The Promise of Bitcoin Micropayments: Corporations and ...

It is hoped that Earthcoin will bring new opportunities to the global village economy under the influence of the new crown virus, and the Earthcoin EAC blockchain will build a new global village.

It is hoped that Earthcoin Earthcoin will bring new opportunities to the global village economy under the influence of the new crown virus, and the Earthcoin EAC blockchain will build a new global village.
Everyone becomes a member of the global village via the Internet, but the real world is divided into many countries and regions. National and regional laws, currencies are inconsistent. The advent of blockchain can build a global village.
1: Global Village, EarthCoin
A word that the Global Village heard a long time ago seems to be a bit old now. The rapid development of modern science and technology has reduced the space-time distance on the earth, and international communication has become increasingly frequent and convenient, so the entire earth is like a small village in a vast universe. The global village in the Internet era is imperfect, because only the rapid transmission of information, and other aspects are deeply affected by the real world.
Earth's development of the digital economy is inseparable from Earth Coin EAC! EAC can help users to pay instantly to anyone on the planet. Earthcoin is a global decentralized payment network and digital currency that calculates the value of labor and quantifies the resources of the earth. Inspired by Bitcoin. Earthcoin can perform fast transactions with little or no fees. No login, registration or hidden fees are required. Users receive Earthcoin or send Earthcoin from any Earthcoin address in the world within seconds. Earthcoin uses P2P technology, and there is no central management agency; the network collectively manages transactions and issues Earthcoin. Earthcoin is also open source. Its design is public participation. No one can own or control Earthcoin. It is committed to sustainable and fair development. It calculates labor value and quantifies earth resources. Every earth person can participate.
2: The current global village
In reality, everyone's connection is broken. You have to use your own currency, you have to abide by your country's laws and regulations, and you have to follow a local law to use the local currency when you go to an area. Many things are inefficient because of this split. For example, bank cards: everyone has a lot of bank cards. There is nothing necessary. How many cards are wasteful. If you want to transfer money, the bank is different. If you want to transfer money from two different countries, you have to go through A complex network is very inefficient. Earthcoin is a global decentralized payment network and digital currency that calculates the value of labor and quantifies the resources of the earth. Can completely solve these problems.
3: If the blockchain changes the global village
The above problem is the reason why there is no strong center. If there is only one country and a bank is so big, things can be very efficient. But it is impossible. The United Nations and the World Bank can be political centers and financial centers by name, but the actual situation is not. The actual power is poor. And it may not be a good thing to create such a strong center, Earth Empire? The emergence of the blockchain has created a new possibility without a center! A lot of things need to be done by the strong center, but they are done just as well by going to the center. 1. In the past you needed the government to prove who you are, your mother is your mother, now the blockchain can. 2. In the past, you needed to use different currencies in different countries, and now Bitcoin Geocoin is accepted in any country, regardless of exchange rates.
The short confirmation time of the Earthcoin EAC block gives it infinite potential to extend to payment applications.
Everyone knows that Bitcoin BTC is the most robust and secure currency in the block. Even a few years ago, many investors around the world have used it as a tool for their own wealth transfer and storage. In the field of value storage, its credit is unmatched, which is the fundamental reason for its market value of 1.4 trillion. However, in the global micropayment application, Bitcoin BTC requires 10 minutes for each block confirmation, and 6 blocks can ensure accurate transactions. If you are shopping in the supermarket or participating in remittances, fundraising, etc., you only pay a sum of money. Wait for 10-60 minutes, it will definitely make people restless, don't even think about doing anything.
Earth Coin EAC has a block time of 60 seconds, and 5 blocks can confirm the transaction. Although there is no Alipay and WeChat Express supported by a centralized database, you have realized a point-to-point seamless link payment globally. , Waiting for confirmation within a few minutes is completely acceptable!
At present, the United States and Europe have begun to encircle China's Alipay and WeChat in terms of financial payment, because it is quickly eating away the cake of the cross-border payment of US dollars and euros in the circulation between Southeast Asia and Europe. Zuckerberg, knowing that his Lbria is equivalent to QQ currency ten years ago, but the US government has almost allowed it [to resist the pressure brought by Chinese payments, but if it is to be issued, it will become the Federal Reserve. And the US dollar's grave diggers were ultimately rejected by Congress], they are all centralized in nature, just like Huawei, no matter how good the product quality is, and where the service is in place, but as long as Huawei is found as a centralized organization, it is because of geopolitics between countries. And under economic coercion, bans are banned. But with a payment system developed using pure POW digital currency with a short confirmation time, no government can start, and people in Asia, Europe, Africa and the United States will long to use them to complete transnational payments in the context of globalization.
Four: Summary
This article triggered my thinking on the blockchain. What is the purpose of decentralization and why do many things go to the center! !! !! In a small area, a strong center is enough to accomplish many things efficiently, but when there is no strong center and it is difficult to exist globally, many simple things are very complicated. 1. Online transfer, if there is Alipay, then it will be a few seconds, but if a Chinese person uses Alipay to transfer to an overseas PayPal account, it is a massive project. After a bunch of banks, exchange rates fluctuated and various fees were charged. Blockchain can transfer money in a few minutes like Alipay. The short confirmation time of the Earthcoin EAC block makes it have endless potential to extend to payment applications. 2. Self-certification, you have to prove who you are, you need proof of where you are registered, you ca n’t prove who you are, you ca n’t prove it, but the district Blockchaining your private key can prove who you are. 3. More secure, Alipay transfer is a strong center, which is theoretically very safe, but it is a black box for you. If something goes wrong, if something goes wrong, how do you prove that you transferred, everything depends on the credit of Alipay, but the blockchain depends on It is code, and everyone can view the public code, which is more credible. Blockchain has many limitations. Without a strong center, there is no strong center, but in many cases, there is no strong center, and then a blockchain is necessary. I hope Earthcoin brings new opportunities to the global village economy under the influence of the new crown virus! (Source network)
submitted by zongyongge to Earthcoin [link] [comments]

A Breakdown of the 4 Leading Financial Cryptocurrencies

This post is written by a friend of mine who works in the financial services industry. I’m posting it for him because he doesn’t have a Reddit account:
I work in the financial services industry myself, and I decided it might be beneficial to provide my opinion on some of the leading financial cryptos based off their website/white papers/news I've read. Today I'll be covering the 4 leading financial cryptos in my opinion: XRP, REQ, OMG, XLM.
Market Cap & Ranking Graph
Ripple (XRP)
  1. Description: Cross border transactions between banks and payment providers
  2. Slogan: “Enterprise blockchain solutions for global payments”
  3. Potential Market Size: $155 trillion/year cross border transactions (McKinsey Global Payments Industry Study)
  4. Primary Focus: Ripple has had huge success lately given its focus on satisfying and providing cross-border payment services for big banks, who have driven up the price of Ripple. It currently has 100+ customers and has the most enterprise traction of the four coins. One big risk is the 55 billiion XRP put into an escrow out of a max 100 billion XRP. Once these escrows expire, there is always the risk of the company flooding the market with XRP. That being said, while Ripple is much further ahead than the other 3 coins, I fear that banks will license Ripple’s blockchain that is centrally governed without intended usage of their token.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ripple (payment protocol)
  6. Market Cap: ~$77B
Request Network (REQ)
  1. Description: A decentralized network for payment requests
  2. Slogan: “The Future of Commerce”
  3. Potential Market Size: $1,825 trillion/year on the SWIFT network that Request Network can capture on its platform (Extrapolated using daily historicals from U.S. Dept. of Treasury)
  4. Primary Focus: Request Network, also known as “Paypal 2.0” is a Y-Combinator-backed project created by the founders of Moneytis. Request Network has the biggest opportunity of the four. They are building out the infrastructure for payments and accounting/auditing between both businesses and consumers. Request will be more secure (blockchain tech), intelligent (smart contracts and IoT) and universal (supports all currencies both Fiat and cryptocurrencies) than Paypal. A key differentiator of Request is its usage of “token burning” during transactions, which intrinsically increases the value of the remaining REQ coins. In addition, Request is heavily focused on reputation management and helping accountants and auditors easily review transactions at extremely low costs. My concern here is that they are the earliest stage project of the four and also the most ambitious project, soon to be released on Mainnet. That being said, their team has executed ahead of planned timelines and I believe they seem to have the right expertise to get the job done.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ethereum
  6. Market Cap: ~$480M (Market cap is ~1/194 the size of Paypal at current valuation)
  7. Paypal Market Cap for comparison: ~$97B
OmiseGo (OMG)
  1. Description: Advanced e-wallet and payment platform
  2. Slogan: “Unbank the Banked with Ethereum.”
  3. Potential Market Size: N/A (market not clearly defined)
  4. Primary Focus: Many people around the world can’t get a credit card or pay for items online because geographically there are no banks around or their credit score is too low to receive financial services. OmiseGo looks to change that by enabling everyone in especially in developing countries to create an e-wallet that enables this underserved population the ability to cash in and cash out without a bank account at low costs. They have an enormous presence in Asia, and their vision is to look like the bank of the future. My concerns here are adoption outside of the Asian countries given the difficulty of scaling across geographies as well as a tough name to pronounce resulting in the necessity for a potential re-branding, but a very solid project with a fair amount of adoption nevertheless.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ethereum
  6. Market Cap: ~$2.5B
OmiseGo Edit:
Some additional points to note are its recent acquisition of Paysbuy (large payment service provider in Thailand) and partnerships with McDonald's Thailand and Alipay. It's often thought REQ and OMG are quite similar which they are, but their focus is different. OMG is firstly focused on banking and e-wallet services, while REQ is currently more focused on the actual payment request process and the accounting behind it, which you'll realize are quite different despite both moving in the same direction.
Stellar (XLM)
  1. Description: Cross border currency transfers between developing countries
  2. Slogan: “Move Money Across Borders Quickly, Reliably, And For Fractions Of A Penny”
  3. Potential Market Size: N/A (market not clearly defined)
  4. Primary Focus: Stellar competes directly with Ripple at different ends of the market. Stellar is a great project focused on providing low-cost financial services for lower classed individuals, whereas Ripple is focused on profit generation and founded by ex-bankers. Stellar differentiates itself through solutions targeted around micropayments, mobile banking and services for the underbanked (similar to OmiseGo). The thing I like about Stellar is that structurally it is set-up as a non-profit and something established for the people to easily exchange money between one another. I think the market is large enough to support multiple competitors, but it is important to note that they compete with Ripple in cross-border transactions and OmiseGo in services to the underbanked.
  5. Architecture: Built on Stellar (payment network)
  6. Market Cap: ~$11.7B
Stellar Edit:
Expanding on Stellar based off comments, let's clarify that Stellar is indeed founded by one of the co-founders of Ripple, which makes them somewhat similar. But wanted to key in on a few more points that make XLM unique: no mining with circulating supply of 100 billion lumens from the start @ 1% inflation rate and a recent partnership with IBM for cross-border payments as a bridge currency. Finally it's important to look at their Stellar Development Foundation, which controls the distribution of Lumens. Distribution is split as follows: 50% through Direct Sign-up Program, 25% through Partnership Program, 20% through Bitcoin program and 5% held by the foundation to support operations. Note this effect is huge because they can also unleash a large amount of lumens, but they do have a more defined mandate for dilution than Ripple.
Read more about it here: https://www.stellar.org/about/mandate/
Disclaimer and Final Words:
I am a holder of all four coins, but from a returns standpoint, I am most bullish on Request Network given it has the largest market size, smallest market cap and an incredible team. But from a risk standpoint, Ripple is the lowest risk coin to hold given its widespread adoption and use across numerous banks that are displayed on their website. Honorable mention for both Stellar and OmiseGo, which are superb projects that will still succeed. Remember that the financial market is extremely deep with trillions of dollars in transactions moved every day, so there is ample room for all four of these coins to find their niche whether it is in a certain region of the world or in certain product types (i.e. micropayments). All in all, you can’t go wrong holding a portfolio of these four coins because each one of these cryptocurrencies are going to kill it in 2018!
 
Sources:
  1. https://ripple.com/
  2. https://omisego.network/
  3. https://request.network/#/
  4. https://www.stellar.org/
  5. https://coinmarketcap.com/
submitted by brianjly to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

[Weekly Report] Micropayments Change the Future of Blockchain

[Weekly Report] Micropayments Change the Future of Blockchain
Dear friends of LivesOne,
In the previous weekly report, we mentioned that LivesOne would focus on building a payment platform, which is our major development direction. After a period of research, we recommend BSV's micro-payment. We're all familiar with payments, but what exactly is micropayment? Let's learn about it today.
What is micropayment?
Micropayment is compared with the existing third-party payment system. At present, PayPal is the world's largest third-party payment provider, and its "micro payment" service charges 5% plus 5 cents for each transaction. If it's a $1 deal, PayPal charges a 10% commission.
At present, PayPal as an American company has almost monopolized the third-party payment market except China. Alipay and WeChat have monopolized the Chinese market, but their status is not unbreakable. If you are a Chinese businessman, the goods you sell may be bought by foreigners, while Alipay and WeChat only connect the domestic consumers. Will you refuse to add a collection options? If you are a Chinese consumer and want to buy goods only sold by foreign businesses, will you refuse to install an additional payment option? Under the general trend of global commodity connectivity, the market scale of cross-border payment in China has been growing steadily year by year.
https://preview.redd.it/r5jb1fi2nb841.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=66a00e8d6e990b0969d35109271677b36fafb373
If Alipay and WeChat are do nothing, the market share will definitely decrease year by year. In contrast, because the underlying design of BSV is the original bitcoin and point-to-point, the operation cost and handling fee are far lower than PayPal. It's also a $1 deal, with BSV charging about $0.0003. This means that there is no pressure on the BSV network that PayPal cannot cover.And even if PayPal is adjusted to a lower fee than the BSV network, BSV can be adjusted accordingly, because of the relative cost advantage.
BSV opens up the situation through micropayment and circulates as a global commodity (like physical gold). Payee can choose not to convert it into legal tender and deposit it like gold. Paypal will never be able to do that without the advantage of currency exchange.
Micropayment instance of BSV
As one of the application development of BSV, Mediopay in Germany has launched a product for article reading.
https://preview.redd.it/z2eyzhu3nb841.jpg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6dd5b3022317c43747f1c7c42f6447d635c146bd
As an example, the demo on the official website of the above picture: Regardless of the national currency of the readers in the world, readers only need to pay the BSV of the same value (such as the 22 cents in the figure) to read the article.
The application is based on WordPress, the world's largest personal blog tool. Bloggers can use the app on WordPress in a few simple steps, and set the amount that readers need to pay to activate the paid reading function.
Even a transaction with a price of as little as 1 cent,you only needs to pay 3% of the handling fee to BSV miner, which may even continue to decrease in further. As an application developer (such as the Mediopay team), you can charge the author a percentage of the service fee. Taking the one-cent micropayment as an example, if 3% of the service charge is paid to BSV miner, the developer can get the service charge to 7%. The third-party payment tool represented by PayPal is only a development team, even if the team structure is complex and huge. However, there is no limit to the number of development teams based on BSV payment tools, and they are globally distributed. If you don't do it, someone else will do it.
Many knowledge payment platforms provide the function of paid reading, but they cannot be allowed to purchased only one article. This rejects the majority of readers with only mild reading needs. Micropayments precisely solve this problem. Because there is no longer bundled sale, excellent authors can stand out quickly - which in turn boosts the consumer market.
Micropayment breaks the existing business model. It is imperative for LivesOne to introduce BSV micropayment. Let's look forward to it.

