uses his mystical chi powers (actually the combined exhaust from all of his mining rigs) to slow down the shotgun pellets, making them hit you as softly as petals drifting in the wind.
  7. The bartender mutters some words, clothes ripping apart as he or she (hard to believe it could be a she but hey) turns into a bear, ready to maul you for cheating him or her of the payment for all the 100 drinks you ordered from him or her.
  8. Steely-eyed, you stand in front of the bartender-turned-bear, daring him to touch you. You've watched Revenant, you know Leonardo di Caprio could survive a bear mauling, and if some posh actor can survive that, you know you can too. You make a pose. "Drunken troll logic attack!"
  9. I think I got sidetracked here.
Lessons learned?

Spilman Channels

Incentive-compatible time-limited unidirectional channel; or, Satoshi's Vision, Fixed (if transaction malleability hadn't been a problem, that is).
Now, we know the bartender will turn into a bear and maul you if you try to cheat the payment channel, and now that we've revealed you're good friends with Jihan Wu, the bartender will no longer accept a payment channel scheme that lets one you cooperate with a miner to cheat the bartender.
Fortunately, Jeremy Spilman proposed a better way that would not let you cheat the bartender.
First, you and the bartender perform this ritual:
  1. You get some funds and create a transaction that pays to a 2-of-2 multisig between you and the bartender. You don't broadcast this yet: you just sign it and get its txid.
  2. You create another transaction that spends the above transaction. This transaction (the "backoff") has an nLockTime equal to the closing time of the bar, plus one block. You sign it and give this backoff transaction (but not the above transaction) to the bartender.
  3. The bartender signs the backoff and gives it back to you. It is now valid since it's spending a 2-of-2 of you and the bartender, and both of you have signed the backoff transaction.
  4. Now you broadcast the first transaction onchain. You and the bartender wait for it to be deeply confirmed, then you can start ordering.
The above is probably vaguely familiar to LN users. It's the funding process of payment channels! The first transaction, the one that pays to a 2-of-2 multisig, is the funding transaction that backs the payment channel funds.
So now you start ordering in this way:
  1. For your first drink, you create a transaction spending the funding transaction output and sending the price of the drink to the bartender, with the rest returning to you.
  2. You sign the transaction and pass it to the bartender, who serves your first drink.
  3. For your succeeding drinks, you recreate the same transaction, adding the price of the new drink to the sum that goes to the bartender and reducing the money returned to you. You sign the transaction and give it to the bartender, who serves you your next drink.
  4. At the end:
    • If the bar closing time is reached, the bartender signs the latest transaction, completing the needed 2-of-2 signatures and broadcasting this to the Bitcoin network. Since the backoff transaction is the closing time + 1, it can't get used at closing time.
    • If you decide you want to leave early because your liver is crying, you just tell the bartender to go ahead and close the channel (which the bartender can do at any time by just signing and broadcasting the latest transaction: the bartender won't do that because he or she is hoping you'll stay and drink more).
    • If you ended up just hanging around the bar and never ordering, then at closing time + 1 you broadcast the backoff transaction and get your funds back in full.
Now, even if you pass 50 drinks to Jihan Wu, you can't give him the first transaction (the one which pays for only one drink) and ask him to mine it: it's spending a 2-of-2 and the copy you have only contains your own signature. You need the bartender's signature to make it valid, but he or she sure as hell isn't going to cooperate in something that would lose him or her money, so a signature from the bartender validating old state where he or she gets paid less isn't going to happen.
So, problem solved, right? Right? Okay, let's try it. So you get your funds, put them in a funding tx, get the backoff tx, confirm the funding tx...
Once the funding transaction confirms deeply, the bartender laughs uproariously. He or she summons the bouncers, who surround you menacingly.
"I'm refusing service to you," the bartender says.
"Fine," you say. "I was leaving anyway;" You smirk. "I'll get back my money with the backoff transaction, and posting about your poor service on reddit so you get negative karma, so there!"
"Not so fast," the bartender says. His or her voice chills your bones. It looks like your exploitation of the Satoshi nSequence payment channel is still fresh in his or her mind. "Look at the txid of the funding transaction that got confirmed."
"What about it?" you ask nonchalantly, as you flip open your desktop computer and open a reputable blockchain explorer.
What you see shocks you.
"What the --- the txid is different! You--- you changed my signature?? But how? I put the only copy of my private key in a sealed envelope in a cast-iron box inside a safe buried in the Gobi desert protected by a clan of nomads who have dedicated their lives and their childrens' lives to keeping my private key safe in perpetuity!"
"Didn't you know?" the bartender asks. "The components of the signature are just very large numbers. The sign of one of the signature components can be changed, from positive to negative, or negative to positive, and the signature will remain valid. Anyone can do that, even if they don't know the private key. But because Bitcoin includes the signatures in the transaction when it's generating the txid, this little change also changes the txid." He or she chuckles. "They say they'll fix it by separating the signatures from the transaction body. They're saying that these kinds of signature malleability won't affect transaction ids anymore after they do this, but I bet I can get my good friend Jihan Wu to delay this 'SepSig' plan for a good while yet. Friendly guy, this Jihan Wu, it turns out all I had to do was slip him 51 drinks and he was willing to mine a tx with the signature signs flipped." His or her grin widens. "I'm afraid your backoff transaction won't work anymore, since it spends a txid that is not existent and will never be confirmed. So here's the deal. You pay me 99% of the funds in the funding transaction, in exchange for me signing the transaction that spends with the txid that you see onchain. Refuse, and you lose 100% of the funds and every other HODLer, including me, benefits from the reduction in coin supply. Accept, and you get to keep 1%. I lose nothing if you refuse, so I won't care if you do, but consider the difference of getting zilch vs. getting 1% of your funds." His or her eyes glow. "GENUFLECT RIGHT NOW."
Lesson learned?

