Bitcoin's Price Drop in the Headlines - CoinDesk

Meet Brock Pierce, the Presidential Candidate With Ties to Pedophiles Who Wants to End Human Trafficking

thedailybeast.com | Sep. 20, 2020.
The “Mighty Ducks” actor is running for president. He clears the air (sort of) to Tarpley Hitt about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein and more.
In the trailer for First Kid, the forgettable 1996 comedy about a Secret Service agent assigned to protect the president’s son, the title character, played by a teenage Brock Pierce, describes himself as “definitely the most powerful kid in the universe.” Now, the former child star is running to be the most powerful man in the world, as an Independent candidate for President of the United States.
Before First Kid, the Minnesota-born actor secured roles in a series of PG-rated comedies, playing a young Emilio Estevez in The Mighty Ducks, before graduating to smaller parts in movies like Problem Child 3: Junior in Love. When his screen time shrunk, Pierce retired from acting for a real executive role: co-founding the video production start-up Digital Entertainment Network (DEN) alongside businessman Marc Collins-Rector. At age 17, Pierce served as its vice president, taking in a base salary of $250,000.
DEN became “the poster child for dot-com excesses,” raising more than $60 million in seed investments and plotting a $75 million IPO. But it turned into a shorthand for something else when, in October of 1999, the three co-founders suddenly resigned. That month, a New Jersey man filed a lawsuit alleging Collins-Rector had molested him for three years beginning when he was 13 years old. The following summer, three teens filed a sexual-abuse lawsuit against Pierce, Collins-Rector, and their third co-founder, Chad Shackley. The plaintiffs later dropped their case against Pierce (he made a payment of $21,600 to one of their lawyers) and Shackley. But after a federal grand jury indicted Collins-Rector on criminal charges in 2000, the DEN founders left the country. When Interpol arrested them in 2002, they said they had confiscated “guns, machetes, and child pornography” from the trio’s beach villa in Spain.
While abroad, Pierce had pivoted to a new venture: Internet Gaming Entertainment, which sold virtual accessories in multiplayer online role-playing games to those desperate to pay, as one Wired reporter put it, “as much as $1,800 for an eight-piece suit of Skyshatter chain mail” rather than earn it in the games themselves. In 2005, a 25-year-old Pierce hired then-Goldman Sachs banker Steve Bannon—just before he would co-found Breitbart News. Two years later, after a World of Warcraft player sued the company for “diminishing” the fun of the game, Steve Bannon replaced Pierce as CEO.
Collins-Rector eventually pleaded guilty to eight charges of child enticement and registered as a sex offender. In the years that followed, Pierce waded into the gonzo economy of cryptocurrencies, where he overlapped more than once with Jeffrey Epstein, and counseled him on crypto. In that world, he founded Tether, a cryptocurrency that bills itself as a “stablecoin,” because its value is allegedly tied to the U.S. dollar, and the blockchain software company Block.one. Like his earlier businesses, Pierce’s crypto projects see-sawed between massive investments and curious deals. When Block.one announced a smart contract software called EOS.IO, the company raised $4 billion almost overnight, setting an all-time record before the product even launched. The Securities and Exchange Commission later fined the company $24 million for violating federal securities law. After John Oliver mocked the ordeal, calling Pierce a “sleepy, creepy cowboy,” Block.one fired him. Tether, meanwhile, is currently under investigation by the New York Attorney General for possible fraud.
On July 4, Pierce announced his candidacy for president. His campaign surrogates include a former Cambridge Analytica director and the singer Akon, who recently doubled down on developing an anonymously funded, $6 billion “Wakanda-like” metropolis in Senegal called Akon City. Pierce claims to be bipartisan, and from the 11 paragraphs on the “Policy” section of his website it can be hard to determine where he falls on the political spectrum. He supports legalizing marijuana and abolishing private prisons, but avoids the phrase “climate change.” He wants to end “human trafficking.” His proposal to end police brutality: body cams.
His political contributions tell a more one-sided story. Pierce’s sole Democratic contribution went to the short-lived congressional run of crypto candidate Brian Forde. The rest went to Republican campaigns like Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, John McCain, and the National Right to Life Political Action Committee. Last year alone, Pierce gave over $44,000 to the Republican National Committee and more than $55,000 to Trump’s re-election fund.
Pierce spoke to The Daily Beast from his tour bus and again over email. Those conversations have been combined and edited for clarity.
You’re announcing your presidential candidacy somewhat late, and historically, third-party candidates haven’t had the best luck with the executive office. If you don’t have a strong path to the White House, what do you want out of the race?
I announced on July 4, which I think is quite an auspicious date for an Independent candidate, hoping to bring independence to this country. There’s a lot of things that I can do. One is: I’m 39 years old. I turn 40 in November. So I’ve got time on my side. Whatever happens in this election cycle, I’m laying the groundwork for the future. The overall mission is to create a third major party—not another third party—a third major party in this country. I think that is what America needs most. George Washington in his closing address warned us about the threat of political parties. John Adams and the other founding fathers—their fear for our future was two political parties becoming dominant. And look at where we are. We were warned.
I believe, having studied systems, any time you have a system of two, what happens is those two things come together, like magnets. They come into collision, or they become polarized and become completely divided. I think we need to rise above partisan politics and find a path forward together. As Albert Einstein is quoted—I’m not sure the line came from him, but he’s quoted in many places—he said that the definition of insanity is making the same mistake or doing the same thing over and over and over again, expecting a different result. [Ed. note: Einstein never said this.] It feels like that’s what our election cycle is like. Half the country feels like they won, half the country feels like they lost, at least if they voted or participated.
Obviously, there’s another late-comer to the presidential race, and that’s Kanye West. He’s received a lot of flak for his candidacy, as he’s openly admitted to trying to siphon votes away from Joe Biden to ensure a Trump victory. Is that something you’re hoping to avoid or is that what you’re going for as well?
Oh no. This is a very serious campaign. Our campaign is very serious. You’ll notice I don’t say anything negative about either of the two major political candidates, because I think that’s one of the problems with our political system, instead of people getting on stage, talking about their visionary ideas, inspiring people, informing and educating, talking about problems, mentioning problems, talking about solutions, constructive criticism. That’s why I refuse to run a negative campaign. I am definitely not a spoiler. I’m into data, right? I’m a technologist. I’ve got digital DNA. So does most of our campaign team. We’ve got our finger on the pulse.
Most of my major Democratic contacts are really happy to see that we’re running in a red state like Wyoming. Kanye West’s home state is Wyoming. He’s not on the ballot in Wyoming I could say, in part, because he didn’t have Akon on his team. But I could also say that he probably didn’t want to be on the ballot in Wyoming because it’s a red state. He doesn’t want to take additional points in a state where he’s only running against Trump. But we’re on the ballot in Wyoming, and since we’re on the ballot in Wyoming I think it’s safe—more than safe, I think it’s evident—that we are not here to run as a spoiler for the benefit of Donald Trump.
In running for president, you’ve opened yourself up to be scrutinized from every angle going back to the beginning of your career. I wanted to ask you about your time at the Digital Entertainment Network. Can you tell me a little bit about how you started there? You became a vice president as a teenager. What were your qualifications and what was your job exactly?
Well, I was the co-founder. A lot of it was my idea. I had an idea that people would use the internet to watch videos, and we create content for the internet. The idea was basically YouTube and Hulu and Netflix. Anyone that was around in the ‘90s and has been around digital media since then, they all credit us as the creators of basically those ideas. I was just getting a message from the creator of The Vandals, the punk rock band, right before you called. He’s like, “Brock, looks like we’re going to get the Guinness Book of World Records for having created the first streaming television show.”
We did a lot of that stuff. We had 30 television shows. We had the top most prestigious institutions in the world as investors. The biggest names. High-net-worth investors like Terry Semel, who’s chairman and CEO of Warner Brothers, and became the CEO of Yahoo. I did all sorts of things. I helped sell $150,000 worth of advertising contracts to the CEOs of Pepsi and everything else. I was the face of the company, meeting all the major banks and everything else, selling the vision of what the future was.
You moved in with Marc Collins-Rector and Chad Shackley at a mansion in Encino. Was that the headquarters of the business?
All start-ups, they normally start out in your home. Because it’s just you. The company was first started out of Marc’s house, and it was probably there for the first two or three months, before the company got an office. That’s, like, how it is for all start-ups.
were later a co-defendant in the L.A. County case filed against Marc Collins-Rector for plying minors with alcohol and drugs, in order to facilitate sexual abuse. You were dropped from the case, but you settled with one of the men for $21,600. Can you explain that?
Okay, well, first of all, that’s not accurate. Two of the plaintiffs in that case asked me if I would be a plaintiff. Because I refused to be a part of the lawsuit, they chose to include me to discredit me, to make their case stronger. They also went and offered 50 percent of what they got to the house management—they went around and offered money to anyone to participate in this. They needed people to corroborate their story. Eventually, because I refused to participate in the lawsuit, they named me. Subsequently, all three of the plaintiffs apologized to me, in front of audiences, in front of many people, saying Brock never did anything. They dismissed their cases.
Remember, this is a civil thing. I’ve never been charged with a crime in my life. And the last plaintiff to have his case dismissed, he contacted his lawyer and said, “Dismiss this case against Brock. Brock never did anything. I just apologized. Dismiss his case.” And the lawyer said, “No. I won’t dismiss this case, I have all these out-of-pocket expenses, I refuse to file the paperwork unless you give me my out-of-pocket expenses.” And so the lawyer, I guess, had $21,000 in bills. So I paid his lawyer $21,000—not him, it was not a settlement. That was a payment to his lawyer for his out-of-pocket expenses. Out-of-pocket expenses so that he would file the paperwork to dismiss the case.
You’ve said the cases were unfounded, and the plaintiffs eventually apologized. But your boss, Marc Collins-Rector later pleaded guilty to eight charges of child enticement and registered as a sex offender. Were you aware of his behavior? How do you square the fact that later allegations proved to be true, but these ones were not?
Well, remember: I was 16 and 17 years old at the time? So, no. I don’t think Marc is the man they made him out to be. But Marc is not a person I would associate with today, and someone I haven’t associated with in a very long time. I was 16 and 17. I chose the wrong business partner. You live and you learn.
You’ve pointed out that you were underage when most of these allegations were said to take place. Did you ever feel like you were coerced or in over your head while working at DEN?
I mean, I was working 18 hours a day, doing things I’d never done before. It was business school. But I definitely learned a lot in building that company. We raised $88 million. We filed our [form] S-1 to go public. We were the hottest start-up in Los Angeles.
In 2000, you left the country with Marc Collins-Rector. Why did you leave? How did you spend those two years abroad?
I moved to Spain in 1999 for personal reasons. I spent those two years in Europe working on developing my businesses.
Interpol found you in 2002. The house where you were staying reportedly contained guns, machetes, and child pornography. Whose guns and child porn were those? Were you aware they were in the house, and how did those get there?
My lawyers have addressed this in 32 pages of documentation showing a complete absence of wrongdoing. Please refer to my webpage for more information.
[Ed. Note: The webpage does not mention guns, machetes, or child pornography. It does state:“It is true that when the local police arrested Collins-Rector in Spain in 2002 on an international warrant, Mr. Pierce was also taken into custody, but so was everyone at Collins-Rector’s house in Spain; and it is equally clear that Brock was promptly released, and no charges of any kind were ever filed against Brock concerning this matter.”]
What do you make of the allegations against Bryan Singer? [Ed. Note: Bryan Singer, a close friend of Collins-Rector, invested at least $50,000 in DEN. In an Atlantic article outlining Singer’s history of alleged sexual assault and statutory rape, one source claimed that at age 15, Collins-Rector abused him and introduced him to Singer, who then assaulted him in the DEN headquarters.]
I am aware of them and I support of all victims of sexual assault. I will let America’s justice system decide on Singer’s outcome.
In 2011, you spoke at the Mindshift conference supported by Jeffrey Epstein. At that point, he had already been convicted of soliciting prostitution from a minor. Why did you agree to speak?
I had never heard of Jeffrey Epstein. His name was not on the website. I was asked to speak at a conference alongside Nobel Prize winners. It was not a cryptocurrency conference, it was filled with Nobel Prize winners. I was asked to speak alongside Nobel Prize winners on the future of money. I speak at conferences historically, two to three times a week. I was like, “Nobel Prize winners? Sounds great. I’ll happily talk about the future of money with them.” I had no idea who Jeffrey Epstein was. His name was not listed anywhere on the website. Had I known what I know now? I clearly would have never spoken there. But I spoke at a conference that he cosponsored.
What’s your connection to the Clinton Global Initiative? Did you hear about it through Jeffrey Epstein?
I joined the Clinton Global Initiative as a philanthropist in 2006 and was a member for one year. My involvement with the Initiative had no connection to Jeffrey Epstein whatsoever.
You’ve launched your campaign in Minnesota, where George Floyd was killed by a police officer. How do you feel about the civil uprising against police brutality?
I’m from Minnesota. Born and raised. We just had a press conference there, announcing that we’re on the ballot. Former U.S. Senator Dean Barkley was there. So that tells you, when former U.S. Senators are endorsing the candidate, right?
[Ed. note: Barkley was never elected to the United States Senate. In November of 2002, he was appointed by then Minnesota Governor Jesse Venture to fill the seat after Sen. Paul Wellstone died in a plane crash. Barkley’s term ended on Jan. 3, 2003—two months later.]
Yes, George Floyd was murdered in Minneapolis. My vice-presidential running mate Karla Ballard and I, on our last trip to Minnesota together, went to visit the George Floyd Memorial. I believe in law and order. I believe that law and order is foundational to any functioning society. But there is no doubt in my mind that we need reform. These types of events—this is not an isolated incident. This has happened many times before. It’s time for change. We have a lot of detail around policy on this issue that we will be publishing next week. Not just high-level what we think, not just a summary, but detailed policy.
You said that you support “law and order.” What does that mean?
“Law and order” means creating a fair and just legal system where our number one priority is protecting the inalienable rights of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” for all people. This means reforming how our police intervene in emergency situations, abolishing private prisons that incentivize mass incarceration, and creating new educational and economic opportunities for our most vulnerable communities. I am dedicated to preventing crime by eliminating the socioeconomic conditions that encourage it.
I support accountability and transparency in government and law enforcement. Some of the key policies I support are requiring body-cams on all law enforcement officers who engage with the public, curtailing the 1033 program that provides local law enforcement agencies with access to military equipment, and abolishing private prisons. Rather than simply defund the police, my administration will take a holistic approach to heal and unite America by ending mass incarceration, police brutality, and racial injustice.
Did you attend any Black Lives Matter protests?
I support all movements aimed at ending racial injustice and inequality. I​ have not attended any Black Lives Matter protests.​ My running-mate, Karla Ballard, attended the March on Washington in support of racial justice and equality.
Your platform doesn’t mention the words “climate change.” Is there a reason for that?
I’m not sure what you mean. Our policy platform specifically references human-caused climate change and we have a plan to restabilize the climate, address environmental degradation, and ensure environmental sustainability.
[Ed. Note: As of writing the Pierce campaign’s policy platform does not specifically reference human-caused climate change.]
You’ve recently brought on Akon as a campaign surrogate. How did that happen? Tell me about that.
Akon and I have been friends for quite some time. I was one of the guys that taught him about Bitcoin. I helped make some videogames for him, I think in 2012. We were talking about Bitcoin, teaching him the ropes, back in 2013. And in 2014, we were both speaking at the Milken Global Conference, and I encouraged him to talk about how Bitcoin, Africa, changed the world. He became the biggest celebrity in the world, talking about Bitcoin at the time. I’m an adviser to his Akoin project, very interested in the work that he’s doing to build a city in Africa.
I think we need a government that’s of, for, and by the people. Akon has huge political aspirations. He obviously was a hugely successful artist. But he also discovered artists like Lady Gaga. So not only is he, himself, a great artist, but he’s also a great identifier and builder of other artists. And he’s been a great businessman, philanthropist. He’s pushing the limits of what can be done. We’re like-minded individuals in that regard. I think he’ll be running for political office one day, because he sees what I see: that we need real change, and we need a government that is of, for, and by the people.
You mentioned that you’re an adviser on Akoin. Do you have any financial investments in Akoin or Akon City?
I don’t believe so. I’d have to check. I have so much stuff. But I don’t believe that I have any economic interests in his stuff. I’d have to verify that. We’ll get back to you. I don’t believe that I have any economic interests. My interest is in helping him. He’s a visionary with big ideas that wants to help things in the world. If I can be of assistance in helping him make the world a better place, I’m all for it. I’m not motivated by money. I’m not running for office because I’m motivated by power. I’m running for office because I’m deeply, deeply concerned about our collective future.
You’ve said you’re running on a pro-technology platform. One week into your campaign last month, a New York appeals court approved the state Attorney General’s attempt to investigate the stablecoin Tether for potentially fraudulent activity. Do you think this will impact your ability to sell people on your tech entrepreneurship?
No, I think my role in Tether is as awesome as it gets. It was my idea. I put it together. But I’ve had no involvement in the company since 2015. I gave all of my equity to the other shareholders. I’ve had zero involvement in the company for almost six years. It was just my idea. I put the initial team together. But I think Tether is one of the most important innovations in the world, certainly. The idea is, I digitized the U.S. dollar. I used technology to digitize currency—existing currency. The U.S. dollar in particular. It’s doing $10 trillion a year. Ten trillion dollars a year of transactional volume. It’s probably the most important innovation in currency since the advent of fiat money. The people that took on the business and ran the business in years to come, they’ve done things I’m not proud of. I’m not sure they’ve done anything criminal. But they certainly did things differently than I would do. But it’s like, you have kids, they turn 18, they go out into the world, and sometimes you’re proud of the things they do, and sometimes you shake your head and go, “Ugh, why did you do that?” I have zero concerns as it relates to me personally. I wish they made better decisions.
What do you think the investigation will find?
I have no idea. The problem that was raised is that there was a $5 million loan between two entities and whether or not they had the right to do that, did they disclose it correctly. There’s been no accusations of, like, embezzlement or anything that bad.
[Ed. Note: The Attorney General’s press release on the investigation reads: “Our investigation has determined that the operators of the ‘Bitfinex’ trading platform, who also control the ‘tether’ virtual currency, have engaged in a cover-up to hide the apparent loss of $850 million dollars of co-mingled client and corporate funds.”]
But there’s been some disclosure things, that is the issue. No one is making any outrageous claims that these are people that have done a bunch of bad—well, on the internet, the media has said that the people behind the business may have been manipulating the price of Bitcoin, but I don’t think that has anything to do with the New York investigation. Again, I’m so not involved, and so not at risk, that I’m not even up to speed on the details.
[Ed note: A representative of the New York State Attorney General told Forbes that he “cannot confirm or deny that the investigation” includes Pierce.]
We’ve recently witnessed the rise of QAnon, the conspiracy theory that Hollywood is an evil cabal of Satanic pedophiles and Trump is the person waging war on them. You mentioned human trafficking, which has become a cause for them. What are your thoughts on that?
I’ve watched some of the content. I think it’s an interesting phenomenon. I’m an internet person, so Anonymous is obviously an organization that has been doing interesting stuff. It’s interesting. I don’t have a big—conspiracy theory stuff is—I guess I have a question for you: What do you think of all of it, since you’re the expert?
You know, I think it’s not true, but I’m not running for president. I do wonder what this politician [Georgia congressional candidate Marjorie Taylor Greene], who’s just won her primary, is going to do on day one, once she finds out there’s no satanic cabal room.
Wait, someone was running for office and won on a QAnon platform, saying that Hollywood did—say what? You’re the expert here.
She won a primary. But I want to push on if we only have a few minutes. In 2006, your gaming company IGE brought on Steve Bannon as an investor. Goldman later bought out most of your stock. Bannon eventually replaced you as CEO of Affinity. You’ve described him as your “right-hand man for, like, seven years.” How well did you know Bannon during that time?
Yes, so this is in my mid-twenties. He wasn’t an investor. He worked for me. He was my banker. He worked for me for three years as my yield guide. And then he was my CEO running the company for another four years. So I haven’t worked with Steve for a decade or so. We worked in videogame stuff and banking. He was at Goldman Sachs. He was not in the political area at the time. But he was a pretty successful banker. He set up Goldman Sachs Los Angeles. So for me, I’d say he did a pretty good job.
During your business relationship, Steve Bannon founded Breitbart News, which has pretty consistently published racist material. How do you feel about Breitbart?
I had no involvement with Breitbart News. As for how I feel about such material, I’m not pleased by any form of hate-mongering. I strongly support the equality of all Americans.
Did you have qualms about Bannon’s role in the 2016 election?
Bannon’s role in the Trump campaign got me to pay closer attention to what he was doing but that’s about it. Whenever you find out that one of your former employees has taken on a role like that, you pay attention.
Bannon served on the board of Cambridge Analytica. A staffer on your campaign, Brittany Kaiser, also served as a business director for them. What are your thoughts on their use of illicitly-obtained Facebook data for campaign promotional material?
Yes, so this will be the last question I can answer because I’ve got to be off for this 5:00 pm. But Brittany Kaiser is a friend of mine. She was the whistleblower of Cambridge Analytica. She came to me and said, “What do I do?” And I said, “Tell the truth. The truth will set you free.”
[Ed. Note: Investigations in Cambridge Analytica took place as early as Nov. 2017, when a U.K. reporter at Channel 4 News recorded their CEO boasting about using “beautiful Ukranian girls” and offers of bribes to discredit political officials. The first whistleblower was Christopher Wylie, who disclosed a cache of documents to The Guardian, published on Mar. 17, 2018. Kaiser’s confession ran five days later, after the scandal made national news. Her association with Cambridge Analytica is not mentioned anywhere on Pierce’s campaign website.]
So I’m glad that people—I’m a supporter of whistleblowers, people that see injustice in the world and something not right happening, and who put themselves in harm’s way to stand up for what they believe in. So I stand up for Brittany Kaiser.
Who do you think [anonymous inventor of Bitcoin] Satoshi Nakamoto is?
We all are Satoshi Nakamoto.
You got married at Burning Man. Have you been attending virtual Burning Man?
I’m running a presidential campaign. So, while I was there in spirit, unfortunately my schedule did not permit me to attend.
OP note: please refer to the original article for reference links within text (as I've not added them here!)
submitted by Leather_Term to Epstein [link] [comments]