Symbiosism Economy Foundation
Jan.2nd, 2020
submitted by LivesoneToken to LivesOne [link] [comments]

07-28 11:03 - 'Donating bitcoin to charity' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/ChrisPaul167418651 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 289-299min

'''
Let me show you something. One of the very first uses of bitcoin was by Wikileaks to accept donations after Paypal and Visa imposed a worldwide blockade. Their website has a 'generate new bitcoin address' button for improved privacy.
Before you sell bitcoin and donate the after-tax proceeds, consider donating your bitcoin directly to charity.
A tax-exempt public charity, sold the bitcoin without having to pay any capital gains tax. Due to these tax efficiencies, with your Giving Account, you are able to dedicate an additional dollars for charitable use. You could lessen your capital gains exposure and claim a higher tax deduction than if you sold the bitcoin and donated the after-tax proceeds.
Charity is the best way to show your support for humanity. There are many issues in this world that have to be taken care of. From hunger to natural calamities, there are numerous conditions where we need to try and make a difference. For the betterment of the human race, there are many charitable organizations set up all over the world. These organizations play a very important role in the global development as they reach out to people in the remote areas and try to solve their problems. There are certain charities that target one nation and try to bring a difference in the quality of living among its people, whereas the other organizations work in all countries for different causes. Be it supporting the girl child in India or providing books for Africa, the charitable organizations are doing their best for supplying the necessities of life to people who can’t afford it. Scroll down to have a look at the top 10 charitable organizations that accepting bitcoin donations. You can always support them in their cause by providing whatever little help you can.
"We believe in continually innovating in our work to improve the lives of children worldwide. Accepting bitcoin has allowed us to bring digital and mobile innovation to our donations."
Ettore Rosetti, Director of Social Media and Digital Marketing for Save the Children
"The Red Cross is thrilled to partner with BitPay to offer a different way for generous donors to support our humanitarian mission. This gives a new generation of supporters the opportunity to help people in need."
Jennifer Niyangoda, Executive Director of Corporate and Foundation Programs for the American Red Cross
All donations are tax-deductible as allowed by law.
Please retain all receipts for tax purposes. All donations FINAL.
I made a LIST non-profit organization that receiving bitcoin donation. GIVE A BIT HELP A LOT. Every micropayment deserves respect.
'''
Donating bitcoin to charity
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: ChrisPaul167418651
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

07-28 06:03 - 'Donating bitcoin to charity' (self.Bitcoin) by /u/ChrisPaul167418651 removed from /r/Bitcoin within 5-15min

'''
Let me show you something. One of the very first uses of bitcoin was by Wikileaks to accept donations after Paypal and Visa imposed a worldwide blockade. Their website has a 'generate new bitcoin address' button for improved privacy.
Before you sell bitcoin and donate the after-tax proceeds, consider donating your bitcoin directly to charity.
A tax-exempt public charity, sold the bitcoin without having to pay any capital gains tax. Due to these tax efficiencies, with your Giving Account, you are able to dedicate an additional dollars for charitable use. You could lessen your capital gains exposure and claim a higher tax deduction than if you sold the bitcoin and donated the after-tax proceeds.
Charity is the best way to show your support for humanity. There are many issues in this world that have to be taken care of. From hunger to natural calamities, there are numerous conditions where we need to try and make a difference. For the betterment of the human race, there are many charitable organizations set up all over the world. These organizations play a very important role in the global development as they reach out to people in the remote areas and try to solve their problems. There are certain charities that target one nation and try to bring a difference in the quality of living among its people, whereas the other organizations work in all countries for different causes. Be it supporting the girl child in India or providing books for Africa, the charitable organizations are doing their best for supplying the necessities of life to people who can’t afford it. Scroll down to have a look at the top 10 charitable organizations that accepting bitcoin donations. You can always support them in their cause by providing whatever little help you can.
"We believe in continually innovating in our work to improve the lives of children worldwide. Accepting bitcoin has allowed us to bring digital and mobile innovation to our donations." Ettore Rosetti, Director of Social Media and Digital Marketing for Save the Children
"The Red Cross is thrilled to partner with BitPay to offer a different way for generous donors to support our humanitarian mission. This gives a new generation of supporters the opportunity to help people in need." Jennifer Niyangoda, Executive Director of Corporate and Foundation Programs for the American Red Cross
All donations are tax-deductible as allowed by law. Please retain all receipts for tax purposes. All donations FINAL.
I made a LIST non-profit organization that receiving bitcoin donation. GIVE A BIT HELP A LOT. Every micropayment deserves respect.
'''
Donating bitcoin to charity
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: ChrisPaul167418651
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

I introduced Bitcoin to a room full of people and was applauded

I just wanted to share this, as it was very encouraging for me. I teach technology classes focused on small business people. In one class I take a broad look at a variety of new or up-and-coming tech, and I usually just briefly mention Bitcoin as something to keep on the radar. I consider myself a Bitcoin enthusiast, but my agenda with the class is to give them info that will be of the most value. Last week I had an expanded talk introducing Bitcoin, the blockchain, and some of the potential applications for both.
I highlighted Bitcoin as an answer to several problems. It wasn't practical to send micropayments before Bitcoin (without spending more in fees to processors, Paypal, etc.). Tips are cool, but this could be huge for content creators and entertainment websites. You might not want to pay for a subscription, but you might pay $0.10 to read an article you were really interested in.
Bitcoin also makes it easy and affordable to send money overseas. Sending money is as easy as sending an email. You don't have to know where someone lives or what their currency's exchange rate is.
Bitcoin can power the Internet of Things (IoT). Vending machines could order their own new merchandise, replacement parts, etc. Self-driving cars could pay for faster lanes, toll roads, etc. to speed up your trip (borrowed that idea from a Winklevoss talk).
I talked about the Blockchain, how Bitcoin is decentralized, and how acceptance and investment are growing rapidly.
One of the common questions I get when I mention that there will be a max of 21 million BTC: How will there be enough Bitcoins for it to be practical for millions of people to use it? I created a chart of the named Bitcoin units down to Satoshi, and I mention that if the value of 1 Bitcoin were to rise to $1 million, 1 Satoshi would be worth just a penny.
Anyway, everyone was very interested. Over half the room had never heard of Bitcoin. My Bitcoin section was the last part of my class, and when I finished I had a round of applause. I guess I ended on a good note!
I am teaching another class in a few weeks, so if anyone has anything they think is great for someone who's never heard of Bitcoin to hear, please let me know!
submitted by webChris to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I introduced Bitcoin to a room full of people and was applauded

I just wanted to share this, as it was very encouraging for me. I teach technology classes focused on small business people. In one class I take a broad look at a variety of new or up-and-coming tech, and I usually just briefly mention Bitcoin as something to keep on the radar. I consider myself a Bitcoin enthusiast, but my agenda with the class is to give them info that will be of the most value. Last week I had an expanded talk introducing Bitcoin, the blockchain, and some of the potential applications for both.
I highlighted Bitcoin as an answer to several problems. It wasn't practical to send micropayments before Bitcoin (without spending more in fees to processors, Paypal, etc.). Tips are cool, but this could be huge for content creators and entertainment websites. You might not want to pay for a subscription, but you might pay $0.10 to read an article you were really interested in.
Bitcoin also makes it easy and affordable to send money overseas. Sending money is as easy as sending an email. You don't have to know where someone lives or what their currency's exchange rate is.
Bitcoin can power the Internet of Things (IoT). Vending machines could order their own new merchandise, replacement parts, etc. Self-driving cars could pay for faster lanes, toll roads, etc. to speed up your trip (borrowed that idea from a Winklevoss talk).
I talked about the Blockchain, how Bitcoin is decentralized, and how acceptance and investment are growing rapidly.
One of the common questions I get when I mention that there will be a max of 21 million BTC: How will there be enough Bitcoins for it to be practical for millions of people to use it? I created a chart of the named Bitcoin units down to Satoshi, and I mention that if the value of 1 Bitcoin were to rise to $1 million, 1 Satoshi would be worth just a penny.
Anyway, everyone was very interested. Over half the room had never heard of Bitcoin. My Bitcoin section was the last part of my class, and when I finished I had a round of applause. I guess I ended on a good note!
I am teaching another class in a few weeks, so if anyone has anything they think is great for someone who's never heard of Bitcoin to hear, please let me know!
Source
submitted by Myrandall to copypasta [link] [comments]

What is raiden? a quick guide for new users

Just a quick guide to Raiden for newcomers. I'm not an expert so please feel free to jump in with any information I've missed or anything that isn’t correct. Cheers.
What is Raiden?
"The Raiden Network is an off-chain scaling solution for performing ERC20-compliant token transfers on the Ethereum blockchain. It is Ethereum’s version of Bitcoin’s Lightning Network, enabling near instant, low-fee, scalable, and privacy-preserving payments." 1
In plain English, Raiden lets you transfer ETH or any ERC20 token-much faster and cheaper than is currently possible.
(See 'further reading' for details on what ERC20 tokens are).
So, it makes crypto transfers faster and cheaper. Is that necessary?
Yes. Currently, the Ethereum blockchain is capable of processing around 15 transactions per second. You may see this referred to as Tx/sec. By comparison. Visa has stated that they can operate at 56,000 transactions per second. 2
During busy periods the system can become clogged and transactions can take hours. Think back to the spat of ICOs in summer 2017, or the more recent CryptoKitties craze, for examples. Vitalik Buterin, the co-founder of Ethereum, acknowledged as much in a recent blogpost:
"With the Ethereum blockchain teaching millions of transactions per day, and both Ethereum and other blockchain projects frequently reaching their full transaction capacity, the need for scaling progress is becoming more and more clear and urgent." 3
If crypto is going to contend for mainstream adoption, it needs to speed up big time. This is where Raiden comes in. You don't need to wait for any blocks to be mined. Its transfers are instant.
And cheaper?
Transfers made on the Ethereum blockchain are calculated based on the computational resource needed to make it. Whether your transfer is big or small, the fee will not be massively different as they all go through a similar process.
With Raiden, the fees are proportionate. This means everyday transactions like buying a cup of coffee will carry a much smaller fee. Even making thousands of tiny payments of just a few pennies/cents will not add up to a large fee, as it would do in the current system.
How does Raiden work?
The Raiden network operates on top of the Ethereum blockchain, but a lot of the heavy lifting takes place off-chain. Transactions take place between two parties using something called balance proofs.
Near-limitless transactions can take place simultaneously, off-chain, with two exceptions; a one-off on-chain transaction at the beginning, and another at the end. You can read all about the specifics here.
A very simplified way to think about it is to imagine a train with 100 passengers all waiting to board in one queue. At the train door the conductor takes payment, gives out change, ensures everything is in order and lets customers on one at a time. This would take a very long time.
Now imagine there are 100 machines to the side that dispense tickets. Everybody goes to get a ticket instantly, then returns to the conductor. There is still only one conductor, but he can now quickly get the passengers on the train without wasting time.
In this analogy, Ethereum is the conductor and Raiden is the ticket machines. The passengers buy their tickets (make transactions) to the side (off-chain). There is still only one conductor (Ethereum blockchain). But instead of queuing up for ages and clogging up the system, the process is sped up by performing most of the work to the side (off-chain) and everybody gets on the train (makes a transaction) much faster. The destination is the same, but the journey is quicker.
Apologies for the very unscientific analogy :)
How long until Raiden is ready to go?
Raiden was initially scheduled for launch in March 2017 but was pushed back.
Currently Raiden is still in the development phase but a limited release is coming soon. This will give Dapp developers a taste of Raiden ahead of its full release. They'll also be able to build prototypes that can interact with the Raiden Ropsten-based test network.
What is µRaiden?
µRaiden is similar to Raiden in that it allows for off-chain transactions. The micropayments that happen off-chain are free, and µRaiden is already live. However, one major difference between this and Raiden is the linear transactions. It cannot be established for many-to-many payments like Raiden can.
And what is Raidos?
Raidos, or Raiden 2.0, is still in its early stages. Instead of only dealing in ERC20 tokens, it will look to cover all types of smart contract.
So Raiden, µRaiden and Raidos are all from one company?
Yes. If you invest in Raiden tokens, you're effectively investing in all three at once.
What is the point of Raiden tokens (RDN)?
For people who want to use Raiden without running a full node - which will be the vast, vast majority - Raiden tokens will have to be bought and used.
Users who run a full node will not require Raiden tokens.
I heard that the token isn't needed, and the ICO was just a 'cash grab'...
Originally, Raiden did not plan to launch a token or hold an ICO of its own. However, the company changed tack and held an ICO which raised just shy of 110,000 ETH. 4
The crypto community, and ETH holders in particular, felt that they were being robbed of value. Those who had bought and held Ethereum would have hoped the news of Raiden would boost the price of their holdings. But with a separate token the perceived consensus was that this move took value away from ETH and into RDN, at least in the short term.
Vitalik Buterin also weighed in on Twitter, saying he wished RDN hadn't held an ICO but equally stating that he understood it was necessary:
“I wish they didn’t [hold an ICO] but I totally understand why they did and do not blame them.” 5
The way things panned out left a bitter taste for many crypto investors. But the token certainly does have a very real use.
Where can I buy Raiden tokens (RDN)?
You can currently buy RDN at a handful of exchanges:
Binance
OKEx
Huobi
Kucoin
EtherDelta
Further reading:
What are ERC20 tokens?
Raiden 101
Vitalik Buterin blog update
Sources and links:
1 https://raiden.network/101.html 2 https://mybroadband.co.za/news/banking/206742-bitcoin-and-ethereum-vs-visa-and-paypal-transactions-per-second.html 3 https://blog.ethereum.org/2018/01/02/ethereum-scalability-research-development-subsidy-programs/ 4 https://token.raiden.network/ 5 https://twitter.com/VitalikButerin/status/911300771819352064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ethnews.com%2Fvitalik-buterin-responds-to-raiden-ico
submitted by Live_Forether to raidennetwork [link] [comments]

Step Inside... We are giving away 200,000,000 Karmacoin to **EVERYONE** Get+Karma, then Give+Karma to someone else!

The Giveaway is Complete. Head on over to our new home at Karmashares to see what we're up to now!

