Bitcoin, Cryptocurrency And The Government Regulation Paradox

Flatten the Curve. #49. Let's Dig into Jade Helm. AI. The Surveillance State. Internet of Things. FISA. Pentagon Preparing for Mass Civil Breakdown. What is Mob Excess Deterrent Using Silent Audio? Stay Aware and Get Ahead of the Curve.

Flatten the Curve. Part 48. Source Here
It's getting crazier day by day now, so are you following the Boy Scout motto?
On this topic, Baden-Powell says: Remember your motto, "Be Prepared." Be prepared for accidents by learning beforehand what you ought to do in the different kinds that are likely to occur. Be prepared to do that thing the moment the accident does occur. In Scouting for Boys, Baden-Powell wrote that to Be Prepared means “you are always in a state of readiness in mind and body to do your duty.”
Why should you be prepared? Because TPTB have been preparing, that’s why.
June 12, 2014: The Guardian • Pentagon preparing for mass civil breakdown. Social science is being militarised to develop 'operational tools' to target peaceful activists and protest movements Source Here
Pentagon preparing for mass civil breakdown. It seemed ludicrous back in 2014, didn't it? Inconceivable. Sure some preppers believed it, but they're always getting ready and nothing happened. Doomsday was always right around the corner, and then the next corner, and on and on. Televangelists have probably accused more politicians of being the antichrist than the number of politicians went to Epstein's Island.
But why would they be preparing for mass civil breakdown? Could it be the same reason as why the miltary is preparing for war, droughts and famines brought about by environmental collapse?
February 20, 2020: History Network • Here’s Why These Six Ancient Civilizations Mysteriously Collapsed. From the Maya to Greenland’s Vikings, check out six civilizations that seemingly disappeared without a trace. Source Here
All of these civilizations vanished because of some combination of exhausting their natural resources, drought, plauge, and the little ice age. Sound familiar? Don't tell me that the Rockefeller Foundation and BlackRock became environmentally aware out of a sense of obligation to the planet. They're setting the groundwork for what's coming down the pipe. This isn't about money anymore, this is about control and survival. Throw out the rulebook because the rules no longer apply.
Do you think the surveillance system is for your protection, or the protection of the state? Don't you think that an era of upcoming calamities will severely damage the communication networks, and thus the surveillance system? It might be prudent to consider that Starlink is being established to make the system redundant, so that they never lose track of the precious worker bees before they can be connected to the AI hive mind, right Elon? Neuralink, don't leave home without it.
But let's not forget about the wonderful world of the Internet of Things.
March 15, 2012 • More and more personal and household devices are connecting to the internet, from your television to your car navigation systems to your light switches. CIA Director David Petraeus cannot wait to spy on you through them. Earlier this month, Petraeus mused about the emergence of an "Internet of Things" -- that is, wired devices -- at a summit for In-Q-Tel, the CIA's venture capital firm. "'Transformational' is an overused word, but I do believe it properly applies to these technologies," Petraeus enthused, "particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft." All those new online devices are a treasure trove of data if you're a "person of interest" to the spy community. Once upon a time, spies had to place a bug in your chandelier to hear your conversation. With the rise of the "smart home," you'd be sending tagged, geolocated data that a spy agency can intercept in real time when you use the lighting app on your phone to adjust your living room's ambiance. "Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters -- all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing," Petraeus said, "the latter now going to cloud computing, in many areas greater and greater supercomputing, and, ultimately, heading to quantum computing." Petraeus allowed that these household spy devices "change our notions of secrecy" and prompt a rethink of "our notions of identity and secrecy." All of which is true -- if convenient for a CIA director. The CIA has a lot of legal restrictions against spying on American citizens. But collecting ambient geolocation data from devices is a grayer area, especially after the 2008 carve-outs to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Hardware manufacturers, it turns out, store a trove of geolocation data; and some legislators have grown alarmed at how easy it is for the government to track you through your phone or PlayStation. That's not the only data exploit intriguing Petraeus. He's interested in creating new online identities for his undercover spies -- and sweeping away the "digital footprints" of agents who suddenly need to vanish. "Proud parents document the arrival and growth of their future CIA officer in all forms of social media that the world can access for decades to come," Petraeus observed. "Moreover, we have to figure out how to create the digital footprint for new identities for some officers." Source Here
December 19, 2019: New York Times • THE DATA REVIEWED BY TIMES OPINION didn’t come from a telecom or giant tech company, nor did it come from a governmental surveillance operation. It originated from a location data company, one of dozens quietly collecting precise movements using software slipped onto mobile phone apps. You’ve probably never heard of most of the companies — and yet to anyone who has access to this data, your life is an open book. They can see the places you go every moment of the day, whom you meet with or spend the night with, where you pray, whether you visit a methadone clinic, a psychiatrist’s office or a massage parlor. The Times and other news organizations have reported on smartphone tracking in the past. But never with a data set so large. Even still, this file represents just a small slice of what’s collected and sold every day by the location tracking industry — surveillance so omnipresent in our digital lives that it now seems impossible for anyone to avoid. It doesn’t take much imagination to conjure the powers such always-on surveillance can provide an authoritarian regime like China’s. Within America’s own representative democracy, citizens would surely rise up in outrage if the government attempted to mandate that every person above the age of 12 carry a tracking device that revealed their location 24 hours a day. Yet, in the decade since Apple’s App Store was created, Americans have, app by app, consented to just such a system run by private companies. Now, as the decade ends, tens of millions of Americans, including many children, find themselves carrying spies in their pockets during the day and leaving them beside their beds at night — even though the corporations that control their data are far less accountable than the government would be. Source Here
The IoT should be renamed to IoTT (Internet of Tracking Things), shouldn't it. But we can't have people figure out what's really happening, can we? It's a good thing that quantum computing isn't too close, isn’t it?
April 5, 2018: Global News • (Project Maven) Over 3,000 Google employees have a signed a petition in protest against the company’s involvement with a U.S. Department of Defense artificial intelligence (AI) project that studies imagery and could eventually be used to improve drone strikes in the battlefield. Source Here
December 12, 2019 • Palantir took over Project Maven defense contract after Google backed out. Source Here
December 29, 2020: Input • Palantir exec says its work is on par with the Manhattan Project. Comparing AI to most lethal weapon in human history isn’t comforting. SourceHere
August 14, 2020: Venture: • Google researchers use quantum computing to help improve image classification. Source Here
Hmmm. Maybe Apple will be for the little guy? They have always valued privacy rights, right?
October 2, 2013: Vice News • The hacktivist group Anonymous released a video statement with an accompanying Pastebin document claiming that there are definitive links between AuthenTec, the company that developed the iPhone 5S’s fingerprint scanner, and the US government. Source Here
An apple a day helps the NSA. Or Google. Or Microsoft. Or Amazon. Take your pick from the basket, because dem Apple's are all the same. But at least we have fundamental rights, right?
Foreign agent declaration not required • No mention of foreign agent status is made in the Protect America Act of 2007. Under prior FISA rules, persons targeted for surveillance must have been declared as foreign agents before a FISA warrant would be accorded by the FISC court.
'Quasi-anti-terrorism law' for all-forms of intelligence collection • Vastly marketed by U.S. federal and military agencies as a law to prevent terror attacks, the Protect America Act was actually a law focused on the 'acquisition' of desired intelligence information, of unspecified nature. The sole requirement is geolocation outside the United States at time of Directive invocation; pursuant to Authorization or Order invocation, surveillance Directives can be undertaken towards persons targeted for intelligence information gathering. Implementation of Directives can take place inside the United States or outside the United States. No criminal or terrorism investigation of the person need be in play at time of the Directive. All that need be required is that the target be related to an official desire for intelligence information gathering for actions on part of persons involved in surveillance to be granted full immunity from U.S. criminal or civil procedures, under Section 105B(l) of the Act.
Removal of FISA Strictures from warrant authorization; warrants not required • But the most striking aspect of the Protect America Act was the notation that any information gathering did not comprise electronic surveillance. This wording had the effect of removing FISA-related strictures from Protect America Act 2007-related Directives, serving to remove a number of protections for persons targeted, and requirements for persons working for U.S. intelligence agencies.
The acquisition does not constitute electronic surveillance • The removal of the term electronic surveillance from any Protect America Act Directive implied that the FISC court approval was no longer required, as FISA warrants were no longer required. In the place of a warrant was a certification, made by U.S. intelligence officers, which was copied to the Court. In effect, the FISC became less of a court than a registry of pre-approved certifications.Certifications (in place of FISA warrants) were able to be levied ex post facto, in writing to the Court no more than 72 hours after it was made. The Attorney General was to transmit as soon as possible to the Court a sealed copy of the certification that would remain sealed unless the certification was needed to determine the legality of the acquisition.Source Here
Oh. FISA is basically a rubber stamp. And even if it the stage play wasn't pretending to follow the script, would it matter? Who could actually stop it at this point? The cat's out of the bag and Pandoras Box is open.
Controversial debates arose as the Protect America Act was published. Constitutional lawyers and civil liberties experts expressed concerns that this Act authorized massive, wide-ranging information gathering with no oversight. Whereas it placed much focus on communications, the Act allowed for information gathering of all shapes and forms. The ACLU called it the "Police America Act" – "authorized a massive surveillance dragnet", calling the blank-check oversight provisions "meaningless," and calling them a "phony court review of secret procedures."
So the surveillance state doesn't have checks and balances anymore. The state is preparing for Massive Civil Breakdown. They keep warning us about environmental collapse. Got it? Good. Let's keep on keeping on.
The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 created a single new district corporation governing the entire federal territory, called the District of Columbia, thus dissolving the three major political subdivisions of the District (Port of Georgetown, the City of Washington, and Washington County) and their governments. Source Here)
The first big leap in corporate personhood from holding mere property and contract rights to possessing more expansive rights was a claim that the Equal Protection Clause applied to corporations. One of the strangest twists in American constitutional law was the moment that corporations gained personhood under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. It occurred in a case called Santa Clara County, and what was odd was that the Supreme Court did not really even decide the matter in the actual opinion. It only appeared in a footnote to the case. What we are likely to have at the conclusion of the Supreme Court term is corporations that are empowered to spend in American elections because of Bellotti and Citizens United; corporations that can make religious objections thanks to Hobby Lobby; and if Jesner turns out as badly as I predict, corporations will be able to aid and abet human rights violations abroad with impunity. Source Here
"Having a corporation would allow people to put property into a collective ownership that could be held with perpetual existence," she says. "So it wouldn't be tied to any one person's lifespan, or subject necessarily to laws regarding inheriting property." Later on, in the United States and elsewhere, the advantages of incorporation were essential to efficient and secure economic development. Unlike partnerships, the corporation continued to exist even if a partner died; there was no unanimity required to do something; shareholders could not be sued individually, only the corporation as a whole, so investors only risked as much as they put into buying shares. Source Here
The way that the Arab Bank may get away with this alleged morally troubling behavior, even though it has a New York branch, is by reasserting the basic argument that was made in Nestle USA and Kiobel II: that the federal Alien Tort Statute was not intended to apply to corporations full stop. Given other cases in this area like Mohamad v. PLO, which held the word “individual” in the Torture Victim Protection Act means a natural person and does not impose any liability against organizations, the Arab Bank’s procorporate argument may well prevail. There are multiple federal Circuit Courts which have shot down the argument that corporations are immune from suit under the Alien Tort Statute. The lone outlier is the Second Circuit, which decided in 2010 that corporations are excused from suit in Kiobel I. This is the case that was appealed to the Supreme Court and became Kiobel II. Jesner v. Arab Bank was litigated in the Second Circuit. One question in Jesner was what exactly did Kiobel II do to Kiobel I. So far in the litigation, Jesner concluded that Kiobel I and its conclusion that corporations can’t be sued in federal court using the Alien Tort Statute remained the controlling law of the Second Circuit.
There's a reason people call lawyers snakes, it's because most of them speak with forked tounges. So the corporation isn't being held liable, but the shareholders can't be held liable either. That's too insane to even be called a Catch 22. We are literally being set up to have no recourse because there isn’t anybody who can be held responsible. Why is that important when I've been talking about the surveillance state?
July 14, 2020: The Intercept • Microsoft’s police surveillance services are often opaque because the company sells little in the way of its own policing products. It instead offers an array of “general purpose” Azure cloud services, such as machine learning and predictive analytics tools like Power BI (business intelligence) and Cognitive Services, which can be used by law enforcement agencies and surveillance vendors to build their own software or solutions. A rich array of Microsoft’s cloud-based offerings is on full display with a concept called “The Connected Officer.” Microsoft situates this concept as part of the Internet of Things, or IoT, in which gadgets are connected to online servers and thus made more useful. “The Connected Officer,” Microsoft has written, will “bring IoT to policing.” With the Internet of Things, physical objects are assigned unique identifiers and transfer data over networks in an automated fashion. If a police officer draws a gun from its holster, for example, a notification can be sent over the network to alert other officers there may be danger. Real Time Crime Centers could then locate the officer on a map and monitor the situation from a command and control center. Source Here
Uhm, I guess it's really is all connected, isn’t it?
June 18, 2020: The Guardian • How Target, Google, Bank of America and Microsoft quietly fund police through private donations. More than 25 large corporations in the past three years have contributed funding to private police foundations, new report says. Source Here
Long live the Military Industrial Techno Surveillance State. If you have nothing to hide, than you have nothing to worry about. Really? Are we still believing that line? Cause it's a load of crap. If we have nothing to worry about, then why are they worried enough to be implementing surveillance systems with corresponding units on the ground? Got your attention there, didn't I?
August 19, 2019: Big Think • Though the term "Orwellian" easily applies to such a technology, Michel's illuminating reporting touches something deeper. Numerous American cities have already been surveilled using these god-like cameras, including Gorgon Stare, a camera-enabled drone that can track individuals over a 50-square kilometer radius from 20,000 feet. Here's the real rub: the feature that allows users to pinch and zoom on Instagram is similar to what WAMI allows. Anything within those 50-square kilometers is now under the microscope. If this sounds like some futuristic tech, think again: Derivations of this camera system have been tested in numerous American cities. Say there is a big public protest. With this camera you can follow thousands of protesters back to their homes. Now you have a list of the home addresses of all the people involved in a political movement. If on their way home you witness them committing some crime—breaking a traffic regulation or frequenting a location that is known to be involved in the drug trade—you can use that surveillance data against them to essentially shut them up. That's why we have laws that prevent the use of surveillance technologies because it is human instinct to abuse them. That's why we need controls. Source Here
Want to know more about the Gorgon Stare? Flatten the Curve. Part 12. Source Here
Now, I'm not sure if you remember or know any Greek Mythology, but the Gorgons were three sisters, and one sister had Snakes on her head (she wasn't a lawyer) and she turned people to stone when she looked at them.
MEDUSA (Mob Excess Deterrent Using Silent Audio) is a directed-energy non-lethal weapon designed by WaveBand Corporation in 2003-2004 for temporary personnel incapacitation. The weapon is based on the microwave auditory effect resulting in a strong sound sensation in the human head when it is subject to certain kinds of pulsed/modulated microwave radiation. The developers claimed that through the combination of pulse parameters and pulse power, it is possible to raise the auditory sensation to a “discomfort” level, deterring personnel from entering a protected perimeter or, if necessary, temporarily incapacitating particular individuals. In 2005, Sierra Nevada Corporation acquired WaveBand Corporation.
Ok. Get it? The Gorgon eye in the sky stares at you while the Medusa makes you immobile. Not good, but at least it'll just freeze you in your tracks.
July 6, 2008: Gizmodo • The Sierra Nevada Corporation claimed this week that it is ready to begin production on the MEDUSA, a damned scary ray gun that uses the "microwave audio effect" to implant sounds and perhaps even specific messages inside people's heads. Short for Mob Excess Deterrent Using Silent Audio, MEDUSA creates the audio effect with short microwave pulses. The pulses create a shockwave inside the skull that's detected by the ears, and basically makes you think you're going balls-to-the-wall batshit insane. Source Here
Uhm. And drive you insane.
July 26, 2008: Gizmodo • The MEDUSA crowd control ray gun we reported on earlier this month sounded like some pretty amazing-and downright scary-technology. Using the microwave auditory effect, the beam, in theory, would have put sounds and voice-like noises in your head, thereby driving you away from the area. Crowd control via voices in your head. Sounds cool. However, it turns out that the beam would actually kill you before any of that happy stuff started taking place, most likely by frying or cooking your brain inside your skull. Can you imagine if this thing made it out into the field? Awkward! Source Here
Annnnnnnndddddd it'll kill you.
Guys, they're prepared. They've been prepared. They're ready. Remember the Doomsday Bunkers? The military moving into Cheyenne Mountain? Deep Underground Military Bunkers? The rapid rolling out of 5G? BITCOIN and UBI so neatly inserted into our minds over the last five years? They've directly told us to have three months of supplies in our homes. 2020 isn't going to be an anomaly? It's the start of the collapse of our natural resources. Take a look on Reddit and all the posts about crazy weather. Cyanobacteria blooms killing dogs and people. Toxic Super Pollution caused by atmospheric inversions killing people. This isn’t normal, this is New Normal. And they know it. They've known it for a while. Let me show you one last thing before I wrap it up.
From the earliest Chinese dynasties to the present, the jade deposits most used were not only those of Khotan in the Western Chinese province of Xinjiang but other parts of China as well, such as Lantian, Shaanxi.
Remember, words matter. Look at Gorgon Stare and Medusa. They don't randomly grab names out of a hat, or pick them because they think it sounds dystopian. They pick words for a reason.
July 7, 2017: The Warzone • There only appears to be one official news story on this exercise at all and it's available on the website of Air Mobility Command’s Eighteenth Air Force, situated at Joint Base Charleston. At the time of writing, a google shows that there were more than a half dozen more copies on other Air Force pages, as well as number of photographs. For some reason, someone appears to have taken these offline or otherwise broken all the links. Using Google to search the Defense Video Imagery Distribution System, which is the main U.S. military's public affairs hub, brings up more broken links. Oh, and unless there's been some sort of mistake, JADE HELM actually stands for the amazingly obtuse Joint Assistance for Deployment Execution Homeland Eradication of Local Militants. A separate web search for this phrase does not turn up any other results. Source Here
Now, using an acronym that indicates training to Eradicate Local Militants seems pretty dumb. It may be used in that manner if environmental collapse triggers riots, but i don't think they would warn everyone ahead of time, do you? So I dug a little bit more.
Joint Assistant for Development and Execution (JADE) is a U.S. military system used for planning the deployment of military forces in crisis situations. The U.S. military developed this automated planning software system in order to expedite the creation of the detailed planning needed to deploy military forces for a military operation. JADE uses Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology combining user input, a knowledge base of stored plans, and suggestions by the system to provide the ability to develop large-scale and complex plans in minimal time. JADE is a knowledge-based system that uses highly structured information that takes advantage of data hierarchies. An official 2016 document approved for public release titled Human Systems Roadmap Review describes plans to create autonomous weapon systems that analyze social media and make decisions, including the use of lethal force, with minimal human involvement. This type of system is referred to as a Lethal Autonomous Weapon System (LAWS). The name "JADE" comes from the jade green color seen on the island of Oahu in Hawaii where the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) is headquartered.
PACOM? Why isn't that command group responsible for the South China Sea?
Formerly known as United States Pacific Command (USPACOM) since its inception, the command was renamed to U.S. Indo-Pacific Command on 30 May 2018, in recognition of the greater emphasis on South Asia, especially India.
Now doesn't it look like Jade Helm is preparing for an invasion? And possibly insurrection later. Or at the same time? Or riots over WW3? Or food riots? And start thinking about why the laws are starting to exclude corporations? Then think about the mercenaries that are being contracted out by the government.
October 17, 2018: The Carolinan • In 2016, 75 percent of American forces were private contractors. In 2017, Erik Prince, former head of Blackwater, and Stephen Feinberg, head of Dyncorp, discussed plans for contractors completely taking over U.S. operations in Afghanistan. Although ultimately unsuccessful, it remains to be seen if the current administration will change its mind. Contractors are involved in almost every military task, such as intelligence analysis, logistics and training allied soldiers. Contractors are even involved in U.S. special ops missions. This is because contractors are essentially untraceable and unaccountable. Most are born in other countries; only 33 percent are registered U.S. citizens. Private military firms don’t have to report their actions to Congress, unlike the military or intelligence agencies. They also aren’t subject to the Freedom of Information Act, so private citizens and journalists aren’t allowed to access their internal documents. There are also no international laws to regulate private military firms. It’s been proven that many contractors are involved in illegal activities. The larger multinational companies sometimes hire local subcontractors. These contractors sometimes aren’t background-checked. A 2010 investigation by the Senate found that many subcontractors were linked to murders, kidnappings, bribery and anti-coalition activities. Some subcontractors even formed their own unlicensed mercenary groups after coalition forces leave. A 2010 House investigation showed evidence that the Department of Defense had hired local warlords for security services. In 2007, Blackwater contractors massacred 17 civilians. This eventually led Blackwater to being restructured and renamed as Academi. Source Here
Military Exercises. Private Defense Firms. No oversight. And it's all coming soon. Read more at Flatten the Curve. Part 20. Upcoming war and catastrophes. Source Here
Nah. I'm just fear mongering and Doomscrolling again.
Heads up and eyes open. Talk soon.
submitted by biggreekgeek to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Federal Reserve Making Moves To Limit Bitcoin More With Travel Rule Changes