Bitcoin is *almost* idiot-proof

I wondered to myself, how much can you lose in this market even being the worst possible trader. Personally, I’m not especially interested in trading, but thought I’d take a look at something. What if you bought the top and sold the bottom of nearly every correction in the last bull run. I’ve used some pretty loose numbers because I only have half an hour, but this is what I found:
Timmy buys $1000USD of Bitcoin in 2015. The price is around $250, so Timmy owns 4BTC.
The price of Bitcoin rockets to around $800USD in June 2016, before falling to around $500USD in August 2016. CNBC predicts the death of Bitcoin. Timmy sells. Timmy is worth $2000USD.
The price of Bitcoin later rallies to just above $1,000USD in Jan 2017, and Timmy buys 2BTC, lamenting the 4 he previously owned. Later that month, the price falls to around $750USD. The whole thing has been a suckers rally and Timmy sells his bitcoin. He now only has $1500.
In March of that year, Timmy sees a news headline about Bitcoin. It has hit $1350. He immediately buys 1.1 BTC. Later that month Bitcoin falls to around $950 and his paid signals group indicates a sell. Timmy sells and is now only worth around $1000USD.
June 2017, Timmy has read the white paper. He realises the potential of Bitcoin, which has surged to around $3,000USD. Timmy uses his $1,000USD to buy around 0.3 BTC. Later in the Summer, the price drops to $2000USD. Bitcoin is a ponzi and Crypto Kirby has told his viewers to enter a short position. He sells Bitcoin for around $600USD.
Lo and behold, August rolls around, Bitcoin is valued at around $5000USD. Timmy buys 0.12 BTC with his $600USD.
Moral of the story is, HODL.
P.s. this was just a little fun in a FUD-filled world. Don’t be Timmy, even though he somehow muddled through.
P.p.s of course the longer you extend this you will lose money, but for the last bull run it was pretty hard to lose money if you were actively involved in this space.
submitted by BeTeeC to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Looking back 18 months.