CLTV-protected Spilman Channels

Using CLTV for the backoff branch.
This variation is simply Spilman channels, but with the backoff transaction replaced with a backoff branch in the SCRIPT you pay to. It only became possible after OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY (CLTV) was enabled in 2015.
Now as we saw in the Spilman Channels discussion, transaction malleability means that any pre-signed offchain transaction can easily be invalidated by flipping the sign of the signature of the funding transaction while the funding transaction is not yet confirmed.
This can be avoided by simply putting any special requirements into an explicit branch of the Bitcoin SCRIPT. Now, the backoff branch is supposed to create a maximum lifetime for the payment channel, and prior to the introduction of OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY this could only be done by having a pre-signed nLockTime transaction.
With CLTV, however, we can now make the branches explicit in the SCRIPT that the funding transaction pays to.
Instead of paying to a 2-of-2 in order to set up the funding transaction, you pay to a SCRIPT which is basically "2-of-2, OR this singlesig after a specified lock time".
With this, there is no backoff transaction that is pre-signed and which refers to a specific txid. Instead, you can create the backoff transaction later, using whatever txid the funding transaction ends up being confirmed under. Since the funding transaction is immutable once confirmed, it is no longer possible to change the txid afterwards.

Todd Micropayment Networks

The old hub-spoke model (that isn't how LN today actually works).
One of the more direct predecessors of the Lightning Network was the hub-spoke model discussed by Peter Todd. In this model, instead of payers directly having channels to payees, payers and payees connect to a central hub server. This allows any payer to pay any payee, using the same channel for every payee on the hub. Similarly, this allows any payee to receive from any payer, using the same channel.
Remember from the above Spilman example? When you open a channel to the bartender, you have to wait around for the funding tx to confirm. This will take an hour at best. Now consider that you have to make channels for everyone you want to pay to. That's not very scalable.
So the Todd hub-spoke model has a central "clearing house" that transport money from payers to payees. The "Moonbeam" project takes this model. Of course, this reveals to the hub who the payer and payee are, and thus the hub can potentially censor transactions. Generally, though, it was considered that a hub would more efficiently censor by just not maintaining a channel with the payer or payee that it wants to censor (since the money it owned in the channel would just be locked uselessly if the hub won't process payments to/from the censored user).
In any case, the ability of the central hub to monitor payments means that it can surveill the payer and payee, and then sell this private transactional data to third parties. This loss of privacy would be intolerable today.
Peter Todd also proposed that there might be multiple hubs that could transport funds to each other on behalf of their users, providing somewhat better privacy.
Another point of note is that at the time such networks were proposed, only unidirectional (Spilman) channels were available. Thus, while one could be a payer, or payee, you would have to use separate channels for your income versus for your spending. Worse, if you wanted to transfer money from your income channel to your spending channel, you had to close both and reshuffle the money between them, both onchain activities.