The main argument that the reddit community makes to me is that they will always have total anti-regulatory powers with bitcoin that allow them to do bitcoin like things and that regulators cannot stop them.
I would urge you to look at the recent legal precedents set by the verdict against Helix, the verdict against Bitmex, the recent DoJ Guideline documents, and the recent proposal in the federal regitrar to amend the travel rule down to 250 dollars from 3000 and to include cryptocurrencies as part of the money outflows rules.

What the Government is really doing is using OFAC and BSA to enforce mandatory global KYC on all countries. If you are a software developer anywhere in the world, they can just say you touch american servers even if you don't and that you enable terrorism even if you don't. They are creating the framework to prosecute software developers anywhere in the world that do not backdoor KYC.
This is de facto global censorship on bitcoin. It basically breaks bitcoin. Bitcoin is largely inhibited by it's dependence on software wallets. Well they forced Komodo to institute KYC on its atomic swaps. They forced in on Waves.

You can and should post your comment on the federal registrar public comments against the Fed's proposal, it is deeply wrong. But they are going to extend it to crypto.
The real key result here is that America is ending free market cross boarder trading anywhere in the world and instituting extremely strong capital flight controls on Americans and Westerners in general.

The only way that cryptocurrency will truly remain uncensorable and fungible is if you transact between people in a cash like manner under the table while using software that deliberately anonymizes the developers. The Government knows you have the bitcoin, it is a frame work for forced confiscation.
This is why Satoshi hid his identity, he knew this was possible. But bitcoin's dependence on software for trading is it's achilles heel.
submitted by samdane7777 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Do I sound more like a Democrat or Republican?

