Nasdaq Plans To Become Cryptocurrency Exchange

This is huge news with the CEO of Nasdaq saying they would consider becoming a cryptocurrency exchange.   One caveat is that Adena Friedman said she is waiting for the market to mature.   I anticipate she sees the threat to cryptocurrency as the fact that we don’t know for sure which currencies will be around in the coming years.  She is waiting for the dot-com like bubble to burst which is an excellent strategy for managing the risk.

The fact that Nasdaq would even contemplate this plus the big money from Wall Street going into cryptocurrency is a very positive sign of where the industry is heading.  The coins that survive the bust will become incredibly valuable and I think Bitcoin is one of them dispute its many issues and drawbacks.  It is a tricky call, with one risk of course being hardforks.  After more Bitcoin scams and hardforks will people possibly lose interest in Bitcoin or will it increase interest in the real Bitcoin?

Either way it may be a bumpy and turbulent ride, but cryptocurrency is looking like its about to create its own economy.  Trading cryptocurrency is not the issue though, as we still wait the “messiah coin” which will hopefully resolve the many issues that we have today.  I’d like to see a coin that does everything right or most things right rather than focusing on just a single aspect.

The time will come and the market will follow.  Everyone hold on things are about to keep getting interesting in 2018!

Federal Reserve Says Bitcoin Cannot Replace the US Dollar

The new chief of the San Francisco branch, of the privately held, Federal Reserve Bank has stated that Bitcoin cannot, and will not ever replace the US Dollar.  First of all, they are doing a fantastic job and understand their market and duties.  They cannot step into this job and say anything else and expect to keep it.

I get it, Bitcoin is printed without supposed backing, although it is backed by a lot of physical hardware assets and electricity.  Fiat currency, especially the US Dollar is printed and floated without any controls or restrictions.  Well, actually, the only control and restriction is that there is none.  The Federal Reserve prints at will and on demand, without limitation or backing of any sort, and they have long abandoned the gold standard.

The fact that the Federal Reserve would comment at all on this matter and mention Bitcoin, to me, is very telling that it is very much a possibility.  When you have this much money put into something that is being traded worldwide, every second, and such an ecosystem I think it is an excellent contender to the US Dollar and fiat currency in general.  Remember, fiat is backed by nothing as well and printed without any limit.  Most cryptocurrencies actually are limited in how many coins can be mined or minted at any rate.

Cryptocurrency is currently at a $421 Billion USD market cap and I think it won’t be long before it is in the trillion dollar range.  This is ultimately the worst nightmare for any central banker with so many competitors, of course your number one priority should be outlawing them and shutting them down.

On that end the Fed is right to do it and is doing their job well.  However, for people who don’t essentially control the fiat financial system, we would do well to root for cryptocurrency as an alternative system.  I think both systems can survive and work together, but if fiat pushes it too much, I think there may be a digital currency revolution that far surpassed the digital rights movement of the late 90s and early 2000s that caught the RIAA and MPAA by surprise.

Verge XVG Mining Exploit Results in $1.1M Heist

In all fairness it was just 3 hours, they have corrected the issue and have apologized which is the way to handle it.  This won’t make me panic sell my Verge coins.


XVG-Verge-ApologiesforMiningAttack
However, a scam closely followed right into the tweet discussion about this with a fake Verge account scamming users by apologizing for the hack (very ironic).

 

 

Because of how well they handled it I have a lot of faith in their team.  Lately a lot of blockchains have been attacked and exploited which is only natural.  Contrary to popular belief blockchain is not invincible or infallible.  Likewise, the people who code the applications and algorithms that run them are only human, so let’s give them a break.

To close this attack vector permanently it looks like a hardfork will be necessary (I generally dislike hardforks but this is a case of necessity).  But once again I’ll say it is a flaw in the majority of permissionless blockchains.  The client side shouldn’t care about this (just as we don’t care about the backend of our bank we only care about using our money).

I see the value of XVG has plummeted as a result, even though similar issues have happened with Bytecoin and Monero due to a flaw that allowed the creation of extra coins in Cryptonight.  I would fathom that a lot, if not most blockchains have been attacked and this has gone undetected and/or unreported.  It is likely just a matter of time.  This still puzzles me more because I think the Ethereum, parity issue, Bitcoin Gold Scam and what I suspect was a similar issue with Raiblocks didn’t impact the value as much.  With that said, this is one more reason I feel PoW is unsustainable and doesn’t help secure networks at all, as even without technical exploits you can still cause damage by having more hashing power than others.

I am not overly concerned about this issue and a big part of that is how the team handles things and it looks like they’ve taken ownership of the problem and have corrected it (something rare in this industry).