Poon-Dryja Lightning Network

Bidirectional two-participant channels.
The Poon-Dryja channel mechanism has two important properties:
Both the original Satoshi and the two Spilman variants are unidirectional: there is a payer and a payee, and if the payee wants to do a refund, or wants to pay for a different service or product the payer is providing, then they can't use the same unidirectional channel.
The Poon-Dryjam mechanism allows channels, however, to be bidirectional instead: you are not a payer or a payee on the channel, you can receive or send at any time as long as both you and the channel counterparty are online.
Further, unlike either of the Spilman variants, there is no time limit for the lifetime of a channel. Instead, you can keep the channel open for as long as you want.
Both properties, together, form a very powerful scaling property that I believe most people have not appreciated. With unidirectional channels, as mentioned before, if you both earn and spend over the same network of payment channels, you would have separate channels for earning and spending. You would then need to perform onchain operations to "reverse" the directions of your channels periodically. Secondly, since Spilman channels have a fixed lifetime, even if you never used either channel, you would have to periodically "refresh" it by closing it and reopening.
With bidirectional, indefinite-lifetime channels, you may instead open some channels when you first begin managing your own money, then close them only after your lawyers have executed your last will and testament on how the money in your channels get divided up to your heirs: that's just two onchain transactions in your entire lifetime. That is the potentially very powerful scaling property that bidirectional, indefinite-lifetime channels allow.
I won't discuss the transaction structure needed for Poon-Dryja bidirectional channels --- it's complicated and you can easily get explanations with cute graphics elsewhere.
There is a weakness of Poon-Dryja that people tend to gloss over (because it was fixed very well by RustyReddit):
Another thing I want to emphasize is that while the Lightning Network paper and many of the earlier presentations developed from the old Peter Todd hub-and-spoke model, the modern Lightning Network takes the logical conclusion of removing a strict separation between "hubs" and "spokes". Any node on the Lightning Network can very well work as a hub for any other node. Thus, while you might operate as "mostly a payer", "mostly a forwarding node", "mostly a payee", you still end up being at least partially a forwarding node ("hub") on the network, at least part of the time. This greatly reduces the problems of privacy inherent in having only a few hub nodes: forwarding nodes cannot get significantly useful data from the payments passing through them, because the distance between the payer and the payee can be so large that it would be likely that the ultimate payer and the ultimate payee could be anyone on the Lightning Network.
Lessons learned?

Future

After LN, there's also the Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels (DMC). This post is long enough as-is, LOL. But for now, it uses a novel "decrementing nSequence channel", using the new relative-timelock semantics of nSequence (not the broken one originally by Satoshi). It actually uses multiple such "decrementing nSequence" constructs, terminating in a pair of Spilman channels, one in both directions (thus "duplex"). Maybe I'll discuss it some other time.
The realization that channel constructions could actually hold more channel constructions inside them (the way the Decker-Wattenhofer puts a pair of Spilman channels inside a series of "decrementing nSequence channels") lead to the further thought behind Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer channel factories. Basically, you could host multiple two-participant channel constructs inside a larger multiparticipant "channel" construct (i.e. host multiple channels inside a factory).
Further, we have the Decker-Russell-Osuntokun or "eltoo" construction. I'd argue that this is "nSequence done right". I'll write more about this later, because this post is long enough.
Lessons learned?
submitted by almkglor to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The biggest cryptocurrency thefts in the last 10 years