Here are my positions -
  1. Should the federal government institute a mandatory buyback of assault weapons? No
  2. Should a business be able to deny service to a customer if the request conflicts with the owner’s religious beliefs? If they are not engaged in interstate commerce, the Federal Government shouldn't hold any power to legislate on the matter. At the state level (and federal if interstate) Yes, so long as they are not discriminating on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, transgender, or other uncontrollable factors.
  3. Should the government continue to fund Planned Parenthood? Yes, with oversight to make sure the money is going o where it is supposed to.
  4. Should universities provide “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” for students? No
  5. Do you support the death penalty? Generally no, with the possible exception of treason during an insurrection or invasion.
  6. Should the government support a separation of church and state by removing references to God on money, federal buildings, and national monuments? No, this is referring to God as a concept.
  7. Should businesses be required to have women on their board of directors? No
  8. Do you support the legalization of same sex marriage? Yes, through a constitutional amendment. At the state level, yes.
  9. Should the military allow women to serve in combat roles? Yes as long as they meet the same physical standards as men and pass the same tests.
  10. Should marital rape be classified and punished as severely as non-marital rape? This should be a state-level issue, but yes.
  11. Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via assisted suicide? Only if there is no chance of survival.
  12. Should hate speech be protected by the first amendment? It is, and yes.
  13. Should gay couples have the same adoption rights as straight couples? Yes
  14. Should states be allowed to display the Confederate flag on government property? They have the right, but I would prefer my state not.
  15. Should women be allowed to wear a Niqāb, or face veil, to civic ceremonies? I am not fully certain. I am leaning towards yes, as long as another woman has verified her identity.
  16. Should welfare recipients be tested for drugs? Only if they have a criminal history related to drug abuse.
  17. Should employers be required to pay men and women the same salary for the same job? This shouldn't be a federal issue unless it involves interstate commerce. But at the state-level (and federal if interstate), Yes if they work the same positions and for the same hours and conditions.
  18. Should there be fewer or more restrictions on current welfare benefits? More, reform it so it supplements, rather than replaces, an income.
  19. Should the government raise the federal minimum wage? The federal government should not have the power to enact minimum wage laws unless it involves interstate commerce, in which case yes, it should be $15 an hour. Each state should be able to set its own laws on the matter.
  20. Should the government make cuts to public spending in order to reduce the national debt? No.
  21. Should the U.S. increase tariffs on imported products from China? Yes, China should be punished for violations of international law.
  22. Should businesses be required to provide paid leave for full-time employees during the birth of a child or sick family member? At the state-level, yes. At the federal level, yes, if they are involved in interstate commerce.
  23. Should the government increase the tax rate on profits earned from the sale of stocks, bonds, and real estate? Capital gains should be taxed the same as ordinary income.
  24. Should the current estate tax rate be decreased? No, I am satisfied with the current system.
  25. Should the U.S. continue to participate in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? No.
  26. Should the President offer tax breaks to individual companies to keep jobs in the U.S.? No, but put tariffs on all imported goods.
  27. Should the government prevent “mega mergers” of corporations that could potentially control a large percentage of market share within its industry? No.
  28. Do you believe labor unions help or hurt the economy? Help, in theory, but are sometimes harmful.
  29. Should the government break up Amazon, Facebook and Google? No.
  30. Should the government add or increase tariffs on products imported into the country? Yes, all imported goods should be taxed 20%.
  31. Should the U.S. raise or lower the tax rate for corporations? Keep at current rate, but close all loopholes.
  32. Should the government require businesses to pay salaried employees, making up to $46k/year, time-and-a-half for overtime hours? At the state level, yes. At the federal level, only if they are involved in interstate commerce.
  33. Do you support the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)? No.
  34. Would you favor an increased sales tax in order to reduce property taxes? No.
  35. Should pension plans for federal, state, and local government workers be transitioned into privately managed accounts? No.
  36. Should the government subsidize farmers? For now, yes, but once we get out of trade deals, put tariffs on all imports, and tax all interstate sales, subsidies should be ended.
  37. Should the government use economic stimulus to aid the country during times of recession? No, recessions are natural cycles.
  38. Should the Federal Reserve Bank be audited by Congress? Yes, we should know where that money is going.
  39. Should the IRS create a free electronic tax filing system? Yes.
  40. Should an in-state sales tax apply to online purchases of in-state buyers from out-of-state sellers? No, the federal government should not enact an intrastate sales tax.
  41. Should pension payments be increased for retired government workers? Yes, adjust them yearly for inflation.
  42. Should U.S. citizens be allowed to save or invest their money in offshore bank accounts? Yes, as long as all income is reported.
  43. Should the government classify Bitcoin as a legal currency? Yes, but maintain the system of the dollar and cash as a legal currency.
  44. Should the government acquire equity stakes in companies it bails out during a recession? No.
  45. Do you support charter schools? No.
  46. Should the government decriminalize school truancy? No for Elementary school. For middle and high school, no social studies and English, yes for everything else.
  47. Should there be more restrictions on the current process of purchasing a gun? States and the federal government should not be allowed to enact any restrictions on black powder weapons or ammunition for them. For cartridge firearms, the federal government should only have the power to regulate interstate sale of them. At the state level, cartridge firearms should require a license to obtain. The process should involve passing a mental and physical health exam, having a decent criminal record, and passing a written and shooting exam. Handguns and centerfire semi-automatic weapons should have higher standards for licensing and should be registered before being obtained, but automatic CCW to anyone who has a license for a handgun. fully automatic weapons should be illegal to sell, except to collectors, who must meet an even higher standard to obtain.
  48. Should victims of gun violence be allowed to sue firearms dealers and manufacturers? No, this is just dumb.
  49. Should the President of the United States have the power to deploy military troops in order to stop protests? If any state governments are overthrown, yes. Otherwise, only if the Governor of a state requests assistance.
  50. Should teachers be allowed to carry guns at school? Yes if they have a valid license 9see above).
  51. Should it be illegal to burn the American flag? No, but I have no respect for anyone who does.
  52. Should the state government order schools to provide online only classes in order to combat coronavirus? No, let each school decide.
  53. Should there be term limits set for members of Congress? Yes, maximum four terms for the House, and maximum two for the Senate.
  54. Should people on the “no-fly list” be banned from purchasing guns and ammunition? No, this denies one of due process rights.
  55. Are you in favor of decriminalizing drug use? Yes, for most but not all drugs (basically the really bad ones, e.g., meth, heroin, etc;)
  56. Should the NSA (National Security Agency) be allowed to collect basic metadata of citizen’s phone calls such as numbers, timestamps, and call durations? Only with a warrant and probable cause of a crime.
  57. Should the Supreme Court be reformed to include more seats and term limits on judges? No, this is just trying to pack the court, which should not be politicized.
  58. Should the government regulate social media sites, as a means to prevent fake news and misinformation? No, this violates free speech.
  59. Do you support the Patriot Act? Not the clause that allows warrantless searches.
  60. Should the government be allowed to seize private property, with reasonable compensation, for public or civic use? Only for public land and not for privatization, and the owner must be paid for losses in full.
  61. Should college sports be played in the fall of 2020? Yes, but let teams decide.
  62. Should local police increase surveillance and patrol of Muslim neighborhoods? No, this just breeds resentment.
  63. Should the government raise the retirement age for Social Security? No
  64. Should the government pass laws which protect whistleblowers? Yes, so long as national security isn't compromised.
  65. Should the redrawing of Congressional districts be controlled by an independent, non-partisan commission? Yes, gerrymandering breeds corruption.
  66. Should internet service providers be allowed to speed up access to popular websites (that pay higher rates) at the expense of slowing down access to less popular websites (that pay lower rates)? If they are privately owned, yes.
  67. Should the U.S. government grant immunity to Edward Snowden? For his leaks on domestic surveillance, yes. Some other things, maybe not.
  68. Should foreign terrorism suspects be given constitutional rights? Yes.
  69. Do you support the killing of Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani? Yes.
  70. Should the U.S. continue to support Israel? Yes.
  71. Should the U.S. accept refugees from Syria? Yes, but only after extensive background checks to confirm that they are not a threat and are genuine refugees and not economic migrants.
  72. Should the government increase or decrease military spending? Decrease by streamlining it, and making it more efficient, through eliminating wasteful spending.
  73. Should the military fly drones over foreign countries to gain intelligence and kill suspected terrorists? No, unless said country has approved it, and American citizens should be given fair trials.
  74. Should the military be allowed to use enhanced interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding, to gain information from suspected terrorists? No.
  75. Should every 18 year old citizen be required to provide at least one year of military service? No, but maintain the Selective Service system and allow states to draft people if necessary.
  76. Should Jerusalem be recognized as the capital of Israel? Yes.
  77. Should the U.S. go to war with Iran? No, they should be disarmed through diplomatic channels.
  78. Should the U.S. remain in the United Nations? Yes.
  79. Should the U.S. remain in NATO? Yes.
  80. Should the U.S. defend other NATO countries that maintain low military defense budgets relative to their GDP? Yes, but get them to pay their share.
  81. Should the United States pull all military troops out of Afghanistan? If the Afghan government wants us to, then yes.
  82. Should the U.S. sell military weapons to India in order to counter Chinese and Russian influence? Yes.
  83. Should the U.S. conduct military strikes against North Korea in order to destroy their long-range missile and nuclear weapons capabilities? No, use all diplomatic means first.
  84. Do you support President Obama’s move to lift the trade and travel embargo on Cuba? Yes.
  85. Should it be illegal to join a boycott of Israel? No.
  86. Should the government cancel production of the F-35 fighter? Yes, until the price has been lowered or our deficits have been drastically reduced, and its hardware is drastically improved.
  87. Do you support the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)? No.
  88. Should people be required to work in order to receive Medicaid? No.
  89. Should cities open drug “safe havens” where people who are addicted to illegal drugs can use them under the supervision of medical professionals? Yes.
  90. Do you support the legalization of Marijuana? The federal government should not have the power to ban marijuana, except to regulate or ban its interstate sale, which it shouldn't at the state level, legalize.
  91. Should the government regulate the prices of life-saving drugs? No.
  92. Should health insurers be allowed to deny coverage to individuals who have a pre-existing condition? At the federal level, no, if they are operating in interstate commerce. At the state level, no.
  93. Should there be more or less privatization of veterans’ healthcare? Less, improve the current system.
  94. Should the federal government increase funding of health care for low income individuals (Medicaid)? Yes.
  95. Should the federal government be allowed to negotiate drug prices for Medicare? Yes.
  96. Should the government fund the World Health Organization? Yes.
  97. Should the government increase environmental regulations to prevent climate change? No.
  98. Should researchers be allowed to use animals in testing the safety of drugs, vaccines, medical devices, and cosmetics? Yes, but not for cosmetics.
  99. Should the U.S. expand offshore oil drilling? No, but maintain current rigs.
  100. Do you support the use of hydraulic fracking to extract oil and natural gas resources? Allow it to be legal, but don't subsidize.
  101. Should the government stop construction of the Dakota Access pipeline? No.
  102. Should disposable products (such as plastic cups, plates, and cutlery) that contain less than 50% of biodegradable material be banned? No.
  103. Should drilling be allowed in the Alaska Wildlife Refuge? No.
  104. Should cities be allowed to offer private companies economic incentives to relocate? Yes.
  105. Should the government give tax credits and subsidies to the wind power industry? No, no industry should be favored.
  106. Should the government require children to be vaccinated for preventable diseases? No.
  107. Do you support the use of nuclear energy? Yes, lessen restrictions, but no subsidies.
  108. Should producers be required to label genetically engineered foods (GMOs)? Yes.
  109. Should illegal immigrants have access to government-subsidized healthcare? No.
  110. Should immigrants be deported if they commit a serious crime? Yes, after serving their sentence.
  111. Should illegal immigrants be offered in-state tuition rates at public colleges within their residing state? No.
  112. Should the U.S. build a wall along the southern border? No, but make a high tech surveillance barrier instead of a physical wall. This is because a physical wall would be too costly and ineffective.
  113. Should local law enforcement be allowed to detain illegal immigrants for minor crimes and transfer them to federal immigration authorities? Yes.
  114. Should sanctuary cities receive federal funding? No.
  115. Should the U.S. increase restrictions on its current border security policy? Yes.
  116. Should immigrants be required to pass a citizenship test to demonstrate a basic understanding of our country’s language, history, and government? Yes.
  117. Should children of illegal immigrants be granted legal citizenship? Yes, if they were born here.
  118. Should Muslim immigrants be banned from entering the country until the government improves its ability to screen out potential terrorists? No.
  119. Should immigrants be required to learn English? Yes, if they wish to become citizens.
  120. Should there be a temporary ban on all immigration into the United States? No, but increase border security.
  121. Should the US increase or decrease the amount of temporary work visas given to high-skilled immigrant workers? Increase, our economy relies on businesses hiring the highest skilled workers at the lowest cost.
  122. Should working illegal immigrants be given temporary amnesty? No.
  123. Should immigrants to the United States be allowed to hold dual citizenship status? Yes.
  124. Do you support Common Core national standards? Yes, but only for English and social studies.
  125. Should a photo ID be required to vote? No, but gradually update voter rolls and purge voters who are required to be according tot eh Voting Registration act of 1993.
  126. Should foreigners, currently residing in the United States, have the right to vote? No, only citizens should.
  127. Should the minimum voting age be lowered? No.
  128. Should the electoral college be abolished? No.
  129. Should the US have a mail-in ballot process for whole states in local, state, and federal elections? No.
  130. Should foreign lobbyists be allowed to raise money for American elections? No.
  131. Should there be a limit to the amount of money a candidate can receive from a donor? No.
  132. Should corporations, unions, and non-profit organizations be allowed to donate to political parties? No.
  133. Should there be a 5-year ban on White House and Congressional officials from becoming lobbyists after they leave the government? No.
  134. Should political candidates be required to release their recent tax returns to the public? No.
  135. Should funding for local police departments be redirected to social and community based programs? No, increase funding and training for police departments in higher crime rate communities
  136. Should police officers be required to wear body cameras? Yes.
  137. Should convicted criminals have the right to vote? Yes, but only after completing their sentence and probation.
  138. Should drug traffickers receive the death penalty? No.
  139. Should non-violent prisoners be released from jail in order to reduce overcrowding? Yes, but have them do community service.
  140. Do you support mandatory minimum prison sentences for people charged with drug possession? No.
  141. Should the government hire private companies to run prisons? No.
  142. Should prisons ban the use of solitary confinement for juveniles? No, but it is currently being overused
  143. Should the US assassinate suspected terrorists in foreign countries? No, capture, interrogate, and imprison them instead
  144. What is your position on Abortion? Adopt a constitutional amendment overturning Roe v Wade and allow state to enact their own laws. At the state level, abortion should be legal within the first 20 weeks, but afterwards, should be banned except for exceptional cases.
  145. Do you support affirmative action? No.
submitted by Maximum-Lingonberry2 to NoStupidQuestions [link] [comments]

Is Cryptocurrency Really The Future?

Is Cryptocurrency Really The Future?
Over the past decade, cryptocurrency has become a breaker of old approaches in monetary policy, finance, economics, and e-commerce. The speed at which the crypto industry is growing today is very impressive. The global cryptocurrency market volume is predicted to reach $1,758 million by 2027 with a compound annual growth rate of 11.2%.
by StealthEX
More and more people are getting faced with the digital currency so the questions on the future of cryptocurrencies are becoming especially relevant today. So what is the future of cryptocurrency? In this article, we’ll try to figure this out.
Predicting the crypto world’s future is impossible without knowing the current situation on the cryptocurrencies market.

What trends can we observe today?

• Nowadays the crypto market is in its formation stage. We can see an increase in the number of areas where blockchain technology is getting involved. The COVID19 and panic that it caused in the markets are also accelerating cryptocurrency adoption.
• Any cryptocurrencies rate is rigidly tied to the situation in the crypto market.
• Bitcoin and Ethereum are the biggest influencers in the cryptocurrency market.
• Investors are paying attention to the crypto projects that are aimed to create platforms for launching decentralized applications (dApps).
• Significant growth of decentralized finance (DeFi).
• Decentralized Internet (Web 3.0) is actively increasing and creating the basis for the Internet of Things development.
The growth of digital currencies around the world allows making some predictions about the future of crypto market. Let’s look ahead to the future and try to forecast the prospective trends in the crypto world development.

Bitcoin’s reign will not end

The first thing that worries many crypto holders is “What will happen to Bitcoin”?
The ups and downs of Bitcoin’s rate, rumors about the next hard fork, legalization in some countries, and prohibition in others — all these kinds of news makes people guess what will come up with the most popular coin. Experts have different opinions from a complete drop in price to the status of the only currency in the world.
Most experts are leaning towards that Bitcoin will maintain its current positions and even strengthen them. For example, John McAfee, businessman and computer programmer, says:
“You can’t stop things like Bitcoin. It’s like trying to stop gunpowder.”
He also made a bet that if Bitcoin will not cost $500,000 by the end of December 2020 he will eat his own…well, you know.
James Altucher, American hedge-fund manager, author, podcaster and entrepreneur, is not sure that BTC price will reach 1 000 000 USD:
“Will it be a million dollars in 2020? Maybe. Will it be 2021? 2022? Who knows.”
He also predicted that:
“At least one country’s currency is likely to fail soon — likely Argentina or Venezuela. This will lead to mass adoption of Bitcoin among that populace. That will in turn lead to Bitcoin rising by more than $50,000 when it happens.”
And just a few days after this forecast, the Venezuelan President announced that they are planning to release national crypto called El Petro. Right now a lot of countries like China, Tunisia, Senegal, Sweden, Singapore, Uruguay, Thailand, Turkey, and Iran are also working on the creation of national cryptocurrency.
So what will happen to Bitcoin? No one knows. The only thing in which many experts agree is that Bitcoin will stay as a “gold standard” in the crypto world for a long time.

Cryptocurrencies will be mainstream

“Cryptocurrencies is a fashionable investment and a sign of belonging to the special community” — this idea is actively promoted by various sports organizations, popular performers, public figures that release their own altcoins.
According to CoinMarketCap, there are already more than six thousand cryptocurrencies, and their total capitalization is $353 billion. A couple of years ago, the digital currency was almost unknown to anyone except geek developers and crypto enthusiasts. However, things are changing: prospects for businesses, rising prices, and strong community support will step by step make cryptocurrencies mainstream around the world.

Market volatility will not disappear

Cryptocurrencies are unstable by their nature, and their volatility is one of the reasons why someone becomes a millionaire and the others lose fortunes.
The strong volatility of crypto is caused by the fact that they are still at an early stage of development. Cryptocurrencies have huge growth potential if they can enter the mass market.
But every news about cryptocurrencies either hints at the possibility of markets going down or rising up. The volatility in the cryptocurrency markets will continue to be felt as the news affects the market, and it is only at the stage of rapid development.

