Mining Calculator Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Dash and Monero
Mining Calculator Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Dash and Monero
Bitcoin Mining And The Break-Even Conundrum PYMNTS.com
Break Even Calculator - Scopulus.co.uk
Bitcoin and Altcoins Price Analysis: Breakout Levels to ...
Bitcoin Mining Calculator - My Crypto Buddy
BitOffer institute: Ethereum miners' daily earnings soared 60%, ETF earning over 85 times
https://preview.redd.it/95910ilvizd51.png?width=696&format=png&auto=webp&s=6681449d66d95faa67159454fe7faff49b4d7df8 On June 27, Ethereum miners earned about $1.85 per 100 (MH/s) per day. In the past month, especially in the last two weeks, the income rose by 60%, reaching a peak of $3.27 per 100 MH/s on July 25, before falling back to around $3. Over the same period, the price of ETH has risen more than 40%, from $229 on June 27 to $327.99, which is a new high for 2020. On July 22, the total market value of decentralized Financial DeFi passed $11.5 billion. The massive hype of DeFi caused a surge in trading volume in ETH, which, along with the surge in trading volume from ETH, pushed miners’ daily income to its highest level in two years. Etherscan, a blockchain browser, shows that the entire computing power of the Ethereum blockchain, the world’s second-largest by market value, has been stable at around 190 petahash per second. Indeed, data from Bitinfocharts show that in the first quarter of this year, Ethereum’s daily mining revenue was below $2 per 100 MH/s before falling to $1 per 100 MH/s on March 12 after the cryptographic market collapsed. Ethereum’s daily mining revenues have tripled in recent months. Currently, some of the most advanced ETH mining equipment, such as the core A10 Pro, which has a 500-megabit hash per second (MH/s) computing power and a power ratio of 1.9w/m, generates $13 per day at Ethereum’s current price and mining difficulty. Based on the miner’s profitability level, and A10 Pro Ethereum miner’s daily power consumption is about 1.1 dollars, and its daily net profit is nearly 12 dollars. Even though bitcoin’s price topping $11,000 for the first time since September 2019, the difficulty of mining bitcoin remains at an all-time high. As a result, even the most efficient bitcoin miners, such as MicroBT’s WhatsMiner M30S ++ and Bitmaint’s AntMiner S19 Pro, generate $9 in daily income. Based on the current price of bitcoin and the difficulty of mining it, a more efficient Bitcoin miner (within 40w/T power ratio) generates about $6.50 in net profits per day. Ethereum miners earn about $13 a day, which is twice as Bitcoin miners. Since the launch of DeFi, it has received a lot of attention from investment institutions and individual investors. Currently, DeFi Wallet has been downloaded more than 5,000 times, far more than any other type of DAPP, it is the number one DAPP developed based on Ethereum. According to the popularity and the current download speed, in the next few months, the downloading number will break through 6000 and bring a sufficient number of volumes for the ETH. Meanwhile, as the ETH 2.0 launch date approximation, these two advantages will boost the price of ETH, the income of the ETH miners will be at the appointed time with increased, which gradually widening the income gap with BTC miner. It is the best time to invest in Ethereum. However, buying BitOffer’s Ethereum ETF Ethereum is better than buying a future, in which profits start at a minimum of three times. Besides, it also includes an intelligent dynamic position reallocation mechanism and the calculation of fund compound interest with the returns of up to 17 times. In the latest week, the Ethereum ETF (ETH3X) has jumped 160% from a peak of $6 to $16, according to data analysis from the BitOffer Exchange. With the launch of DeFi and ETH 2.0, once Ethereum rises more than fivefold over the next few months, the ETH3X could rise as much as 85 times. If you buy Ethereum for $10,000, and ETH goes up fivefold, you can maximum make a fivefold profit, Which from $10,000 to $50,000. But buying ETH3X is a different story. Once Ethereum increases fivefold, you can make up to 85 times, which would be from $10,000 to $850,000, the 17 times than buying futures, more than over $800,000. Buying the Ethereum ETF would be a better deal.
﷽ The Federal Reserve and the United States government are pumping extreme amounts of money into the economy, already totaling over $484 billion. They are doing so because it already had a goal to inflate the United States Dollar (USD) so that the market can continue to all-time highs. It has always had this goal. They do not care how much inflation goes up by now as we are going into a depression with the potential to totally crash the US economy forever. They believe the only way to save the market from going to zero or negative values is to inflate it so much that it cannot possibly crash that low. Even if the market does not dip that low, inflation serves the interest of powerful people. The impending crash of the stock market has ramifications for Bitcoin, as, though there is no direct ongoing-correlation between the two, major movements in traditional markets will necessarily affect Bitcoin. According to the Blockchain Center’s Cryptocurrency Correlation Tool, Bitcoin is not correlated with the stock market. However, when major market movements occur, they send ripples throughout the financial ecosystem which necessary affect even ordinarily uncorrelated assets. Therefore, Bitcoin will reach X price on X date after crashing to a price of X by X date.