Swiss Researchers Forecast Sideways Trading and Downward Pressure on Bitcoin for 2018

They have based it on Metcalfe’s law which says at this point that Bitcoin could lose another 27%.  The group also cites the part I agree with, in that so far cryptocurrency prices are mainly driven by Bitcoin which means Altcoins (other than Bitcoin) have risen and fallen in direct correlation.

Where I am not sure if I agree or disagree is their theory that a lot of this is driven by fear in the news.  While I am sure it is, if the fear is unfounded why should bad news reflect on the long-term valuation?

A sensible market would be wise to react to say the hacks that have happened to Ethereum or the fact that illegal content has been inserted into the Bitcoin Blockchain.  That is bad news that has relevance since these issues potentially threaten the integrity of the entire blockchain.

While we’re on the topic of Metcalfe’s law, since cryptocurrency is a completely new and largely irrational market can we trust this is a valid predictor?  I am not aware that any other traditional models have successfully called any of the major events in cryptocurrency.

I do agree it was time for a significant correction but the same has happened in commodities and stocks before, yet the stock markets keep moving (albeit with a lot of money printing and manipulation-is that what regulators mean by regulation for cryptocurrency? :) ).

Only time will tell where things head but I do think that currencies that are efficient, secure and easy to use will stand the test of time (which admittedly are very few and I cannot think of a single one that solves all of the issues just yet).

Telegram Raises 1.2Billion in unnecessary ICO

I’ve checked their website but not the whitepaper (it took forever and never loaded-why use a PDF and a slow server?) and I’m shaking my head.  There is little to no background on the website about exactly why this coin is needed, what it does or what it solves.

Granted they do say it is fast, allows decentralized apps but there are little details that are discernible to me.  I remain unconvinced that it is really anything but a cash grab like most ICOs are.

It’s hard to figure out if they are trying to be an Ethereum or a currency and how they would do things better?

Based on the website having just about 2 paragraphs of information I am very skeptical but time will tell.  I’m certainly not going to invest based on this information.  The question really remains is why would Telegram even need the money?

Surely they would already have enough to do this project and it should already be done based on their resources.  For that reason alone it reminds me of another regret from FINOM.  FINOM convinced me because they have existing projects up, running and making money and it turned it to be a scam (I never received my tokens and see no evidence of anything being delivered in terms of performance).

Telegram looks to be about the same, they have a working application that is successful.  Why do you need to collect money at all if it’s not just a cash grab?

I think that is the litmus test for judging ICOs which appear to come from trustworthy teams and successful projects.  If they should already have the money and resources and are doing an ICO, they chances are it’s only to collect your coins.

 

We Need A Better Coin Now!

Cryptocurrency today as of the time of this writing is in a bit of a flux and identity crisis.  Part of this is due to a well directed campaign in the news via government and banking entities.  However, I will always give credit where it is due and many of the flaws that have been pointed out by these entities are completely true.  In fact, from a business, security and IT standpoint I find that most cryptocurrencies are almost impossible to use.  There are coins that individually address “some of the issues” but I have never seen a coin or team that “just seems to get it”.

Whether it’s how an ICO is run, basic functionality, security, privacy, getting out information it seems apparent to me that the vast majority of teams and coins do not sufficient combined IT and Business Knowledge to make things work.

There are just so many issues with a lot of the top coins that could kill them, let me name a few in no particular order.

Speed – 99% of cryptocurrencies are extremely slow taking minutes, hours or several days to complete a transaction!

Expensive – A lot of times you can spend a small fortune just sending a small amount of coin to someone (you could spend $100 to send $5 of coins with some Ethereum tokens for example)!

Security – Most coins are by default completely insecure.  Any coin that has a public ledger is insecure and has 0 privacy.  This allows for replay attacks and all kinds of nasty things.  It also means your activities are easily tracked and traced.  Imagine if your competitors can see exactly who is paying and who you are paying including the full amounts?  It would put your business at a huge disadvantage.  Having “public, permissionless blockchain” such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin etc..  will mean the coins can never be secure when the whole public is involved.

Hardforks – Most coins are easily counterfeited, hard or softforked where basically anyone can copy an entire coin and just rename it and call it their own, while confusing and devaluing the original coin holders.  This should never be able to happen just for the reason of sanity, continuity and integrity.  There have already been scams like the BTG Scam and replay attacks.

PoW/Mining – It is absolutely crazy that mining still exists, as cool as it originally was, mining is now a hindrance in many ways to the cryptocurrency community.  Not only is it wasteful in terms of energy resources, it is unsustainable in both environmental, monetary and functional terms.  Returns are so slow with most major coins that it is almost not worth it unless your power is cheap or free.