I was going through old emails today and came across this one I sent out to family on January 4, 2018. It was a reflection on the 2017 crypto bull market and where I saw it heading, as well as some general advice on crypto, investment, and being safe about how you handle yourself in cryptoland.
I feel that we are on the cusp of a new bull market right now, so I thought that I would put this out for at least a few people to see *before* the next bull run, not after. While the details have changed, I don't see a thing in this email that I fundamentally wouldn't say again, although I'd also probably insist that people get a Yubikey and use that for all 2FA where it is supported.
Happy reading, and sorry for some of the formatting weirdness -- I cleaned it up pretty well from the original email formatting, but I love lists and indents and Reddit has limitations... :-/
Also, don't laught at my token picks from January 2018! It was a long time ago and (luckliy) I took my own advice about moving a bunch into USD shortly after I sent this. I didn't hit the top, and I came back in too early in the summer of 2018, but I got lucky in many respects.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- Jan-4, 2018
Hey all!
I woke up this morning to ETH at a solid $1000 and decided to put some thoughts together on what I think crypto has done and what I think it will do. *******, if you could share this to your kids I’d appreciate it -- I don’t have e-mail addresses, and it’s a bit unwieldy for FB Messenger… Hopefully they’ll at least find it thought-provoking. If not, they can use it as further evidence that I’m a nutjob. 😉
Some history before I head into the future.
I first mined some BTC in 2011 or 2012 (Can’t remember exactly, but it was around the Christmas holidays when I started because I had time off from work to get it set up and running.) I kept it up through the start of summer in 2012, but stopped because it made my PC run hot and as it was no longer winter, ********** didn’t appreciate the sound of the fans blowing that hot air into the room any more. I’ve always said that the first BTC I mined was at $1, but looking back at it now, that’s not true – It was around $2. Here’s a link to BTC price history.
In the summer of 2013 I got a new PC and moved my programs and files over before scrapping the old one. I hadn’t touched my BTC mining folder for a year then, and I didn’t even think about salvaging those wallet files. They are now gone forever, including the 9-10BTC that were in them. While I can intellectually justify the loss, it was sloppy and underlines a key thing about cryptocurrency that I believe will limit its widespread adoption by the general public until it is addressed and solved: In cryptoland, you are your own bank, and if you lose your password or account number, there is no person or organization that can help you reset it so that you can get access back. Your money is gone forever.
On April 12, 2014 I bought my first BTC through Coinbase. BTC had spiked to $1000 and been in the news, at least in Japan. This made me remember my old wallet and freak out for a couple of months trying to find it and reclaim the coins. I then FOMO’d (Fear Of Missing Out”) and bought $100 worth of BTC. I was actually very lucky in my timing and bought at around $430. Even so, except for a brief 50% swing up almost immediately afterwards that made me check prices 5 times a day, BTC fell below my purchase price by the end of September and I didn’t get back to even until the end of 2015.
In May 2015 I bought my first ETH at around $1. I sent some guy on bitcointalk ~$100 worth of BTC and he sent me 100 ETH – all on trust because the amounts were small and this was a small group of people. BTC was down in the $250 range at that point, so I had lost 30-40% of my initial investment. This was of the $100 invested, so not that much in real terms, but huge in percentages. It also meant that I had to buy another $100 of BTC on Coinbase to send to this guy. A few months after I purchased my ETH, BTC had doubled and ETH had gone down to $0.50, halving the value of my ETH holdings. I was even on the first BTC purchase finally, but was now down 50% on the ETH I had bought.
The good news was that this made me start to look at things more seriously. Where I had skimmed white papers and gotten a superficial understanding of the technology before FOMO’ing, I started to act as an investor, not a speculator. Let me define how I see those two different types of activity:
So what has been my experience as an investor? After sitting out the rest of 2015 because I needed to understand the market better, I bought into ETH quite heavily, with my initial big purchases being in March-April of 2016. Those purchases were in the $11-$14 range. ETH, of course, dropped immediately to under $10, then came back and bounced around my purchase range for a while until December of 2016, when I purchased a lot more at around $8.
I also purchased my first ICO in August of 2016, HEAT. I bought 25ETH worth. Those tokens are now worth about half of their ICO price, so about 12.5ETH or $12500 instead of the $25000 they would be worth if I had just kept ETH. There are some other things with HEAT that mean I’ve done quite a bit better than those numbers would suggest, but the fact is that the single best thing I could have done is to hold ETH and not spend the effort/time/cost of working with HEAT. That holds true for about every top-25 token on the market when compared to ETH. It certainly holds true for the many, many tokens I tried to trade in Q1-Q2 of 2017. In almost every single case I would have done better and slept better had I just held ETH instead of trying to be smarter than Mr. Market.
But, I made money on all of them except one because the crypto market went up more in USD terms than any individual coin went down in ETH or BTC terms. This underlines something that I read somewhere and that I take to heart: A rising market makes everyone seem like a genius. A monkey throwing darts at a list of the top 100 cryptocurrencies last year would have doubled his money. Here’s a chart from September that shows 2017 year-to-date returns for the top 10 cryptocurrencies, and all of them went up a *lot* more between then and December. A monkey throwing darts at this list there would have quintupled his money.
When evaluating performance, then, you have to beat the monkey, and preferably you should try to beat a Wall Street monkey. I couldn’t, so I stopped trying around July 2017. My benchmark was the BLX, a DAA (Digital Asset Array – think fund like a Fidelity fund) created by ICONOMI. I wasn’t even close to beating the BLX returns, so I did several things.
  1. I went from holding about 25 different tokens to holding 10 now. More on that in a bit.
  2. I used those funds to buy ETH and BLX. ETH has done crazy-good since then and BLX has beaten BTC handily, although it hasn’t done as well as ETH.
  3. I used some of those funds to set up an arbitrage operation.
The arbitrage operation is why I kept the 11 tokens that I have now. All but a couple are used in an ETH/token pair for arbitrage, and each one of them except for one special case is part of BLX. Why did I do that? I did that because ICONOMI did a better job of picking long-term holds than I did, and in arbitrage the only speculative thing you must do is pick the pairs to trade. My pairs are (No particular order):
I also hold PLU, PLBT, and ART. These two are multi-year holds for me. I have not purchased BTC once since my initial $200, except for a few cases where BTC was the only way to go to/from an altcoin that didn’t trade against ETH yet. Right now I hold about the same 0.3BTC that I held after my first $100 purchase, so I don’t really count it.
Looking forward to this year, I am positioning myself as follows:
Looking at my notes, I have two other things that I wanted to work into this email that I didn’t get to, so here they are:
  1. Just like with free apps and other software, if you are getting something of value and you didn’t pay anything for it, you need to ask why this is. With apps, the phrase is “If you didn’t pay for the product, you are the product”, and this works for things such as pump groups, tips, and even technical analysis. Here’s how I see it.
    1. People don’t give tips on stocks or crypto that they don’t already own that stock or token. Why would they, since if they convince anyone to buy it, the price only goes up as a result, making it more expensive for them to buy in? Sure, you will have friends and family that may do this, but people in a crypto club, your local cryptocurrency meetup, or online are generally not your friends. They are there to make money, and if they can get you to help them make money, they will do it. Pump groups are the worst of these, and no matter how enticing it may look, stay as far away as possible from these scams. I even go so far as to report them when I see them advertise on FB or Twitter, because they are violating the terms of use.
    2. Technical analysis (TA) is something that has been argued about for longer than I’ve been alive, but I think that it falls into the same boat. In short, TA argues that there are patterns in trading that can be read and acted upon to signal when one must buy or sell. It has been used forever in the stock and foreign exchange markets, and people use it in crypto as well. Let’s break down these assumptions a bit.
i. First, if crypto were like the stock or forex markets we’d all be happy with 5-7% gains per year rather than easily seeing that in a day. For TA to work the same way in crypto as it does in stocks and foreign exchange, the signals would have to be *much* stronger and faster-reacting than they work in the traditional market, but people use them in exactly the same way.
ii. Another area where crypto is very different than the stock and forex markets centers around market efficiency theory. This theory says that markets are efficient and that the price reflects all the available information at any given time. This is why gold in New York is similar in price to gold in London or Shanghai, and why arbitrage margins are easily <0.1% in those markets compared to cryptoland where I can easily get 10x that. Crypto simply has too much speculation and not enough professional traders in it yet to operate as an efficient market. That fundamentally changes the way that the market behaves and should make any TA patterns from traditional markets irrelevant in crypto.
iii. There are services, both free and paid that claim to put out signals based on TA for when one should buy and sell. If you think for even a second that they are not front-running (Placing orders ahead of yours to profit.) you and the other people using the service, you’re naïve.
iv. Likewise, if you don’t think that there are people that have but together computerized systems to get ahead of people doing manual TA, you’re naïve. The guys that I have programming my arbitrage bots have offered to build me a TA bot and set up a service to sell signals once our position is taken. I said no, but I am sure that they will do it themselves or sell that to someone else. Basically they look at TA as a tip machine where when a certain pattern is seen, people act on that “tip”. They use software to see that “tip” faster and take a position on it so that when slower participants come in they either have to sell lower or buy higher than the TA bot did. Remember, if you are getting a tip for free, you’re the product. In TA I see a system when people are all acting on free preset “tips” and getting played by the more sophisticated market participants. Again, you have to beat that Wall Street monkey.
  1. If you still don’t agree that TA is bogus, think about it this way: If TA was real, Wall Street would have figured it out decades ago and we would have TA funds that would be beating the market. We don’t.
  2. If you still don’t agree that TA is bogus and that its real and well, proven, then you must think that all smart traders use them. Now follow that logic forward and think about what would happen if every smart trader pushing big money followed TA. The signals would only last for a split second and would then be overwhelmed by people acting on them, making them impossible to leverage. This is essentially what the efficient market theory postulates for all information, including TA.
OK, the one last item. Read this weekly newsletter – You can sign up at the bottom. It is free, so they’re selling something, right? 😉 From what I can tell, though, Evan is a straight-up guy who posts links and almost zero editorial comments.
Happy 2018.
submitted by uetani to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Crypto Investing Guide: Useful resources and tools, and how to create an investment strategy

Lots of people have PM'd me asking me the same questions on where to find information and how to put together their portfolio so I decided to put a guide for crypto investors, especially those who have only been in a few months and are still confused.
Many people entered recently at a time when the market was rewarding the very worst type of investment behavior. Unfortunately there aren't many guides and a lot of people end up looking at things like Twitter or the trending Youtube crypto videos, which is dominated by "How to make $1,00,000 by daytrading crypto" and influencers like CryptoNick.
So I'll try to put together a guide from what I've learned and some tips, on how to invest in this asset class. This is going to be Part 1, in another post later I'll post a systematic approach to valuation and picking individual assets.

Getting started: Tools and resources

You don't have to be a programmer or techie to invest in crypto, but you should first learn the basics of how it functions. I find that this video by 3Blue1Brown is the best introduction to what a blockchain actually is and how it functions, because it explains it clearly and simply with visuals while not dumbing it down too much. If you want a more ELI5 version with cute cartoons, then Upfolio has a nice beginner's intro to the blockchain concept and quick descriptions of top 100 cryptocurrencies. I also recommend simply going to Wikipedia and reading the blockchain and cryptocurrency page and clicking onto a few links in, read about POS vs POW...etc. Later on you'll need this information to understand why a specific use case may or may not benefit from a blockchain structure. Here is a quick summary of the common terms you should know.
Next you should arm yourself with some informational resources. I compiled a convenient list of useful tools and sites that I've used and find to be worthy of bookmarking:
Market information
Analysis tools
Portfolio Tracking
Youtube
I generally don't follow much on Youtube because it's dominated by idiocy like Trevon James and CryptoNick, but there are some that I think are worthy of following:

Constructing a Investment Strategy

I can't stress enough how important it is to construct an actual investment strategy. Organize what your goals are, what your risk tolerance is and how you plan to construct a portfolio to achieve those goals rather than just chasing the flavor of the week.
Why? Because it will force you to slow down and make decisions based on rational thinking rather than emotion, and will also inevitably lead you to think long term.

Setting ROI targets

Bluntly put, a lot of young investors who are in crypto have really unrealistic expectations about returns and risk.
A lot of them have never invested in any other type of financial asset, and hence many seem to consider a 10% ROI in a month to be unexciting, even though that is roughly what they should be aiming for.
I see a ton of people now on this sub and on other sites making their decisions with the expectation to double their money every month. This has lead a worrying amount of newbies putting in way too much money way too quickly into anything on the front page of CoinMarketCap with a low dollar value per coin hoping that crypto get them out of their debt or a life of drudgery in a cubicle. And all in the next year or two!
But its important to temper your hype about returns and realize why we had this exponential growth in the last year. The only reason we saw so much upward price action is because of fiat monetary base expansion from people FOMO-ing in due to media coverage. People are hoping to ride the bubble and sell to a greater fool in a few months, it is classic Greater Fool Theory. That's it. Its not because we are seeing any mass increase in adoption or actual widespread utility with cryptocurrency. We passed the $1,000 psychological marker again for Bitcoin which we hadn't seen since right before the Mt.Gox disaster, and it just snowballed the positivity as headline after headline came out about the price growth. However those unexciting returns of 10% a month are not only the norm, but much more healthy for an alternative investment class. Here are the annual returns for Bitcoin for the last few years:
Year BTC Return
2017 1,300%
2016 120%
2015 35%
2014 -60%
2013 5300%
2012 150 %
Keep in mind that a 10% monthly increase when compounded equals a 313% annual return, or over 3x your money. That may not sound exciting to those who entered recently and saw their money go 20x in a month on something like Tron before it crashed back down, but that 3X annual return is better than Bitcoin's return every year except the year right before the last market meltdown and 2017. I have been saying for a while now that we are due for a major correction and every investor now should be planning for that possibility through proper allocation and setting return expectations that are reasonable.
How to set a realistic ROI target
How do I set my own personal return target?
Basically I aim to achieve a portfolio return of roughly 385% annually (3.85X increase per year) or about 11.89% monthly return when compounded. How did I come up with that target? I base it on the average compounded annual growth return (CAGR) over the last 3 years on the entire market:
Year Total Crypto Market Cap
Jan 1, 2014: $10.73 billion
Jan 1, 2017: $615 billion
Compounded annual growth return (CAGR): (615/10.73)1/3 = 385%
My personal strategy is to sell my portfolio every December then buy back into the market at around the beginning of February and I intend to hold on average for 3 years, so this works for me but you may choose to do it a different way for your own reasons. I think this is a good average to aim for as a general guideline because it includes both the good years (2017) and the bad (2014). Once you have a target you can construct your risk profile (low risk vs. high risk category coins) in your portfolio. If you want to try for a higher CAGR than about 385% then you will likely need to go into more highly speculative picks. I can't tell you what return target you should set for yourself, but just make sure its not depended on you needing to achieve continual near vertical parabolic price action in small cap shillcoins because that isn't sustainable.
As the recent January dip showed while the core cryptos like Bitcoin and Ethereum would dip an X percentage, the altcoins would often drop double or triple that amount. Its a very fragile market, and the type of dumb behavior that people were engaging in that was profitable in a bull market (chasing pumps, going all in on a microcap shillcoin, having an attention span of a squirrel...etc) will lead to consequences. Just like they jumped on the crypto bandwagon without thinking about risk adjusted returns, they will just as quickly jump on whatever bandwagon will be used to blame for the deflation of the bubble, whether the blame is assigned to Wall Steet and Bitcoin futures or Asians or some government.
Nobody who pumped money into garbage without any use case or utility will accept that they themselves and their own unreasonable expectations for returns were the reason for the gross mispricing of most cryptocurrencies.