Stock Market Crash
The Federal Reserve has caused some serious consternation with their release of ridiculous amounts of money in an attempt to buoy the economy. At face value, it does not seem to have any rationale or logic behind it other than keeping the economy afloat long enough for individuals to profit financially and politically. However, there is an underlying basis to what is going on which is important to understand in order to profit financially. All markets are functionally price probing systems. They constantly undergo a price-discovery process. In a fiat system, money is an illusory and a fundamentally synthetic instrument with no intrinsic value – similar to Bitcoin. The primary difference between Bitcoin is the underlying technology which provides a slew of benefits that fiat does not. Fiat, however, has an advantage in being able to have the support of powerful nation-states which can use their might to insure the currency’s prosperity. Traditional stock markets are composed of indices (pl. of index). Indices are non-trading market instruments which are essentially summaries of business values which comprise them. They are continuously recalculated throughout a trading day, and sometimes reflected through tradable instruments such as Exchange Traded Funds or Futures. Indices are weighted by market capitalizations of various businesses. Price theory essentially states that when a market fails to take out a new low in a given range, it will have an objective to take out the high. When a market fails to take out a new high, it has an objective to make a new low. This is why price-time charts go up and down, as it does this on a second-by-second, minute-by-minute, day-by-day, and even century-by-century basis. Therefore, market indices will always return to some type of bull market as, once a true low is formed, the market will have a price objective to take out a new high outside of its’ given range – which is an all-time high. Instruments can only functionally fall to zero, whereas they can grow infinitely. So, why inflate the economy so much? Deflation is disastrous for central banks and markets as it raises the possibility of producing an overall price objective of zero or negative values. Therefore, under a fractional reserve system with a fiat currency managed by a central bank – the goal of the central bank is to depreciate the currency. The dollar is manipulated constantly with the intention of depreciating its’ value. Central banks have a goal of continued inflated fiat values. They tend to ordinarily contain it at less than ten percent (10%) per annum in order for the psyche of the general populace to slowly adjust price increases. As such, the markets are divorced from any other logic. Economic policy is the maintenance of human egos, not catering to fundamental analysis. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth is well-known not to be a measure of actual growth or output. It is a measure of increase in dollars processed. Banks seek to produce raising numbers which make society feel like it is growing economically, making people optimistic. To do so, the currency is inflated, though inflation itself does not actually increase growth. When society is optimistic, it spends and engages in business – resulting in actual growth. It also encourages people to take on credit and debts, creating more fictional fiat. Inflation is necessary for markets to continue to reach new heights, generating positive emotional responses from the populace, encouraging spending, encouraging debt intake, further inflating the currency, and increasing the sale of government bonds. The fiat system only survives by generating more imaginary money on a regular basis. Bitcoin investors may profit from this by realizing that stock investors as a whole always stand to profit from the market so long as it is managed by a central bank and does not collapse entirely. If those elements are filled, it has an unending price objective to raise to new heights. It also allows us to realize that this response indicates that the higher-ups believe that the economy could crash in entirety, and it may be wise for investors to have multiple well-thought-out exit strategies.
Economic Analysis of Bitcoin
The reason why the Fed is so aggressively inflating the economy is due to fears that it will collapse forever or never rebound. As such, coupled with a global depression, a huge demand will appear for a reserve currency which is fundamentally different than the previous system. Bitcoin, though a currency or asset, is also a market. It also undergoes a constant price-probing process. Unlike traditional markets, Bitcoin has the exact opposite goal. Bitcoin seeks to appreciate in value and not depreciate. This has a quite different affect in that Bitcoin could potentially become worthless and have a price objective of zero. Bitcoin was created in 2008 by a now famous mysterious figure known as Satoshi Nakamoto and its’ open source code was released in 2009. It was the first decentralized cryptocurrency to utilize a novel protocol known as the blockchain. Up to one megabyte of data may be sent with each transaction. It is decentralized, anonymous, transparent, easy to set-up, and provides myriad other benefits. Bitcoin is not backed up by anything other than its’ own technology. Bitcoin is can never be expected to collapse as a framework, even were it to become worthless. The stock market has the potential to collapse in entirety, whereas, as long as the internet exists, Bitcoin will be a functional system with a self-authenticating framework. That capacity to persist regardless of the actual price of Bitcoin and the deflationary nature of Bitcoin means that it has something which fiat does not – inherent value. Bitcoin is based on a distributed database known as the “blockchain.” Blockchains are essentially decentralized virtual ledger books, replete with pages known as “blocks.” Each page in a ledger is composed of paragraph entries, which are the actual transactions in the block. Blockchains store information in the form of numerical transactions, which are just numbers. We can consider these numbers digital assets, such as Bitcoin. The data in a blockchain is immutable and recorded only by consensus-based algorithms. Bitcoin is cryptographic and all transactions are direct, without intermediary, peer-to-peer. Bitcoin does not require trust in a central bank. It requires trust on the technology behind it, which is open-source and may be evaluated by anyone at any time. Furthermore, it