To top it off why on earth should we let transactions be controlled by “miners finding the next block”.  It doesn’t secure the network anymore and that is because coins like Bitcoin were created before ASICs and assumed “no one would party would hold more than 10% hashing power”.  Of course single pools in China have way more than 10% power and so do some mining farms possibly.  This means that pools and large farms could work together to defraud people by sending false transactions and confirming it among themselves.  By the time the scam is realized the parties who initiated the scam would already have escaped with the money.

Mining also leads to centralization, the very thing that cryptocurrency was meant to avoid.  This inevitable because as difficulty increases, only large corporate or government players with deep pockets can continue.

The same applies with running full nodes, large organizations will be the one running them.

Usability – Most coins are unusable because they are slow and insecure but to make it worse there’s more.  The current coins are not easily integrated in a secure way.  You shouldn’t have to run a full Litecoin, Bitcoin or Ethereum node on a huge mega server with tons of RAM and HDD just to create receiving addresses and receive payments.  This not only inefficient, it is insecure because the same computer that generates the receiving addresses is usually the one that holds the wallet/funds.

To top it off you can send to a wrong or non-existent address and lose your money forever with virtually all currencies.  Blockchain is just a big database, couldn’t some query be done to make sure the address actually exists?!  On top of that there is no feedback, send by e-mail or notifications by e-mail you always need to keep your wallet open to notice.  It would be much easier if these different functions are kept separate.  However this is a problem too because most cryptocurrencies are admittedly not secure if you don’t sync the entire chain.  And that’s another issue, syncing is a huge issue with coins like Ethereum it is extremely slow and takes a ridiculous amount of CPU cycles.  Imagine paying someone from Craigslist in person  and one of you says “hold on mate sorry I have to wait for my wallet to sync for hours or days!”.

 

Youtube’s Communist Censorship Plan

Youtube has announced it will be the new thought police.  They’ll be doing this by discouraging and contradicting any thoughts, beliefs or theories that are not within mainstream beliefs or teachings.  At this rate they’ll have met the gold standard for censorship and subversion and China will be viewed as an easier place to share your thoughts.  On its face it may not sound that bad to link to Wikipedia articles but in fact anyone can write and manipulate Wikipedia.  Google will be choosing what counterpoints to make by of course selecting which article(s) get linked to.  This is quite alarming and also frustrating since hate, racism and other harmful activity has been rampant on the web ever since it began but no company or government have made any concrete steps to counter it.  So why worry about people posting their alternative beliefs and thoughts online and exposing the lies of the news?  By the gauge of most the mainstream news is the fake news yet media giants like Facebook want to declare thoughts outside of that realm as “Fake News”.  By this method then the PRISM system of spying on and intercepting people’s private information is a “bad conspiracy theory” that people have to be warned away from (of course most now understand this was never a conspiracy since Edward Snowden revealed more details about what most already knew).  There are some valid reasons for this to be done (from the perspective of nice government men and corporate greed).  There is a lot of information being shared on Youtube about pharmaceutical companies and really whole swaths of very solid information about a lot of things going on in our world.  The majority of it is well sourced and quoted and most people won’t view that content as conspiracy.  Could it be that anything that doesn’t fit the viewpoint or ends of certain elite companies and people are what is really being targeted?  Until racism and hate has been cleaned up from these platforms I am just not buying there is any good or genuine reason for Google to do this.    I think we’re heading down a slippery slope to the point where freedom of thought and expression will be completely eliminated gradually through these policies.  Eventually Google will probably start deranking websites which fit into this category of “non-conformity” to the mainstream and elitists.

What do you guys think?  I think it’s time to support Tron (TRX) and any other decentralized social media platforms.  It’s time to take the internet back!

Washington Org Warns Of Petro Coin Threat

Based on an article from Brookings Institute they have a dire warning for all cryptocurrency users!  They first take a shot at the very idea of it helping Venezuela in the first paragraph “the idea that the petro can ameliorate an economic crisis rooted in the bolívar’s volatility seems unbelievable”.  It goes on to say it is a threat to all cryptocurrency “petro will not only fail to cure Venezuela’s economic woes but will also weaken the integrity of cryptocurrencies writ-large”.  And my last but most favorite quote is what I think it’s really about “As Turkey, Iran, Russia, and other sanctioned countries deal with their severe economic impacts, they might pursue the same fraudulent strategy as Venezuela: create a cryptocurrency tied to a government-controlled asset, raise money in violation of sanctions, and proceed to manipulate that cryptocurrency’s value to maximize profit.”