The future of trading — decentralized exchanges

In the near future, we will see a prime of decentralized exchanges. Many believe that DEXes is not yet ready for mass adoption. But there are factors for a favorable development of events.
First of all, centralized exchanges don’t fit the purpose of cryptocurrencies cause the key advantage of digital coins is decentralization. In decentralized exchanges, transactions can be made directly between users (peer-to-peer) without the need for a trusted intermediary, which means there are no transaction fees for users.
On top of this, decentralized exchanges are much more secure against hackers as there no single point of failure like in centralized exchanges. Everyone knows the cases with Mt.Gox, Bitfinex, Coincheck when people lost millions and millions. The need for more security will lead users to decentralized exchanges.

The rise of crypto loans

“Cryptocurrency is convenient to take on credit” — not long ago this idea seemed like a wild ride since the digital currency has high volatility. But today the popularity of lending in digital currencies is increasing and here are the main reasons:
• Low-interest rates.
• Increase in the number of traders and investors for whom receiving funds immediately in cryptocurrencies is convenient.
• A simplified system of requirements for borrowers, those who hadn’t been approved for bank loans could easily receive digital money.
Nowadays, the entire crypto loaning industry is estimated at $4.7 billion and the number of crypto loan platforms will continue growing.

Regulators gonna regulate

In the early days of cryptocurrencies history, traditional financial institutions sharply criticized crypto enthusiasts. The crypto market, however, has proven that it is sturdy against these kinds of attacks. Nowadays traditional institutions’ opinion regarding cryptocurrency is changing. In the future, stakeholders can have an increase in the flow of funds from Wall Street to cryptocurrencies.
There is no doubt that this will require more transparency and regulation in the crypto market. Today government and regulatory agencies around the world, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Department of Homeland Security, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (and this is only within the US borders) are giving more and more attention to cryptocurrencies. The regulation of the crypto in different states is realizing in diverse ways: in some countries, it is legally recognized as a means of payment, in others its use is prohibited.
The G20 summit participants, following the discussions on cryptocurrencies, came to the conclusion that a complete prohibition of crypto will not solve anything as nowadays the digital currency plays a significant role in the economy. And if the digital currency cannot be prohibited, it must be regulated:
“Technological innovations can deliver significant benefits to the financial system and the broader economy. While crypto-assets do not pose a threat to global financial stability at this point, we are closely monitoring developments and remain vigilant to existing and emerging risks.”
As we can see the world is changing very quickly. The speed with which cryptocurrencies are integrating into the global financial system is a clear indicator that traditional financial institutions can no longer have a monopoly on the management of financial flows.
The year 2020 is the start of a new decade for the cryptocurrency industry. The next ten years will bring us key changes in traditional finance when blockchain and cryptocurrencies will become a daily thing in most countries of the world.
What are your thoughts on the future of cryptocurrencies? Tell us your ideas in the comments below.
And remember if you need to exchange your coins StealthEX is here for you. We provide a selection of more than 250 coins and constantly updating the list so that our customers will find a suitable option. Our service does not require registration and allows you to remain anonymous. Why don’t you check it out? Just go to StealthEX and follow these easy steps:
✔ Choose the pair and the amount for your exchange. For example BTC to ETH.
✔ Press the “Start exchange” button.
✔ Provide the recipient address to which the coins will be transferred.
✔ Move your cryptocurrency for the exchange.
✔ Receive your coins.
Follow us on Medium, Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit to get StealthEX.io updates and the latest news about the crypto world. For all requests message us via [email protected].
The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision.
Original article was posted on https://stealthex.io/blog/2020/09/15/is-cryptocurrency-really-the-future/
submitted by Stealthex_io to StealthEX [link] [comments]

The Tether Conspiracy

I am going to write a long article/rant against the Tether conspiracy. The reason is not that I have any vested interested, it’s not that I like the guys and secrecy of their project and it’s not that I don’t like transparency in general. But as with all conspiracy theories they need some sense of logic and I am here to provide this without insider knowledge. Just rational thinking as an investor.

What is Tether?

Tether is a *centralized* cryptocurrency run by the same people that run Bitfinex, one of the first and biggest exchanges. It’s ticker is USDT and you can find it in almost every cryptocurrency exchange. It has a price tied on the US Dollar but that is precisely the issue of the conspiracy theories. They claim that Tether is not actually tied to the dollar and that it’s value is used to prop up the value of Bitcoin. I will break down both arguments rationally.

Is it backed by USD?

First of all there is evidence form the long trial of NY attorney that is going on for ages. So let’s first understand something. Tether and Bitfinex is providing a worldwide service for cryptocurrency which is NOT legal tender in every country and has many rules and regulations. Therefore it’s totally unrealistic to think of it as a normal bank that needs to be super transparent to its shareholders. It provides a certain service to the cryptocurrency community that is supposed to not want to be traced. Now on the matter of if it is backed or not, this trial has revealed that it was indeed backed until a foreign government(s) froze part of their money supply in the order of 20% or so. After that they did a reverse ICO on Bitfinex and got the money supply they wanted. Now other reasons to debunk this theory if you are thinking straight:
  1. It is absolutely impossible for all the cryptocurrency exchanges that deal with millions of volume to not know if something is wrong and expose themselves to systemic risk like that. It is like saying that JP Morgan doesn’t know if their Gold suppliers are scammers or not. Yes they do if they are the same suppliers for all the big banks. And in the end, if they are scammers, anyone reading this article is in no way to tell and now more about the truth.
  2. Tether has had an audit (although not complete and controversial) that was done by a firm founded by US Federal Judges who would put their reputation in front if they were attesting to a scam. You can find the relevant article here.
  3. Tether has kept its price peg. That is extremely important because in the open market if I know that Tether is unbacked that means that I should short sell it because the price will drop. But the price hasn’t dropped. When FUD was abundant the Bitfinex guys were actually buying their reserves on discount! That is incredible because they made money on people speculating on their reserves that they knew (I suppose!) that were there.

Market Manipulation

First of all I will start by saying that nobody knows when the Bitcoin market is going up, down or sideways. There are too many variables and unknowns even to the higher echelons of Bitcoin hodlers (see whales). As an example a Japanese liquidator was selling en masse Bitcoins in 2018 in the open market without anybody knowing it. Also, bubbles get created by pure mania. Nobody needed Tether to pump in 2017, you could go in taxis and the cab driver would tell you to buy altcoins! Nevertheless there are at least 2 opposing studies done by universities where one finds that it was indeed the culprit and the other one finds that price was irrelevant and no wrong doing. You can chose your medicine here. The fundamental fact that newbies scream about in the forums and it’s absolutely driving crazy is this:
Tether is supposed to “print” more when exchanges ask for liquidity because of increased deposits.
It is extremely tiring to read every day on reddit that “Tether prints another 4 million USD” kid of posts that assume that this is money that is non-existent. No, that’s not how it works. On the opposite side, Tether also burns tokens, something that very few know, realize and understand. So the act of adding liquidity is obviously correlated to the price because liquidity increases when big market movements are coming. That doesn’t and can’t prove of manipulation. There was this famous Bitfinexed account on Twitter that went silent. A guy that was obsessed for years and years with Bitfinex.

Conclusion

I am not saying that Bitfinex and Tether are legit. I am saying that as an investor I need to take a critical look at what’s going on and stop hearing cassandras. Yes maybe they are scammers and maybe they will default. If this happens it means that most or *all* of the cryptocurrency exchanges knew and nobody said a thing. That means that you know better than the NY attorney that confirmed they were in possession of at least 80% of their reserves and the other ones were confiscated. To make things simple, your local bank doesn’t have 80% reserves today if needed. I hope I am correct because Tether could take down the price of Bitcoin a lot if it fails but it won’t be a death blow for sure. The are other stablecoins that are gaining traction (see GUSD,USDC,DAI).
P.S If you find value in what you are reading subscribe to the newsletter.
submitted by aelaos1 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

How does cryptocurrency works?

How does cryptocurrency works?
When we were a much smaller society, people could trade in the community pretty easily, but as the distance in our trade grew, we ended up inventing institutions such as banks, markets, stocks etc. that help us to conduct financial transactions. The currencies we are operating with nowadays are bills or coins, controlled by a centralized authority and tracked by previously mentioned financial institutions. The thing is, having a third party in our money transactions is not always what we wish for. But fortunately, today we have a tool that allows us to make fast and save financial transactions without any middlemen, it has no central authority and it is regulated by math. Sounds cool, right? Cryptocurrency is this tool. It is quite a peculiar system, so let’s take a closer look at it.
by StealthEX

Layers of a crypto-cake

Layer 1: Blockchain

First of all – any cryptocurrency is based on the blockchain. In simple words, blockchain is a kind of a database. It stores information in batches, called blocks that are linked together in a chronological way. As the blockchain is not located in one place but rather on thousands of computers around the globe, the blockchain and the transactions thus are decentralized, they have no head center. The newest blocks of transaction are continuously added on (or changed) to all the previous blocks. That’s how you get a cryptocurrency blockchain.
The technology’s name is a compound of the words “block” and “chain”, as the “blocks” of information are linked together in a “chain”. That’s how crypto security works – the information in the recently created block depends on the previous one. It means that no block can be changed without affecting the others, this system prevents a blockchain from being hacked.
There are 2 kinds of blockchain: private and public. Public, as goes by its name, is publicly available blockchain, whereas private blockchain is permissioned, which only a limited number of people have access to.

Layer 2: Transaction

In fact, everything begins with the intention of someone to complete a transaction. A transaction itself is a file that consists of the sender’s and recipient’s public keys (wallet addresses) and the amount of coins transferred. The sender begins by logging in into his cryptocurrency wallet with the private key – a unique combination of letters and numbers, something you would call a personal password in a bank. Now the transaction is signed and the first step which is called basic public key cryptography is completed.
Then the signed (encrypted) transaction is shared with everyone in the cryptocurrency network, meaning it gets to every other peer. We should mention that the transaction is firstly queued up to be added to the public ledger. Then, when it’s broadcasted to the public ledger, all the computers add a new transaction to a shared list of recent transactions, known as blocks.
Having a ledger forces everyone to “play fair” and reduce the risk of spending extra. The numbers of transactions are publicly available, but the information about senders and receivers is encrypted. Each transaction holds on to a unique set of keys. Whoever owns a set of keys, owns the amount of cryptocurrency associated with those keys (just like whoever owns a bank account owns the money in it). This is how peer-to-peer technology works.

Layer 3: Mining

Now let’s talk about mining. Once confirmed, the transaction is forever captured into the blockchain history**.** The verification of the block is done by Cryptocurrency Miners – they verify and then add blocks to the public ledger. To verify them, miners go down on the road of solving a very difficult math puzzle using powerful software, which is that the computer needs to produce the correct sequence number – “hash” – that is specific to the given block, there is not much chance of finding it. Whoever solves the puzzle first, gets the opportunity to officially add a block of transactions to the ledger and get fresh and new coins as reward. The reward is given in whatever cryptocurrency’s blockchain miners are operating into. For example, BTC originally used to reward miners in 50 BTC, but after the first halving it decreased to 25 BTC, and at present time it is 6.25 BTC. The process of miners competing against each other in order to complete the transactions on the network and get rewarded is known as the Proof-of-Work (PoW) algorithm, which is natural for BTC and many other cryptocurrencies. Also there are another consensus mechanisms: Proof-of-Stake (PoS), Delegated Proof-of-Stake (dPoS), Proof-of-Authority (PoA), Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT), Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (pBFT), Federated Byzantine Agreement (FBA) and Delegated Byzantine Fault Tolerance (dBFT). Still, all of them are used to facilitate an agreement between network participants.
The way that system works – when many computers try to verify a block – guarantees that no computer is going to monopolize a cryptocurrency market. To ensure the competition stays fair, the puzzle becomes harder as more computers join in. Summing it up, let’s say that mining is responsible for two aspects of the crypto mechanism: producing the proof and allowing more coins to enter circulation.

Types of cryptocurrency

In the virtual currency world there are a bunch of different cryptocurrency types with their own distinctive features.
The first cryptocurrency is, of course, Bitcoin. Bitcoin is the first crypto coin ever created and used. BTC is the most liquid cryptocurrency in the market and has the highest market cap among all the cryptocurrencies.

Altcoins

The term ‘altcoins’ means ‘alternatives’ of Bitcoin. The first altcoin Namecoin was created in 2011 and later on hundreds of them appeared in crypto-world, among them are Ravencoin, Dogecoin, Litecoin, Syscoin etc. Altcoins were initially launched with a purpose to overcome Bitcoin’s weak points and become upgraded substitutes of Bitcoin. Altcoins usually stand an independent blockchain and have their own miners and wallets. Some altcoins actually have boosted features yet none of them gained popularity akin to Bitcoin. More about altcoins in our article.

Tokens

Token is a unit of account that is used to represent the digital balance of an asset. Basically tokens represent an asset or utility that usually are made on another blockchain. Tokens are registered in a database based on blockchain technology, and they are accessed through special applications using electronic signature schemes.
Tokens and cryptocurrencies are not the same thing. Let’s explain it more detailed:
• First of all, unlike cryptocurrencies, tokens can be issued and managed both centralized and decentralized.
• The verification of the token transactions can be conducted both centralized and decentralized, when cryptocurrencies’ verification is only decentralized.
• Tokens do not necessarily run their own blockchain, but for cryptocurrencies having their own blockchain is compulsory.
• Tokens’ prices can be affected by a vast range of factors such as demand and supply, tokens’ additional emission, or binding to other assets. On the other hand, the price of cryptocurrencies is completely regulated by the market.
Tokens can be:
• Utility tokens – something that accesses a user to a product or service and support dApps built on the blockchain.
• Governance tokens – fuel for voting systems executed on the blockchain.
• Transactional tokens – serve as a unit of accounts and used for trading.
• Security tokens – represent legal ownership of an asset, can be used in addition to or in place of a password.
Tokens are usually created through smart contracts and are often adapted to an ICO – initial coin offering, which is a means of crowdfunding. It is much easier to create tokens, that is why they make a majority of coins in existence. Altcoin and token blockchains work on the concept of smart contracts or decentralized applications, where the programmable, self-executing code is ruling the transactions within a blockchain. By the way, the vast majority of tokens were distributed on the Ethereum platform.