(We're giving away 200,000,000 Karmacoin over the next few days to everyone. See the "How Do I Get Karmacoin?" section below.)
WELCOME TO KARMACOIN
What is Karmacoin?
Karmacoin is a new way to show your family, friends, and others that you appreciate them. Think of it as a "Like" button that you can take anywhere. It's a P2P currency, like Bitcoin. You can use it to share with those you care about. We call it Give+Karma, because when you do good, good comes back to you.
You can think of Karmacoin as another way to say thanks. When you Give+Karma you're sharing your experience in a community where the little things matter. Random acts of kindness, caring about what others have to say, showing appreciation, being happy, doing good things, and enjoying life. It's the little things that count. And that's why we developed Karmacoin.
We're currently expanding our cause not just around the internet but around the world. We shared a summary of our business plan and project schedule with our community so that everyone knows what we're up to. Our goal is to become the #1 way for people to reward others, and be rewarded themselves. Karmacoin can be thought of as an incentive for more people to:
Our vision is a world where hundreds of millions of people around the world use Karmacoin everyday.
How Do I Get Karmacoin?
You can get Karmacoin from others who share it, or purchasing it from a trusted exchange like MintPal using your Bitcoin. In a few days we'll be announcing an easy way to buy Karmacoin using Paypal.
Luckily, to celebrate our new main website and a new place where you can share stories about people doing good things called Karmashare, both launching on March 20, we are giving away 200,000,000 Karmacoin so you can try it out!
**Be sure to subscribe to this subreddit ** And be sure to vote on the cointips tipbot when it replies
Be sure to download the Wallet for Windows, Mac, or Linux. (We're updating the graphics so don't be alarmed! It's the correct version.) Once you've installed this, you can click on the Receive tab, highlight the first row, and click the Copy button at the bottom. This is your new Karmacoin address ("Karmaddress") you can use to receive Karmacoin. (You can also send by clicking on the Send tab and entering the recipient's Karmaddress.) We're working on an easy-to-understand video tutorial now, and will be posting that for the community.
If someone is sending you Karma you can give them your new Karmaddress and you should receive it anywhere from 15 seconds to a few minutes.
Our website will soon offer some instructions of how to get and use Karmacoin. Stay tuned...
The Karmacoin Vision
We believe that the micro-transaction economy is based on kindness, sharing, small donations, microloans, tipping, and the little things that can make life wonderful and people feel appreciated, including:
  • Online tips to other internet users who deserve a little recognition
  • Tipping helpful service people offline and online
  • Paying for your co-workers cup of coffee in the morning
  • Kids receiving small amounts of money, or even allowance
  • Being able to trade a few hours of your professional time for Karmacoin that are then donated to your favorite cause on KarmaTrade.me (coming soon)
  • Independent artists being paid more money by receiving more payments from more people
  • Paying 30% less for a song because Karmacoin makes transaction fees nearly non-existent.
  • Lending a stranger $10 worth of Karma, knowing that he's got a good reputation with others at the future Karmacoin microloan site, KarmaPay.me
  • Helping someone out with bus fare to get to their first job interview at Karmashare.me or sharing a story about how someone helped you when you needed it most
  • Being able to easily accept small payments from friends, family, co-workers, or customers
This is an untapped industry because traditional payment methods such as credit cards, bank transfers, and checks (even PayPal) make small transactions too expensive from transaction fees, or too slow to be of practical use. For example, if you wish to give 25 cents to someone in person, it's easy. But try doing it online. It becomes prohibitively expensive to the point where you'd need to send 50 cents or more just so the other person can get 25.
Further, Karmacoin can be used by:
  • Companies wanting to provide redeemable rewards to staff
  • Companies wanting to provide redeemable rewards to customers
  • School systems wanting to provide redeemable rewards to students
  • Local governments wanting to provide rewards to their citizens
  • Websites wanting to entice visitors with incentives to visit, interact, or purchase
  • Retail shops wanting to provide incentives to customers to visit the store, browse, or shop
The possibilities in this new industry, which we call the "Good" economy, are endless. Karmacoin aims to be at the forefront of the Good economy by making these micropayments easy, fast, secure, and very, very cheap for everyone involved.
Karmacoin transaction fees are so small they barely register. Here's a comparison of fees:
Credit Card Check Wire Transfer Paypal Bitcoin KARMACOIN
Cost to send 10 cents >100% >100% >100% >100% >100% 0.00%
But the above list of ways in which Karmacoin can be used only scratches the surface of what is possible. As we move towards the Internet of things there will be ways to interact with all of its little components. Each of these components potentially represents a micro-transaction. Accessing, buying, and selling content, services, and other information and a whole world of things that we are unable to think of now.
Billions of transactions performed by hundreds of millions of people each and every day. Many of these transactions fall within the domain of Karmacoin, and that is where we will take the lead in the Good economy.
That is our vision. We hope you'll join us by using, sharing, and giving Karmacoin.
Developers
Please take a look at our development and promotional bounties. We appreciate all you can do to advance Karmacoin and bring it to the next level. We all here believe in Karmacoin and hope you will too. Please help us on our journey. We promise it will be an exciting one!
Thank you to the entire Karmacoin community for being so wonderful and spreading good karma. This will be an exciting journey for us!
submitted by kosmost to Karmacoin [link] [comments]

Why I don't think there's much growth potential left

Disclaimer: Stepped in around 90 dollar, cashed out around 2600.
Currently, Bitcoin has a market cap of 45 billion dollar. Paypal, has a market cap of 63 billion dollar. It handled 115 transactions per second back in late 2014, today it handles around 150. With Bitcoin, we manage to handle 7 transactions per second right now. We're practically approaching a digital civil war over the question of doubling this transaction capacity.
We can't do what Paypal can do, but if we could at some point in the future, it would justify perhaps at most a 50% increase in value. Some might say that it can also be used as a store of value, but as a store of value Bitcoin is already bigger than the entire silver market today.
Worse, we don't really have practical added value over Paypal when it comes to most payments. Micropayments aren't going to take place on the blockchain. If I wanted to make micropayments right now, I would use an altcoin. Paypal has ease of use, no volatility issues, no serious concerns over hackers stealing your money to the degree that Bitcoin has.
This doesn't mean Bitcoin is useless. It has clear niches, most of them not legal. I know the corporate suits who have to explain at the cocktail parties and to parents in law what they do for a living want to minimalize the subversive potential of Bitcoin, but it was founded by an anonymous hacker for a reason. We use Bitcoin because we don't trust authorities. The big voices you hear talking about Bitcoin don't really mention this.
Bitcoin is used in ransomware, it's used by people who want to exchange illegal substances, it can be used by people living under autocratic regimes. Its value isn't zero. However, its value isn't realistically speaking going to be trillions of dollars either. What I hear at the moment in the media is mostly irrational hype (bitcoin will be 1 million a coin) as a replacement of the ignorant denial we heard in the past (tulip bulbs).
The most important use for Bitcoin is perhaps as a medium of exchange that enables access to other cryptocurrencies. I don't want my bank to know I bought Monero, because we all know what Monero is used for. In other words I would never buy Monero directly, I would buy Bitcoin and buy Monero with it through an exchange.
Another angle to Bitcoin that's not sufficiently discussed is its ability to store value in a place where authorities can't reach. This is mostly useful for people who have reason to fear seizure of their assets, like fraudsters and drug dealers. You want to leave something behind for your family. This is not per definition an enormous niche, but it is a relevant niche.
As a store of value, Bitcoin will never be very relevant for people who have alternative options available. The reason for that is very simple: Bitcoin is too volatile. It will always remain volatile, because the coins are so centralized in the hands of a few owners. We have a few big owners who hold hundreds of thousands of coins. You can see for yourself how little depth the order books have. If anyone were to dump his coins on the market today, we would witness a tremendous price crash. With precious metals, this is not a serious concern.
You might say that Bitcoin will become less volatile as it matures, but I don't think this is guaranteed. The reason for this is because of the recurring hacks of exchanges and the exit scams committed by darknet markets and even exchanges. These incidents place coins in the hands of a small minority of individuals. In addition, the supply of new coins is in decline. If we end up in a situation where very few of the existing Bitcoin are used for legitimate purposes, fluctuation of the price becomes nearly inevitable.
Another long term irresolvable issue Bitcoin faces is its problem concerning miner centralization. Without an algorithm change, the currency will always be controlled by a few big mining pools. This places tremendous power in the hands of a few individuals who are bound by few obligations. A 51% attack is now a very legitimate concern. You might say that a miner has no such incentive, but there is no guarantee for this. As a result of this problem, Bitcoin will always face legitimate competition from alternative crypto's.
So what I would recommend is to look beyond the hype and to look at its genuine potential. In my opinion, its genuine potential is what it's being used for right now. Its potential as a technology is intrinsically subversive, whether we like it or not. Because of the network effect, we have reason to believe Bitcoin will remain relevant for the foreseeable future, despite the fact that technologically superior alternatives exist. If present trends continue, the most likely outcome would be for Bitcoin to become one cryptocurrency among many. The vision of the Bitcoin maximalists is not exactly looking likely at this point as Bitcoin's market dominance continues to decline.
Personally, I would not buy Bitcoin at current prices for investment purposes. Besides the fact that I believe it may be overvalued, I believe there is little potential for growth left. Most people I personally know who own Bitcoin right now don't use it for legitimate purposes, they own it because they expect the price to go up because they've been led to believe this is their only chance to become a millionaire. This is how bubbles form. I expect this bubble will pop too, although the level at which it will pop is hard to say. The enormous rise in prices we've seen in the past is by no means a guarantee for the future.
It might be possible for Bitcoin to increase in value tenfold in the long term as scalability issues are addressed, but the same can be said about various other crypto assets and even regular stock, so I personally see no reason to continue holding onto Bitcoin when I expect alternatives to have a better chance of growth. Any ability for Bitcoin to scale won't significantly broaden the relevant niches for which Bitcoin can be used. I would argue that at the moment, Bitcoin is used for the same niches as it was four years ago. There is no indication of significant growth for legitimate purposes other than speculation by late-comers who expect to get rich quick.
submitted by iuseupyourusernames to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/CryptoCurrency] The top 10 cryptos to buy for 2018 - discuss!

The following post by broccoleet is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been openly removed.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ CryptoCurrency/comments/7ngs65
The original post's content was as follows:
Hey guys, just sharing my knowledge as a frequent trader of both stocks and cryptos of a few years now. 10 essential cryptos/coins/tokens everyone should think about owning in 2018. Feel free to share your own essentials.
  1. Rai Blocks(XRB) -- In its simplicity, it currently works beautifully. If it can continue to scale with no fees and maintain the quick tx times, it WILL be a top 5-10 market cap coin by end of year. This is the new litecoin/DASH/original Bitcoin spiritual successor. Very few things have seen the growth that XRB has this year. The only things holding it back are some questions on security, and the need for idiot-proof mobile wallets with good UI for widespread use and adoption.
  2. Ethereum(ETH) -- A strong foundation in place for dApps. With the influx of money, dApps are likely to continue to grow in 2018. Ether also is quickly becoming the preferred all-purpose crypto for exchange sites. They are also the current platform for many popular erc20 tokens going into 2018 such as REQ. Even if other dApp platforms take off, ETH looks like a strong contender to try and remain decentralized and innovative with its approaches to the technology.
  3. Stellar Lumens (XLM) -- When people realize this is essentially a slightly more decentralized version of ripple with half the circulating supply and an IBM backing, it will take off. Huge focus on micropayments and quick tx times.
  4. Bitcoin(BTC) -- Bitcoin is a giant question mark. They clearly have the name recognition and "old guard" status, but their fate relies on being able to reduce their high tx fee and times. Plans are in place, but there are strong arguments for both sides of why this may or may not work considering the emerging tech. Regardless, worth investing a portion of a portfolio in due to its store of value status , being able to acquire practically every alt coin out there, and being the most notable crypto in existence.
  5. Request Network(REQ) -- Despite its current run, REQ has one of the strongest roadmaps for 2018. Their actual product is quite simple and yet desirable, as the world as quickly needing an efficient method to transact both crypto and fiat through a trusted source. The ambition comes from their vision to implement this as effectively as paypal. Support from YCombinator and other strong sources will guarantee this is a finished product that could be one of the first to break crypto into the mainstream for mobile and retail purchases
  6. Neo (NEO) -- Dubbed the "Ethereum" of China, it's clear Neo is the frontrunner for dApps in the East going into 2018. China presents a semi-closed off market, and Neo has the most connections and foundation in place. I am bullish af on dApps as you can tell. Deep Brain Chain was one of Neo's first and it is already taking off. I feel like Neo is highly undervalued at the moment and one of the surest bets to see a steady price increase throughout 2018.
  7. Walton (WTC) /VeChain (VEN) -- take your pick, both focused on RFID integration with blockchain. One of the most practical approaches to applying tech to the business world. Currently undervalued!
  8. ICON (ICX) -- another great platform to invest in that has the backdoor to a closed market (Korea). This would have likely risen in price even higher than it did earlier in December if their Main net release wasn't delayed until January. They are the frontrunner to be the best dApp platform for South Korea
  9. Enigma (ENG) -- with blockchains actually being adopted by businesses and institutions, enigma has the current most versatile program for privatizing data on any blockchain. A year of growth would make them look very undervalued right now if we are to be bullish as a whole on crypto in 2018. I think this is much more promising than the current slew of privacy currencies which will likely maintain their value or only slightly rise.
  10. Dogecoin (DOGE) -- because 1 doge will always = 1 doge, and if the entire market crashes, you will want your money in this. Trust me.
I would love to hear your opinions, I'm sure many will disagree. But my portfolio has strongly grown over last year and I am confident in these choices.
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