In this article, we will try to remember all the major theft of cryptocurrencies over the past 10 years.
1. Bitstamp $5.3 mln (BTC), January 4th, 2015
On January 4, 2015, the operational hot wallet of Bitstamp announced that it was hacked by an anonymous hacker and 19,000 Bitcoins (worth of $5 million) were lost.
The initiation of the attack fell on November 4, 2014. Then Damian Merlak, the CTO of the exchange, was offered free tickets to punk rock festival Punk Rock Holiday 2015 via Skype, knowing that Merlak is interested in such music and he plays in the band. To receive the tickets, he was asked to fill out a participant questionnaire by sending a file named “Punk Rock Holiday 2015 TICKET Form1.doc”. This file contained the VBA script. By opening the file, he downloaded the malware on his computer. Although Merlak did not suspect wrong and has opened the "application form", to any critical consequences, this did not open access to the funds of exchange.
The attackers, however, did not give up. The attack continued for five weeks, during which hackers presented themselves as journalists, then headhunters.
Finally, the attackers were lucky. On December 11, 2014, the infected word document was opened on his machine by Bitstamp system administrator Luka Kodric, who had access to the exchange wallet. The file came to the victim by email, allegedly on behalf of an employee of the Association for computer science, although in fact, as the investigation showed, the traces of the file lead deep into Tor. Hackers were not limited to just one letter. Skype attacker pretending to be an employee of the Association for computing machinery, convinced that his Frame though to make international honor society, which required some paperwork. Kodric believed.
By installing a Trojan on Kodriс's computer hackers were able to obtain direct access to the hot wallet of the exchange. The logs show that the attacker, under the account of Kodric, gained access to the server LNXSRVBTC, where he kept the wallet file.dat, and the DORNATA server where the password was stored. Then the servers were redirected to a certain IP address that belongs to one of the providers of Germany.
There are still no official reports of arrests in this case. Obviously, the case is complicated by the fact that the hackers are outside the UK, and the investigation has to cooperate with law enforcement agencies in other countries.
2. GateHub $9.5 mln (XRP), June 1th, 2019
Hackers have compromised nearly 100 XRP Ledger wallets on cryptocurrency wallet service GateHub. The incident was reported by GateHub in a preliminary statement on June 6.
XRP enthusiast Thomas Silkjær, who first noticed the suspicious activity, estimates that the hackers have stolen nearly $10 million worth of cryptocurrency (23,200,000 XRP), $5.5 million (13,100,000 XRP) of which has already been laundered through exchanges and mixer services.
GateHub notes that it is still conducting an investigation and therefore cannot publish any official findings. Also, GateHub advises victims to make complaints to the relevant authorities of their jurisdiction.
3. Tether, $30.9 mln (USDT), November 19th, 2017
Tether created a digital currency called "US tokens" (USDT) — they could be used to trade real goods using Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ether. By depositing $1 in Tether, the user received 1 USD, which can be converted back into fiat. On November 19, 2017, the attacker gained access to the main Tether wallet and withdrew $ 30.9 million in tokens. For the transaction, he used a Bitcoin address, which means that it was irreversible.
To fix the situation, Tether took action by which the hacker was unable to withdraw the stolen money to fiat or Bitcoin, but the panic led to a decrease in the value of Bitcoin.
4. Ethereum, $31 mln (ETH), July 20th, 2017
On July 20, 2017, the hacker transferred 153,037 Ethers to $31 million from three very large wallets owned by SwarmCity, Edgeless Casino and Eternity. Unknown fraudster managed to change the ownership of wallets, taking advantage of the vulnerability with multiple signatures.
First, the theft was noticed by the developers of SwarmCity.
Further events deserve a place in history: "white hackers" returned the stolen funds, and then protected other compromised accounts. They acted in the same way as criminals, who stole funds from vulnerable wallets — just not for themselves. And it all happened in less than a day.
5. Dao (Decentralized Autonomous Organization) $70 mln (ETH), June 18th, 2016
On June 18, 2016, members of the Ethereum community noticed that funds were being drained from the DAO and the overall ETH balance of the smart contract was going down. A total of 3.6 million Ether (worth around $70 million at the time) was drained by the hacker in the first few hours. The attack was possible because of an exploit found in the splitting function. The attackes withdrew Ether from the DAO smart contract multiple times using the same DAO Tokens. This was possible due to what is known as a recursive call exploit.
In this exploit, the attacker was able to "ask" the smart contract (DAO) to give the Ether back multiple times before the smart contract could update its own balance. There were two main faults that made this possible: the fact that when the DAO smart contract was created the coders did not take into account the possibility of a recursive call, and the fact that the smart contract first sent the ETH funds and then updated the internal token balance.
It's important to understand that this bug did not come from Ethereum itself, but from this one application that was built on Ethereum. The code written for the DAO had multiple bugs, and the recursive call exploit was one of them. Another way to look at this situation is to compare Ethereum to the Internet and any application based on Ethereum to a website: if a website is not working, it doesn't mean that the Internet is not working, it simply means that one website has a problem.
The hacker stopped draining the DAO for unknown reasons, even though they could have continued to do so.
The Ethereum community and team quickly took control of the situation and presented multiple proposals to deal with the exploit. In order to prevent the hacker from cashing in the Ether from his child DAO after the standard 28 days, a soft-fork was voted on and came very close to being introduced. A few hours before it was set to be released, a few members of the community found a bug with the implementation that opened a denial-of-service attack vector. This soft fork was designed to blacklist all the transactions made from the DAO.
6. NiceHash, 4736.42 (BTC), December 6th, 2017
NiceHash is a Slovenian cryptocurrency hash power broker with integrated marketplace that connects sellers of hashing power (miners) with buyers of hashing power using the sharing economy approach.