Risk Management

Quanitifying risk in crypto is surprisingly difficult because the historical returns aren't normally distributed, meaning that tools like Sharpe Ratio and other risk metrics can't really be used as intended. Instead you'll have to think of your own risk tolerance and qualitatively evaluate how risky each crypto is based on the team, the use case prospects, the amount of competition and the general market risk.
You can think of each crypto having a risk factor that is the summation of the general crypto market risk (Rm) as ultimately everything is tied to how Bitcoin does, but also its own inherent risk specific to its own goals (Ri).
Rt = Rm +Ri
The market risk is something you cannot avoid, if some China FUD comes out about regulations on Bitcoin then your investment in solid altcoin picks will go down too along with Bitcoin. This (Rm) return is essentially what risk you undertake to have a market ROI of 385% I talked about above. What you can minimize though is the Ri, the aset specific risks with the team, the likelihood they will actually deliver, the likelihood that their solution will be adopted. Unfortunately there is no one way to do this, you simply have to take the time to research and form your own opinion on how risky it really is before allocating a certain percentage to it. Consider the individual risk of each crypto and start looking for red flags:
  • guaranteed promises of large returns (protip: that's a Ponzi)
  • float allocations that give way too much to the founder
  • vague whitepapers
  • vague timelines
  • no clear use case
  • Github with no useful code and sparse activity
  • a team that is difficult to find information on or even worse anonymous
While all cryptocurrencies are a risky investments but generally you can break down cryptos into "low" risk core, medium risk speculative and high risk speculative
  • Low Risk Core - This is the exchange pairing cryptos and those that are well established. These are almost sure to be around in 5 years, and will recover after any bear market. Bitcoin, Litecoin and Ethereum are in this class of risk, and I would also argue Monero.
  • Medium Risk Speculative - These would be cryptos which generally have at least some product and are reasonably established, but higher risk than Core. Things like ZCash, Ripple, NEO..etc.
  • High Risk Speculative - This is anything created within the last few months, low caps, shillcoins, ICOs...etc. Most cryptos are in this category, most of them will be essentially worthless in 5 years.
How much risk should you take on? That depends on your own life situation but also it should be proportional to how much expertise you have in both financial analysis and technology. If you're a newbie who doesn't understand the tech and has no idea how to value assets, your risk tolerance should be lower than a programmer who understand the tech or a financial analyst who is experienced in valuation metrics.
Right now the trio of BTC-ETH-LTC account for 55% of the market cap, so between 50-70% of your portfolio in low Risk Core for newbies is a great starting point. Then you can go down to 25-30% as you gain confidence and experience. But always try to keep about 1/3rd in safe core positions. Don't go all in on speculative picks.
Core principles to minimize risk
  • Have the majority of your holdings in things you feel good holding for at least 2 years. Don't use the majority of your investment for day trading or short term investing.
  • Consider using dollar cost averaging to enter a position. This generally means investing a X amount over several periods, instead of at once. You can also use downward biased dollar cost averaging to mitigate against downward risk. For example instead of investing $1000 at once in a position at market price, you can buy $500 at the market price today then set several limit orders at slightly lower intervals (for example $250 at 5% lower than market price, $250 at 10% lower than market price). This way your average cost of acquisition will be lower if the crypto happens to decline over the short term.
  • Never chase a pump. Its simply too risky as its such an inefficient and unregulated market. If you continue to do it, most of your money losing decisions will be because you emotionally FOMO-ed into gambling on a symbol.
  • Invest what you can afford to lose. Don't have more than 5-10% of your net worth in crypto.
  • Consider what level of loss you can't accept in a position with a high risk factor, and use stop-limit orders to hedge against sudden crashes. Set you stop price at about 5-10% above your lowest limit. Stop-limit orders aren't perfect but they're better than having no hedging strategy for a risky microcap in case of some meltdown. Only you can determine what bags you are unwilling to hold.
  • Diversify across sectors and rebalance your allocations periodically. Keep about 1/3rd in low risk core holdings.
  • Have some fiat in reserve at a FDIC-insured exchange (ex. Gemini), and be ready to add to your winning positions on a pullback.
  • Remember you didn't actually make any money until you take some profits, so take do some profits when everyone else is at peak FOMO-ing bubble mode. You will also sleep much more comfortably once you take out the equivalent of your principal.

Portfolio Allocation

Along with thinking about your portfolio in terms of risk categories described above, I really find it helpful to think about the segments you are in. OnChainFX has some segment categorization but I generally like to bring it down to:
  • Core holdings - essentially the Low Risk Core segment
  • Platform segment
  • Privacy segment
  • Finance/Bank settlement segment
  • Enterprise Blockchain solutions segment
  • Promising/Innovative Tech segment
This is merely what I use, but I'm sure you can think of your own. The key point I have is to try to invest your medium and high risk picks in a segment you understand well, and in which you can relatively accurately judge risk. If you don't understand anything about how banking works or SWIFT or international settlement layers, don't invest in Stellar. If you have no idea how a supply chain functions, avoid investing in VeChain (even if it's being shilled to death on Reddit at the moment just like XRB was last month).
What's interesting is that often we see like-coin movement, for example when a coin from one segment pumps we will frequently see another similar coin in the same segment go up (think Stellar following after Ripple).
Consider the historic correlations between your holdings. Generally when Bitcoin pumps, altcoins dump but at what rate depends on the coin. When Bitcoin goes sideways we tend to see pumping in altcoins, while when Bitcoin goes down, everything goes down.
You should set price targets for each of your holdings, which is a whole separate discussion I'll go in Part 2 of the guide.

Summing it up

This was meant to get you think about what return targets you should set for your portfolio and how much risk you are willing to take and what strategies you can follow to mitigate that risk.
Returns around 385% (average crypto market CAGR over the last 3 years) would be a good target to aim for while remaining realistic, you can tweak it a bit based on your own risk tolerance. What category of risk your individual crypto picks should be will be determined by how much more greed you have for above average market return. A portfolio of 50% core holdings, 30% medium risk in a sector you understand well and 20% in high risk speculative is probably what the average portfolio should look like, with newbies going more towards 70% core and only 5% high risk speculative.
Just by thinking about these things you'll likely do better than most crypto investors, because most don't think about this stuff, to their own detriment.
submitted by arsonbunny to CryptoMarkets [link] [comments]