Forks

Generally a fork occurs when a protocol code, on which the blockchain is operating, is being changed, modified and updated by developers or users. Due to the changes, the blockchain splits into 2 paths: an old way of doing things and a new way. These changes may happen because: a disagreement between users and creators; a major hack, as it was with Ethereum; developers’ decision to fix errors and add new functionality. The blockchain mainly splits into hard forks and soft forks. Shortly speaking, coin hard forks cannot work with older versions while soft forks still can work with older versions.
Hard fork – after a hard fork, a new version is completely separated from the previous one, there’s no connection between them anymore, although the new version keeps the data of all the previous transactions but now on, each version will have its own transaction history. In order to use the new versions, every node has to upgrade their software. A hard fork requires majority support (or consensus) from coin holders with a connection to the coin network. If enough users don’t update then you will be unable to get a clean upgrade which could lead to a break in the blockchain.
Soft fork – a protocol change, but with backward compatibility. The rules of the network have been changed, but nodes running the old software will still be able to validate transactions, but those updated nodes won’t be able to mine new blocks. So to be used and useful, soft forks require the majority of the network’s hash power. Otherwise, they risk becoming set out and anyway ending up as a hard fork.

Stablecoins

As it comes from the name, stablecoins are price-stabilized that are becoming big in the crypto world. Still enjoying most of the “typical-cryptocurrency” benefits, it is standing out as a fixed and stable coin, not volatile at all. Stablecoins’ values are stabilized by pegging them to other assets such as the US Dollar or gold.
Stablecoins include Tether (USDT), Standard (PAX), Gemini Dollar (GUSD) which are backed by the US Dollar and approved by the New York State Department of Financial Services.

Conclusion

Now that we hacked into cryptocurrency, you probably understand that it is much less mysterious than it first seemed. Nowadays, cryptocurrencies are making the revolution of the financial institution. For example, Bitcoin is currently used in 96 countries and growing, with more than 12,000 transactions per hour. More and more investors are involved, banks and governments realize that these cutting edge technologies are prone to draw their control away. Cryptocurrencies are slowly changing the world and you can choose – either stand beside and observe or become part of history in the making.
And remember if you need to exchange your coins StealthEX is here for you. We provide a selection of more than 300 coins and constantly updating the cryptocurrency list so that our customers will find a suitable option. Our service does not require registration and allows you to remain anonymous. Why don’t you check it out? Just go to StealthEX and follow these easy steps:
✔ Choose the pair and the amount for your exchange. For example BTC to ETH.
✔ Press the “Start exchange” button.
✔ Provide the recipient address to which the coins will be transferred.
✔ Move your cryptocurrency for the exchange.
✔ Receive your coins.
Follow us on Medium, Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit to get StealthEX.io updates and the latest news about the crypto world. For all requests message us via [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]).
The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision.
Original article was posted on https://stealthex.io/blog/2020/09/29/how-does-cryptocurrency-works/
submitted by Stealthex_io to StealthEX [link] [comments]

US digital dollar coming soon? Chainlink, Swift, Federal Reserve, ISO20222, and The Clearing House serving as pieces of the puzzle.

This is my first Reddit thread, so please feel free to contribute your thoughts.
I believe the US digital dollar will be making its debut very soon, which could very well likely be the next One World Currency. I've included a timeline of public releases/announcements that fall in line with my theory. Bear with me, there are lot of moving parts.... There may be some details or insights missing so please feel free to enlighten. I believe this will, in time, lead to a New World Order with one global currency. I would like to be proven wrong.
First things first, there are 3 big players: The Federal Reserve, The Clearing House, and SWIFT with ISO20222 system.
Who is The Clearing House group? Conglomerate of many LARGE banks. Source: https://www.theclearinghouse.org/about/owner-banks
What is CHIPS? The Clearing House Interbank Payments System (CHIPS) is an electronic payments system that transfers funds and settles transactions in U.S. dollars. CHIPS enables banks to transfer and settle international payments more quickly by replacing official bank checks with electronic bookkeeping entries. As of January 2002, CHIPS had 59 members, including large U.S. banks and U.S. branches of foreign banks. Source: https://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/fedpoint/fed36.html
What is ISO20222? From Swift itself, "ISO 20022 is an emerging global and open standard for payments messaging. It creates a common language and model for payments data across the globe."Source: https://www.swift.com/standards/about-iso-20022
July 16 2018, Federal Reserve Proposes ISO 20022 Message Format for Fedwire Funds Service. 3-step Phase integration of CHIPS & Fedwire. Source: https://www.sullcrom.com/files/upload/SC-Publication-Federal-Reserve-Proposes-ISO-20022-Message-Format-for-Fedwire.pdf
Timeline of 3-step phase model infographic: https://imgur.com/XaNUcR3
July 19 2018, Assocation of Financial Professionals confirms above with article: NY Fed creates group to consider adopting ISO20222: "In 2012, the New York Fed formed a stakeholder group to assess the value in adopting ISO 20022. This led to the 2015 Strategies for Improving the Payment System paper, in which the Fed recommended that the U.S. develop a strategy for adopting the standard. Since that time, the Fed and The Clearing House (TCH) have worked together on plans to adopt ISO 20022 for Fedwire and CHIPS. While they have each opted to implement the standard separately, the Fed and TCH plan to align the implementation of the new format on Fedwire and CHIPS." Source: https://www.afponline.org/ideas-inspiration/topics/articles/Details/fed-seeks-comment-on-iso-20022-fedwire-proposal
Nov 20 2019, The Federal Reserve is looking into developing a digital currency in the US, Powell confirms. Source: https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/the-federal-reserve-is-looking-into-developing-digital-currency-us-2019-11-1028705211
Nov 25 2019, Coinbase Chief Legal Officer argued private corporations are best positioned to build a much-debated digital U.S. dollar, and that the government should stand back and let them, doing little, if anything, to regulate their underlying blockchains. Source: https://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-legal-chief-says-private-sector-should-build-us-digital-dollar
Jan 16 2020, Former CFTC chair launches US digital dollar research project. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200116005116/en/CFTC-Chair-Launches-Digital-Dollar-Project
Feb 6 2020, Federal Reserve researching US digital dollar (CBDC- Central Bank Digital Currency) application. Source: https://www.coindesk.com/fed-reserve-is-researching-dlt-based-digital-dollar-says-governor
Feb 20 2020, "To give consumers more control over their data, FMR LLC, the parent company of Fidelity Investments, today announced the spin-off of Akoya℠ as an independent company that will be jointly owned by Fidelity, The Clearing House Payments Co. and 11 of its member banks. Bank of America, Capital One, Citi, FMR LLC, the parent company of Fidelity Investments, Huntington National Bank, JPMorgan Chase, KeyBank, PNC Bank, The Clearing House Payments Co., TD Bank, Truist, U.S. Bank and Wells Fargo & Company, are the new owners of Akoya." Source: https://www.theclearinghouse.org/payment-systems/articles/2020/02/02-20-2020-financial-industry-give-consumers-more-control-over-their-data
March 16 2020, Coinbase Chief Legal Officer begins to work at NY Fed: "Coinbase's chief legal officer, Brian Brooks, is leaving the crypto exchange to become the second in command at the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)". Source: https://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-chief-legal-officer-leaves-to-take-senior-role-at-us-bank-regulator
March 2020, 2020 SWIFT attempting to bring entire banking payment processing industry to IS20222 standard: "In line with that vision, SWIFT is fully committed to improving transaction data quality through ISO 20022 and will continue to accelerate industry support to adopt ISO 20022 for market infrastructure initiatives, including TARGET2 migration/ESMIG, EURO1 and Bank of England RTGS renewal. .... The end-date to enable full ISO 20022 for cross-border payments remains as originally planned, November 2025." https://www.swift.com/standards/iso-20022-programme/timeline
March 20 2020, Fed-backed digital dollar to be well received by crypto-community with digital dollar being viewed as compliment, rather than a competitor to bitcoin. Source: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-enthusiasts-liberal-lawmakers-cheer-a-fed-backed-digital-dollar-2020-03-30
March 23 2020, COVID 19 pandemic leads to Stimulus Bill which includes proposed digital wallets for Stimilus Bill moneys to be distributed to people who do not have bank accounts currently. Ultimately, the digital wallets section was not included in signed bills but likely will resurface again shortly. Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/in-covid-19-stimulus-us-congress-eyes-digital-dollar-to-send-aid-to-the-unbanked
March 30 2020, Bitcoin enthusiasts, liberal lawmakers cheer a Fed-backed digital dollar. “My legislation would allow every American to set up a free bank account so they don’t have to rely on expensive check cashers to access their hard-earned money,” Sen. Brown told the American Banker. While a digital dollar didn’t make it into the final stimulus legislation, that it concept is now being taken seriously by high-profile lawmakers in Washington is another signpost on the road to a digital-money future, said Carlos Domingo, CEO of Securitize. “The question is not if a digital dollar will be created but when and how.” Source: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bitcoin-enthusiasts-liberal-lawmakers-cheer-a-fed-backed-digital-dollar-2020-03-30.
April 5 2020, NetCents Declares Readiness for Expected US Federal Reserve "Digital Dollar". Source: https://yhoo.it/34jPL0d
April 8 2020, Marion Laboure, Macro Strategist of DeutscheBank just tweeted this. Confirmation of Big Banks making big moves. One world currency coming soon by 2025? Source: https://twitter.com/MarionLaboure/status/1241316697128214529?s=20
The Clearing House will soon launch Secure Token Exchange (STE), a service to manage token issuance and authentication for mobile and ecommerce transactions. Source: https://www.theclearinghouse.org/payment-systems/secure-token-exchange
The Clearing House confirms their new RTP network through job posting on The Clearing House career website that's aim is to provide instant access to ALL account holders inUS. From their job listing: "The The RTP® network from The Clearing House is a real-time payments platform that all federally insured U.S. depository institutions are eligible to use for payments innovation. "The goal of the system is to ultimately provide access to instant payments to every financial institution and account holder in the US. To achieve this goal, significant enhancements and expansion of the system will occur over the next 3-5 years in order to support over 10,000 financial institutions. Qualifications Desired: Money transfer experience, especially knowledge of SWIFT, FED or CHIPS payment processing and settlement" This is stated in current job opening listed under "RTP Senior Developer" at The Clearing House. Source: https://www.theclearinghouse.org/about/careers/rtp-senior-developer. Screenshot of position in case this link dissappears: https://imgur.com/wr2Zoap
submitted by DanielGONZZZ to Chainlink [link] [comments]

Bitcoin challenged my comprehension of money. and from that, governance too

Social Media hacking jokes aside for today, I thought to share a thought experiment I had on how bitcoin fundamentally challenged the way I view money forever.
I was always told throughout life and even in school that money distributed by the government, managed by the government, but used amount the populus. It wasn't until I was 17 in my senior year where I learned about the in-depth concepts of money with topics such as Federal Reserve Banking (How banks make money), taxes, debt, and fiscal and monetary economy. What's funnier is that when I was 14 I heard about bitcoin, but I thought it was just an idea for some far off technology like Nuclear Fusion or Astro mining. So I'm happy to state I learned more about bitcoin before I learned about my own government monetary system. Unfortunately, It would not be for another 2 years before I learn about cryptocurrency and blockchain entirely and another few months before I can actually buy some.
It was at the moment when I fully understood the concepts of bitcoin where I fell in love with it, the idea that NO government, company, or bank could just step in and take your money. No overdrafts, chargebacks, or no 3-5 days deposits. It is great. I get excited to the point I share all I can to people around me about the concept and yet they are confused like a child learning a new language because the concept of true financial responsibility and digital sovereignty can be complex to comprehend. Many of them refer to the same statements: "Money should be protected and held by the bank so I trust that it will forever be there". As I think of it more I start to think of ways how blockchain technology as a whole can be implemented into fintech (or even become the new fintech). Henry Ford once said that
" It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."
It is merely with the introduction of bitcoin and decentralized finance tools when this quote incubates into fruition. Cryptocurrency as a whole puts the individual in power with the same banking tools as the whole banking collective operates on. I agree that there are many people who are fed up with the banks, and their practices but at the same time those people are even more scared to assume their own financial control due to immense responsibilities the bitcoin introduces (private key, cognitive understanding of the industry and tech). Yes, banks are here to provide a service to the public ease and use, but therein lies the question of how much freedom do people really want when they realize that they are also baring even more responsibilities than they are used to. Great power comes with great responsibility. The more financial freedom (I'm not talking about in dollar amounts, but security and accessibility ) you have over your wealth the more responsibility is needed to maintain it. So then more so this brings furthermore changed my perception that I don't have to be so reliant on centralized parties with my money, but I can own my money on the blockchain and send it anywhere where in the world as I deem fit.
So this brings to my thoughts of how would blockchain systems work in government and laws. The laws are barely adapted to handle the internet as is; now they are further behind to handle blockchain. With coronavirus going around this is a testament to show how we are becoming stronger digital society. I have not been out of my home in the past few days, and most of the older ways of doing things are becoming challenged with the introduction of new technologies. The only thing that defines our governments are the lands in which was founded, discovered, or concurred by winning factions and ideals that ultimately curated most of the cultures we see today. We can speak to anyone we can on the internet in a matter of seconds, make a full-time living, we can buy nearly anything and get it delivered on the same day or week, and be associated with communities that align with our interest all online. So when these apps have more data and international relations than the governments we reside, can governments be more than just "land"?
Finally, this brings into question Facebook and Libra. Facebook is one of the largest public multi-national countries on this planet, and libra in eyes of many just a software update. However, Libra shined a light on so many things I've always wondered. With as powerful as Facebook is that probably knows more about you than your government, and has more international relationships with more countries than your government, if/whenever libra is released, this now puts a corporate entity in charge of your money. And As they say, libra existing on blockchains, really can't be stopped if ever it's released. Sure governments can be banned and sue Facebook all they want, but if there are people using it, the damage is done, they can't shut down Facebook without causing an economic collapse probably one worse than the great depression. Facebook is just too big to fail. Google, Amazon are other companies seeking to challenge governance by cities for their corporate entities and employees. They most likely won't be here in the USA too much regulation, but someone where like Africa or even cities on water .
All in all, as I leave, Everything I knew about finances such as mortgages, paychecks, loans, mediums of exchange, trade, and banking tools are all fundamentally challenged by the introduction of bitcoin. The power lies in those who own the system, and when no one owns the system, but everyone manages it, the real power becomes invested back into the people. With this knowledge, I know that I am truly more powerful than I thought I was, and you should feel empowered as well. Sure the infrastructure may take time before things become convenient enough for wide-scale adoption, but we are the founding fathers and mothers of the first generation in the true power of decentralized tech. We are the ones that decide on how the first implementation of this tech should be used, and that's all by experimentation. I agree that it will be a daunting task and scary for those who are not familiar with this. Like all things that exist it starts with experimentation.
submitted by tycooperaow to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