On December 6, 2017, the company's servers became the target of attack. At first, Reddit users reported that they could not access their funds and make transactions — when they tried to log in, they were shown a message about a service interruption. In the end, it became known that the service had undergone a major cyberattack and 4736,42 Bitcoins disappeared without a trace.
Despite heavy losses, NiceHash was able to continue working, but CEO and founder Marco Koval resigned, giving way to a new team. The company managed to maintain the trust of investors and began to strengthen the protection of its systems.
7. Mt.Gox, 850000 (BTC), June 19th, 2011
The Hacking Of Mt.Gox was one of the biggest Bitcoin thefts in history. It was the work of highly professional hackers using complex vulnerabilities.
A hacker (or a group of hackers) allegedly gained access to a computer owned by one of the auditors and used a security vulnerability to access Mt.Gox servers, then changed the nominal value of Bitcoin to 1 cent per coin.
Then they brought out about 2000 BTC. Some customers, without knowing it, conducted transactions at this low price, a total of 650 BTC, and despite the fact that the hacking hit the headlines around the world, no Bitcoin could be returned.
To increase investor confidence, the company has compensated all of the stolen coins, placed most of the remaining funds in offline storage, and the next couple of years was considered the most reliable Bitcoin exchanger in the world.
However, it was only an illusion of reliability.
The problems of the organization were much more serious, and the management probably did not even know about them.
CEO of Mt.Gox, Mark Karpeles, was originally a developer, but over time he stopped delving into technical details, basking in the rays of glory — because he created the world's largest platform for cryptocurrency exchange. At that time Mt.Gox handled over 70% of all Bitcoin transactions.
And, of course, there were those who wanted to take advantage of the technological weakness of the service. At some point, hackers made it so that Bitcoins could be bought at any price, and within minutes millions of dollars worth of coins were sold — mostly for pennies. World prices for Bitcoin stabilized in a few minutes, but it was too late.
As a result, Mt.Gox lost about 850,000 Bitcoins. The exchange had to declare bankruptcy, hundreds of thousands of people lost money, and the Japanese authorities arrested CEO Mark Karpeles for fraud. He pleaded not guilty and was subsequently released. In 2014, the authorities restored some of the Bitcoins remaining at the old addresses, but did not transfer them to the exchange, and created a trust to compensate for the losses of creditors.
8. Coincheck, $530 mln, January 26th, 2018
The sum was astonishing, and even surpassed the infamous Mt.Gox hack.
While Mt.Gox shortly filed for bankruptcy following the hack, Coincheck has surprisingly remained in business and was even recently approved as a licensed exchange by Japan’s Financial Services (FSA).
Coincheck was founded in 2014 in Japan and was one of the most popular cryptocurrency exchanges in the country. Offering a wide variety of digital assets including Bitcoin, Ether, LISK, and NEM, Coincheck was an emerging exchange that joined the Japan Blockchain Association.
Since Coincheck was founded it 2014, it was incidentally not subject to new exchange registration requirements with Japan’s FSA — who rolled out a framework after Mt. Gox –, and eventually was a contributing factor to its poor security standards that led to the hack.
On January 26th, 2018, Coincheck posted on their blog detailing that they were restricting NEM deposits and withdrawals, along with most other methods for buying or selling cryptocurrencies on the platform. Speculation arose that the exchange had been hacked, and the NEM developers issued a statement saying they were unaware of any technical glitches in the NEM protocol and any issues were a result of the exchange’s security.
Coincheck subsequently held a high-profile conference where they confirmed that hackers had absconded with 500 million NEM tokens that were then distributed to 19 different addresses on the network. Totaling roughly $530 million at the time — NEM was hovering around $1 then — the Coincheck hack was considered the largest theft in the industry’s history.
Coincheck was compelled to reveal some embarrassing details about their exchange’s security, mentioning how they stored all of the NEM in a single hot wallet and did not use the NEM multisignature contract security recommended by the developers.
Simultaneously, the NEM developers team had tagged all of the NEM stolen in the hack with a message identifying the funds as stolen so that other exchanges would not accept them. However, NEM announced they were ending their hunt for the stolen NEM for unspecified reasons several months later, and speculation persisted that hackers were close to cashing out the stolen funds on the dark web.
Mainstream media covered the hack extensively and compared it to similar failures by cryptocurrency exchanges in the past to meet adequate security standards. At the time, most media coverage of cryptocurrencies was centered on their obscure nature, dramatic volatility, and lack of security. Coincheck’s hack fueled that narrative considerably as the stolen sum was eye-popping and the cryptocurrency used — NEM — was unknown to most in the mainstream.
NEM depreciated rapidly following the hack, and the price fell even more throughout 2018, in line with the extended bear market in the broader industry. Currently, NEM is trading at approximately $0.07, a precipitous fall from ATH over $1.60 in early January.
The extent of the Coincheck hack was rivaled by only a few other hacks, notably the Mt.Gox hack. While nominally Coincheck is the largest hack in the industry’s history, the effects of Mt.Gox were significantly more impactful since the stolen funds consisted only of Bitcoin and caused a sustained market correction as well as an ongoing controversy with the stolen funds and founder. Moreover, Mt.Gox squandered 6% of the overall Bitcoin circulation at the time in a market that was much less mature than it is today.
Despite the fallout, Coincheck is now fully operational and registered with Japan’s FSA.
As practice shows, people make mistakes and these mistakes can cost a lot. Especially, when we talk about mad cryptoworld. Be careful and keep your private keys in a safe place.
submitted by SwapSpace_co to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Bitcoin price looping at Mt. Gox. Today in Bitcoin (2017-07-26) - Mt. Gox Hack Solved? BTC-E Down, Admin Arrested Mt. Gox to Blame for the Recent Bitcoin CRASH?!? Is $1,800 the Next Target? Facebook Blockchain MtGox Bitcoins to BTC e Bitcoins in 50 seconds - YouTube BITCOIN PRICE BREAKOUT! $20k possible? MT Gox Bitcoin ...

Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash amounts will be paid to crypto exchanges. Other cryptocurrencies will be converted to fiat. Mt. Gox was once the biggest Bitcoin exchange. By 2014, it was handling more than 70% of global Bitcoin trading volume. It closed down in February 2014 after suffering an extended hack of 650,000 Bitcoin—worth $4.3 billion today. Bitcoin’s price is $13,112.09 BTC/USD exchange rate today. The real-time BTC market cap of $242.7 Billion currently ranks #1 with a chart dominance at 62.37%, daily trading volume of $4.65 Billion and live coin value change of BTC-0.29 in the last 24 hours.. Bitcoin Price: Live BTC/USD Charts, History Analysis Updates and Real-Time Coin Market Value Data Mt. Gox said on Friday it found 200,000 "forgotten" bitcoins on March 7, a week after the Tokyo-based digital currency exchange filed for bankruptcy protection, saying it lost nearly all the ... This answer, however, was not enough for MtGox users, many of whom had been waiting weeks to have withdrawals completed. On Sunday, after much criticism, MtGox CEO Mark Karpeles stepped down from the board of the Bitcoin Foundation, a nonprofit group that advocated the use of Bitcoin and its technology. The following day, MtGox vanished into thin air. Today, we are discussing the most iconic cryptocurrency exchange hack: the infamous Mt. Gox hack. Mt. Gox was the most renowned cryptocurrency exchange in the early days, having been founded in 2010. The exchange handled over 70% of all Bitcoin transactions in the world at its time.

[index] [27076] [31046] [29554] [2304] [41876] [15928] [12534] [49192] [5943] [21780]

Bitcoin price looping at Mt. Gox.

MtGox Bitcoins to BTC Bitcoins in 50 seconds BITCOIN PRICE , BITCOIN FUTURE in doubt http://youtu.be/eO-yrpQpIT8 What is NAMECOIN BITCOIN'S First Fork http:/... Mt Gox still haunts us and is contributing to the panic sell-off happening in the market right now. Mix that with fear and uncertainty about what happens next for Bitcoin and you have the perfect ... I also look at the bitcoin news and crypto news. Coingeek is having an event in london with craig wright speaking for bitcoin SV, and MT Gox receive anew settlement offer for their stolen bitcoins ... Donate Bitcoin: 1NX6ijFGErktMGNYUHayD5iHDcZSFHdAwe Be a Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/madbitcoins Tone Vays Market Analysis LIVE: https://www.youtube.com/... BITCOIN PRICE , BITCOIN FUTURE in doubt http://youtu.be/eO-yrpQpIT8 What is NAMECOIN BITCOIN'S First Fork http://youtu.be/oBkhPhu3_B4 Test Scanning Stainless...

#