CRYPTOCURRENCY BITCOIN

CRYPTOCURRENCY BITCOIN
Bitcoin Table of contents expand: 1. What is Bitcoin? 2. Understanding Bitcoin 3. How Bitcoin Works 4. What's a Bitcoin Worth? 5. How Bitcoin Began 6. Who Invented Bitcoin? 7. Before Satoshi 8. Why Is Satoshi Anonymous? 9. The Suspects 10. Can Satoshi's Identity Be Proven? 11. Receiving Bitcoins As Payment 12. Working For Bitcoins 13. Bitcoin From Interest Payments 14. Bitcoins From Gambling 15. Investing in Bitcoins 16. Risks of Bitcoin Investing 17. Bitcoin Regulatory Risk 18. Security Risk of Bitcoins 19. Insurance Risk 20. Risk of Bitcoin Fraud 21. Market Risk 22. Bitcoin's Tax Risk What is Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is a digital currency created in January 2009. It follows the ideas set out in a white paper by the mysterious Satoshi Nakamoto, whose true identity is yet to be verified. Bitcoin offers the promise of lower transaction fees than traditional online payment mechanisms and is operated by a decentralized authority, unlike government-issued currencies.
There are no physical bitcoins, only balances kept on a public ledger in the cloud, that – along with all Bitcoin transactions – is verified by a massive amount of computing power. Bitcoins are not issued or backed by any banks or governments, nor are individual bitcoins valuable as a commodity. Despite it not being legal tender, Bitcoin charts high on popularity, and has triggered the launch of other virtual currencies collectively referred to as Altcoins.
Understanding Bitcoin Bitcoin is a type of cryptocurrency: Balances are kept using public and private "keys," which are long strings of numbers and letters linked through the mathematical encryption algorithm that was used to create them. The public key (comparable to a bank account number) serves as the address which is published to the world and to which others may send bitcoins. The private key (comparable to an ATM PIN) is meant to be a guarded secret and only used to authorize Bitcoin transmissions. Style notes: According to the official Bitcoin Foundation, the word "Bitcoin" is capitalized in the context of referring to the entity or concept, whereas "bitcoin" is written in the lower case when referring to a quantity of the currency (e.g. "I traded 20 bitcoin") or the units themselves. The plural form can be either "bitcoin" or "bitcoins."
How Bitcoin Works Bitcoin is one of the first digital currencies to use peer-to-peer technology to facilitate instant payments. The independent individuals and companies who own the governing computing power and participate in the Bitcoin network, also known as "miners," are motivated by rewards (the release of new bitcoin) and transaction fees paid in bitcoin. These miners can be thought of as the decentralized authority enforcing the credibility of the Bitcoin network. New bitcoin is being released to the miners at a fixed, but periodically declining rate, such that the total supply of bitcoins approaches 21 million. One bitcoin is divisible to eight decimal places (100 millionths of one bitcoin), and this smallest unit is referred to as a Satoshi. If necessary, and if the participating miners accept the change, Bitcoin could eventually be made divisible to even more decimal places. Bitcoin mining is the process through which bitcoins are released to come into circulation. Basically, it involves solving a computationally difficult puzzle to discover a new block, which is added to the blockchain and receiving a reward in the form of a few bitcoins. The block reward was 50 new bitcoins in 2009; it decreases every four years. As more and more bitcoins are created, the difficulty of the mining process – that is, the amount of computing power involved – increases. The mining difficulty began at 1.0 with Bitcoin's debut back in 2009; at the end of the year, it was only 1.18. As of February 2019, the mining difficulty is over 6.06 billion. Once, an ordinary desktop computer sufficed for the mining process; now, to combat the difficulty level, miners must use faster hardware like Application-Specific Integrated Circuits (ASIC), more advanced processing units like Graphic Processing Units (GPUs), etc.
What's a Bitcoin Worth? In 2017 alone, the price of Bitcoin rose from a little under $1,000 at the beginning of the year to close to $19,000, ending the year more than 1,400% higher. Bitcoin's price is also quite dependent on the size of its mining network since the larger the network is, the more difficult – and thus more costly – it is to produce new bitcoins. As a result, the price of bitcoin has to increase as its cost of production also rises. The Bitcoin mining network's aggregate power has more than tripled over the past twelve months.
How Bitcoin Began
Aug. 18, 2008: The domain name bitcoin.org is registered. Today, at least, this domain is "WhoisGuard Protected," meaning the identity of the person who registered it is not public information.
Oct. 31, 2008: Someone using the name Satoshi Nakamoto makes an announcement on The Cryptography Mailing list at metzdowd.com: "I've been working on a new electronic cash system that's fully peer-to-peer, with no trusted third party. The paper is available at http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf." This link leads to the now-famous white paper published on bitcoin.org entitled "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System." This paper would become the Magna Carta for how Bitcoin operates today.
Jan. 3, 2009: The first Bitcoin block is mined, Block 0. This is also known as the "genesis block" and contains the text: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks," perhaps as proof that the block was mined on or after that date, and perhaps also as relevant political commentary.
Jan. 8, 2009: The first version of the Bitcoin software is announced on The Cryptography Mailing list.
Jan. 9, 2009: Block 1 is mined, and Bitcoin mining commences in earnest.
Who Invented Bitcoin?
No one knows. Not conclusively, at any rate. Satoshi Nakamoto is the name associated with the person or group of people who released the original Bitcoin white paper in 2008 and worked on the original Bitcoin software that was released in 2009. The Bitcoin protocol requires users to enter a birthday upon signup, and we know that an individual named Satoshi Nakamoto registered and put down April 5 as a birth date. And that's about it.
Before Satoshi
Though it is tempting to believe the media's spin that Satoshi Nakamoto is a solitary, quixotic genius who created Bitcoin out of thin air, such innovations do not happen in a vacuum. All major scientific discoveries, no matter how original-seeming, were built on previously existing research. There are precursors to Bitcoin: Adam Back’s Hashcash, invented in 1997, and subsequently Wei Dai’s b-money, Nick Szabo’s bit gold and Hal Finney’s Reusable Proof of Work. The Bitcoin white paper itself cites Hashcash and b-money, as well as various other works spanning several research fields.
Why Is Satoshi Anonymous?
There are two primary motivations for keeping Bitcoin's inventor keeping his or her or their identity secret. One is privacy. As Bitcoin has gained in popularity – becoming something of a worldwide phenomenon – Satoshi Nakamoto would likely garner a lot of attention from the media and from governments.
The other reason is safety. Looking at 2009 alone, 32,489 blocks were mined; at the then-reward rate of 50 BTC per block, the total payout in 2009 was 1,624,500 BTC, which at today’s prices is over $900 million. One may conclude that only Satoshi and perhaps a few other people were mining through 2009 and that they possess a majority of that $900 million worth of BTC. Someone in possession of that much BTC could become a target of criminals, especially since bitcoins are less like stocks and more like cash, where the private keys needed to authorize spending could be printed out and literally kept under a mattress. While it's likely the inventor of Bitcoin would take precautions to make any extortion-induced transfers traceable, remaining anonymous is a good way for Satoshi to limit exposure.
The Suspects
Numerous people have been suggested as possible Satoshi Nakamoto by major media outlets. Oct. 10, 2011, The New Yorker published an article speculating that Nakamoto might be Irish cryptography student Michael Clear or economic sociologist Vili Lehdonvirta. A day later, Fast Company suggested that Nakamoto could be a group of three people – Neal King, Vladimir Oksman and Charles Bry – who together appear on a patent related to secure communications that were filed two months before bitcoin.org was registered. A Vice article published in May 2013 added more suspects to the list, including Gavin Andresen, the Bitcoin project’s lead developer; Jed McCaleb, co-founder of now-defunct Bitcoin exchange Mt. Gox; and famed Japanese mathematician Shinichi Mochizuki.
In December 2013, Techcrunch published an interview with researcher Skye Grey who claimed textual analysis of published writings shows a link between Satoshi and bit-gold creator Nick Szabo. And perhaps most famously, in March 2014, Newsweek ran a cover article claiming that Satoshi is actually an individual named Satoshi Nakamoto – a 64-year-old Japanese-American engineer living in California. The list of suspects is long, and all the individuals deny being Satoshi.
Can Satoshi's Identity Be Proven?
It would seem even early collaborators on the project don’t have verifiable proof of Satoshi’s identity. To reveal conclusively who Satoshi Nakamoto is, a definitive link would need to be made between his/her activity with Bitcoin and his/her identity. That could come in the form of linking the party behind the domain registration of bitcoin.org, email and forum accounts used by Satoshi Nakamoto, or ownership of some portion of the earliest mined bitcoins. Even though the bitcoins Satoshi likely possesses are traceable on the blockchain, it seems he/she has yet to cash them out in a way that reveals his/her identity. If Satoshi were to move his/her bitcoins to an exchange today, this might attract attention, but it seems unlikely that a well-funded and successful exchange would betray a customer's privacy.
Receiving Bitcoins As Payment
Bitcoins can be accepted as a means of payment for products sold or services provided. If you have a brick and mortar store, just display a sign saying “Bitcoin Accepted Here” and many of your customers may well take you up on it; the transactions can be handled with the requisite hardware terminal or wallet address through QR codes and touch screen apps. An online business can easily accept bitcoins by just adding this payment option to the others it offers, like credit cards, PayPal, etc. Online payments will require a Bitcoin merchant tool (an external processor like Coinbase or BitPay).
Working For Bitcoins
Those who are self-employed can get paid for a job in bitcoins. There are several websites/job boards which are dedicated to the digital currency:
Work For Bitcoin brings together work seekers and prospective employers through its websiteCoinality features jobs – freelance, part-time and full-time – that offer payment in bitcoins, as well as Dogecoin and LitecoinJobs4Bitcoins, part of reddit.comBitGigs
Bitcoin From Interest Payments
Another interesting way (literally) to earn bitcoins is by lending them out and being repaid in the currency. Lending can take three forms – direct lending to someone you know; through a website which facilitates peer-to-peer transactions, pairing borrowers and lenders; or depositing bitcoins in a virtual bank that offers a certain interest rate for Bitcoin accounts. Some such sites are Bitbond, BitLendingClub, and BTCjam. Obviously, you should do due diligence on any third-party site.
Bitcoins From Gambling
It’s possible to play at casinos that cater to Bitcoin aficionados, with options like online lotteries, jackpots, spread betting, and other games. Of course, the pros and cons and risks that apply to any sort of gambling and betting endeavors are in force here too.
Investing in Bitcoins
There are many Bitcoin supporters who believe that digital currency is the future. Those who endorse it are of the view that it facilitates a much faster, no-fee payment system for transactions across the globe. Although it is not itself any backed by any government or central bank, bitcoin can be exchanged for traditional currencies; in fact, its exchange rate against the dollar attracts potential investors and traders interested in currency plays. Indeed, one of the primary reasons for the growth of digital currencies like Bitcoin is that they can act as an alternative to national fiat money and traditional commodities like gold.
In March 2014, the IRS stated that all virtual currencies, including bitcoins, would be taxed as property rather than currency. Gains or losses from bitcoins held as capital will be realized as capital gains or losses, while bitcoins held as inventory will incur ordinary gains or losses.
Like any other asset, the principle of buying low and selling high applies to bitcoins. The most popular way of amassing the currency is through buying on a Bitcoin exchange, but there are many other ways to earn and own bitcoins. Here are a few options which Bitcoin enthusiasts can explore.
Risks of Bitcoin Investing
Though Bitcoin was not designed as a normal equity investment (no shares have been issued), some speculative investors were drawn to the digital money after it appreciated rapidly in May 2011 and again in November 2013. Thus, many people purchase bitcoin for its investment value rather than as a medium of exchange.
However, their lack of guaranteed value and digital nature means the purchase and use of bitcoins carries several inherent risks. Many investor alerts have been issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), and other agencies.
The concept of a virtual currency is still novel and, compared to traditional investments, Bitcoin doesn't have much of a long-term track record or history of credibility to back it. With their increasing use, bitcoins are becoming less experimental every day, of course; still, after eight years, they (like all digital currencies) remain in a development phase, still evolving. "It is pretty much the highest-risk, highest-return investment that you can possibly make,” says Barry Silbert, CEO of Digital Currency Group, which builds and invests in Bitcoin and blockchain companies.
Bitcoin Regulatory Risk
Investing money into Bitcoin in any of its many guises is not for the risk-averse. Bitcoins are a rival to government currency and may be used for black market transactions, money laundering, illegal activities or tax evasion. As a result, governments may seek to regulate, restrict or ban the use and sale of bitcoins, and some already have. Others are coming up with various rules. For example, in 2015, the New York State Department of Financial Services finalized regulations that would require companies dealing with the buy, sell, transfer or storage of bitcoins to record the identity of customers, have a compliance officer and maintain capital reserves. The transactions worth $10,000 or more will have to be recorded and reported.
Although more agencies will follow suit, issuing rules and guidelines, the lack of uniform regulations about bitcoins (and other virtual currency) raises questions over their longevity, liquidity, and universality.
Security Risk of Bitcoins
Bitcoin exchanges are entirely digital and, as with any virtual system, are at risk from hackers, malware and operational glitches. If a thief gains access to a Bitcoin owner's computer hard drive and steals his private encryption key, he could transfer the stolen Bitcoins to another account. (Users can prevent this only if bitcoins are stored on a computer which is not connected to the internet, or else by choosing to use a paper wallet – printing out the Bitcoin private keys and addresses, and not keeping them on a computer at all.) Hackers can also target Bitcoin exchanges, gaining access to thousands of accounts and digital wallets where bitcoins are stored. One especially notorious hacking incident took place in 2014, when Mt. Gox, a Bitcoin exchange in Japan, was forced to close down after millions of dollars worth of bitcoins were stolen.
This is particularly problematic once you remember that all Bitcoin transactions are permanent and irreversible. It's like dealing with cash: Any transaction carried out with bitcoins can only be reversed if the person who has received them refunds them. There is no third party or a payment processor, as in the case of a debit or credit card – hence, no source of protection or appeal if there is a problem.
Insurance Risk
Some investments are insured through the Securities Investor Protection Corporation. Normal bank accounts are insured through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) up to a certain amount depending on the jurisdiction. Bitcoin exchanges and Bitcoin accounts are not insured by any type of federal or government program.
Risk of Bitcoin Fraud
While Bitcoin uses private key encryption to verify owners and register transactions, fraudsters and scammers may attempt to sell false bitcoins. For instance, in July 2013, the SEC brought legal action against an operator of a Bitcoin-related Ponzi scheme.
Market Risk
Like with any investment, Bitcoin values can fluctuate. Indeed, the value of the currency has seen wild swings in price over its short existence. Subject to high volume buying and selling on exchanges, it has a high sensitivity to “news." According to the CFPB, the price of bitcoins fell by 61% in a single day in 2013, while the one-day price drop in 2014 has been as big as 80%.
If fewer people begin to accept Bitcoin as a currency, these digital units may lose value and could become worthless. There is already plenty of competition, and though Bitcoin has a huge lead over the other 100-odd digital currencies that have sprung up, thanks to its brand recognition and venture capital money, a technological break-through in the form of a better virtual coin is always a threat.
Bitcoin's Tax Risk
As bitcoin is ineligible to be included in any tax-advantaged retirement accounts, there are no good, legal options to shield investments from taxation.
SPONSORED
Start with ¥3000 trading bonus
Trade forex and CFDs on stock indices, commodities, metals and energies with alicensed and regulated broker. For all clients who open their first real account, XM offers a¥3000 trading bonus to test the XM products and services without any initial deposit needed. Learn more about how you can trade from your PC and Mac, or from a variety of mobile devices.
Compare Investment Accounts
Advertiser Disclosure
Related Terms
Satoshi
The satoshi is the smallest unit of the bitcoin cryptocurrency. It is named after Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of the protocol used in block chains and the bitcoin cryptocurrency.
Chartalism Chartalism is a non-mainstream theory of money that emphasizes the impact of government policies and activities on the value of money.
Satoshi Nakamoto The name used by the unknown creator of the protocol used in the bitcoin cryptocurrency. Satoshi Nakamoto is closely-associated with blockchain technology.
Bitcoin Mining, Explained Breaking down everything you need to know about Bitcoin Mining, from Blockchain and Block Rewards to Proof-of-Work and Mining Pools.
Understanding Bitcoin Unlimited Bitcoin Unlimited is a proposed upgrade to Bitcoin Core that allows larger block sizes. The upgrade is designed to improve transaction speed through scale.
Blockchain Explained
A guide to help you understand what blockchain is and how it can be used by industries. You've probably encountered a definition like this: “blockchain is a distributed, decentralized, public ledger." But blockchain is easier to understand than it sounds.
Top 6 Books to Learn About Bitcoin About UsAdvertiseContactPrivacy PolicyTerms of UseCareers Investopedia is part of the Dotdash publishing family.The Balance Lifewire TripSavvy The Spruceand more
By Satoshi Nakamoto
Read it once, go read other crypto stuff, read it again… keep doing this until the whole document makes sense. It’ll take a while, but you’ll get there. This is the original whitepaper introducing and explaining Bitcoin, and there’s really nothing better out there to understand on the subject.
“What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party

submitted by adrian_morrison to BlockchainNews [link] [comments]