LOEx Market Research Report on September 22: Fringe market falls sharply to drive BTC down

LOEx Market Research Report on September 22: Fringe market falls sharply to drive BTC down
[Today's Hot Tips]
1. [Brazilian Fund Management Company and Nasdaq will cooperate to launch Bitcoin ETF]
According to Cointelegraph on September 22, a regulated Brazilian fund management company, Hashdex, signed an agreement with Nasdaq to launch the world's first Bitcoin ETF on the Bermuda Stock Exchange. The ETF product has been approved by the Bermuda government and will be online trading before the end of the year.
2. [South Korean Internet giant, Kakao, may be interested in entering the DeFi field]
According to Cryptocurrency News on September 22, South Korean Internet giant, Kakao, seems to be interested in getting involved in the DeFi field recently. Li Yunhao, head of the ground X business of its blockchain subsidiary, recently stated that the Klaytn platform (a blockchain platform owned by Ground X, which owns the encrypted token KLAY) is open to expanding business related to DeFi. In addition, he also mentioned that Kakao plans to expand the scope of Klip wallet applications to allow support for copyright-related tokenized files, derivatives, and NFT tokens.
3. [OCC: Bank of America can hold reserves for stablecoin issuers]
According to The Block's news on September 21, according to OCC's new guidelines, the Federal Chartered Bank can hold reserves for stablecoins issuers. The Acting Auditor General, Brian Brooks, said in a statement: "This guidance provides banks in the Federal Banking System with greater regulatory certainty, enabling them to provide services to customers in a safe and reliable manner."
[Today's market analysis]
Bitcoin (BTC)BTC fluctuated upwards in the morning as a whole, rebounding slightly from around 10400 USDT to around 10450 USDT, and the overall fluctuation was not large. The mainstream currencies basically follow the trend of the broader market and have little volatility, and the overall trend is upward. BTC is currently trading at 10450.9 USDT on LOEx Global, an increase of 0.30% in 24h.
Global assets fell simultaneously. The European and American stock markets fell sharply yesterday. Spot gold began to fall at 14:00 in the afternoon, falling from 1955 to 1928, directly leading to a crash. BTC fell almost simultaneously, from 10900 to 10320.
BTC has followed the trend of gold obviously. On the other hand, ETH directly led the decline, with a maximum drop of more than 7%. We don't know how many chips are on the mountain again. The DeFi sector has encountered a big waterfall; the so-called not breaking or standing, personally feel that BTC will fall below 10,000 points this time, and you can gradually take positions below 10,000 points. For short-term analysis, as long as it does not stand firmly at 11,000, you should not be too optimistic about the market. After all, this wave is a "blood sucking" model and does not represent the overall strength of the market. In recent times, BTC has risen while other mainstream coins have not risen but fell. Yesterday, the decline of BTC is that mainstream coins have fallen even more, indicating that the "blood sucking" model has not yet ended.
However, there is no need to be too pessimistic. Last week, the hot spots in the end market have weakened. We need to see if there are new hot spots in the future. If not, the outflow of funds from the hot spots still needs a channel to receive.
Under normal circumstances, BTC and mainstream currencies in the currency circle are commonly used channels for capital inflows, so you can still stay focused. Look at the pressure of $ 11000 above BTC. A momentary breakthrough in this position does not mean anything. The key is to stand firm. We should look at $10,000 first at below.
Operation suggestions:
Support level: the first support level is 10000 points, the second support level is 9800 integers;
Resistance level: the first resistance level is 10500 points, the second resistance level is 11000 points.
LOEx is registered in Seychelles. It is a global one-stop digital asset service platform with business distribution nodes in 20 regions around the world. It has been exempted from Seychelles and Singapore Monetary Authority (MAS) digital currency trading services. Provide services and secure encrypted digital currency trading environment for 2 million community members in 24 hours.
https://preview.redd.it/ndl1g4526no51.png?width=619&format=png&auto=webp&s=84413e0d7f72332cacc177a6bd9575a1965b4662
submitted by LOEXCHANGE to loex [link] [comments]

Stablecoins Are Not as Safe as You Think. How Your USDT, PAX, BUSD Get Frozen in a Moment

Stablecoins Are Not as Safe as You Think. How Your USDT, PAX, BUSD Get Frozen in a Moment
Being created on the basis of blockchain, stablecoins were considered to be a safe haven for investors… until recently. Why is their immunity elusive and how does the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) plan to control them?
Established in 1989 by the G7, the FATF inter-governmental organization develops policies to resist money laundering and financing of terrorism. It sets standards and implements legal and regulatory measures to combat illegal financial transactions.
They developed recommendations for the monitoring of money laundering and keep revising them regularly. In case of non-compliance, law enforcement is executed via regional financial organizations. As of 2019, there are 39 full members of FATF, including the USA, UK, Australia, most EU countries, Singapore, India and the Russian Federation.
Since 1st July, the FATF organization has been headed by Marcus Pleyer. During the last FATF meeting, the new president expressed his concerns about global stablecoins and organizations that issue them. Although the organization had already dealt with these cryptocurrencies, it highlighted that, “it is essential to continue closely monitoring the ML/TF risks of so-called stablecoins, including anonymous peer-to-peer transactions via unhosted wallets”.
Is it ever possible to control crypto wallets that are not hosted on online exchanges? – you’d ask. We’re used to the fact that cryptocurrencies are outside the reach of banks and governments. However, when it comes to stablecoins, things are different.

It’s in the code

What makes stablecoins special is that they are pegging to fiat currency, for example, 1 TUSD = $1 USD. This means that such assets should be backed up by real money stored in the bank accounts of the issuing organization. Consequently, stablecoin creators need to comply with the requirements of the SEC, FATF and other controlling agencies, if they are to operate in the cryptocurrency sphere and be authorised to sell stablecoins. Transparent reports are not the only requirement, stablecoins must also provide the possibility of account blocking.
Surprisingly, this feature is implemented in each stablecoin. The experts from QDAO DeFi are covering several stablecoin protocols that enable this function.

OMNI-based USDT

Issued by Tether Limited, USDT is a stablecoin that was originally created to be worth $1 with each token backed by a $1 real fiat reserve. The currency was successfully promoted and added to major cryptocurrency exchanges but stayed a controversial asset. Despite the claims of Tether Limited, they failed to provide any contractual right or other legal claims to guarantee that USDT can be swapped for dollars or be redeemed.
In April 2019, Tether’s lawyers explained that each USDT was backed by only $0.74 in cash or equivalent assets. No audit of dollar collateral was done. A month before that, it changed the backing to include loans to affiliate companies. The scandal also involved the Bitfinex exchange that was accused of using USDT funds to cover $850 million in funds lost since 2018. They were also accused of manipulating USDT to push the BTC price.
Tether is available on five blockchains: Omni, Ehereum, EOS, Tron and Liquid. Only the latter does not have a freezing feature. Omni was the first protocol for USDT. Blocking of users’ accounts is possible, thanks to the following piece of code:

https://preview.redd.it/uqho45l33om51.png?width=690&format=png&auto=webp&s=c0feebdae086b0deeccde05278eaf3cc760f9e2b
Apparently, it’s used to blacklist addresses and contracts.

PAX

The concerns about PAX were centered around the notorious MMM BSC Ponzi scheme. Before the widespread adoption of DeFi services, it was the second-largest gas consumer after Ethereum. Out of 25,000 daily transactions, 5,000 were performed by MMM BSC. It was reported to be a scam but none of the accounts were frozen. Does it mean PAX lacked the resources to regulate illicit activities?
Evidently, not. The protocol code has a LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNCTIONALITY function that allows for the freezing/unfreezing of contracts or burning assets on blacklisted accounts. It turns out, anyone risks having their PAX coins destroyed during an investigation process while their accounts stay blocked.

History of frozen accounts

In 2019, the ZCash Foundation and Eric Wall conducted research on the privacy of stablecoins and revealed several frozen addresses. It’s not clear why exactly they were blocked. Most probably, it happened shortly after the exchange withdrawal – users took this action after witnessing platforms being hacked.

https://preview.redd.it/pkbruqm83om51.png?width=838&format=png&auto=webp&s=b068c5b8c5e5439892eaf5feefa3fbc93c694c8c
USDT was implicated at least twice in scandals to do with freezing. In April 2019, about $850 million in Tether dollars sent by Crypto Capital Corp. were frozen by a New York court. Tether and Btfinex were accused of participating in a cover-up to hide about $850 million worth in clients’ funds. By July 2020, Tether had frozen 40 Ethereum addresses with millions of USDT (some of them are shown in the screenshot above).
The Centre Consortium was the next to follow their lead; about a month ago, it blacklisted an address with USDC worth $100,000. That was done in response to law enforcement.
Yet, it’s not only Europe and the USA imposing control over cryptocurrencies. Since June 2020, the Chinese government managed to block several thousands of users’ bank accounts. It was done to resist illicit activities, especially money laundering. On some of those accounts, no activity had been detected for several months. Meanwhile, prior to April 2020, Chinese residents moved over $50 billion worth of crypto outside the country borders – more than is officially allowed (a maximum of $50,000 per person).
The authorities claim that USDT and other stablecoins are often used in illegal activities. Together with the People’s Bank of China (PBOC), they are developing new ways of investigating digital crimes and money laundering operations involving exchanges and crypto wallets. Local financial bureaus and police are working tight-lipped about investigating startups and crypto exchanges. And they are succeeding at it.
In July 2020, Chinese authorities confiscated BTC, ETH and USDT worth $15 million from people who allegedly ran a fake cryptocurrency scheme.
By the way, not only corporate accounts are being closed. One investor claims his account had been frozen after using yuan to purchase crypto. Also, users who transfer illegally obtained money outside of the mainland in large amounts are under suspicion. Does it mean the Chinese government has started tightening the screws on cryptocurrency users?

DAI, USDT on Liquid and USDQ are the main options for stablecoin deposits

So, where can you store your crypto assets? USDT on Liquid and DAI are not the only solutions available. Consider making a deposit in USDQ, the stablecoin of the QDAO ecosystem. Like other stablecoins, it’s 1-to-1 pegged to USD. However, it cannot be frozen by a government, financial organization or anyone from the QDAO team. You can check it yourself by reading our Smart contract and USDQ Audit.
In QDAO, users’ accounts are never frozen by a single person – all account issues are solved by the entire QDAO community, with the help of a QDAO governance token.
In case of blocking (the chances of which are almost non-existent), you can address the QDAO community and get timely help.

Bottom Line

With FATF taking this new course of action, we might witness serious pressure on stablecoin providers. Some projects will resist it, but it’s still not safe to store your assets in popular stablecoins, especially USDT. Your account can be frozen by authorities for dozens of reasons without the possibility of retrieval.
Yet, there are a number of reliable alternatives and USDQ stablecoin is one of them. QDAO DeFi platform users feel free to manage their crypto reserves and make profitable deposits.
Want to be the first to hear QDAO DeFi news and updates? Visit our website and stay in touch with us on social media: Twitter, Facebook, Telegram and LINE (for the Japanese-speaking community).
submitted by QDAODeFi to u/QDAODeFi [link] [comments]

How To End The Cryptocurrency Exchange "Wild West" Without Crippling Innovation


In case you haven't noticed the consultation paper, staff notice, and report on Quadriga, regulators are now clamping down on Canadian cryptocurrency exchanges. The OSC and other regulatory bodies are still interested in industry feedback. They have not put forward any official regulation yet. Below are some ideas/insights and a proposed framework.



Many of you have limited time to read the full proposal, so here are the highlights:

Offline Multi-Signature

Effective standards to prevent both internal and external theft. Exchange operators are trained and certified, and have a legal responsibility to users.

Regular Transparent Audits

Provides visibility to Canadians that their funds are fully backed on the exchange, while protecting privacy and sensitive platform information.

Insurance Requirements

Establishment of basic insurance standards/strategy, to expand over time. Removing risk to exchange users of any hot wallet theft.


Background and Justifications


Cold Storage Custody/Management
After reviewing close to 100 cases, all thefts tend to break down into more or less the same set of problems:
• Funds stored online or in a smart contract,
• Access controlled by one person or one system,
• 51% attacks (rare),
• Funds sent to the wrong address (also rare), or
• Some combination of the above.
For the first two cases, practical solutions exist and are widely implemented on exchanges already. Offline multi-signature solutions are already industry standard. No cases studied found an external theft or exit scam involving an offline multi-signature wallet implementation. Security can be further improved through minimum numbers of signatories, background checks, providing autonomy and legal protections to each signatory, establishing best practices, and a training/certification program.
The last two transaction risks occur more rarely, and have never resulted in a loss affecting the actual users of the exchange. In all cases to date where operators made the mistake, they've been fully covered by the exchange platforms.
• 51% attacks generally only occur on blockchains with less security. The most prominent cases have been Bitcoin Gold and Ethereum Classic. The simple solution is to enforce deposit limits and block delays such that a 51% attack is not cost-effective.
• The risk of transactions to incorrect addresses can be eliminated by a simple test transaction policy on large transactions. By sending a small amount of funds prior to any large withdrawals/transfers as a standard practice, the accuracy of the wallet address can be validated.
The proposal covers all loss cases and goes beyond, while avoiding significant additional costs, risks, and limitations which may be associated with other frameworks like SOC II.