DEVCON2 report: Day Three - Final day

previous days
Question: the 3 days of devcon are over. Are people interested in reports on the next 3 days of international Blockchain week (demo day + 2 days of global Blockchain summit) http://www.blockchainweek2016.org
`
Event update
The buzz during the day was around the "stick puzzle" that Bok Khoo was giving out to people. It is just a stick, with a loop of string. He gets you to turn away, he uses "the trick" to put it onto your bag and then you try to get it off.
The WeChat channel was just filled with everyone asking where they can get it, and the screaming that they can't figure it out. Only about 5 people reported they were able to solve it (I haven't yet)
http://imgur.com/mYfJQP4 http://imgur.com/4Euka1a
`
Sessions
I'm biased, but I thought the announcement from Microsoft with the update of cryptlets was a big deal. The morning sessions covered a few different oracle systems, the afternoon had lots of IPFS sessions.
Microsoft - A Lap around Cryptlets
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/cryptletsdd/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/documentation/templates/ethereum-consortium-blockchain-network/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/authomarleyg
Microsoft was a sponsor of Devcon1 & 2 Ethereum is a 1st class citizen Support for community & partners - Bizspark, Meetups, Workshops
Announcing: Bletchley v1 Distributed Ledger stack V1 is a private Ethrerum consortium, that you can spin up for your own enterprise / group
http://imgur.com/olwwd36
Cryptlets are being developed to help with security, identity, etc. How do you get trusted external data feeds injected into the Blockchain? Doing things on a specific interval (every 15 mins) When price of something hits a threshold (oil goes above $40/barrel) Secure IP protected algorithms, but still share with blockchain network. Use libraries for common platforms (.Net, Java, etc)
Cryptlets vs Oracle Cryptlets will have a marketplace on Azure that will allow you to purchase and utilise
Use case: Trigger on an event Wake up on 4pm, if market was open that day, then give me the price of gold for that day.Get signature of attested server, attested sender.
Use case: Control Using smart contract like a traditional DB. Declare data you are keeping track of, and the functions/"stored proc" to update that data. Cryptlet runs off chain, and can be scaled up.
http://imgur.com/ysgL8S2
Utility cryptlet. Use an attribute in solidity contract with cryptlet details Developer references at design time the cryptlet they want the contract to call Contract cryptlet, deploy the cryptlet at same time as contract.
Why would you want Azure to do this? SGX allows you to create "secure enclaves", can have complete isolation on the hardware chip where it is not modifable. Provides a secure enclave at the CPU level. Can give full attestation right down to the silicon. Will be provided as a enclave container on Azure. Will be released for .NET core CLR first, then other languages. Can create cryptlet libraries that you can scale and put into the Azure marketplace. An ecosystem for developers & ISVs to consume and publish.
Bletchley v1 released today will let you spin up a private consortium. Before today, it took a long time to try and deploy a private consortium (can take weeks to read doco, Now takes 5 minutes to deploy! Creates a private consortium, puts each member in its own separate subnet
http://imgur.com/w4yUsqE
Mist Vision and Demo I was too busy sharing the release posts of Microsoft project bletchey v1, missed this talk. It did look interesting, I will watch this one later. Idea: Reward for bandwidth. Providing connection could replace mining as entrance point for desktop computers. Allow you to have a trickle so you can trigger smart contracts. Standardised backends, so that you can swap out the underlying node between geth, blockapps, etc.
Web3.js
https://github.com/ethereum/web3.js Etehereum JS API Smart conracts are EVM opcodes, Helps translates calls to JSON RPC calls. Helps do the ABI encoding when sending data from JS to EVM It kept on growing, many different utility functions being thrown in. Is time to clean it up and be refactored.
They are now building a NEW web3.js The communication will be socket based, will enable subscriptions. Everything will be based on promises to subscribe to events, like log events. Bunch of other newer cleaner methods and ways to do things like deploying contracts.
Smart contract security
Was a very good postmorteum of The DAO and things that could be done to mitigate it in the future.
An issue with The DAO was trying to do a massive jump from centralisation all the way to full decentralisation. Meant no one could step up and make a decision on how to save it. We need to make smaller steps towards full decentralisation as we learn as a community how to do this. Same security patterns as yesterday's talks: check invarients, beware 1024 call stack depth, reentry exploit (update state BEFORE executing calls), timestamps are manipulatable. Updateable contracts. Who can update it? Community multisig? We need better rools: formal verification, compiler warnings, improved IDEs, trusted libraries, excape hatches
Conclusion: It is still very early days in this space, be careful.
A Provably Honest Oracle Model: Auditable Offchain Data Gathering & Computations
Oracalize is the most widely used oracle (until everyone starts using Microsoft Azure cryptlets ;-) ) Contract calls Oracalize contract with the data they want, off chain they see this get the data, Oracalise then trigger their contract externally, which does a callback to your contract with the data. Can use external notary servers. Can get proof from multiple external services to get a higher level of confidence about data (e.g. stock price from a few feeds). Off-chain (auditable_ computation) AWS sandbox 2.0. Put the execution package onto IPFS, AWS gets it and executes it, signs it.
iEx.ec: Fully Distributed Cloud Thanks to the Ethereum Blockchain
http://iex.ec/ Provides blockchain based execution environments Global market for computing resources. Idea is to do what we did before with "grid computing" use the idle capacity of computers. But this time do a trickle of micropayments. Allows people to harness this global power to execute their tasks in a global "distributed cloud".
The Final frontier: The company smart conract
http://otonomos.com/ Helping companies to incorporate on the blockchain.
Smart oracles
https://github.com/smartoracles Connecting to external resources is difficult. Hard to try and use external currencies (like a bank account / fiat money) to make transactions. Could hook in paypal, HSBC, wells fargo, etc. Can provide your own payment services as an API to a smart oracle for smart contracts to consume. Do off chain data storage by calling smart oracle API Roadmap: more data sources & more payment methods
IPFS & Ethereum: Updates
https://Ipfs.io IPFS is AMAZING, seriously go watch the full 1 hour talks Juan has given in previous years.
Current web has current issues. Centralisation, etc. IPFS is a new hypermedia transfer protocol Content can be retrieved not from specific servers, but instead via it's hash so that it can come from anywhere in the network (maybe from the person next to you who has cached it). It is highly modular, all of the transfer protocals, routing, naming, etc. are all swapable Is available as GO-IPFS & now JS-IPFS Means now you can run IPFS in the browser IPFS was great for static content, but not so great for dynamic content. Low latency pub/sub protocol will help with dynamic data. Created a distributed peer to peer chat app using this new dynamic content protocol. IPLD a common link-tree hash format Will be able to use IPFS to retrieve ethereum blockchain blocks DIRECTLY Can use IPFS as a package manager to retrieve them in a distributed manner.
Many projects are using Ethereum & IPFS Uport, Digix, Infura, Ujo, Eris, Blockfreight. Filecoin was created as a way to try and incentivize nodes to keep files longer time. People rent out hdd space to earn filecoin. Exchange bitcoin/filecoin. Use filecoin to store files in network. Filecoin is going to be built on top of the public Ethereum blockchain, as a virtual blockchain / token.
IPFS Libp2p & Ethereum networking
Network connectivity between any 2 nodes can be difficult. Censorship, bandwidth, network issues, etc. Having to deal with different networking topologies and access. Libp2p & Devp2p is different. Devp2p is for Ethereum. LIbp2p is modular, can swap out components to change network access, encryption methods, etc. Can build up a MEGA mesh network, by utilising traditional wired internet, radio, bluetooth between some nodes. Web browser using web socket, to a node, which routes across network, to zigbee to a IoT device. Libp2p & Devp2p could merge and augment each other. Could create the libp2p components to replace the devp2p bits Any 2 nodes that speak the same protocol can communicate and be a part of the network chain. Experiment. They took the browser based version of EVM. Then used Libp2p to talk to the Ethereum network. Had a complete ethereum node running in a browser.
Uport
https://uport.me/ Universal identity platform Current challenges: key management. Ux for average person. Dapps via mobile. Identity and data ownership. How do you keep a consistent identity, even if you lose a key. Have some multisig contracts that you can use to keep track. Social recovery, use your friends to attest it is really you. Keep private key on mobile, do transactions on the desktop, scan a QR code to sign the transaction on your phone and send it off.
A Deep Dive into the Colony Foundation Protocol
It is an open source governance protocol built on Ethereum Problem with voting is how to prevent Sybil attacks. Votes are weighted by a reputation score. Reputation is non-transferable that can only be earned. Total weighted voting helps mitigate this.
Chain orchestration tooling & smart contract package management
Eris is tooling for developers. Package manager to build your own blockchain. Can compose a chain, e.g. geth + tendermint consensus. Init, install, do. Can easily install on Mac/bew, linux/apt-get, Windows/choco
The Golem Project: Ethereum-based market for computing power
http://www.golemproject.net/ Anyone can make an offer to sell computing power. e.g. Distributed rendering Want to create a standard framework that anyone can use to submit and process jobs.
Status: Integrating Ethereum Into Our Daily Lives
https://status.im Want to get ethereum everywhere. "Mist for Mobile" Everyone is using their mobile phones for everything, but mostly using instant messaging. What would Ethereum in a IM window look? Created a IM mobile app that has a local geth node. tart up, it asks you to create a password, it generates a pub/private pair. Then can send messages via whisper, and the messages are signed with your public key. Can load Dapps up in the local webview and interact with them. Allows you to create "chat Dapps", that you interact with via text. Like chatbots
Maker Ecosystem Overview
www.Makerdao.com Dai: seeking stability on blockchain. Stablecoin engine: smart contract that holds collateral reserves and controls the Dai lifecycle. MKR: open source community managing risk of the system In the last year, investing in a solid technical core. More slow and audit things. Moving into the next phase of stablecoin development. Their latest project is the "Simplecoin project" Meeting Thereum community's need for stability. An independent platform for creating centrally administered simple stablecoins. Issues create their own rule sets: Collateral types, participant whitelists, security parameters. Example: Shrutebucks. The only people who own it are Dwight, Jim & Pam. They backed it with 1/3 ETH 1/3 DGX 1/3 DUSD.
Orbit. A distributed peer to peer app on IPFS
https://github.com/haadcode Created a full distributed chat room, itself distributed through IPFS. It is integrated with uPort for identification Using uPort allows you to verify that you are talking to the correct person in the chat channel. All their messages are signed with their public keys He also created a full distribited twitter clone, using uport for the identity as well. Orbit-db key value store DB that stores its data on IPFS. Eventually consistent Appends data to the DB, an event is sent to those subscribed on pub/sub so they can see the latest root hash. Based on CRDT Ethereum + Pubsub + CRDTs + IPFS = super power primatives to build dynamic distributed apps
Development considerations with distributed apps. Need to ensure that apps work offline. No centralised servers. No data silos. Provide integration path.
Future work: could you use uPort for ACL like permissions? Mobile use cases, how to make it work nicely on mobiles
Building scalable React Dapp architecture
https://github.com/SilentCicero/react-dapp-boilerplate React + Ethereum He has a configured boilerplate template. Has contract scaffolding. Enforced contract Linting/testing. Wallet generation/identity. Preconfigured web3 instance. UI: Mature react arhitecture "react boilerplate". Prices listed in USD with ETH/btc via kraken api. A basic multi-contract example Dapp. Offline first, dapp runs without internet. Uses Redux. State models in UI & blockchains work well. PostCSS, CSS Modules, sanitize.cs. Redux, immutableJS, reslect, redux-saga, i18n, redux-router. Web3, ethdeploy, dapple, solium, eth-lightwallet, chaithereum, ethereumjs0-testrpc Enforced contract testing in 2 languages.
Ethereum for Enterprise (BlockApps Strato)
Trying to make sure that Ethereum stays relevent to enterprise development. Why do you need a blockchain WITHIN an org, shouldn't they trust each other? Well different departments may not, they may reconcile differently, and can help automate/orchestrate between them. Blockchain is the "killer app" for cloud financial services. Legacy infrastructure, batch prossing, etc are all restricting fintech from progressing. Blockchain can happen in real time, can replace legacy. Ethereum is very flexible and programmable, works well. There are others based on Bitcoin (like Hyperledger). Ethereum + Blockapps = Extreme productivity + Proven Technology. Blockapps is extending Ethereum for Enterprise. Runs very well on Azure Enterprises don't want all their data exposed on public chain. Blockapps helps solve data privacy and scaling with multichain fabrics.
submitted by DavidBurela to ethereum [link] [comments]

Honest question about scaling via block size (technical)

Hi all, I'm trying to wade through the Great Scaling Debate and really trying to understand what the concerns are on both sides.
I'm aware that the debate (the technical side of it anyway, there's also lots of politics which are hard to follow) is between increasing blocksize on the one hand, and adopting second layer solutions like lightning network on the other hand (which, as we all know, requires segwit, which I admit is at an alarmingly low percentage of adoption weeks after being activated).
Currently Bitcoin Core can handle ~4 transactions/second, and to get Visa-like scale, it needs to handle ~1667 transactions/second, i.e. an increase of 3 orders of magnitude. [1]
So scaling via blocksize only would require a 3 order increase in blocksize, from 1 MB to 1000 MB / block, considerable higher than the recent 8 MB fork and the proposed 2 MB fork. At first blush, a 1 GB blocksize puts me on edge as it seems unwieldy, but the merit of a good technical solution is not whether or not it makes us feel comfortable, but whether or not it's effective.
What concerns me more is some interesting analysis I read [2], which points out that due to disk seek times, even with arbitrarily large block sizes, current disk hardware would max out the transaction rate at 200/sec. And then when you add in the requirement to broadcast all transactions over a network, it could go down to 100/sec.
So, my question is, is there more to on-chain scaling beyond block size increase? Are participants within the community generally aware of these limitations, and if so, are there alternative ways around them, or are there reasons to not be so concerned (i.e. maybe bitcoin doesn't actually need to scale to visa-like?)?
  1. http://www.altcointoday.com/bitcoin-ethereum-vs-visa-paypal-transactions-per-second/
  2. https://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/file/716b955c130e6c703fac336ea17b1670/duplex-micropayment-channels.pdf
submitted by Nickolai1989 to btc [link] [comments]

This is why BS is unlikely to raise the blocksize as a last resort measure to lower the fees

Another post by u/jstolfi I thought is relevant now:
Another reason [for keeping full blocks], slightly less "evil" perhaps, is that the LN will only work -- in the sense of allowing 100x more traffic than Satoshi's bitcoin -- if each channel is used for 100s of payments, on average.
That is possible only if the LN is a "mostly closed economy". That is, if most of the coins that each LN user spends through the LN are received through the LN, and vice-versa.
For example, if Alice receives her salary as a weekly on-chain payment, and spends most of it through the LN over the next week, then her channels will run out of funds after a week, and will have to be closed and re-opened. Then she would have to issue two on-chain transactions per week per channel. The average number of payments per channel will be very low.
However, the LN will not be a closed economy if only a fraction of the bitcoin users (BUs) are LN users (LUs). For example, suppose that 50% of the BUs are LUs, while the other 50% (NUs) refuse to use the LN; and suppose that BUs make payments to other BUs at random. Then only 25% of all payments will be LU-LU and will be able to go through the LN.
Worse, in that scenario, 50% of the payments would be NU-LU or LU-NU; and each of these payments would require the LN user to close and open at least one channel. Thus the LN would carry only 25% of the total bitcoin traffic but would actually increase the total on-chain traffic, by as much as 25%.
Thus the LN cannot start small -- say, with only 1% of the BUs -- and then grow by attracting more users. The LN will be attractive to a BU only if a very large percentage of the other BUs are using it too. Hence the reasoning that the BUs must be forced to migrate to the LN, willing or not, "for their own good".
And why the demand for micropayment channels alone is not enough for LN to work:
There is no demand for micropayments. People have been trying to get them to work for more than 25 years, but they just can't "catch on". In retrospect, there are good practical and economic reasons for that failure, independent of technical considerations.
As a micropayments platform, the LN would be much more expensive and cumbersome than any centralized solution (a "MicroPayPal" or "MicroVisa").
As Satoshi himself mentioned way back in 2009, unidirectional payment channels could allow individual micropayments slightly faster and cheaper than a MicroPayPal could offer. However, that advantage would be negated by the cost and delay of setting up the channel, and the need to lock enough funds in advance.
As for the LN, it requires multi-hop payments through bidirectional channels, which are much more expensive to set up and execute than even a PayPal or Visa payment. Note that each micropayment through a 5-hop path would require a separate negotiation among 6 users with the exchange of at least a dozen messages, and paying a flat fee to each of the 4 middlemen. Not to mention the cost and delay of finding the path.
source
tl;dr to bootstrap the LN they have to force almost everyone to use it
submitted by unitedstatian to btc [link] [comments]

PayPal vs Stripe - which is right for your business?