The Greatest Fails: 10 Dead Coins You Didn't Know About

The population of cryptocurrencies continues to increase almost on a daily basis. While new projects emerge with their coins, the previously created ones are in different stages of development.
Blockchains are created to solve specialized problems, and to do so, their underlying tokens are employed. In the process, the tokens are supposed to have increased demand and become elements of value.
Many tokens have not been able to live up to this expectation, as a result they lose value and fade into oblivion. The reasons for these failures vary and depend on what happens before, during or after they are distributed.
Some blockchain tokens are products of outright scams, while some are unable to compete with bigger projects that are already offering similar solutions. Others fail simply due to lack of capacity. In the end, these coins that depreciate to irrecoverable levels are classified as “deadcoins”. Here is a list of 10 deadcoins that you didn’t know about.
10. Swisscoin
With no data on its daily volume and no network activity, Swisscoin is regarded as one of the deadcoins in the cryptocurrency ecosystem.
Although some of the infrastructure used to operate Swisscoin are still in existence, many people in crypto space consider it as a scam coin due to lack of a genuine use case.
During its hay days, Swisscoin (SIC) was propagated more as a tool for networking. It was a ponzi scheme that sucked in as many ignorant users as it could. The people behind it took advantage of the crypto frenzy of 2016/2017 period, after which activities surrounding the coin dropped significantly.
At a price of $0.000104 and no network activity or trading volume of any kind, Swisscoin qualifies as one of the failed coins within the cryptocurrency space.
9. SpaceBit
By failing to deliver on the promise of using blockchain to launch nano-satellites into space, Spacebit joins the list of deadcoins. Despite becoming popular among crypto users between 2014 and 2015, the project never really came to life and anyone holding the coins at the moment does not really see any value in Spacebit.
8. Enigma
Enigma (ENG) is a crypto platform that’s trying to solve the problem of privacy on the blockchain by giving access to data storage and privacy while remaining scalable. Enigma aims to extend Ethereum Smart Contracts by introducing secret contracts.
Although not completely extinct, this project has struggled probably due to competition from similar projects that are offering better solutions in the industry.
The Enigma (ENG) token, having reached an all time high of $8.30 in January 2018, has struggled to bounce back from the market slump that followed. The coin currently trades below $0.5.
7. DAO
This is one failure that took the industry by storm. This product of Ethereum arrived with so much promise and expectations from the industry. This was reflected in the huge success recorded during the crowdfunding exercise by Ethereum.
A breach of the DAO protocol by hackers in 2016 lead to a massive sell-off, the aftermath of which caused a disagreement within the Ethereum community, and an eventual chain split. This gave rise to the two different versions of Ethereum that exist today, and the demise of the DAO.
6. Zest
Zest is a typical example of what most people regard as scamcoins. On the blockchain, there is absolutely no activity and its history has no data, this is based on information from CoinmarketCap (CMC).
On creation, users were able to generate ZEST through the process of mining and the last known price for Zest is $0.081716. The website is gone, and there is no network activity either for the coin. That is a classic example of a deadcoin.
5. Internet of Service Token
The Internet of Service (IOST) project set out to solve the scalability problem within the blockchain industry. With so much promise for what appeared to be a genuine problem in the industry, the lack of activity on this project over a long period of time qualifies it as a deadcoin.
Even on the projects website, which is still live, data on all the key parameters that could qualify it as a living project are all in NIL. No network activity, no project.
4. PossCoin
The stats on PossCoin are some of the most ridiculous that you will find in the cryptocurrency marketplace. Here are a few that might interest you:
MarketCap - No Data
All time high - $0.00008142
24 hour Volume - No Data
Current price - $0.00000002
This is a classic description of an inactive coin, a failed coin or a deadcoin. With 30,059,347,897 of the 31,999,303,031 total supply of POSS already in circulation, holders of the coins are certain that no value exists in their holdings.
3. Linda Health Coin
Not many people would have heard of this coin, or the project behind it either. LindaHealthCoin (LNDA) is supposed to be a cryptocurrency used to purchase a CryptoHealthInsurance offering an Artificial Intelligence Virtual Medical Assistant App. Today, it counts as one of the projects that did not make it out of the 2017/2018 ICO era.
Midway into the projects ICO, securities regulators in the U.S. state of Colorado issued a cease and desist order halting the initial coin offering (ICO) of Linda Health Coin (LNDA), which they deemed an unregistered security.
This is a hit that the project never recovered from.
2. CryptoCopy
CryptoCopy set out to design a social trading and investing platform that will allow traders and investors in the crypto industry to copy the activities of other successful participants. The idea behind this creation was for “Copy” holders, which is the platform’s native coin, to implement it in accessing the platform for valuable information.
A post on BitcoinTalk described this project to have been reported as a scam by a number of users. Apparently, the Copy community went into oblivion shortly afterwards, confirming every suspicion of it being one of those deliberate exit scams in crypto.
1. BitConnect
BitConnect failed after it was discovered to be operating a classical ponzi. It was an open source cryptocurrency that was connected to a high yield investment program. Many people were sucked in, especially those who did not have a proper understanding of cryptocurrencies. In the end, like every other ponzi scheme, it ran out of life and crashed. Leaving coin holders in the middle of nowhere.
Conclusion
Deadcoins do exist, and as already indicated, the reasons for the demise of projects behind these coins vary. While there are outright scams and unserious projects, there are those who started out with genuine intentions, but could not cope with the demands of the industry.
Holders of deadcoins at the moment consider them of no value. However. The innovation by CoinJanitor has a goal of restoring value for industry participants that hold deadcoins in their portfolio.
Coinjanitor does not revive the projects, rather it swaps its JAN native tokens with the deadcoins that are held by industry participants. This happens when certain conditions are met by the project owners and the community of the deadcoin in question.
Coinjanitor retrieves these deadcoins in the swap and burns them, while the original holders are given fresh and viable JAN coins that introduces them to an active network with a lot of value. This system restores value for coin holder, and at the same time cleans up the industry while getting rid of coins that have no use.
https://coins.newbium.com/post/28199-the-greatest-fails-10-dead-coins-you-didn-t-know
submitted by OliAustin101 to CryptoICO [link] [comments]

batching in Bitcoin

On May 6th, 2017, Bitcoin hit an all-time high in transactions processed on the network in a single day: it moved 375,000 transactions which accounted for a nominal output of about $2.5b. Average fees on the Bitcoin network had climbed over a dollar for the first time a couple days prior. And they kept climbing: by early June average fees hit an eye-watering $5.66. This was quite unprecedented. In the three-year period from Jan. 1 2014 to Jan. 1 2017, per-transaction fees had never exceeded 31 cents on a weekly average. And the hits kept coming. Before 2017 was over, average fees would top out at $48 on a weekly basis. When the crypto-recession set in, transaction count collapsed and fees crept back below $1.
During the most feverish days of the Bitcoin run-up, when normal users found themselves with balances that would cost more to send than they were worth, cries for batching — the aggregation of many outputs into a single transaction — grew louder than ever. David Harding had written a blog post on the cost-savings of batching at the end of August and it was reposted to the Bitcoin subreddit on a daily basis.
The idea was simple: for entities sending many transactions at once, clustering outputs into a single transaction was more space- (and cost-) efficient, because each transaction has a fixed data overhead. David found that if you combined 10 payments into one transaction, rather than sending them individually, you could save 75% of the block space. Essentially, batching is one way to pack as many transactions as possible into the finite block space available on Bitcoin.
When fees started climbing in mid-2017, users began to scrutinize the behavior of heavy users of the Bitcoin blockchain, to determine whether they were using block space efficiently. By and large, they were not — and an informal lobbying campaign began, in which these major users — principally exchanges — were asked to start batching transactions and be good stewards of the scarce block space at their disposal. Some exchanges had been batching for years, others relented and implemented it. The question faded from view after Bitcoin’s price collapsed in Q1 2018 from roughly $19,000 to $6000, and transaction load — and hence average fee — dropped off.
But we remained curious. A common refrain, during the collapse in on-chain usage, was that transaction count was an obfuscated method of apprehending actual usage. The idea was that transactions could encode an arbitrarily large (within reason) number of payments, and so if batching had become more and more prevalent, those payments were still occurring, just under a regime of fewer transactions.

“hmmm”
Some sites popped up to report outputs and payments per day rather than transactions, seemingly bristling at the coverage of declining transaction count. However, no one conducted an analysis of the changing relationship between transaction count and outputs or payments. We took it upon ourselves to find out.
Table Of Contents:
Introduction to batching
A timeline
Analysis
Conclusion
Bonus content: UTXO consolidation
  1. Introduction to batching
Bitcoin uses a UTXO model, which stands for Unspent Transaction Output. In comparison, Ripple and Ethereum use an account/balance model. In bitcoin, a user has no balances, only UTXOs that they control. If they want to transfer money to someone else, their wallet selects one or more UTXOs as inputs that in sum need to add up to the amount they want to transfer. The desired amount then goes to the recipient, which is called the output, and the difference goes back to the sender, which is called change output. Each output can carry a virtually unlimited amount of value in the form of satoshis. A satoshi is a unit representing a one-hundred-millionth of a Bitcoin. This is very similar to a physical wallet full of different denominations of bills. If you’re buying a snack for $2.50 and only have a $5, you don’t hand the cashier half of your 5 dollar bill — you give him the 5 and receive some change instead.
Unknown to some, there is no hardcoded limit to the number of transactions that can fit in a block. Instead, each transaction has a certain size in megabytes and constitutes an economic incentive for miners to include it in their block. Because miners have limited space of 2 MB to sell to transactors, larger transactions (in size, not bitcoin!) will need to pay higher fees to be included. Additionally, each transaction can have a virtually unlimited number of inputs or outputs — the record stands at transactions with 20,000 inputs and 13,107 outputs.
So each transaction has at least one input and at one output, but often more, as well as some additional boilerplate stuff. Most of that space is taken up by the input (often 60% or more, because of the signature that proves they really belong to the sender), while the output(s) account for 15–30%. In order to keep transactions as small as possible and save fees, Bitcoin users have two major choices:
Use as few inputs as possible. In order to minimize inputs, you can periodically send your smaller UTXOs to yourself in times when fees are very low, getting one large UTXO back. That is called UTXO consolidation or consolidating your inputs.
Users who frequently make transfers (especially within the same block) can include an almost unlimited amount of outputs (to different people!) in the same transaction. That is called transaction batching. A typical single output transaction takes up 230 bytes, while a two output transaction only takes up 260 bytes, instead of 460 if you were to send them individually.
This is something that many casual commentators overlook when comparing Bitcoin with other payment systems — a Bitcoin transaction can aggregate thousands of individual economic transfers! It’s important to recognize this, as it is the source of a great deal of misunderstanding and mistaken analysis.
We’ve never encountered a common definition of a batched transaction — so for the purposes of this study we define it in the loosest possible sense: a transaction with three or more outputs. Commonly, batching is understood as an activity undertaken primarily by mining pools or exchanges who can trade off immediacy for efficiency. It is rare that a normal bitcoin user would have cause to batch, and indeed most wallets make it difficult to impossible to construct batched transactions. For everyday purposes, normal bitcoiners will likely not go to the additional effort of batching transactions.
We set the threshold at three for simplicity’s sake — a normal unbatched transaction will have one transactional output and one change output — but the typical major batched transaction from an exchange will have dozens if not hundreds of outputs. For this reason we are careful to provide data on various different batch sizes, so we could determine the prevalence of three-output transactions and colossal, 100-output ones.
We find it helpful to think of a Bitcoin transaction as a mail truck full of boxes. Each truck (transaction) contains boxes (outputs), each of contains some number of letters (satoshis). So when you’re looking at transaction count as a measure of the performance and economic throughput of the Bitcoin network, it’s a bit like counting mail trucks to discern how many letters are being sent on a given day, even though the number of letters can vary wildly. The truck analogy also makes it clear why many see Bitcoin as a settlement layer in the future — just as mail trucks aren’t dispatched until they’re full, some envision that the same will ultimately be the case for Bitcoin.

Batching
  1. A timeline
So what actually happened in the last six months? Let’s look at some data. Daily transactions on the Bitcoin network rose steadily until about May 2017, when average fees hit about $4. This precipitated the first collapse in usage. Then began a series of feedback loops over the next six months in which transaction load grew, fees grew to match, and transactions dropped off. This cycle repeated itself five times over the latter half of 2017.

more like this on coinmetrics.io
The solid red line in the above chart is fees in BTC terms (not USD) and the shaded red area is daily transaction count. You can see the cycle of transaction load precipitating higher fees which in turn cause a reduction in usage. It repeats itself five or six times before the detente in spring 2018. The most notable period was the December-January fee crisis, but fees were actually fairly typical in BTC terms — the rising BTC price in USD however meant that USD fees hit extreme figures.
In mid-November when fees hit double digits in USD terms, users began a concerted campaign to convince exchanges to be better stewards of block space. Both Segwit and batching were held up as meaningful approaches to maximize the compression of Bitcoin transactions into the finite block space available. Data on when exchanges began batching is sparse, but we collected information where it was available into a chart summarizing when exchanges began batching.

Batching adoption at selected exchanges
We’re ignoring Segwit adoption by exchanges in this analysis; as far as batching is concerned, the campaign to get exchanges to batch appears to have persuaded Bitfinex, Binance, and Shapeshift to batch. Coinbase/GDAX have stated their intention to begin batching, although they haven’t managed to integrate it yet. As far as we can tell, Gemini hasn’t mentioned batching, although we have some mixed evidence that they may have begun recently. If you know about the status of batching on Gemini or other major exchanges please get in touch.
So some exchanges have been batching all along, and some have never bothered at all. Did the subset of exchanges who flipped the switch materially affect the prevalence of batched transactions? Let’s find out.
  1. Analysis
3.1 How common is batching?
We measured the prevalence of batching in three different ways, by transaction count, by output value and by output count.

The tl;dr.
Batching accounts for roughly 12% of all transactions, 40% of all outputs, and 30–60% of all raw BTC output value. Not bad.
3.2 Have batched transactions become more common over time?
From the chart in 3.1, we can already see a small, but steady uptrend in all three metrics, but we want to dig a little deeper. So we first looked at the relationship of payments (all outputs that actually pay someone, so total outputs minus change outputs) and transactions.

More at transactionfee.info/charts
The first thing that becomes obvious is that the popular narrative — that the drop in transactions was caused by an increase in batching — is not the case; payments dropped by roughly the same proportion as well.
Dividing payment count by transaction count gives us some insight into the relationship between the two.

In our analysis we want to zoom into the time frame between November 2017 and today, and we can see that payments per transactions have actually been rallying, from 1.5 payments per transaction in early 2017 to almost two today.
3.3 What are popular batch sizes?
In this next part, we will look at batch sizes to see which are most popular. To determine which transactions were batched, we downloaded a dataset of all transactions on the Bitcoin network between November 2017 and May 2018from Blockchair.
We picked that period because the fee crisis really got started in mid-November, and with it, the demands for exchanges to batch. So we wanted to capture the effect of exchanges starting to batch. Naturally a bigger sample would have been more instructive, but we were constrained in our resources, so we began with the six month sample.
We grouped transactions into “batched” and “unbatched” groups with batched transactions being those with three or more outputs.

We then divided batched transactions into roughly equal groups on the basis of how much total output in BTC they had accounted for in the six-month period. We didn’t select the batch sizes manually — we picked batch sizes that would split the sample into equal parts on the basis of transaction value. Here’s what we ended up with:

All of the batch buckets have just about the same fraction of total BTC output over the period, but they account for radically different transaction and output counts over the period. Notice that there were only 183,108 “extra large” batches (with 41 or more outputs) in the six-month period, but between them there were 23m outputs and 30m BTC worth of value transmitted.
Note that output value in this context refers to the raw or unadjusted figure — it would have been prohibitively difficult for us to adjust output for change or mixers, so we’re using the “naive” estimate.
Let’s look at how many transactions various batch sizes accounted for in the sample period:


Batched transactions steadily increased relative to unbatched ones, although the biggest fraction is the small batch with between 3 and 5 outputs. The story for output counts is a bit more illuminating. Even though batched transactions are a relatively small fraction of overall transaction count, they contain a meaningful number of overall outputs. Let’s see how it breaks down:


Lastly, let’s look at output value. Here we see that batched transactions represent a significant fraction of value transmitted on Bitcoin.