While they do make some valid points governments around the world create their own currency usually without any backing of gold or resources out of thin error and continue to manipulate their currencies all the time.   To call Petro Coin over any other coin or ICO doesn’t seem to be based on anything other than political views. I think the article is highly biased and that Brookings is essentially the mouth piece for Washington and cannot be taken seriously.

The fact that Petro raised over 700M USD is significant and is less likely to be a scam than the other 90% of ICOs out there.  If I want to offer criticism of Petro I am frustrated that they don’t have their own top level domain for it and that they didn’t allow individual investors to get in on the coin.  As an investor when things are difficult and information is not easy to find I get frustrated and lose interest.  I think that is really the biggest risk to the Petro Coin.  I also disagree with larger countries sanctioning smaller countries who do not do their bidding since it just ends up creating poverty and suffering for the average person.

I am long Petro Coin if they can get more organized and get out better information.  Petro Coin stands to succeed if not for the reason that there are powerful backers of it.  Historically this been enough for the weakest of states, currencies and assets to continue floating on.  It’s also the same principle of what makes Bitcoin work, people have invested into it in different ways and it continues to be used although I do agree all cryptocurrencies essentially need an overhaul and they are certainly lacking in ease, functionality and security but his will be resolved in time.

 

IMF Wants To Regulate Bitcoin with Blockchain!

Christine Lagarde of the IMF has suggested “fighting fire with fire” by regulating Bitcoin with the IMF’s own blockchain technology.  I am not sure what they are proposing on a technical level or what this common is really based on, but let’s read between the lines of the intention.

This is very exciting news as it signals the IMF is acknowledging that cryptocurrency and Bitcoin especially are here to stay.  They wouldn’t regulate something that they don’t expect to survive.

Now the bad news is that the IMF may have something up their sleeves that slows or impedes Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies from functioning as they should.  After all the IMF has also played roles that many of us do not think is constructive or fair to the countries that have used it.  If we apply the same scenario to Bitcoin it is time to get excited and scared at once.  It also seems disingenuous to imply cryptocurrency has a darkside while implying fiat doesn’t.  I get it and agree, fiat is better controlled so they like it but fiat is still used for crimes all the time.  If fiat wasn’t regulated under their control they would probably make similar statements about fiat instead of cryptocurrency.

The real question is what is the real intention?  Obviously as they’ve stated it is regulation but will the regulation make it so only the elite can trade Bitcoin or do they simply just want their own cut and control of cryptocurrency?  I think if we look at the history of their role and fiat, the truth will lay right in the middle but only as far as what they’ve decided should be the fate and role of fiat.  Both can coexist but do they intend for them to coexist or for one to roll over the other?

Either way announcements like this show us that cryptocurrency is certainly here to stay and it has caught the attention of the entire finance world.

The Future Of Blockchain Currencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum and Litecoin belong to governments, banks and large corporate players.

One aspect of cryptocurrencies that some users aren’t aware of is that decentralized blockchain based currencies are in their own ways their own worst enemy.  The blockchain is the problem, as currencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum keep getting slower due to their limited transactions per second, and the blockchain gets large this has started the end game.   The end game is clearly spelled out in Ethereum’s current white paper and it’s that essentially the blockchain will get so large no small players (individuals) will be able to participate.   This is because all transactions are stored in the blockchain ledger, and the more transactions the larger it gets.  Eventually the blockchains will grow to several terabytes and require more memory.  This will mean that only big corporate, government and banking players will have the resources to control these so-called decentralized currencies.  It is really inevitable unless a mechanism is adopted for off-loading this storage to trusted third parties.

I may not be a huge Microsoft fan but I think Ankur Patel has stated what many in the cryptocurrency already understand to be correct.

Patel said that blockchains that increase network capacity through on-chain scaling, which involves raising the blocksize, will eventually experience degraded centralization and will not be able to function on a “world-scale.”

https://www.ccn.com/public-blockchain-chain-scaling-degrades-decentralization-microsoft-researcher/

This is something that Stellar Lumens and Ripple essentially do.  They are a centralized blockchain that are generally faster than the competitors but are centralized and literally supported by big corporate players and banks.  These have pros and cons.  As an investment they are an excellent hedge against threatened regulations that people fear for the decentralized currencies and they also provide real value and work very well.

Is this all bad?  It’s hard to say because public blockchains can be attacked literally with DDOS/SPAM/bad blocks and this has happened with all the major currencies.  On top of that you are still giving up trust to unknown people and the value and stability of these currencies are at risk for other reasons such as hardfork cash grabs like Bitcoin Cash and the Bitcoin Gold Group.

The future is bright for crypto but these uncertainties need to be accounted for and sorted out.  It may be that the future is going to involve a combination of foundations and semi-decentralized currencies.