Hey Entrepreneurs,
I'm here to offer a detailed comparison of PayPal and Stripe. I hope this post can help some of you with this difficult decision.
Disclosure: I work for Control, a small startup that aggregates payment data from PayPal and Stripe into a single dashboard. So we like both platforms, and try not to pick favourites :)
Still, there are some key differences between PayPal and Stripe that I'll get into today. If you want this content with cool visuals, head on over to this post. Otherwise, sit back and relax, it's time to get started!
PayPal vs Stripe — Transaction Fees
Before digging into what’s different between Paypal and Stripe, let’s look at what’s the same.
In the United States, both PayPal and Stripe charge the same basic fee: 2.9% + 30c per successful transaction. These fees vary by which country you’re trading in, but the two payment processors charge generally about the same.
Here is some more detailed information about transaction fees for each.
Stripe Transaction Fees:
PayPal Transaction Fees:
Micropayments
Stripe and PayPal have different policies when it comes to micropayments (typically thought of as charges of less than $10 or $12).
PayPal currently offers 0.5% + 5c US per transaction under $10, whereas with Stripe, the basic rate applies.
As you can see, PayPal is currently a better option for micropayments.
Access to Payments
Stripe allows its users in the US to access payments on a two-day rolling basis. Other International countries have a 7-day rolling transfer schedule. PayPal allows merchants to access funds within 3-4 days.
Set Up
Getting up and running with PayPal is incredibly simple. All you’ll need to do is copy and paste a few lines of code onto your website. Once this is complete, you’ll see the instantly recognizable “Buy It Now” button which will allow you to start trading.
On the other hand, unless you have a web developer in-house, or have dev knowledge yourself, setting up Stripe can prove tricky. The payment processor is built for developers and the Average Joe might have a hard time navigating the lines of code that come with installing Stripe as your payment processor of choice.
User Experience
Stripe, on the other hand, have API nailed down. Their interface allows for developers to build on a pre-existing framework and explore Stripe’s plethora of features.
Unless you pay for PayPal Advanced or Pro, your customers will be redirected to a PayPal payment page, and therefore exiting them from your website. With Stripe, you have the ability to create a checkout on site which provides a better user experience.
PayPal vs Stripe — Which should your business choose?
The ultimate decision of choose PayPal or Stripe depends on the needs of your business. If you’re looking to trade internationally, think about whether offering Stripe alongside PayPal will help you save on transaction fees. If you’re looking to trade strictly in the US only, calculate whether investing in Stripe will be worth doing.
If you choose to run both PayPal and Stripe payment processors, this will give your business greater payment visibility, allow you to accept international payments with ease, present the opportunity to integrate a modern API with your website, and help establish your brand or business as one that’s up to date with the latest in payment technologies.
That's all we've got for today! Hope some of you found this write-up valuable.
Which payment processor do you prefer for your business?
submitted by the_long_bridge to Entrepreneur [link] [comments]

Is anyone else surprised by how bitcoin is holding its value?

Bitcoin seems to be dead.
People are well past the 'it's going to be a world currency' and 'It'll replace paypal', 'the future of micropayments'. They're aware that it's rort with scams, and it's easy to lose your coins.
Yet bitcoin's value is still at about $450.
Does this surprise anyone else?
Let's be clear - bitcoin does still have value as an uncontrollable means of payment - good if you are selling drugs online or running a ransomware operation.
Is this the only thing that is holding the value up?
submitted by derpiato to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Is anyone else freaked out by this whole blocksize debate? Does anyone else find themself often agreeing with *both* sides - depending on whichever argument you happen to be reading at the moment? And do we need some better algorithms and data structures?