On The Subject of Third Party Custodians
Many Canadian platforms are currently experimenting with third party custody. From the standpoint of the exchange operator, they can liberate themselves from some responsibility of custody, passing that off to someone else. For regulators, it puts crypto in similar categorization to oil, gold, and other commodities, with some common standards. Platform users would likely feel greater confidence if the custodian was a brand they recognized. If the custodian was knowledgeable and had a decent team that employed multi-sig, they could keep assets safe from internal theft. With the right protections in place, this could be a great solution for many exchanges, particularly those that lack the relevant experience or human resources for their own custody systems.
However, this system is vulnerable to anyone able to impersonate the exchange operators. You may have a situation where different employees who don't know each other that well are interacting between different companies (both the custodian and all their customers which presumably isn't just one exchange). A case study of what can go wrong in this type of environment might be Bitpay, where the CEO was tricked out of 5000 bitcoins over 3 separate payments by a series of emails sent legitimately from a breached computer of another company CEO. It's also still vulnerable to the platform being compromised, as in the really large $70M Bitfinex hack, where the third party Bitgo held one key in a multi-sig wallet. The hacker simply authorized the withdrawal using the same credentials as Bitfinex (requesting Bitgo to sign multiple withdrawal transactions). This succeeded even with the use of multi-sig and two heavily security-focused companies, due to the lack of human oversight (basically, hot wallet). Of course, you can learn from these cases and improve the security, but so can hackers improve their deception and at the end of the day, both of these would have been stopped by the much simpler solution of a qualified team who knew each other and employed multi-sig with properly protected keys. It's pretty hard to beat a human being who knows the business and the typical customer behaviour (or even knows their customers personally) at spotting fraud, and the proposed multi-sig means any hacker has to get through the scrutiny of 3 (or more) separate people, all of whom would have proper training including historical case studies.
There are strong arguments both for and against using use of third party custodians. The proposal sets mandatory minimum custody standards would apply regardless if the cold wallet signatories are exchange operators, independent custodians, or a mix of both.

On The Subject Of Insurance
ShakePay has taken the first steps into this new realm (congratulations). There is no question that crypto users could be better protected by the right insurance policies, and it certainly feels better to transact with insured platforms. The steps required to obtain insurance generally place attention in valuable security areas, and in this case included a review from CipherTrace. One of the key solutions in traditional finance comes from insurance from entities such as the CDIC.
However, historically, there wasn't found any actual insurance payout to any cryptocurrency exchange, and there are notable cases where insurance has not paid. With Bitpay, for example, the insurance agent refused because the issue happened to the third party CEO's computer instead of anything to do with Bitpay itself. With the Youbit exchange in South Korea, their insurance claim was denied, and the exchange ultimately ended up instead going bankrupt with all user's funds lost. To quote Matt Johnson in the original Lloyd's article: “You can create an insurance policy that protects no one – you know there are so many caveats to the policy that it’s not super protective.”
ShakePay's insurance was only reported to cover their cold storage, and “physical theft of the media where the private keys are held”. Physical theft has never, in the history of cryptocurrency exchange cases reviewed, been reported as the cause of loss. From the limited information of the article, ShakePay made it clear their funds are in the hands of a single US custodian, and at least part of their security strategy is to "decline[] to confirm the custodian’s name on the record". While this prevents scrutiny of the custodian, it's pretty silly to speculate that a reasonably competent hacking group couldn't determine who the custodian is. A far more common infiltration strategy historically would be social engineering, which has succeeded repeatedly. A hacker could trick their way into ShakePay's systems and request a fraudulent withdrawal, impersonate ShakePay and request the custodian to move funds, or socially engineer their way into the custodian to initiate the withdrawal of multiple accounts (a payout much larger than ShakePay) exploiting the standard procedures (for example, fraudulently initiating or override the wallet addresses of a real transfer). In each case, nothing was physically stolen and the loss is therefore not covered by insurance.
In order for any insurance to be effective, clear policies have to be established about what needs to be covered. Anything short of that gives Canadians false confidence that they are protected when they aren't in any meaningful way. At this time, the third party insurance market does not appear to provide adequate options or coverage, and effort is necessary to standardize custody standards, which is a likely first step in ultimately setting up an insurance framework.
A better solution compared to third party insurance providers might be for Canadian exchange operators to create their own collective insurance fund, or a specific federal organization similar to the CDIC. Such an organization would have a greater interest or obligation in paying out actual cases, and that would be it's purpose rather than maximizing it's own profit. This would be similar to the SAFU which Binance has launched, except it would cover multiple exchanges. There is little question whether the SAFU would pay out given a breach of Binance, and a similar argument could be made for a insurance fund managed by a collective of exchange operators or a government organization. While a third party insurance provider has the strong market incentive to provide the absolute minimum coverage and no market incentive to payout, an entity managed by exchange operators would have incentive to protect the reputation of exchange operators/the industry, and the government should have the interest of protecting Canadians.

On The Subject of Fractional Reserve
There is a long history of fractional reserve failures, from the first banks in ancient times, through the great depression (where hundreds of fractional reserve banks failed), right through to the 2008 banking collapse referenced in the first bitcoin block. The fractional reserve system allows banks to multiply the money supply far beyond the actual cash (or other assets) in existence, backed only by a system of debt obligations of others. Safely supporting a fractional reserve system is a topic of far greater complexity than can be addressed by a simple policy, and when it comes to cryptocurrency, there is presently no entity reasonably able to bail anyone out in the event of failure. Therefore, this framework is addressed around entities that aim to maintain 100% backing of funds.
There may be some firms that desire but have failed to maintain 100% backing. In this case, there are multiple solutions, including outside investment, merging with other exchanges, or enforcing a gradual restoration plan. All of these solutions are typically far better than shutting down the exchange, and there are multiple cases where they've been used successfully in the past.

Proof of Reserves/Transparency/Accountability
Canadians need to have visibility into the backing on an ongoing basis.
The best solution for crypto-assets is a Proof of Reserve. Such ideas go back all the way to 2013, before even Mt. Gox. However, no Canadian exchange has yet implemented such a system, and only a few international exchanges (CoinFloor in the UK being an example) have. Many firms like Kraken, BitBuy, and now ShakePay use the Proof of Reserve term to refer to lesser proofs which do not actually cryptographically prove the full backing of all user assets on the blockchain. In order for a Proof of Reserve to be effective, it must actually be a complete proof, and it needs to be understood by the public that is expected to use it. Many firms have expressed reservations about the level of transparency required in a complete Proof of Reserve (for example Kraken here). While a complete Proof of Reserves should be encouraged, and there are some solutions in the works (ie TxQuick), this is unlikely to be suitable universally for all exchange operators and users.
Given the limitations, and that firms also manage fiat assets, a more traditional audit process makes more sense. Some Canadian exchanges (CoinSquare, CoinBerry) have already subjected themselves to annual audits. However, these results are not presently shared publicly, and there is no guarantee over the process including all user assets or the integrity and independence of the auditor. The auditor has been typically not known, and in some cases, the identity of the auditor is protected by a NDA. Only in one case (BitBuy) was an actual report generated and publicly shared. There has been no attempt made to validate that user accounts provided during these audits have been complete or accurate. A fraudulent fractional exchange, or one which had suffered a breach they were unwilling to publicly accept (see CoinBene), could easily maintain a second set of books for auditors or simply exclude key accounts to pass an individual audit.
The proposed solution would see a reporting standard which includes at a minimum - percentage of backing for each asset relative to account balances and the nature of how those assets are stored, with ownership proven by the auditor. The auditor would also publicly provide a "hash list", which they independently generate from the accounts provided by the exchange. Every exchange user can then check their information against this public "hash list". A hash is a one-way form of encryption, which fully protects the private information, yet allows anyone who knows that information already to validate that it was included. Less experienced users can take advantage of public tools to calculate the hash from their information (provided by the exchange), and thus have certainty that the auditor received their full balance information. Easy instructions can be provided.
Auditors should be impartial, their identities and process public, and they should be rotated so that the same auditor is never used twice in a row. Balancing the cost of auditing against the needs for regular updates, a 6 month cycle likely makes the most sense.

Hot Wallet Management
The best solution for hot wallets is not to use them. CoinBerry reportedly uses multi-sig on all withdrawals, and Bitmex is an international example known for their structure devoid of hot wallets.
However, many platforms and customers desire fast withdrawal processes, and human validation has a cost of time and delay in this process.
A model of self-insurance or separate funds for hot wallets may be used in these cases. Under this model, a platform still has 100% of their client balance in cold storage and holds additional funds in hot wallets for quick withdrawal. Thus, the risk of those hot wallets is 100% on exchange operators and not affecting the exchange users. Since most platforms typically only have 1%-5% in hot wallets at any given time, it shouldn't be unreasonable to build/maintain these additional reserves over time using exchange fees or additional investment. Larger withdrawals would still be handled at regular intervals from the cold storage.
Hot wallet risks have historically posed a large risk and there is no established standard to guarantee secure hot wallets. When the government of South Korea dispatched security inspections to multiple exchanges, the results were still that 3 of them got hacked after the inspections. If standards develop such that an organization in the market is willing to insure the hot wallets, this could provide an acceptable alternative. Another option may be for multiple exchange operators to pool funds aside for a hot wallet insurance fund. Comprehensive coverage standards must be established and maintained for all hot wallet balances to make sure Canadians are adequately protected.

Current Draft Proposal

(1) Proper multi-signature cold wallet storage.
(a) Each private key is the personal and legal responsibility of one person - the “signatory”. Signatories have special rights and responsibilities to protect user assets. Signatories are trained and certified through a course covering (1) past hacking and fraud cases, (2) proper and secure key generation, and (3) proper safekeeping of private keys. All private keys must be generated and stored 100% offline by the signatory. If even one private keys is ever breached or suspected to be breached, the wallet must be regenerated and all funds relocated to a new wallet.
(b) All signatories must be separate background-checked individuals free of past criminal conviction. Canadians should have a right to know who holds their funds. All signing of transactions must take place with all signatories on Canadian soil or on the soil of a country with a solid legal system which agrees to uphold and support these rules (from an established white-list of countries which expands over time).
(c) 3-5 independent signatures are required for any withdrawal. There must be 1-3 spare signatories, and a maximum of 7 total signatories. The following are all valid combinations: 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7.
(d) A security audit should be conducted to validate the cold wallet is set up correctly and provide any additional pertinent information. The primary purpose is to ensure that all signatories are acting independently and using best practices for private key storage. A report summarizing all steps taken and who did the audit will be made public. Canadians must be able to validate the right measures are in place to protect their funds.
(e) There is a simple approval process if signatories wish to visit any country outside Canada, with a potential whitelist of exempt countries. At most 2 signatories can be outside of aligned jurisdiction at any given time. All exchanges would be required to keep a compliant cold wallet for Canadian funds and have a Canadian office if they wish to serve Canadian customers.
(2) Regular and transparent solvency audits.
(a) An audit must be conducted at founding, after 3 months of operation, and at least once every 6 months to compare customer balances against all stored cryptocurrency and fiat balances. The auditor must be known, independent, and never the same twice in a row.
(b) An audit report will be published featuring the steps conducted in a readable format. This should be made available to all Canadians on the exchange website and on a government website. The report must include what percentage of each customer asset is backed on the exchange, and how those funds are stored.
(c) The auditor will independently produce a hash of each customer's identifying information and balance as they perform the audit. This will be made publicly available on the exchange and government website, along with simplified instructions that each customer can use to verify that their balance was included in the audit process.
(d) The audit needs to include a proof of ownership for any cryptocurrency wallets included. A satoshi test (spending a small amount) or partially signed transaction both qualify.
(e) Any platform without 100% reserves should be assessed on a regular basis by a government or industry watchdog. This entity should work to prevent any further drop, support any private investor to come in, or facilitate a merger so that 100% backing can be obtained as soon as possible.
(3) Protections for hot wallets and transactions.
(a) A standardized list of approved coins and procedures will be established to constitute valid cold storage wallets. Where a multi-sig process is not natively available, efforts will be undertaken to establish a suitable and stable smart contract standard. This list will be expanded and improved over time. Coins and procedures not on the list are considered hot wallets.
(b) Hot wallets can be backed by additional funds in cold storage or an acceptable third-party insurance provider with a comprehensive coverage policy.
(c) Exchanges are required to cover the full balance of all user funds as denominated in the same currency, or double the balance as denominated in bitcoin or CAD using an established trading rate. If the balance is ever insufficient due to market movements, the firm must rectify this within 24 hours by moving assets to cold storage or increasing insurance coverage.
(d) Any large transactions (above a set threshold) from cold storage to any new wallet addresses (not previously transacted with) must be tested with a smaller transaction first. Deposits of cryptocurrency must be limited to prevent economic 51% attacks. Any issues are to be covered by the exchange.
(e) Exchange platforms must provide suitable authentication for users, including making available approved forms of two-factor authentication. SMS-based authentication is not to be supported. Withdrawals must be blocked for 48 hours in the event of any account password change. Disputes on the negligence of exchanges should be governed by case law.

Steps Forward

Continued review of existing OSC feedback is still underway. More feedback and opinions on the framework and ideas as presented here are extremely valuable. The above is a draft and not finalized.
The process of further developing and bringing a suitable framework to protect Canadians will require the support of exchange operators, legal experts, and many others in the community. The costs of not doing such are tremendous. A large and convoluted framework, one based on flawed ideas or implementation, or one which fails to properly safeguard Canadians is not just extremely expensive and risky for all Canadians, severely limiting to the credibility and reputation of the industry, but an existential risk to many exchanges.
The responsibility falls to all of us to provide our insight and make our opinions heard on this critical matter. Please take the time to give your thoughts.
submitted by azoundria2 to QuadrigaInitiative [link] [comments]

What Is Defi?