As we can see, even though batched transactions make up an average of only 12% of all transactions, they move between 30%-60% of all Bitcoins, at peak times even 70%. We think this is quite remarkable. Keep in mind, however that the ‘total output’ figure has not been altered to account for change outputs, mixers, or self-churn; that is, it is the raw and unadjusted figure. The total output value is therefore not an ideal approximation of economic volume on the Bitcoin network.
3.4 Has transaction count become an unreliable measure of Bitcoin’s usage because of batching?
Yes. We strongly encourage any analysts, investors, journalists, and developers to look past mere transaction count from now on. The default measure of Bitcoin’s performance should be “payments per day” rather than transaction count. This also makes Bitcoin more comparable with other UTXO chains. They generally have significantly variable payments-per-transaction ratios, so just using payments standardizes that. (Stay tuned: Coinmetrics will be rolling out tools to facilitate this very soon.)
More generally, we think that the economic value transmitted on the network is its most fundamental characteristic. Both the naive and the adjusted figures deserve to be considered. Adjusting raw output value is still more art than science, and best practices are still being developed. Again, Coinmetrics is actively developing open-source tools to make these adjustments available.
  1. Conclusion
We started by revisiting the past year in Bitcoin and showed that while the mempool was congested, the community started looking for ways to use the blockspace more efficiently. Attention quickly fell on batching, the practice of combining multiple outputs into a single transaction, for heavy users. We showed how batching works on a technical level and when different exchanges started implementing the technique.
Today, around 12% of all transactions on the Bitcoin network are batched, and these account for about 40% of all outputs and between 30–60% of all transactional value. The fact such that a small set of transactions carries so much economic weight makes us hopeful that Bitcoin still has a lot of room to scale on the base layer, especially if usage trends continue.
Lastly, it’s worth noting that the increase in batching on the Bitcoin network may not be entirely due to deliberate action by exchanges, but rather a function of its recessionary behavior in the last few months. Since batching is generally done by large industrial players like exchanges, mixers, payment processors, and mining pools, and unbatched transactions are generally made by normal individuals, the batched/unbatched ratio is also a strong proxy for how much average users are using Bitcoin. Since the collapse in price, it is quite possible that individual usage of Bitcoin decreased while “industrial” usage remained strong. This is speculation, but one explanation for what happened.
Alternatively, the industrial players appear to be taking their role as stewards of the scarce block space more seriously. This is a significant boon to the network, and a nontrivial development in its history. If a culture of parsimony can be encouraged, Bitcoin will be able to compress more data into its block space and everyday users will continue to be able to run nodes for the foreseeable future. We view this as a very positive development. Members of the Bitcoin community that lobbied exchanges to add support for Segwit and batching should be proud of themselves.
  1. Bonus content: UTXO consolidation
Remember that we said that a second way to systematically save transaction fees in the Bitcoin network was to consolidate your UTXOs when fees were low? Looking at the relationship between input count and output count allows us to spot such consolidation phases quite well.

Typically, inputs and outputs move together. When the network is stressed, they decouple. If you look at the above chart carefully, you’ll notice that when transactions are elevated (and block space is at a premium), outputs outpace inputs — look at the gaps in May and December 2017. However, prolonged activity always results in fragmented UTXO sets and wallets full of dust, which need to be consolidated. For this, users often wait until pressure on the network has decreased and fees are lower. Thus, after transactions decrease, inputs become more common than outputs. You can see this clearly in February/March 2017.

Here we’ve taken the ratio of inputs to outputs (which have been smoothed on a trailing 7 day basis). When the ratio is higher, there are more inputs than outputs on that day, and vice versa. You can clearly see the spam attack in summer 2015 in which thousands (possibly millions) of outputs were created and then consolidated. Once the ratio spikes upwards, that’s consolidation. The spike in February 2018 after the six weeks of high fees in December 2017 was the most pronounced sigh of relief in Bitcoin’s history; the largest ever departure from the in/out ratio norm. There were a huge number of UTXOs to be consolidated.
It’s also interesting to note where inputs and outputs cluster. Here we have histograms of transactions with large numbers of inputs or outputs. Unsurprisingly, round numbers are common which shows that exchanges don’t publish a transaction every, say, two minutes, but instead wait for 100 or 200 outputs to queue up and then publish their transaction. Curiously, 200-input transactions were more popular than 100-input transactions in the period.


We ran into more curiosities when researching this piece, but we’ll leave those for another time.
Future work on batching might focus on:
Determining batched transactions as a portion of (adjusted) economic rather than raw volume
Looking at the behavior of specific exchanges with regards to batching
Investigating how much space and fees could be saved if major exchanges were batching transactions
Lastly, we encourage everyone to run their transactions through the service at transactionfee.info to assess the efficiency of their transactions and determine whether exchanges are being good stewards of the block space.
Update 31.05.2018
Antoine Le Calvez has created a series of live-updated charts to track batching and batch sizes, which you can find here.
We’d like to thank 0xB10C for their generous assistance with datasets and advice, the people at Blockchair for providing the core datasets, and David A. Harding for writing the initial piece and answering our questions.
submitted by miguelfranco1412 to 800cc [link] [comments]

The Greatest Fails: 10 Dead Coins You Didn't Know About

The population of cryptocurrencies continues to increase almost on a daily basis. While new projects emerge with their coins, the previously created ones are in different stages of development.
Blockchains are created to solve specialized problems, and to do so, their underlying tokens are employed. In the process, the tokens are supposed to have increased demand and become elements of value.
Many tokens have not been able to live up to this expectation, as a result they lose value and fade into oblivion. The reasons for these failures vary and depend on what happens before, during or after they are distributed.
Some blockchain tokens are products of outright scams, while some are unable to compete with bigger projects that are already offering similar solutions. Others fail simply due to lack of capacity. In the end, these coins that depreciate to irrecoverable levels are classified as “deadcoins”. Here is a list of 10 deadcoins that you didn’t know about.
10. Swisscoin
With no data on its daily volume and no network activity, Swisscoin is regarded as one of the deadcoins in the cryptocurrency ecosystem.
Although some of the infrastructure used to operate Swisscoin are still in existence, many people in crypto space consider it as a scam coin due to lack of a genuine use case.
During its hay days, Swisscoin (SIC) was propagated more as a tool for networking. It was a ponzi scheme that sucked in as many ignorant users as it could. The people behind it took advantage of the crypto frenzy of 2016/2017 period, after which activities surrounding the coin dropped significantly.
At a price of $0.000104 and no network activity or trading volume of any kind, Swisscoin qualifies as one of the failed coins within the cryptocurrency space.
9. SpaceBit
By failing to deliver on the promise of using blockchain to launch nano-satellites into space, Spacebit joins the list of deadcoins. Despite becoming popular among crypto users between 2014 and 2015, the project never really came to life and anyone holding the coins at the moment does not really see any value in Spacebit.
8. Enigma
Enigma (ENG) is a crypto platform that’s trying to solve the problem of privacy on the blockchain by giving access to data storage and privacy while remaining scalable. Enigma aims to extend Ethereum Smart Contracts by introducing secret contracts.
Although not completely extinct, this project has struggled probably due to competition from similar projects that are offering better solutions in the industry.
The Enigma (ENG) token, having reached an all time high of $8.30 in January 2018, has struggled to bounce back from the market slump that followed. The coin currently trades below $0.5.
7. DAO
This is one failure that took the industry by storm. This product of Ethereum arrived with so much promise and expectations from the industry. This was reflected in the huge success recorded during the crowdfunding exercise by Ethereum.
A breach of the DAO protocol by hackers in 2016 lead to a massive sell-off, the aftermath of which caused a disagreement within the Ethereum community, and an eventual chain split. This gave rise to the two different versions of Ethereum that exist today, and the demise of the DAO.
6. Zest
Zest is a typical example of what most people regard as scamcoins. On the blockchain, there is absolutely no activity and its history has no data, this is based on information from CoinmarketCap (CMC).
On creation, users were able to generate ZEST through the process of mining and the last known price for Zest is $0.081716. The website is gone, and there is no network activity either for the coin. That is a classic example of a deadcoin.
5. Internet of Service Token
The Internet of Service (IOST) project set out to solve the scalability problem within the blockchain industry. With so much promise for what appeared to be a genuine problem in the industry, the lack of activity on this project over a long period of time qualifies it as a deadcoin.
Even on the projects website, which is still live, data on all the key parameters that could qualify it as a living project are all in NIL. No network activity, no project.
4. PossCoin
The stats on PossCoin are some of the most ridiculous that you will find in the cryptocurrency marketplace. Here are a few that might interest you:
MarketCap - No Data
All time high - $0.00008142
24 hour Volume - No Data
Current price - $0.00000002
This is a classic description of an inactive coin, a failed coin or a deadcoin. With 30,059,347,897 of the 31,999,303,031 total supply of POSS already in circulation, holders of the coins are certain that no value exists in their holdings.
3. Linda Health Coin
Not many people would have heard of this coin, or the project behind it either. LindaHealthCoin (LNDA) is supposed to be a cryptocurrency used to purchase a CryptoHealthInsurance offering an Artificial Intelligence Virtual Medical Assistant App. Today, it counts as one of the projects that did not make it out of the 2017/2018 ICO era.
Midway into the projects ICO, securities regulators in the U.S. state of Colorado issued a cease and desist order halting the initial coin offering (ICO) of Linda Health Coin (LNDA), which they deemed an unregistered security.
This is a hit that the project never recovered from.
2. CryptoCopy
CryptoCopy set out to design a social trading and investing platform that will allow traders and investors in the crypto industry to copy the activities of other successful participants. The idea behind this creation was for “Copy” holders, which is the platform’s native coin, to implement it in accessing the platform for valuable information.
A post on BitcoinTalk described this project to have been reported as a scam by a number of users. Apparently, the Copy community went into oblivion shortly afterwards, confirming every suspicion of it being one of those deliberate exit scams in crypto.
1. BitConnect
BitConnect failed after it was discovered to be operating a classical ponzi. It was an open source cryptocurrency that was connected to a high yield investment program. Many people were sucked in, especially those who did not have a proper understanding of cryptocurrencies. In the end, like every other ponzi scheme, it ran out of life and crashed. Leaving coin holders in the middle of nowhere.
Conclusion
Deadcoins do exist, and as already indicated, the reasons for the demise of projects behind these coins vary. While there are outright scams and unserious projects, there are those who started out with genuine intentions, but could not cope with the demands of the industry.
Holders of deadcoins at the moment consider them of no value. However. The innovation by CoinJanitor has a goal of restoring value for industry participants that hold deadcoins in their portfolio.
Coinjanitor does not revive the projects, rather it swaps its JAN native tokens with the deadcoins that are held by industry participants. This happens when certain conditions are met by the project owners and the community of the deadcoin in question.
Coinjanitor retrieves these deadcoins in the swap and burns them, while the original holders are given fresh and viable JAN coins that introduces them to an active network with a lot of value. This system restores value for coin holder, and at the same time cleans up the industry while getting rid of coins that have no use.
https://coins.newbium.com/post/28199-the-greatest-fails-10-dead-coins-you-didn-t-know
submitted by OliAustin101 to Crypto_ICO_Investing [link] [comments]