Why do both sides of the debate seem “right” to me?
I know, I know, a healthy debate is healthy and all - and maybe I'm just not used to the tumult and jostling which would be inevitable in a real live open major debate about something as vital as Bitcoin.
And I really do agree with the starry-eyed idealists who say Bitcoin is vital. Imperfect as it may be, it certainly does seem to represent the first real chance we've had in the past few hundred years to try to steer our civilization and our planet away from the dead-ends and disasters which our government-issued debt-based currencies keep dragging us into.
But this particular debate, about the blocksize, doesn't seem to be getting resolved at all.
Pretty much every time I read one of the long-form major arguments contributed by Bitcoin "thinkers" who I've come to respect over the past few years, this weird thing happens: I usually end up finding myself nodding my head and agreeing with whatever particular piece I'm reading!
But that should be impossible - because a lot of these people vehemently disagree!
So how can both sides sound so convincing to me, simply depending on whichever piece I currently happen to be reading?
Does anyone else feel this way? Or am I just a gullible idiot?
Just Do It?
When you first look at it or hear about it, increasing the size seems almost like a no-brainer: The "big-block" supporters say just increase the blocksize to 20 MB or 8 MB, or do some kind of scheduled or calculated regular increment which tries to take into account the capabilities of the infrastructure and the needs of the users. We do have the bandwidth and the memory to at least increase the blocksize now, they say - and we're probably gonna continue to have more bandwidth and memory in order to be able to keep increasing the blocksize for another couple decades - pretty much like everything else computer-based we've seen over the years (some of this stuff is called by names such as "Moore's Law").
On the other hand, whenever the "small-block" supporters warn about the utter catastrophe that a failed hard-fork would mean, I get totally freaked by their possible doomsday scenarios, which seem totally plausible and terrifying - so I end up feeling that the only way I'd want to go with a hard-fork would be if there was some pre-agreed "triggering" mechanism where the fork itself would only actually "switch on" and take effect provided that some "supermajority" of the network (of who? the miners? the full nodes?) had signaled (presumably via some kind of totally reliable p2p trustless software-based voting system?) that they do indeed "pre-agree" to actually adopt the pre-scheduled fork (and thereby avoid any possibility whatsoever of the precious blockchain somehow tragically splitting into two and pretty much killing this cryptocurrency off in its infancy).
So in this "conservative" scenario, I'm talking about wanting at least 95% pre-adoption agreement - not the mere 75% which I recall some proposals call for, which seems like it could easily lead to a 75/25 blockchain split.
But this time, with this long drawn-out blocksize debate, the core devs, and several other important voices who have become prominent opinion shapers over the past few years, can't seem to come to any real agreement on this.
Weird split among the devs
As far as I can see, there's this weird split: Gavin and Mike seem to be the only people among the devs who really want a major blocksize increase - and all the other devs seem to be vehemently against them.
But then on the other hand, the users seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of a major increase.
And there are meta-questions about governance, about about why this didn't come out as a BIP, and what the availability of Bitcoin XT means.
And today or yesterday there was this really cool big-blockian exponential graph based on doubling the blocksize every two years for twenty years, reminding us of the pure mathematical fact that 210 is indeed about 1000 - but not really addressing any of the game-theoretic points raised by the small-blockians. So a lot of the users seem to like it, but when so few devs say anything positive about it, I worry: is this just yet more exponential chart porn?
On the one hand, Gavin's and Mike's blocksize increase proposal initially seemed like a no-brainer to me.
And on the other hand, all the other devs seem to be against them. Which is weird - not what I'd initially expected at all (but maybe I'm just a fool who's seduced by exponential chart porn?).
Look, I don't mean to be rude to any of the core devs, and I don't want to come off like someone wearing a tinfoil hat - but it has to cross people's minds that the powers that be (the Fed and the other central banks and the governments that use their debt-issued money to run this world into a ditch) could very well be much more scared shitless than they're letting on. If we assume that the powers that be are using their usual playbook and tactics, then it could be worth looking at the book "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins, to get an idea of how they might try to attack Bitcoin. So, what I'm saying is, they do have a track record of sending in "experts" to try to derail projects and keep everyone enslaved to the Creature from Jekyll Island. I'm just saying. So, without getting ad hominem - let's just make sure that our ideas can really stand scrutiny on their own - as Nick Szabo says, we need to make sure there is "more computer science, less noise" in this debate.
When Gavin Andresen first came out with the 20 MB thing - I sat back and tried to imagine if I could download 20 MB in 10 minutes (which seems to be one of the basic mathematical and technological constraints here - right?)
I figured, "Yeah, I could download that" - even with my crappy internet connection.
And I guess the telecoms might be nice enough to continue to double our bandwidth every two years for the next couple decades – if we ask them politely?
On the other hand - I think we should be careful about entrusting the financial freedom of the world into the greedy hands of the telecoms companies - given all their shady shenanigans over the past few years in many countries. After decades of the MPAA and the FBI trying to chip away at BitTorrent, lately PirateBay has been hard to access. I would say it's quite likely that certain persons at institutions like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs and the Fed might be very, very motivated to see Bitcoin fail - so we shouldn't be too sure about scaling plans which depend on the willingness of companies Verizon and AT&T to double our bandwith every two years.
Maybe the real important hardware buildout challenge for a company like 21 (and its allies such as Qualcomm) to take on now would not be "a miner in every toaster" but rather "Google Fiber Download and Upload Speeds in every Country, including China".
I think I've read all the major stuff on the blocksize debate from Gavin Andresen, Mike Hearn, Greg Maxwell, Peter Todd, Adam Back, and Jeff Garzick and several other major contributors - and, oddly enough, all their arguments seem reasonable - heck even Luke-Jr seems reasonable to me on the blocksize debate, and I always thought he was a whackjob overly influenced by superstition and numerology - and now today I'm reading the article by Bram Cohen - the inventor of BitTorrent - and I find myself agreeing with him too!
I say to myself: What's going on with me? How can I possibly agree with all of these guys, if they all have such vehemently opposing viewpoints?
I mean, think back to the glory days of a couple of years ago, when all we were hearing was how this amazing unprecedented grassroots innovation called Bitcoin was going to benefit everyone from all walks of life, all around the world:
...basically the entire human race transacting everything into the blockchain.
(Although let me say that I think that people's focus on ideas like driverless cabs creating realtime fare markets based on supply and demand seems to be setting our sights a bit low as far as Bitcoin's abilities to correct the financial world's capital-misallocation problems which seem to have been made possible by infinite debt-based fiat. I would have hoped that a Bitcoin-based economy would solve much more noble, much more urgent capital-allocation problems than driverless taxicabs creating fare markets or refrigerators ordering milk on the internet of things. I was thinking more along the lines that Bitcoin would finally strangle dead-end debt-based deadly-toxic energy industries like fossil fuels and let profitable clean energy industries like Thorium LFTRs take over - but that's another topic. :=)
Paradoxes in the blocksize debate
Let me summarize the major paradoxes I see here:
(1) Regarding the people (the majority of the core devs) who are against a blocksize increase: Well, the small-blocks arguments do seem kinda weird, and certainly not very "populist", in the sense that: When on earth have end-users ever heard of a computer technology whose capacity didn't grow pretty much exponentially year-on-year? All the cool new technology we've had - from hard drives to RAM to bandwidth - started out pathetically tiny and grew to unimaginably huge over the past few decades - and all our software has in turn gotten massively powerful and big and complex (sometimes bloated) to take advantage of the enormous new capacity available.
But now suddenly, for the first time in the history of technology, we seem to have a majority of the devs, on a major p2p project - saying: "Let's not scale the system up. It could be dangerous. It might break the whole system (if the hard-fork fails)."
I don't know, maybe I'm missing something here, maybe someone else could enlighten me, but I don't think I've ever seen this sort of thing happen in the last few decades of the history of technology - devs arguing against scaling up p2p technology to take advantage of expected growth in infrastructure capacity.
(2) But... on the other hand... the dire warnings of the small-blockians about what could happen if a hard-fork were to fail - wow, they do seem really dire! And these guys are pretty much all heavyweight, experienced programmers and/or game theorists and/or p2p open-source project managers.
I must say, that nearly all of the long-form arguments I've read - as well as many, many of the shorter comments I've read from many users in the threads, whose names I at least have come to more-or-less recognize over the past few months and years on reddit and bitcointalk - have been amazingly impressive in their ability to analyze all aspects of the lifecycle and management of open-source software projects, bringing up lots of serious points which I could never have come up with, and which seem to come from long experience with programming and project management - as well as dealing with economics and human nature (eg, greed - the game-theory stuff).
So a lot of really smart and experienced people with major expertise in various areas ranging from programming to management to game theory to politics to economics have been making some serious, mature, compelling arguments.
But, as I've been saying, the only problem to me is: in many of these cases, these arguments are vehemently in opposition to each other! So I find myself agreeing with pretty much all of them, one by one - which means the end result is just a giant contradiction.
I mean, today we have Bram Cohen, the inventor of BitTorrent, arguing (quite cogently and convincingly to me), that it would be dangerous to increase the blocksize. And this seems to be a guy who would know a few things about scaling out a massive global p2p network - since the protocol which he invented, BitTorrent, is now apparently responsible for like a third of the traffic on the internet (and this despite the long-term concerted efforts of major evil players such as the MPAA and the FBI to shut the whole thing down).
Was the BitTorrent analogy too "glib"?
By the way - I would like to go on a slight tangent here and say that one of the main reasons why I felt so "comfortable" jumping on the Bitcoin train back a few years ago, when I first heard about it and got into it, was the whole rough analogy I saw with BitTorrent.
I remembered the perhaps paradoxical fact that when a torrent is more popular (eg, a major movie release that just came out last week), then it actually becomes faster to download. More people want it, so more people have a few pieces of it, so more people are able to get it from each other. A kind of self-correcting economic feedback loop, where more demand directly leads to more supply.
(BitTorrent manages to pull this off by essentially adding a certain structure to the file being shared, so that it's not simply like an append-only list of 1 MB blocks, but rather more like an random-access or indexed array of 1 MB chunks. Say you're downloading a film which is 700 MB. As soon as your "client" program has downloaded a single 1-MB chunk - say chunk #99 - your "client" program instantly turns into a "server" program as well - offering that chunk #99 to other clients. From my simplistic understanding, I believe the Bitcoin protocol does something similar, to provide a p2p architecture. Hence my - perhaps naïve - assumption that Bitcoin already had the right algorithms / architecture / data structure to scale.)
The efficiency of the BitTorrent network seemed to jive with that "network law" (Metcalfe's Law?) about fax machines. This law states that the more fax machines there are, the more valuable the network of fax machines becomes. Or the value of the network grows on the order of the square of the number of nodes.
This is in contrast with other technology like cars, where the more you have, the worse things get. The more cars there are, the more traffic jams you have, so things start going downhill. I guess this is because highway space is limited - after all, we can't pave over the entire countryside, and we never did get those flying cars we were promised, as David Graeber laments in a recent essay in The Baffler magazine :-)
And regarding the "stress test" supposedly happening right now in the middle of this ongoing blocksize debate, I don't know what worries me more: the fact that it apparently is taking only $5,000 to do a simple kind of DoS on the blockchain - or the fact that there are a few rumors swirling around saying that the unknown company doing the stress test shares the same physical mailing address with a "scam" company?
Or maybe we should just be worried that so much of this debate is happening on a handful of forums which are controlled by some guy named theymos who's already engaged in some pretty "contentious" or "controversial" behavior like blowing a million dollars on writing forum software (I guess he never heard that reddit.com software is open-source)?
So I worry that the great promise of "decentralization" might be more fragile than we originally thought.
Scaling
Anyways, back to Metcalfe's Law: with virtual stuff, like torrents and fax machines, the more the merrier. The more people downloading a given movie, the faster it arrives - and the more people own fax machines, the more valuable the overall fax network.
So I kindof (naïvely?) assumed that Bitcoin, being "virtual" and p2p, would somehow scale up the same magical way BitTorrrent did. I just figured that more people using it would somehow automatically make it stronger and faster.
But now a lot of devs have started talking in terms of the old "scarcity" paradigm, talking about blockspace being a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" - which seems kinda scary, and antithetical to much of the earlier rhetoric we heard about Bitcoin (the stuff about supporting our favorite creators with micropayments, and the stuff about Africans using SMS to send around payments).
Look, when some asshole is in line in front of you at the cash register and he's holding up the line so they can run his credit card to buy a bag of Cheeto's, we tend to get pissed off at the guy - clogging up our expensive global electronic payment infrastructure to make a two-dollar purchase. And that's on a fairly efficient centralized system - and presumably after a year or so, VISA and the guy's bank can delete or compress the transaction in their SQL databases.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but if some guy buys a coffee on the blockchain, or if somebody pays an online artist $1.99 for their work - then that transaction, a few bytes or so, has to live on the blockchain forever?
Or is there some "pruning" thing that gets rid of it after a while?
And this could lead to another question: Viewed from the perspective of double-entry bookkeeping, is the blockchain "world-wide ledger" more like the "balance sheet" part of accounting, i.e. a snapshot showing current assets and liabilities? Or is it more like the "cash flow" part of accounting, i.e. a journal showing historical revenues and expenses?
When I think of thousands of machines around the globe having to lug around multiple identical copies of a multi-gigabyte file containing some asshole's coffee purchase forever and ever... I feel like I'm ideologically drifting in one direction (where I'd end up also being against really cool stuff like online micropayments and Africans banking via SMS)... so I don't want to go there.
But on the other hand, when really experienced and battle-tested veterans with major experience in the world of open-souce programming and project management (the "small-blockians") warn of the catastrophic consequences of a possible failed hard-fork, I get freaked out and I wonder if Bitcoin really was destined to be a settlement layer for big transactions.
Could the original programmer(s) possibly weigh in?
And I don't mean to appeal to authority - but heck, where the hell is Satoshi Nakamoto in all this? I do understand that he/she/they would want to maintain absolute anonymity - but on the other hand, I assume SN wants Bitcoin to succeed (both for the future of humanity - or at least for all the bitcoins SN allegedly holds :-) - and I understand there is a way that SN can cryptographically sign a message - and I understand that as the original developer of Bitcoin, SN had some very specific opinions about the blocksize... So I'm kinda wondering of Satoshi could weigh in from time to time. Just to help out a bit. I'm not saying "Show us a sign" like a deity or something - but damn it sure would be fascinating and possibly very helpful if Satoshi gave us his/hetheir 2 satoshis worth at this really confusing juncture.
Are we using our capacity wisely?
I'm not a programming or game-theory whiz, I'm just a casual user who has tried to keep up with technology over the years.
It just seems weird to me that here we have this massive supercomputer (500 times more powerful than the all the supercomputers in the world combined) doing fairly straightforward "embarassingly parallel" number-crunching operations to secure a p2p world-wide ledger called the blockchain to keep track of a measly 2.1 quadrillion tokens spread out among a few billion addresses - and a couple of years ago you had people like Rick Falkvinge saying the blockchain would someday be supporting multi-million-dollar letters of credit for international trade and you had people like Andreas Antonopoulos saying the blockchain would someday allow billions of "unbanked" people to send remittances around the village or around the world dirt-cheap - and now suddenly in June 2015 we're talking about blockspace as a "scarce resource" and talking about "fee markets" and partially centralized, corporate-sponsored "Level 2" vaporware like Lightning Network and some mysterious company is "stess testing" or "DoS-ing" the system by throwing away a measly $5,000 and suddenly it sounds like the whole system could eventually head right back into PayPal and Western Union territory again, in terms of expensive fees.
When I got into Bitcoin, I really was heavily influenced by vague analogies with BitTorrent: I figured everyone would just have tiny little like utorrent-type program running on their machine (ie, Bitcoin-QT or Armory or Mycelium etc.).
I figured that just like anyone can host a their own blog or webserver, anyone would be able to host their own bank.
Yeah, Google and and Mozilla and Twitter and Facebook and WhatsApp did come along and build stuff on top of TCP/IP, so I did expect a bunch of companies to build layers on top of the Bitcoin protocol as well. But I still figured the basic unit of bitcoin client software powering the overall system would be small and personal and affordable and p2p - like a bittorrent client - or at the most, like a cheap server hosting a blog or email server.
And I figured there would be a way at the software level, at the architecture level, at the algorithmic level, at the data structure level - to let the thing scale - if not infinitely, at least fairly massively and gracefully - the same way the BitTorrent network has.
Of course, I do also understand that with BitTorrent, you're sharing a read-only object (eg, a movie) - whereas with Bitcoin, you're achieving distributed trustless consensus and appending it to a write-only (or append-only) database.
So I do understand that the problem which BitTorrent solves is much simpler than the problem which Bitcoin sets out to solve.
But still, it seems that there's got to be a way to make this thing scale. It's p2p and it's got 500 times more computing power than all the supercomputers in the world combined - and so many brilliant and motivated and inspired people want this thing to succeed! And Bitcoin could be our civilization's last chance to steer away from the oncoming debt-based ditch of disaster we seem to be driving into!
It just seems that Bitcoin has got to be able to scale somehow - and all these smart people working together should be able to come up with a solution which pretty much everyone can agree - in advance - will work.
Right? Right?
A (probably irrelevant) tangent on algorithms and architecture and data structures
I'll finally weigh with my personal perspective - although I might be biased due to my background (which is more on the theoretical side of computer science).
My own modest - or perhaps radical - suggestion would be to ask whether we're really looking at all the best possible algorithms and architectures and data structures out there.
From this perspective, I sometimes worry that the overwhelming majority of the great minds working on the programming and game-theory stuff might come from a rather specific, shall we say "von Neumann" or "procedural" or "imperative" school of programming (ie, C and Python and Java programmers).
It seems strange to me that such a cutting-edge and important computer project would have so little participation from the great minds at the other end of the spectrum of programming paradigms - namely, the "functional" and "declarative" and "algebraic" (and co-algebraic!) worlds.
For example, I was struck in particular by statements I've seen here and there (which seemed rather hubristic or lackadaisical to me - for something as important as Bitcoin), that the specification of Bitcoin and the blockchain doesn't really exist in any form other than the reference implementation(s) (in procedural languages such as C or Python?).
Curry-Howard anyone?
I mean, many computer scientists are aware of the Curry-Howard isomorophism, which basically says that the relationship between a theorem and its proof is equivalent to the relationship between a specification and its implementation. In other words, there is a long tradition in mathematics (and in computer programming) of:
And it's not exactly "turtles all the way down" either: a specification is generally simple and compact enough that a good programmer can usually simply visually inspect it to determine if it is indeed "correct" - something which is very difficult, if not impossible, to do with a program written in a procedural, implementation-oriented language such as C or Python or Java.
So I worry that we've got this tradition, from the open-source github C/Java programming tradition, of never actually writing our "specification", and only writing the "implementation". In mission-critical military-grade programming projects (which often use languages like Ada or Maude) this is simply not allowed. It would seem that a project as mission-critical as Bitcoin - which could literally be crucial for humanity's continued survival - should also use this kind of military-grade software development approach.
And I'm not saying rewrite the implementations in these kind of theoretical languages. But it might be helpful if the C/Python/Java programmers in the Bitcoin imperative programming world could build some bridges to the Maude/Haskell/ML programmers of the functional and algebraic programming worlds to see if any kind of useful cross-pollination might take place - between specifications and implementations.
For example, the JavaFAN formal analyzer for multi-threaded Java programs (developed using tools based on the Maude language) was applied to the Remote Agent AI program aboard NASA's Deep Space 1 shuttle, written in Java - and it took only a few minutes using formal mathematical reasoning to detect a potential deadlock which would have occurred years later during the space mission when the damn spacecraft was already way out around Pluto.
And "the Maude-NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) Protocol Analyzer (Maude-NPA) is a tool used to provide security proofs of cryptographic protocols and to search for protocol flaws and cryptosystem attacks."
These are open-source formal reasoning tools developed by DARPA and used by NASA and the US Navy to ensure that program implementations satisfy their specifications. It would be great if some of the people involved in these kinds of projects could contribute to help ensure the security and scalability of Bitcoin.
But there is a wide abyss between the kinds of programmers who use languages like Maude and the kinds of programmers who use languages like C/Python/Java - and it can be really hard to get the two worlds to meet. There is a bit of rapprochement between these language communities in languages which might be considered as being somewhere in the middle, such as Haskell and ML. I just worry that Bitcoin might be turning into being an exclusively C/Python/Java project (with the algorithms and practitioners traditionally of that community), when it could be more advantageous if it also had some people from the functional and algebraic-specification and program-verification community involved as well. The thing is, though: the theoretical practitioners are big on "semantics" - I've heard them say stuff like "Yes but a C / C++ program has no easily identifiable semantics". So to get them involved, you really have to first be able to talk about what your program does (specification) - before proceeding to describe how it does it (implementation). And writing high-level specifications is typically very hard using the syntax and semantics of languages like C and Java and Python - whereas specs are fairly easy to write in Maude - and not only that, they're executable, and you state and verify properties about them - which provides for the kind of debate Nick Szabo was advocating ("more computer science, less noise").
Imagine if we had an executable algebraic specification of Bitcoin in Maude, where we could formally reason about and verify certain crucial game-theoretical properties - rather than merely hand-waving and arguing and deploying and praying.
And so in the theoretical programming community you've got major research on various logics such as Girard's Linear Logic (which is resource-conscious) and Bruni and Montanari's Tile Logic (which enables "pasting" bigger systems together from smaller ones in space and time), and executable algebraic specification languages such as Meseguer's Maude (which would be perfect for game theory modeling, with its functional modules for specifying the deterministic parts of systems and its system modules for specifiying non-deterministic parts of systems, and its parameterized skeletons for sketching out the typical architectures of mobile systems, and its formal reasoning and verification tools and libraries which have been specifically applied to testing and breaking - and fixing - cryptographic protocols).
And somewhat closer to the practical hands-on world, you've got stuff like Google's MapReduce and lots of Big Data database languages developed by Google as well. And yet here we are with a mempool growing dangerously big for RAM on a single machine, and a 20-GB append-only list as our database - and not much debate on practical results from Google's Big Data databases.
(And by the way: maybe I'm totally ignorant for asking this, but I'll ask anyways: why the hell does the mempool have to stay in RAM? Couldn't it work just as well if it were stored temporarily on the hard drive?)
And you've got CalvinDB out of Yale which apparently provides an ACID layer on top of a massively distributed database.
Look, I'm just an armchair follower cheering on these projects. I can barely manage to write a query in SQL, or read through a C or Python or Java program. But I would argue two points here: (1) these languages may be too low-level and "non-formal" for writing and modeling and formally reasoning about and proving properties of mission-critical specifications - and (2) there seem to be some Big Data tools already deployed by institutions such as Google and Yale which support global petabyte-size databases on commodity boxes with nice properties such as near-real-time and ACID - and I sometimes worry that the "core devs" might be failing to review the literature (and reach out to fellow programmers) out there to see if there might be some formal program-verification and practical Big Data tools out there which could be applied to coming up with rock-solid, 100% consensus proposals to handle an issue such as blocksize scaling, which seems to have become much more intractable than many people might have expected.
I mean, the protocol solved the hard stuff: the elliptical-curve stuff and the Byzantine General stuff. How the heck can we be falling down on the comparatively "easier" stuff - like scaling the blocksize?
It just seems like defeatism to say "Well, the blockchain is already 20-30 GB and it's gonna be 20-30 TB ten years from now - and we need 10 Mbs bandwidth now and 10,000 Mbs bandwidth 20 years from - assuming the evil Verizon and AT&T actually give us that - so let's just become a settlement platform and give up on buying coffee or banking the unbanked or doing micropayments, and let's push all that stuff into some corporate-controlled vaporware without even a whitepaper yet."
So you've got Peter Todd doing some possibly brilliant theorizing and extrapolating on the idea of "treechains" - there is a Let's Talk Bitcoin podcast from about a year ago where he sketches the rough outlines of this idea out in a very inspiring, high-level way - although the specifics have yet to be hammered out. And we've got Blockstream also doing some hopeful hand-waving about the Lightning Network.
Things like Peter Todd's treechains - which may be similar to the spark in some devs' eyes called Lightning Network - are examples of the kind of algorithm or architecture which might manage to harness the massive computing power of miners and nodes in such a way that certain kinds of massive and graceful scaling become possible.
It just seems like a kindof tiny dev community working on this stuff.
Being a C or Python or Java programmer should not be a pre-req to being able to help contribute to the specification (and formal reasoning and program verification) for Bitcoin and the blockchain.
XML and UML are crap modeling and specification languages, and C and Java and Python are even worse (as specification languages - although as implementation languages, they are of course fine).
But there are serious modeling and specification languages out there, and they could be very helpful at times like this - where what we're dealing with is questions of modeling and specification (ie, "needs and requirements").
One just doesn't often see the practical, hands-on world of open-source github implementation-level programmers and the academic, theoretical world of specification-level programmers meeting very often. I wish there were some way to get these two worlds to collaborate on Bitcoin.
Maybe a good first step to reach out to the theoretical people would be to provide a modular executable algebraic specification of the Bitcoin protocol in a recognized, military/NASA-grade specification language such as Maude - because that's something the theoretical community can actually wrap their heads around, whereas it's very hard to get them to pay attention to something written only as a C / Python / Java implementation (without an accompanying specification in a formal language).
They can't check whether the program does what it's supposed to do - if you don't provide a formal mathematical definition of what the program is supposed to do.
Specification : Implementation :: Theorem : Proof
You have to remember: the theoretical community is very aware of the Curry-Howard isomorphism. Just like it would be hard to get a mathematician's attention by merely showing them a proof without telling also telling them what theorem the proof is proving - by the same token, it's hard to get the attention of a theoretical computer scientist by merely showing them an implementation without showing them the specification that it implements.
Bitcoin is currently confronted with a mathematical or "computer science" problem: how to secure the network while getting high enough transactional throughput, while staying within the limited RAM, bandwidth and hard drive space limitations of current and future infrastructure.
The problem only becomes a political and economic problem if we give up on trying to solve it as a mathematical and "theoretical computer science" problem.
There should be a plethora of whitepapers out now proposing algorithmic solutions to these scaling issues. Remember, all we have to do is apply the Byzantine General consensus-reaching procedure to a worldwide database which shuffles 2.1 quadrillion tokens among a few billion addresses. The 21 company has emphatically pointed out that racing to compute a hash to add a block is an "embarrassingly parallel" problem - very easy to decompose among cheap, fault-prone, commodity boxes, and recompose into an overall solution - along the lines of Google's highly successful MapReduce.
I guess what I'm really saying is (and I don't mean to be rude here), is that C and Python and Java programmers might not be the best qualified people to develop and formally prove the correctness of (note I do not say: "test", I say "formally prove the correctness of") these kinds of algorithms.
I really believe in the importance of getting the algorithms and architectures right - look at Google Search itself, it uses some pretty brilliant algorithms and architectures (eg, MapReduce, Paxos) which enable it to achieve amazing performance - on pretty crappy commodity hardware. And look at BitTorrent, which is truly p2p, where more demand leads to more supply.
So, in this vein, I will close this lengthy rant with an oddly specific link - which may or may not be able to make some interesting contributions to finding suitable algorithms, architectures and data structures which might help Bitcoin scale massively. I have no idea if this link could be helpful - but given the near-total lack of people from the Haskell and ML and functional worlds in these Bitcoin specification debates, I thought I'd be remiss if I didn't throw this out - just in case there might be something here which could help us channel the massive computing power of the Bitcoin network in such a way as to enable us simply sidestep this kind of desperate debate where both sides seem right because the other side seems wrong.
https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/neil.ghani/papers/ghani-calco07
The above paper is about "higher dimensional trees". It uses a bit of category theory (not a whole lot) and a bit of Haskell (again not a lot - just a simple data structure called a Rose tree, which has a wikipedia page) to develop a very expressive and efficient data structure which generalizes from lists to trees to higher dimensions.
I have no idea if this kind of data structure could be applicable to the current scaling mess we apparently are getting bogged down in - I don't have the game-theory skills to figure it out.
I just thought that since the blockchain is like a list, and since there are some tree-like structures which have been grafted on for efficiency (eg Merkle trees) and since many of the futuristic scaling proposals seem to also involve generalizing from list-like structures (eg, the blockchain) to tree-like structures (eg, side-chains and tree-chains)... well, who knows, there might be some nugget of algorithmic or architectural or data-structure inspiration there.
So... TL;DR:
(1) I'm freaked out that this blocksize debate has splintered the community so badly and dragged on so long, with no resolution in sight, and both sides seeming so right (because the other side seems so wrong).
(2) I think Bitcoin could gain immensely by using high-level formal, algebraic and co-algebraic program specification and verification languages (such as Maude including Maude-NPA, Mobile Maude parameterized skeletons, etc.) to specify (and possibly also, to some degree, verify) what Bitcoin does - before translating to low-level implementation languages such as C and Python and Java saying how Bitcoin does it. This would help to communicate and reason about programs with much more mathematical certitude - and possibly obviate the need for many political and economic tradeoffs which currently seem dismally inevitable - and possibly widen the collaboration on this project.
(3) I wonder if there are some Big Data approaches out there (eg, along the lines of Google's MapReduce and BigTable, or Yale's CalvinDB), which could be implemented to allow Bitcoin to scale massively and painlessly - and to satisfy all stakeholders, ranging from millionaires to micropayments, coffee drinkers to the great "unbanked".
submitted by BeYourOwnBank to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