Cryptocurrency’s promise is to make money and payments universally accessible– to anyone, no matter where they are in the world.
The Decentralized Finance (DeFi) or Open Finance movement takes that promise a step further. Imagine a global, open alternative to every financial service you use today — savings, loans, trading, insurance and more — accessible to anyone in the world with a smartphone and internet connection.
This is now possible on smart contract blockchains, like Ethereum. “Smart contracts” are programs running on the blockchain that can execute automatically when certain conditions are met. These smart contracts enable developers to build far more sophisticated functionality than simply sending and receiving cryptocurrency. These programs are what we now call decentralized apps, or dapps.
You can think of a dapp as an app that is built on decentralized technology, rather than being built and controlled by a single, centralized entity or company. (Get used to this word, dapp, you’ll be seeing it a lot from here on out.)
While some of these concepts might sound futuristic–automated loans negotiated directly between two strangers in different parts of the world, without a bank in the middle– many of these dapps are already live today. There are DeFi dapps that allow you to create stablecoins (cryptocurrency whose value is pegged to the US dollar), lend out money and earn interest on your crypto, take out a loan, exchange one asset for another, go long or short assets, and implement automated, advanced investment strategies.

What differentiates these DeFi dapps from their traditional bank or Wall Street counterparts?

At their core, the operations of these businesses are not managed by an institution and its employees — instead the rules are written in code (or smart contract, as mentioned above). Once the smart contract is deployed to the blockchain, DeFi dapps can run themselves with little to no human intervention (although in practice developers often do maintain the dapps with upgrades or bug fixes).
The code is transparent on the blockchain for anyone to audit. This builds a different kind of trust with users, because anyone has the opportunity to understand the contract’s functionality or find bugs. All transaction activity is also public for anyone to view. While this may raise privacy questions, transactions are pseudonymous by default, i.e. not tied directly to your real-life identity.
Dapps are designed to be global from day one — Whether you’re in Texas or Tanzania, you have access to the same DeFi services and networks. Of course, local regulations may apply but, technically speaking, most DeFi apps are available to anyone with an internet connection.
Permissionless” to create, “permissionless” to participate — anyone can create DeFi apps, and anyone can use them. Unlike finance today, there are no gatekeepers or accounts with lengthy forms. Users interact directly with the smart contracts from their crypto wallets.
Flexible user experience — don’t like the interface to a certain dapp? No problem — you can use a third party interface, or build your own. Smart contracts are like an open API that anyone can build an app for.
Interoperable — new DeFi applications can be built or composed by combining other DeFi products like Lego pieces — e.g. stablecoins, decentralized exchanges, and prediction markets can be combined to form entirely new products.
DeFi is now one of the fastest growing sectors in crypto. Industry observers measure traction with a unique new metric — “ETH locked in DeFi”. At the time of writing, users have deposited over $600 million worth of crypto into these smart contracts.
Intrigued? Let’s take a closer look at just a few of the popular DeFi dapps out there that you can try today. You’ll need a cryptocurrency wallet with a built-in dapp browser (like Coinbase Wallet) to connect to these dapps. You can also use most of these dapps on desktop by selecting the Coinbase Wallet option and scanning a QR code.
It’s still early days for dapps, so DeFi users should do their research on new products and services. Like any computer code, smart contracts can be vulnerable to both unintended programming mistakes and malicious hacks.

Stablecoin and Decentralized Reserve Bank: MakerDAO

Maker is a stablecoin project where each stablecoin (called DAI) is pegged to the US Dollar and is backed by collateral in the form of crypto. Stablecoins offer the programmability of crypto without the downside of volatility that you see with “traditional” cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum.
You can try creating your own DAI stablecoin on the Maker Oasis dapp. Maker is more than just a stablecoin project, though–it aspires to be a decentralized reserve bank. People who hold a separate but related token, MKR, can vote on important decisions like the Stability Fee (similar to how the Federal Reserve’s Federal Open Market Committee votes on the Fed Funds rate).
Another stablecoin with a different architecture is USD Coin (USDC), where every USDC token is backed by one US dollar held in an audited bank account.
Borrow and Lend: Compound
Compound is a blockchain-based borrowing and lending dapp — you can lend your crypto out and earn interest on it. Or maybe you need some money to pay the rent or buy groceries, but your funds are tied up in your crypto investments? You can deposit your crypto to the Compound smart contract as collateral, and borrow against it. The Compound contract automatically matches borrowers and lenders, and adjusts interest rates dynamically based on supply and demand.
Other popular borrow/lend dapps are Dharma and dYdX. Aggregators like LoanScan track borrow/lend interest rates across the various dapps, so you can shop around for the best rates.
Automated Token Exchange: Uniswap
Uniswap is a cryptocurrency exchange run entirely on smart contracts, letting you trade popular tokens directly from your wallet. This is different from an exchange like Coinbase, which stores your crypto for you and holds your private keys for safekeeping. Uniswap uses an innovative mechanism known as Automated Market Making to automatically settle trades near the market price. In addition to trading, any user can become a liquidity provider, by supplying crypto to the Uniswap contract and earning a share of the exchange fees. This is called “pooling”.
Other popular Decentralized Exchange platforms (DEXes) include 0x, AirSwap, Bancor, Kyber, IDEX, Paradex and Radar Relay. All have slightly different architectures.
Prediction Markets: Augur
Augur is a decentralized prediction market protocol. With Augur, you can vote on the outcome of events, except you put ‘skin in the game’ by attaching a value to your vote. Prediction market platforms like Augur and Guesser are nascent, but offer a view into a future where users can make better predictions by tapping into the wisdom of the crowd.
Synthetic Assets: Synthetix
Synthetix is a platform that lets users create and exchange synthetic versions of assets like gold, silver, cryptocurrencies and traditional currencies like the Euro. The synthetic assets are backed by excess collateral locked into the Synthetix contracts.
No-loss savings games: PoolTogether
The composability of DeFi lends itself to infinite new possibilities. PoolTogether is a no-loss game where participants deposit the DAI stablecoin into a common pot. At the end of each month, one lucky participant wins all the interest earned, and everyone gets their initial deposits back.

So what’s next for DeFi?

Money and finance have been around in one form or the other since the dawn of human civilization. Crypto is just the latest digital avatar. In upcoming years, we might see every financial service that we use in today’s fiat system being rebuilt for the crypto ecosystem. We’ve already seen asset issuance and exchange, borrowing, lending, custody, and derivatives built for crypto. What’s next?
The first generation of DeFi dapps rely heavily on collateral as a safeguard. That is, you need to already own crypto and provide it as collateral in order to borrow more crypto. More traditional unsecured borrowing and lending will need to rely on an identity system, so that borrowers can build up credit and increase their borrowing power, much like today’s SSN and FICO scores. Unlike today’s identity and credit systems however, a decentralized identity will have to be both universal and privacy-preserving.
We’re also seeing innovation in the insurance space. Many of today’s DeFi loans are overcollateralized (meaning that loans seem inherently safe because of the generous cushion of assets held in reserve). But the black swan for DeFi is smart contract vulnerabilities. If a hacker finds and exploits a bug in the open source code for a dapp, millions of dollars could be drained in an instant. Teams like Nexus Mutual are building decentralized insurance that would make users whole in the event of smart contract hacks.
Another trend we’re seeing is better user experience. The first generation of dapps was built by blockchain enthusiasts for blockchain enthusiasts. These dapps did a great job of demonstrating exciting new DeFi possibilities, but the usability left something to be desired. The latest iterations of DeFi apps are prioritizing design and ease of use in order to take open finance to a wider audience.
In the future, we expect that crypto wallets will be the portal to all your digital asset activity, just like an internet browser today is your portal to the world’s news and information. Imagine a dashboard that shows you not just what assets you own, but how much you have locked up in different open finance protocols–loans, pools, and insurance contracts.
Across the DeFi ecosystem, we’re also seeing a move towards decentralizing governance and decision-making. Despite the word “decentralized” in DeFi, many projects today have master keys for the developers to shut down or disable dapps. This was done to allow for easy upgrades and provide an emergency shutoff valve in case of buggy code. However, as the code becomes more battle-tested, we expect developers will give up these backdoor switches. The DeFi community is experimenting with ways to allow stakeholders to vote on decisions, including through the use of blockchain-based Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs).
Something magical is happening in the open financial system — crypto is bringing money online, and we’re seeing a quantum leap in what’s possible when it comes to the functionality of money. It’s a rare opportunity to see an entirely new industry blossom from scratch. The DeFi space will at first play catch up with today’s financial services industry. But over time, it’s hard to even fathom what innovations will come about when the power to build financial services is democratized to anyone who can write code.
submitted by jakkkmotivator to Latest_Defi_News [link] [comments]

Gold standard? Federal Reserve?

Gold standard? End the Federal Reserve?
I'm pretty sure this has been debated before and asked a lot in this forum but pardon me being new here.
I am a history major and have been trying to read as much about economics as I can during my spare time. I'm about finished with Gregory Mankiw's Principles of Macroeconomics and plan to read his Principles of Microeconomics soon enough. I have also read Thomas Sowell's Basic Economics and am about halfway through reading Henry Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson. I have also recently seen Milton Friedman's Free to Choose and also plan on reading his works, as well as Friedrich Hayek and Frederick Bastiat.
One of the topics I really want to delve into is in regard to the merits of having a Federal Reserve and whether it is more beneficial to go back to a gold standard. I think that there is an economic consensus that the money supply has a great correlation with the level of inflation and the value of the dollar, as the more that is printed, the more worthless the dollar becomes, and the less printed it is, the more worth it becomes. Particularly also, fiat currency tends to be valued only in, so, far, as there is confidence in the financial systems.
For this reason, there seems to be two issues and questions at hand. The first one is if it would be more beneficial to go back to a gold standard? I understand that there are various ways in which this could occur. This could include going back to the physical use of gold as money, pegging the dollar back to gold, or begging it to some other commodity such as Bitcoin. The purpose of any of these approaches is to control the money supply by something that is finite and hence limited in nature.
This seems to solve the problem of controlling the quantity of the dollar. Some have criticized the gold standard due to the overly restricted circulation of currency that has historically led to deflationary, as opposed to inflationary periods, which could be just as devastating as inflationary periods.
The second question and problem concern the Federal Reserve. To what extent is it beneficial to have a Fed? Should the Fed be reconstructed, and or more heavily regulated? Should we outright do away with the Fed? Or should the Fed be kept the way it is? On the one hand, it makes sense in theory to have an institution such as the Fed to help regulate banks, ensuring that things such as bank runs, and or banking disasters are preventing. It also seems sensible in theory to have an institution such as the Fed, which is independent of the government, to help in coordinating monetary policy.
However, in practice, it also seems that the Fed has often been the cause of such disasters such as the Great Depression and the Great Recession by creating boom and bust cycles through arbitrarily changing interest rates, and through its various tactics at influencing monetary policy and controlling the money supply. A similar, yet different issue would be laws passed by the government encouraging risky lending such as forcing financial institutions, whether private or public to give out bad loans to risky people such as those who can't afford to take the loan.
Would it not make more sense to simply let the "invisible hand" (the forces of supply and demand) to allocate the money supply and interest rates? If there is more demand for borrowing this will push interest rates up, as banks and other financial institutions would want to charge higher interests and they would ideally want to be careful as to who they are lending money to. If there is a greater demand for saving than lending, this would push interest rates down as banks would not want to give out as much money in interest and other financial institutions would want to encourage more borrowing.
I would appreciate any resource recommendations whether they be books or other media platforms that you think do a good job at tackling any of these two issues.
submitted by Crazrwire999 to economy [link] [comments]

Cryptocurrency Regulation EXPLAINED: The GOOD, The Bad, and The UGLY Should governments regulate business? Should the government subsidize junk food? New York to Regulate Bitcoin: Is the Cryptocurrency Biz Like Should The Bitcoin Block Chain Be Regulated? Juan Llanos Talks About Bitcoin Compliance In The US

Home Breaking News Government Is Taking Steps to Regulate Bitcoin. Government Is Taking Steps to Regulate Bitcoin. By. Contributing Author - Nov 19, 2013: 10:27 pm. Facebook. Twitter. Google+. Pinterest. WhatsApp ... Various government agencies are discussing the possibility of regulating Bitcoin, but some experts say that Bitcoin's decentralized nature makes it difficult if not impossible to regulate. by Bob ... So what's next? Bitcoin's future is hard to determine its price fluctuates at a crazy rate 10,000 people use Bitcoin Amazon and Overstock.com currently accept it ????? Opponents: Issues, Arguments, Values Issues & Arguments privacy: opponents of regulation argue that Bitcoin Various government agencies are discussing the possibility of regulating Bitcoin, but some experts say that Bitcoin's decentralized nature makes it difficult if not impossible to regulate. by Bob ... Discusses the Government Regulation Paradox of cryptocurrencies, which is that cryptocurrencies need government regulation for stability but one of the reasons that investors are buying it in the ...

[index] [987] [12018] [17291] [30234] [26303] [4358] [50489] [43925] [27749] [14350]

Cryptocurrency Regulation EXPLAINED: The GOOD, The Bad, and The UGLY

Hello Dosto Mai hu Raj, is video me apko latest cryptocurrency se related news ke bare me bataya gya hai aur ummed karta hu apko ye video pasand aaya ho. kis... Cryptocurrency Regulation EXPLAINED: I go through the good, the bad, and the ugly of regulation, explaining how exactly it is playing out on a global scale f... http://www.youtube.com/user/wearechange http://prisonplanet.tv/ http://www.infowars.com/ http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8136133221213939183 We Do N... Just as I realize that Bitcoin is such a world changing technology, government agencies and regulators are also realizing how risky it may be. It's not about government obstructionism, it's about ... According to a new report by Bloomberg Quint, India may be planning to regulate cryptocurrencies. The government is thinking about a regulatory framework where virtual currencies will be notified ...

#