The Greatest Fails: 10 Dead Coins You Didn't Know About

The population of cryptocurrencies continues to increase almost on a daily basis. While new projects emerge with their coins, the previously created ones are in different stages of development.
Blockchains are created to solve specialized problems, and to do so, their underlying tokens are employed. In the process, the tokens are supposed to have increased demand and become elements of value.
Many tokens have not been able to live up to this expectation, as a result they lose value and fade into oblivion. The reasons for these failures vary and depend on what happens before, during or after they are distributed.
Some blockchain tokens are products of outright scams, while some are unable to compete with bigger projects that are already offering similar solutions. Others fail simply due to lack of capacity. In the end, these coins that depreciate to irrecoverable levels are classified as “deadcoins”. Here is a list of 10 deadcoins that you didn’t know about.
10. Swisscoin
With no data on its daily volume and no network activity, Swisscoin is regarded as one of the deadcoins in the cryptocurrency ecosystem.
Although some of the infrastructure used to operate Swisscoin are still in existence, many people in crypto space consider it as a scam coin due to lack of a genuine use case.
During its hay days, Swisscoin (SIC) was propagated more as a tool for networking. It was a ponzi scheme that sucked in as many ignorant users as it could. The people behind it took advantage of the crypto frenzy of 2016/2017 period, after which activities surrounding the coin dropped significantly.
At a price of $0.000104 and no network activity or trading volume of any kind, Swisscoin qualifies as one of the failed coins within the cryptocurrency space.
9. SpaceBit
By failing to deliver on the promise of using blockchain to launch nano-satellites into space, Spacebit joins the list of deadcoins. Despite becoming popular among crypto users between 2014 and 2015, the project never really came to life and anyone holding the coins at the moment does not really see any value in Spacebit.
8. Enigma
Enigma (ENG) is a crypto platform that’s trying to solve the problem of privacy on the blockchain by giving access to data storage and privacy while remaining scalable. Enigma aims to extend Ethereum Smart Contracts by introducing secret contracts.
Although not completely extinct, this project has struggled probably due to competition from similar projects that are offering better solutions in the industry.
The Enigma (ENG) token, having reached an all time high of $8.30 in January 2018, has struggled to bounce back from the market slump that followed. The coin currently trades below $0.5.
7. DAO
This is one failure that took the industry by storm. This product of Ethereum arrived with so much promise and expectations from the industry. This was reflected in the huge success recorded during the crowdfunding exercise by Ethereum.
A breach of the DAO protocol by hackers in 2016 lead to a massive sell-off, the aftermath of which caused a disagreement within the Ethereum community, and an eventual chain split. This gave rise to the two different versions of Ethereum that exist today, and the demise of the DAO.
6. Zest
Zest is a typical example of what most people regard as scamcoins. On the blockchain, there is absolutely no activity and its history has no data, this is based on information from CoinmarketCap (CMC).
On creation, users were able to generate ZEST through the process of mining and the last known price for Zest is $0.081716. The website is gone, and there is no network activity either for the coin. That is a classic example of a deadcoin.
5. Internet of Service Token
The Internet of Service (IOST) project set out to solve the scalability problem within the blockchain industry. With so much promise for what appeared to be a genuine problem in the industry, the lack of activity on this project over a long period of time qualifies it as a deadcoin.
Even on the projects website, which is still live, data on all the key parameters that could qualify it as a living project are all in NIL. No network activity, no project.
4. PossCoin
The stats on PossCoin are some of the most ridiculous that you will find in the cryptocurrency marketplace. Here are a few that might interest you:
MarketCap - No Data
All time high - $0.00008142
24 hour Volume - No Data
Current price - $0.00000002
This is a classic description of an inactive coin, a failed coin or a deadcoin. With 30,059,347,897 of the 31,999,303,031 total supply of POSS already in circulation, holders of the coins are certain that no value exists in their holdings.
3. Linda Health Coin
Not many people would have heard of this coin, or the project behind it either. LindaHealthCoin (LNDA) is supposed to be a cryptocurrency used to purchase a CryptoHealthInsurance offering an Artificial Intelligence Virtual Medical Assistant App. Today, it counts as one of the projects that did not make it out of the 2017/2018 ICO era.
Midway into the projects ICO, securities regulators in the U.S. state of Colorado issued a cease and desist order halting the initial coin offering (ICO) of Linda Health Coin (LNDA), which they deemed an unregistered security.
This is a hit that the project never recovered from.
2. CryptoCopy
CryptoCopy set out to design a social trading and investing platform that will allow traders and investors in the crypto industry to copy the activities of other successful participants. The idea behind this creation was for “Copy” holders, which is the platform’s native coin, to implement it in accessing the platform for valuable information.
A post on BitcoinTalk described this project to have been reported as a scam by a number of users. Apparently, the Copy community went into oblivion shortly afterwards, confirming every suspicion of it being one of those deliberate exit scams in crypto.
1. BitConnect
BitConnect failed after it was discovered to be operating a classical ponzi. It was an open source cryptocurrency that was connected to a high yield investment program. Many people were sucked in, especially those who did not have a proper understanding of cryptocurrencies. In the end, like every other ponzi scheme, it ran out of life and crashed. Leaving coin holders in the middle of nowhere.
Conclusion
Deadcoins do exist, and as already indicated, the reasons for the demise of projects behind these coins vary. While there are outright scams and unserious projects, there are those who started out with genuine intentions, but could not cope with the demands of the industry.
Holders of deadcoins at the moment consider them of no value. However. The innovation by CoinJanitor has a goal of restoring value for industry participants that hold deadcoins in their portfolio.
Coinjanitor does not revive the projects, rather it swaps its JAN native tokens with the deadcoins that are held by industry participants. This happens when certain conditions are met by the project owners and the community of the deadcoin in question.
Coinjanitor retrieves these deadcoins in the swap and burns them, while the original holders are given fresh and viable JAN coins that introduces them to an active network with a lot of value. This system restores value for coin holder, and at the same time cleans up the industry while getting rid of coins that have no use.
https://coins.newbium.com/post/28199-the-greatest-fails-10-dead-coins-you-didn-t-know
submitted by OliAustin101 to ico [link] [comments]

The Greatest Fails: 10 Dead Coins You Didn't Know About

The Greatest Fails: 10 Dead Coins You Didn't Know About

https://preview.redd.it/6mr1ig5s8ym31.jpg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=907b49a959fdf15a47ed433d2ef46797c6d089b1
The population of cryptocurrencies continues to increase almost on a daily basis. While new projects emerge with their coins, the previously created ones are in different stages of development.
Blockchains are created to solve specialized problems, and to do so, their underlying tokens are employed. In the process, the tokens are supposed to have increased demand and become elements of value.
Many tokens have not been able to live up to this expectation, as a result they lose value and fade into oblivion. The reasons for these failures vary and depend on what happens before, during or after they are distributed.
Some blockchain tokens are products of outright scams, while some are unable to compete with bigger projects that are already offering similar solutions. Others fail simply due to lack of capacity. In the end, these coins that depreciate to irrecoverable levels are classified as “deadcoins”. Here is a list of 10 deadcoins that you didn’t know about.
10. Swisscoin
With no data on its daily volume and no network activity, Swisscoin is regarded as one of the deadcoins in the cryptocurrency ecosystem.
Although some of the infrastructure used to operate Swisscoin are still in existence, many people in crypto space consider it as a scam coin due to lack of a genuine use case.
During its hay days, Swisscoin (SIC) was propagated more as a tool for networking. It was a ponzi scheme that sucked in as many ignorant users as it could. The people behind it took advantage of the crypto frenzy of 2016/2017 period, after which activities surrounding the coin dropped significantly.
At a price of $0.000104 and no network activity or trading volume of any kind, Swisscoin qualifies as one of the failed coins within the cryptocurrency space.
9. SpaceBit
By failing to deliver on the promise of using blockchain to launch nano-satellites into space, Spacebit joins the list of deadcoins. Despite becoming popular among crypto users between 2014 and 2015, the project never really came to life and anyone holding the coins at the moment does not really see any value in Spacebit.
8. Enigma
Enigma (ENG) is a crypto platform that’s trying to solve the problem of privacy on the blockchain by giving access to data storage and privacy while remaining scalable. Enigma aims to extend Ethereum Smart Contracts by introducing secret contracts.
Although not completely extinct, this project has struggled probably due to competition from similar projects that are offering better solutions in the industry.
The Enigma (ENG) token, having reached an all time high of $8.30 in January 2018, has struggled to bounce back from the market slump that followed. The coin currently trades below $0.5.
7. DAO
This is one failure that took the industry by storm. This product of Ethereum arrived with so much promise and expectations from the industry. This was reflected in the huge success recorded during the crowdfunding exercise by Ethereum.
A breach of the DAO protocol by hackers in 2016 lead to a massive sell-off, the aftermath of which caused a disagreement within the Ethereum community, and an eventual chain split. This gave rise to the two different versions of Ethereum that exist today, and the demise of the DAO.
6. Zest
Zest is a typical example of what most people regard as scamcoins. On the blockchain, there is absolutely no activity and its history has no data, this is based on information from CoinmarketCap (CMC).
On creation, users were able to generate ZEST through the process of mining and the last known price for Zest is $0.081716. The website is gone, and there is no network activity either for the coin. That is a classic example of a deadcoin.
5. Internet of Service Token
The Internet of Service (IOST) project set out to solve the scalability problem within the blockchain industry. With so much promise for what appeared to be a genuine problem in the industry, the lack of activity on this project over a long period of time qualifies it as a deadcoin.
Even on the projects website, which is still live, data on all the key parameters that could qualify it as a living project are all in NIL. No network activity, no project.
4. PossCoin
The stats on PossCoin are some of the most ridiculous that you will find in the cryptocurrency marketplace. Here are a few that might interest you:
MarketCap - No Data
All time high - $0.00008142
24 hour Volume - No Data
Current price - $0.00000002
This is a classic description of an inactive coin, a failed coin or a deadcoin. With 30,059,347,897 of the 31,999,303,031 total supply of POSS already in circulation, holders of the coins are certain that no value exists in their holdings.
3. Linda Health Coin
Not many people would have heard of this coin, or the project behind it either. LindaHealthCoin (LNDA) is supposed to be a cryptocurrency used to purchase a CryptoHealthInsurance offering an Artificial Intelligence Virtual Medical Assistant App. Today, it counts as one of the projects that did not make it out of the 2017/2018 ICO era.
Midway into the projects ICO, securities regulators in the U.S. state of Colorado issued a cease and desist order halting the initial coin offering (ICO) of Linda Health Coin (LNDA), which they deemed an unregistered security.
This is a hit that the project never recovered from.
2. CryptoCopy
CryptoCopy set out to design a social trading and investing platform that will allow traders and investors in the crypto industry to copy the activities of other successful participants. The idea behind this creation was for “Copy” holders, which is the platform’s native coin, to implement it in accessing the platform for valuable information.
A post on BitcoinTalk described this project to have been reported as a scam by a number of users. Apparently, the Copy community went into oblivion shortly afterwards, confirming every suspicion of it being one of those deliberate exit scams in crypto.
1. BitConnect
BitConnect failed after it was discovered to be operating a classical ponzi. It was an open source cryptocurrency that was connected to a high yield investment program. Many people were sucked in, especially those who did not have a proper understanding of cryptocurrencies. In the end, like every other ponzi scheme, it ran out of life and crashed. Leaving coin holders in the middle of nowhere.
Conclusion
Deadcoins do exist, and as already indicated, the reasons for the demise of projects behind these coins vary. While there are outright scams and unserious projects, there are those who started out with genuine intentions, but could not cope with the demands of the industry.
Holders of deadcoins at the moment consider them of no value. However. The innovation by CoinJanitor has a goal of restoring value for industry participants that hold deadcoins in their portfolio.
Coinjanitor does not revive the projects, rather it swaps its JAN native tokens with the deadcoins that are held by industry participants. This happens when certain conditions are met by the project owners and the community of the deadcoin in question.
Coinjanitor retrieves these deadcoins in the swap and burns them, while the original holders are given fresh and viable JAN coins that introduces them to an active network with a lot of value. This system restores value for coin holder, and at the same time cleans up the industry while getting rid of coins that have no use.
https://coins.newbium.com/post/28199-the-greatest-fails-10-dead-coins-you-didn-t-know
submitted by OliAustin101 to ICOAnalysis [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Price drops again... Double Bottom into Reversal possible? Bitcoin Price: Chinese New Year and Wuhan Coronavirus 2015 Bitcoin Price, Important Thoughts To Keep In Mind If we repeat 2015 the Bitcoin Bearmarket is over now! Bitcoin price smashes $7K mark. Is it time to drop the 'bubble' talk?

One Bitcoin exchange, CEX.IO, has already halted its cloud mining service due to the price drop. “The miners can’t operate on a profit if the price goes below $200,” says Grace Caffyn ... The price of a bitcoin has been on the rise of late, but the year wasn't all good news. Let's look back to the few highs and many lows of 2015. The price of bitcoin is continuing to crash, dropping as low as $173 early Wednesday, according to stats from CoinDesk. It is down from about $244 just a day before, a drop of nearly 30%. Bitcoin price is still rising. Experts predict the future rise for Bitcoin price as in 2017. 4 June 2019 $7,750 The price of bitcoin fell by more than 10%. 15 June 2019 $8,700 The price of BTC has risen above $ 8,000. Experts claim that the 2015 pattern is repeating. 16 June 2019 $9,311 Cryptocurrency updated the annual maximum at around $9000 Jan 15, 2015 at 13:50 UTC Updated Feb 20, 2015 at 16:16 UTC. Yessi Bello Perez. Bitcoin’s Price Drop in the Headlines. The fact that bitcoin is endowed with a somewhat volatile nature does not ...

[index] [51092] [9030] [31868] [3550] [5105] [1364] [31961] [33866] [29722] [13336]

Bitcoin Price drops again... Double Bottom into Reversal possible?

This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue 2015 Bitcoin Price, Important Thoughts To Keep In Mind ... Published on Jan 4, 2015. There are a lot of ups and downs right now but its important to take perspective on Bitcoins success ... If we repeat 2015 the Bitcoin Bearmarket is over now! sunny decree. Loading... Unsubscribe from sunny decree? Cancel Unsubscribe. Working... Subscribe Subscribed Unsubscribe 113K. Loading ... Should I Buy Bitcoin Now... or Wait For Price To Drop? - Duration: 21:28. Mark Moss ... Bitcoin About To Bottom Out?! - 2015 VS 2020 - Bitcoin Price Analysis - Duration: 7:40. Team Underground ... Bitcoin soared past the $7,000 US mark for the first time, proving its many skeptics wrong. Is the cryptocurrency the future of money? Or is it the latest bubble that's about to burst ...

#