The fastest, easiest and cheapest way to send micro-donations (as well as Macro-payments) around the world, instantly: Bitcoin

So right now I can send you 10 cents or 1 million dollars instantly from my phone wallet, using bitcoin. Anywhere in the world, fee-free, instantly. The blockchain technology is amazing!, here is some info about it:
Decentralized/peer-to-peeworldwide distributed systems are the way to empower the people and bypass banks and all centralized financial institutions, the path to re-set the control from the few to the many, are the future for everything. The potential implications of the development of distributed consensus technologies is revolutionary.
We have now an open source peer to peer decentralized digital currency. It is very safe, since is cryptographically secured by a distributed global mathematical algorithm and public decentralized open source ledger, a revolutionary disruptive technology called 'Blockchain'. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_chain
This could be the future of money for everything, from donations, micropayments, money transfers, online shopping and bill payments, etc.
Empowering and welcoming to the game to billions of unbanked people. And the blockchain peer-to-peer open source decentralized secure technology will be used for many more applications, like escrow, contracts, voting, global ledger, etc.
We shouldn't be like the ones that were dismissing the internet not long ago as a "den of pedophiles, drug dealers and terrorists". The blockchain is the biggest thing since the internet and will benefit also the billions of under and unbanked people.
Bill Gates: “Bitcoin Technology is Key” https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bill-gates-bitcoin-technology-key/
WSJ article about FINCEN recognizing bitcoin: http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323407104579037301852662422 Bloomberg article about IRS legitimizing bitcoin as property: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-25/bitcoin-is-property-not-currency-in-tax-system-irs-says.html
PayPal now lets shops accept Bitcoin: http://money.cnn.com/2014/09/26/technology/paypal-bitcoin/index.html?iid=HP_LN
Bitcoin goes mainstream: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/29/bitcoin-circle-cryptocurrency-jeremy-allaire
Bank Of England: Digital currencies and how do they work https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxDKE_gQX_M&feature=youtu.be
Transfer money anywhere, safely, no fees, no middlemen, no charge-backs for merchants and no fraud.
These are just physical businesses accepting bitcoin:
http://coinmap.org/
With tens of thousands more online:
http://www.coinjabber.com/
Some of the Big companies accepting Bitcoin:
PayPal, VirginGalactic, CheapAir, Uber, Wordpress,Wikipedia, Zynga,Dish Network,Suntimes, Gyft, CheapAir, TigerDirect, OverStock, Expedia, Newegg, 1-800-Flowers.com, Dell,LordandTaylor, Shopify, Foodler, Digital River, Scan.co, Overclockers.co.uk, Takeaway.com, Wix.com, Cheaperthansteam.com, eGifter.com, Etsy.com, King’s College, OKCupid, Mint.com, Pizzaforcoins.com, Reddit, Square, Twitch.tv, Zappos.com, Menufy
If you want to learn more:
http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/
https://www.weusecoins.com/en/
https://www.trybtc.com/
https://bitcoin.org/en/
http://www.thebitcoinpage.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP9-lAYngi4
Quotes:
"Not having an internet strategy in 1995 is the equivalent of not having a bitcoin strategy now.” -Moe Levin
“I’m a big fan of Bitcoin … Regulation of money supply needs to be depoliticized.” -Al Gore
“Bitcoin is a technological tour de force.” -Bill Gates
“Bitcoin will do to banks what email did to the postal industry.” -Rick Falkvinge
“With e-currency based on cryptographic proof, without the need to trust a third party middleman, money can be secure and transactions effortless.” -Satoshi Nakamoto Historical graph: How much bitcoin a $1 dollar can buy? https://i.imgur.com/pR4ptme.jpg
Runaway Dollar Inflation Graph: (Source: the FED) https://i.imgur.com/t8oBzH0.jpg
How safe is bitcoin?
https://i.imgur.com/CzyO1yv.jpg
submitted by teelm to millionairemakers [link] [comments]

About Cardano, Ethereum and Bitcoin

According to this post: https://www.reddit.com/cardano/comments/7on3xs/how_does_cardano_approach_scaling_versus_ethereum/
I do not understand, I am a technical layman. I would like to ask, according to this statement, Cardano network with unique algorithm guarantees, the more people to trade, the more nodes, the faster the transaction speed, and each transaction is a fair fee, The incentive mechanism is well protected, remunerative to the operating nodes and funded by a voting mechanism for the sustainable development of the project. Bitcoins' lightning network technology allows for an unlimited increase in the number of small transactions and quick confirmation, not based on any third party, with almost zero fees. But in fact the lightning network as a top layer is based on the underlying blockchain, the underlying blockchain is not based on any third party. The combination of top and bottom trading, the credibility of the top channel transactions from the bottom. Reduce the load on the underlying blockchain by handing a large number of small transactions to the top lightning network. However, the top-of-the-line transaction costs almost zero and is credited quickly, at this point similar to what we normally use Paypal or Alipay. Micropayment is removed from the incentives and the underlying blockchain is responsible for the incentives. Large payments still have the highest confidence in the underlying blockchain because of the high demands placed on the security of the transaction. This is in line with the use of bitcoin digital gold. The lightning network does not rely on any third party, but in fact it relies on the underlying blockchain. According to the current development of the POW mechanism, the power of the underlying blockchain will soon be monopolized by the few large ore pools in the world. Cardano as a digital currency, its unique algorithm ensures the value of currency transactions. Every transaction requires the same fair handling fee, both decentralized and fair in the same way, and the more people and nodes you trade, the faster you trade. If you need to pay for sending an e-mail, there will be no more spam. The Cardano network can not be attacked by trash transactions. Each transaction has a fair handling fee and is distributed in an equitable and reasonable manner and the project itself is funded by democratic voting. I don't know if my understanding right? And what will the role of Ethereum?
submitted by chitoncats to cardano [link] [comments]

[uncensored-r/CryptoCurrency] A Breakdown of the 4 Leading Financial Cryptocurrencies

The following post by brianjly is being replicated because some comments within the post(but not the post itself) have been openly removed.
The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link:
np.reddit.com/ CryptoCurrency/comments/7q66rx
The original post's content was as follows:
This post is written by a friend of mine who works in the financial services industry. I’m posting it for him because he doesn’t have a Reddit account:
I work in the financial services industry myself, and I decided it might be beneficial to provide my opinion on some of the leading financial cryptos based off their website/white papers/news I've read. Today I'll be covering the 4 leading financial cryptos in my opinion: XRP, REQ, OMG, XLM.
Market Cap & Ranking Graph
Ripple (XRP)
  1. Description: Cross border transactions between banks and payment providers
  2. Slogan: “Enterprise blockchain solutions for global payments”
  3. Potential Market Size: $155 trillion/year cross border transactions (McKinsey Global Payments Industry Study)
  4. Primary Focus: Ripple has had huge success lately given its focus on satisfying and providing cross-border payment services for big banks, who have driven up the price of Ripple. It currently has 100+ customers and has the most enterprise traction of the four coins. One big risk is the 55 billiion XRP put into an escrow out of a max 100 billion XRP. Once these escrows expire, there is always the risk of the company flooding the market with XRP. That being said, while Ripple is much further ahead than the other 3 coins, I fear that banks will license Ripple’s blockchain that is centrally governed without intended usage of their token.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ripple (payment protocol)
  6. Market Cap: ~$77B
Request Network (REQ)
  1. Description: A decentralized network for payment requests
  2. Slogan: “The Future of Commerce”
  3. Potential Market Size: $1,825 trillion/year on the SWIFT network that Request Network can capture on its platform (Extrapolated using daily historicals from U.S. Dept. of Treasury)
  4. Primary Focus: Request Network, also known as “Paypal 2.0” is a Y-Combinator-backed project created by the founders of Moneytis. Request Network has the biggest opportunity of the four. They are building out the infrastructure for payments and accounting/auditing between both businesses and consumers. Request will be more secure (blockchain tech), intelligent (smart contracts and IoT) and universal (supports all currencies both Fiat and cryptocurrencies) than Paypal. A key differentiator of Request is its usage of “token burning” during transactions, which intrinsically increases the value of the remaining REQ coins. In addition, Request is heavily focused on reputation management and helping accountants and auditors easily review transactions at extremely low costs. My concern here is that they are the earliest stage project of the four and also the most ambitious project, soon to be released on Mainnet. That being said, their team has executed ahead of planned timelines and I believe they seem to have the right expertise to get the job done.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ethereum
  6. Market Cap: ~$480M (Market cap is ~1/194 the size of Paypal at current valuation)
  7. Paypal Market Cap for comparison: ~$97B
OmiseGo (OMG)
  1. Description: Advanced e-wallet and payment platform
  2. Slogan: “Unbank the Banked with Ethereum.”
  3. Potential Market Size: N/A (market not clearly defined)
  4. Primary Focus: Many people around the world can’t get a credit card or pay for items online because geographically there are no banks around or their credit score is too low to receive financial services. OmiseGo looks to change that by enabling everyone in especially in developing countries to create an e-wallet that enables this underserved population the ability to cash in and cash out without a bank account at low costs. They have an enormous presence in Asia, and their vision is to look like the bank of the future. My concerns here are adoption outside of the Asian countries given the difficulty of scaling across geographies as well as a tough name to pronounce resulting in the necessity for a potential re-branding, but a very solid project with a fair amount of adoption nevertheless.
  5. Architecture: Built on Ethereum
  6. Market Cap: ~$2.5B
OmiseGo Edit:
Some additional points to note are its recent acquisition of Paysbuy (large payment service provider in Thailand) and partnerships with McDonald's Thailand and Alipay. It's often thought REQ and OMG are quite similar which they are, but their focus is different. OMG is firstly focused on banking and e-wallet services, while REQ is currently more focused on the actual payment request process and the accounting behind it, which you'll realize are quite different despite both moving in the same direction.
Stellar (XLM)
  1. Description: Cross border currency transfers between developing countries
  2. Slogan: “Move Money Across Borders Quickly, Reliably, And For Fractions Of A Penny”
  3. Potential Market Size: N/A (market not clearly defined)
  4. Primary Focus: Stellar competes directly with Ripple at different ends of the market. Stellar is a great project focused on providing low-cost financial services for lower classed individuals, whereas Ripple is focused on profit generation and founded by ex-bankers. Stellar differentiates itself through solutions targeted around micropayments, mobile banking and services for the underbanked (similar to OmiseGo). The thing I like about Stellar is that structurally it is set-up as a non-profit and something established for the people to easily exchange money between one another. I think the market is large enough to support multiple competitors, but it is important to note that they compete with Ripple in cross-border transactions and OmiseGo in services to the underbanked.
  5. Architecture: Built on Stellar (payment network)
  6. Market Cap: ~$11.7B
Stellar Edit:
Expanding on Stellar based off comments, let's clarify that Stellar is indeed founded by one of the co-founders of Ripple, which makes them somewhat similar. But wanted to key in on a few more points that make XLM unique: no mining with circulating supply of 100 billion lumens from the start @ 1% inflation rate and a recent partnership with IBM for cross-border payments as a bridge currency. Finally it's important to look at their Stellar Development Foundation, which controls the distribution of Lumens. Distribution is split as follows: 50% through Direct Sign-up Program, 25% through Partnership Program, 20% through Bitcoin program and 5% held by the foundation to support operations. Note this effect is huge because they can also unleash a large amount of lumens, but they do have a more defined mandate for dilution than Ripple.
Read more about it here: https://www.stellar.org/about/mandate/
Disclaimer and Final Words:
I am a holder of all four coins, but from a returns standpoint, I am most bullish on Request Network given it has the largest market size, smallest market cap and an incredible team. But from a risk standpoint, Ripple is the lowest risk coin to hold given its widespread adoption and use across numerous banks that are displayed on their website. Honorable mention for both Stellar and OmiseGo, which are superb projects that will still succeed. Remember that the financial market is extremely deep with trillions of dollars in transactions moved every day, so there is ample room for all four of these coins to find their niche whether it is in a certain region of the world or in certain product types (i.e. micropayments). All in all, you can’t go wrong holding a portfolio of these four coins because each one of these cryptocurrencies are going to kill it in 2018!
 
Sources:
  1. https://ripple.com/
  2. https://omisego.network/
  3. https://request.network/#/
  4. https://www.stellar.org/
  5. https://coinmarketcap.com/
submitted by censorship_notifier to noncensored_bitcoin [link] [comments]

Tangle (DAG), The Phenomenal Solution Oriented Approach to all Blockchain Cryptocurrencies woes

https://preview.redd.it/ij86oj9478511.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=6d0c83701b368623182acc56ce2c563860b527e9
Tangle (DAG) for some is a just a buzzword, while for others, it has become the best way of crypto financing or may be, a way of living. There are a number of different cryptocurrencies flourishing in the market such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, ETH, NEM, Ripple, IOTA and Litecoin etc. All these cryptocurrencies have multi-billion dollar worth in the financial market but still, there are some technology related shortcomings Let us first look at the evolution of Tangle (DAG), what it is actually and how it has become, what it is today.
Evolution of Tangle (DAG):
DAG in Tangle stands for Directed Acyclic Graph. So, it is a kind of a directed graph type which employs such data structure which brings into use the topological ordering as well. The system is designed in such a way that the sequence could only possibly move from the earlier to the later point and not otherwise. Briefly, it has application where there are issues related to the processing of data, looking for the optimized navigation path, scheduling and data compression. In order to understand the evolution of Tangle (DAG), we need to connect dots back in the year 2015, when the blockchain was the standalone ruling technology. Before this enormous popularity of blockchain was achieved, it was just known as a conventional data structure that is using the Bitcoin technology. So, the transition from just being an ordinary technology to a popular one helped it gain the title of Blockchain 1.0, the pioneer and the first of its kind.
That was the time when Ethereum based model (also used by CyBitTM) was creating great waves in the crypto circle as a much loved decentralized platform which was preferred for running just as it is programmed. Soon, with time, Ethereum model became to be known as the Blockchain 2.0. This is the time when there are many speculations about what would become the Blockchain 3.0. This could probably be the Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) for a number of its good characteristics which might not be possessed by all of its predecessors or other related technologies.
Bitcoin VS Tangle (DAG):
What is Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is the pioneer in the decentralized digital currency, where their worldwide payment system is made to work without having any central authority, single administrator or a central bank. Unlike the fiat currencies, Bitcoin has got limited supply which is tightly scrutinized by the underlying algortithm.it is an open source platform whose code is readily available over the web in order to be manipulated by the project developers as per their needs in the projects.
Pros:
· It comes with a minimal transaction cost.
· The digital nature provides immense protection against possible payment fraud.
· Bitcoin just on its own made over $8 billion in transactions as compared to a total of $132 million done altogether by Fedwire, Bank of America, Western Union, PayPal and Automated Clearing House (ACH).
· Ensures direct transfer and eliminates any need for third party approval for payments.
· The technology protects your identity and other information over the public network.
Cons:
· Transactions carried through Bitcoin blockchain network are irreversible. It means if you make a transaction accidentally then your funds are lost forever.
· Bitcoin has scalability issues as a block size limit of 1MB is still imposed.
· By nature, the Bitcoin network could be used for illicit funding and immoral activities.
Comparison of Bitcoin VS Tangle (DAG):
· Centralization – We have seen earlier that small miners makes large groups for the sake of lessening the reward’s variation. This situation propels into the concentration of power going into the control of a handful of operators. It enables them to implement policies of wide spectrum, including postposing and filtering policies over a certain range of transactions. Although, no reporting of such incidents anytime in the past with the misuse of power but certainly there was the presence of such an opportunity. This is what Tangle is. Bitcoin, on the other hand is known for somewhat having a centralized control. Just imagine that there are 10 mining pools which accounts for 80 percent of the mined blocks over the past week and all exist Japan. This is an issue as just imagine a regulation change in Japan resulting in a large chunk Bitcoin hardware getting totally isolated from the other parts of the world.
· Cryptography – Tangle technology make use of the quantum resistant algorithms for cryptography which are immune to any kind of the brute force attack. Moreover, Tangle also diminishes any chances of having a Quantum consensus attack impact by a million times. This on the other side is an issue with Bitcoin, as that could be crippled with an instantaneous Quantum computers large scale deployment.
· Micropayments – Bitcoin in its initial days had very low transaction fees and was the unique selling point of Bitcoin at that time. But, with time, the transaction fees went quite high. Tangle, has no transaction fees, whatsoever. You may send a token worth a fraction of dollar with no payment of any transaction fees.
· Partition – Bitcoin requires transactions to be fully relayed by the nodes that are hooked up with the network. There is no possibility of carrying out any transactions in an off-chain manner as the ledger update is constantly required in order to restrict ant double spends cases. The Tangle may operate without the need to be hooked up with the main Tangle. You may do so with the connection with ease and whenever you want.
Ethereum VS Tangle (DAG):
What is Ethereum?
Ethereum is one of the finest and innovative open source blockchain technology offering distributed computer network. Ethereum by nature is very much similar to the Bitcoin technology discussed above but, there are some notable technology-based differences between the two. Their major difference is in their capability and purpose. With an Ethereum blockchain as the one entrusted by CyBitTM, the miners work for earning Ether, which is a particular type of a crypto token required for fueling the network, instead of mining bitcoin. Ether more so is also employed by the developers of the platform to pay the required transaction fees and for any of the services on the Ethereum network.
Pros:
· In an Ethereum network, no third party could ever make any possible change to the data.
· The Ethereum platform is totally corruption free as it is almost impossible to make any kind of censorship.
· Any app that is connected to Ethereum would hardly ever go down and this could never be shut down as well.
· Ethereum can largely be trusted for the fundraising campaigns by making use of the smart contracts.
· There is no set limit for the platform in Megabytes
· Ethereum, for mining the Ether tokens just takes about 14seconds, which is quick as compared to the bitcoin, that takes somewhere over 4 hours.
· The algorithm that the network uses for mining Ether tokens is known as “Proof of Work” and this is smart enough to restrict any kind of hacker attacks.
Cons:
· The smart contracts are programmed manually so there is an element of possible human error which could lead to code bugs and result in unintended actions to be taken.
· If there is any possible attack or exploitation in the network then only possible way to stop this is to rewrite the underlying code and go for a network consensus prior to that.
Comparison of Ethereum VS Tangle (DAG):
· Mining – Ethereum is totally dependent upon the miners to work for validating the carried transactions. Tangle on the other hand does not need miners to validate any transaction. Actually, every transacting device over the network of Tangle is required for validating transactions.
· Speed – The transaction speed of Tangle is about double to that of the Ethereum. In actual comparison, Ethereum takes about 6 minutes for completing its transaction while Tangle takes just about 3 minutes for doing the same job.
· Transaction Speed - As Tangle by nature has no miners at all in its network, so for carrying out any transactions, no transaction fees is required to be paid. On the flipside, Ethereum does require a transaction fee to be paid in order to complete it.
· Efficiency – Tangle is far more efficient than the Ethereum as lack of mining means that not much energy is required for running the Tangle network. Ternary logic in place of the binary logic also makes Tangle network more efficient. Ethereum is still known for relying on mining and for this reason, it consumes a lot of energy.
· Open Source – Ethereum enjoys a completely open source platform, in contrast to the closed-nature platform of Tangle, which is highly criticized for such a structure.
· Inflation – IOTA, one of the application of Tangle is known to have all its tokens being already issues. On the other end, the supply for Ethereum would always be increasing. This scenario in other word means that Ethereum has a risk for inflation and Tangle doesn’t.
NEM VS Tangle (DAG):
What is NEM?
NEM is a versatile open source natured blockchain platform which came into the crypto scene in January 2014. It is popular for meeting the requirements of the mainstream industry which are known to stretch far ahead in the clean crypto type applications. This incredible financial solution can be entrusted for the varying needs such as for making payments and ensuring settlement in a completely controlled and as well as private environments. NEMs private version is known as Mijin which is popularly used in Japan by 140 plus institutions.
Pros:
· NEM is loved by most of the users for the fact that it has pure and a highly tried and tested application outside of the crypto. It is applicable for real world applications and can be used for settling any asset.
· NEM uses harvesting model instead of the conventional mining. Users are tempted to harvest more for the incentive or the reward they get for harvesting.
· Transaction fees is the lowest among many of the blockchain cryptocurrencies.
· NEM has the potential to verify a transaction just in a matter of little over a couple of minutes.
· NEM can be used for a lot more applications other than just the financial and monetary solutions. For example, theoretically, NEM can be used for storing any kind of official documents such as company shares or birth certificates etc.
Cons:
· Proof of work is used by the NEM model which in today’s time is just considered as a total waste of time, computing energy and other monetary resources.
· Scalability just like Bitcoin is an issue having a block size fixed at 1MB.
Comparison of NEM VS Tangle (DAG):
· Public or Private – The NEM technology has got the potential to impeccably interface between he private and public network chains. This enables you to transfer files, crypto tokens or currency from your internal private network to another company’s private network using the public blockchain. On the other hand, Tangle majorly is a public network.
· Speed – Speed is the best selling point of NEM. NEM is known for completing its transaction successfully in 3 seconds. This is quite low as compared to that of Tangle which is around 3 minutes. Although, 3 minutes for Tangle is still good as compared to several other blockchain based cryptocurrencies.
· Transaction Fee – NEM does have a transaction fee to be paid for every transaction carried, along with any additional fee if message is included. The Tangle on the other hand has absolutely no fee for carrying out transactions over its network.
· Fork – NEM is an open source project and it’s codebase is available online so that any developer working on NEM project could download, modify and upload the code as per their project’s requirements. On the other end, Tangle is completely closed-end solution with no such flexibility available as compared to NEM or may be other blockchain technologies.
· Harvesting – NEM employs the concept of harvesting instead of mining. In this case, approved users only with a certain number of XEM could only harvest. This makes absolutely no room for cheating or a scam to take place. The Tangle on the other end does not require mining for validating transactions, but nonetheless, it is also a secure model for users.
Litecoin VS Tangle (DAG):
What is Litecoin?
Litecoin, under the blockchain umbrella comes as one of the many online currencies of decentralized nature. The currency could be employed for performing online transactions and purchases, including website development, buying subscriptions or ordering things like jewelry online. Just like other blockchain based cryptocurrencies, it provide users with a very easy and quick method for accepting money online. The payment receiver has the potential for quick verification of the transaction made and this Litecoin platform is actually much quicker than Bitcoin and several other blockchain based technologies.
Pros:
· Litecoin in terms of completing a transaction is the fastest among many of the popular blockchain based cryptocurrencies.
· The transaction fee in this model is as good as zero as compared to Bitcoin.
· Mining is far easier in Litecoin as compared to other cryptocurrencies due to the inclusion of its innovative ‘Prove of Work’ algorithm.
· Litecoin has a very low market cap when compared with the other top of the line tokens in the crypto market of today.
· Security is impeccable which has grown in quality since its inception some 6 years ago.
Cons:
· Litecoin is touted as a kind of modified version of bitcoin and it lacks innovations of its own. It has got significant identity problem and it gets a kind of over-shadowed in the presence of Bitcoin crypto platform.
· Once the scalability issue of Bitcoin is resolved then Litecoin market would definitely be negatively impacted.
Comparison of Litecoin VS Tangle (DAG):
· Speed – In comparison to the 3 minutes speed of transaction completion for the Tangle platform, the speed for same for the Litecoin is 10 times than the Tangle. Yes, you read that right, transaction speed for Litecoin is 30 minutes. However, Litecoin transaction validation is very quick and is just a matter of seconds.
· Transaction feed – As stated above in comparison of multiple other blockchain platforms with Tangle, the later has got no transaction fees at all. In case of Litecoin, there is a transaction fee but that is too little.
· Mining – Litecoin like almost all other blockchain based cryptocurrencies rely over the mining mechanism for validating all the transactions carried on through its network. On the other hand, Tangle as mentioned above does not require mining at all.
· Market Cap – Litecoin is known to have a market cap which is even lower than that for NEM and ETC, which is required when the volumes are higher. On the other hand, Tangle is fully scalable and does not have any such market cap imposed.
https://preview.redd.it/6tf2oq7d78511.png?width=833&format=png&auto=webp&s=1ccacd2c1fc30ba1c28dcbdb706a39b2a4f71bc5
The Critical Tangle bug:
As we have learned by now that the Tangle network has got the potential to validate transactions in quick time, which is all thanks to its graph structure. However, it has also been noticed that the current implementations in several crypto projects are seeing another big issue of synchronization. It is the need for the synchronization of the states in the network between the nodes. There are ICOs using such models who have multiple impractical solutions to these issues. Some are having a single node controller mechanism while some using a multi-node (as many as 12 nodes) controller. Such controllers are operated directly by the developer and this does not make it an ideal solution, mainly because of having immense human intervention, leading to many possible human errors. Furthermore, it is also not ideal because of having a single point of failure.
The Blockless Model Idea:
Just as we write this, the IOTA, IoT Chain and Byteball are the major players in the crypto market that are categorized as the blockless projects. With the blockchain core cryptocurrencies, the main bottleneck is the limited creation speed. As far as bitcoin is concerned then it is known to generate a new block in every 10 minutes which is too long to manage a highly complex network. Ethereum on the other hand is much better, but still it takes some 20 seconds for the purpose of validating the block. Has anybody ever thought that why at all we need a block? If you understand the bitcoin network then it is seen that numerous transactions carried are actually mined into the form of block. At the same time, the sequence of transaction is recorded by the pre-hashes that exists between the blocks. So, how is that for an idea if we go on to combine the transactions and blocks together? In this situation, every transaction should be made involved directly in the maintenance of the sequences. So, once, any transaction is carried, there is a possibility for the mining process to be skipped. This all shapes up into an efficient, blockless model which will have the best of both the blockchain and Tangle technologies, thus giving us the most optimized and trusted solution.
Final Word:
In essence, blockchain is good with its data integrity features and in security and transactions handling features, Tangle has a definite edge over blockchain. At this point of time, it could be concluded that Tangle is better than blockchain, but at the same time, it doesn’t take much away from the credibility of the blockchain as the other is a novice technology and taking its stepping stones towards success. However, it can be safely said that tangle has got great potential for beating blockchain in the near future.

Guney Demirci
VP Operation (VPO)
Blockchain Fintech Product
CyBit Limited | Cybit.io
Copyright © CyBit Limited 2018. All rights reserved.
submitted by CybitCorp to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

PayPal Digital Goods Micropayments WooCommerce Extension for PayPal Micropayments What are micropayments? How To Buy Bitcoin With PayPal Using VirWox 2018 Using PayPal with Microsoft Dynamics 365 - YouTube

Bitcoin and PayPal take off: 346 million get crypto access. After the payment provider’s statement, Bitcoin and PayPal’s shares reacted promptly. The crypto community is euphoric, and both the ... Digital money that’s instant, private, and free from bank fees. Download our official wallet app and start using Bitcoin today. Read news, start mining, and buy BTC or BCH. After months of development and hype, Brave Software Inc. has finally released an update that integrates under-the-hood bitcoin micropayments right into its browser.. Also read: Private Internet ... Bitcoin is a distributed, worldwide, decentralized digital money. Bitcoins are issued and managed without any central authority whatsoever: there is no government, company, or bank in charge of Bitcoin. You might be interested in Bitcoin if you like cryptography, distributed peer-to-peer systems, or economics. A large percentage of Bitcoin enthusiasts are libertarians, though people of all ... Mikrotransaktionen oder Micropayments. Das Problem ist jedoch. Kleine Geldbeträge im Netz zu verschicken, ist bisher fast unmöglich. Der beliebte Zahlungsdienstleister Paypal beispielsweise nimmt pro Transaktion mindestens 35 Cent Gebühren, in manchen Situationen auch weniger. Aber unter zehn Cent läuft eigentlich nichts. Dabei bieten ...

[index] [5301] [36385] [26197] [8146] [31439] [23916] [27881] [22669] [37722] [3875]

PayPal Digital Goods Micropayments

Bitcoin soared to its highest level since July 2019, gaining 15% during the last 10 days. The movement was support by PayPal last week announcement of the la... What are micropayments? ... 4:33. Bitcoin Uncensored Recommended for you. 4:33. How to Use Paypal: Avoiding Fees and Scams - Duration: 3:28. GBR 102,198 views. 3:28. Stone Setting Tips and Tricks ... This is how you buy Bitcoin with PayPal in USA. Also credit/debit cards and prepaid gift cards! Also credit/debit cards and prepaid gift cards! - Duration: 19:04. With Microsoft Dynamics 365, you can setup many different payment services. In this video, we show how to add a link to PayPal automatically on your invoices... This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue

#