is impossible to manipulate as doing so would require all of the nodes in the network to be hacked at once – unlike the stock market which is manipulated by the government and “Market Makers”. Bitcoin is also private in that, though the ledge is openly distributed, it is encrypted. Bitcoin’s blockchain has one of the greatest redundancy and information disaster recovery systems ever developed. Bitcoin has a distributed governance model in that it is controlled by its’ users. There is no need to trust a payment processor or bank, or even to pay fees to such entities. There are also no third-party fees for transaction processing. As the ledge is immutable and transparent it is never possible to change it – the data on the blockchain is permanent. The system is not easily susceptible to attacks as it is widely distributed. Furthermore, as users of Bitcoin have their private keys assigned to their transactions, they are virtually impossible to fake. No lengthy verification, reconciliation, nor clearing process exists with Bitcoin. Bitcoin is based on a proof-of-work algorithm. Every transaction on the network has an associated mathetical “puzzle”. Computers known as miners compete to solve the complex cryptographic hash algorithm that comprises that puzzle. The solution is proof that the miner engaged in sufficient work. The puzzle is known as a nonce, a number used only once. There is only one major nonce at a time and it issues 12.5 Bitcoin. Once it is solved, the fact that the nonce has been solved is made public. A block is mined on average of once every ten minutes. However, the blockchain checks every 2,016,000 minutes (approximately four years) if 201,600 blocks were mined. If it was faster, it increases difficulty by half, thereby deflating Bitcoin. If it was slower, it decreases, thereby inflating Bitcoin. It will continue to do this until zero Bitcoin are issued, projected at the year 2140. On the twelfth of May, 2020, the blockchain will halve the amount of Bitcoin issued when each nonce is guessed. When Bitcoin was first created, fifty were issued per block as a reward to miners. 6.25 BTC will be issued from that point on once each nonce is solved. Unlike fiat, Bitcoin is a deflationary currency. As BTC becomes scarcer, demand for it will increase, also raising the price. In this, BTC is similar to gold. It is predictable in its’ output, unlike the USD, as it is based on a programmed supply. We can predict BTC’s deflation and inflation almost exactly, if not exactly. Only 21 million BTC will ever be produced, unless the entire network concedes to change the protocol – which is highly unlikely. Some of the drawbacks to BTC include congestion. At peak congestion, it may take an entire day to process a Bitcoin transaction as only three to five transactions may be processed per second. Receiving priority on a payment may cost up to the equivalent of twenty dollars ($20). Bitcoin mining consumes enough energy in one day to power a single-family home for an entire week.
Trading or Investing?
The fundamental divide in trading revolves around the question of market structure. Many feel that the market operates totally randomly and its’ behavior cannot be predicted. For the purposes of this article, we will assume that the market has a structure, but that that structure is not perfect. That market structure naturally generates chart patterns as the market records prices in time. In order to determine when the stock market will crash, causing a major decline in BTC price, we will analyze an instrument, an exchange traded fund, which represents an index, as opposed to a particular stock. The price patterns of the various stocks in an index are effectively smoothed out. In doing so, a more technical picture arises. Perhaps the most popular of these is the SPDR S&P Standard and Poor 500 Exchange Traded Fund ($SPY). In trading, little to no concern is given about value of underlying asset. We are concerned primarily about liquidity and trading ranges, which are the amount of value fluctuating on a short-term basis, as measured by volatility-implied trading ranges. Fundamental analysis plays a role, however markets often do not react to real-world factors in a logical fashion. Therefore, fundamental analysis is more appropriate for long-term investing. The fundamental derivatives of a chart are time (x-axis) and price (y-axis). The primary technical indicator is price, as everything else is lagging in the past. Price represents current asking price and incorrectly implementing positions based on price is one of the biggest trading errors. Markets and currencies ordinarily have noise, their tendency to back-and-fill, which must be filtered out for true pattern recognition. That noise does have a utility, however, in allowing traders second chances to enter favorable positions at slightly less favorable entry points. When you have any market with enough liquidity for historical data to record a pattern, then a structure can be divined. The market probes prices as part of an ongoing price-discovery process. Market technicians must sometimes look outside of the technical realm and use visual inspection to ascertain the relevance of certain patterns, using a qualitative eye that recognizes the underlying quantitative nature Markets and instruments rise slower than they correct, however they rise much more than they fall. In the same vein, instruments can only fall to having no worth, whereas they could theoretically grow infinitely and have continued to grow over time. Money in a fiat system is illusory. It is a fundamentally synthetic instrument which has no intrinsic value. Hence, the recent seemingly illogical fluctuations in the market. According to trade theory, the unending purpose of a market or instrument is to create and break price ranges according to the laws of supply and demand. We must determine when to trade based on each market inflection point as defined in price and in time as opposed to abandoning the trend (as the contrarian trading in this sub often does). Time and Price symmetry must be used to be in accordance with the trend. When coupled with a favorable risk to reward ratio, the ability to stay in the market for most of the defined time period, and adherence to risk management rules; the trader has a solid methodology for achieving considerable gains. We will engage in a longer term market-oriented analysis to avoid any time-focused pressure. The Bitcoin market is open twenty-four-hours a day, so trading may be done when the individual is ready, without any pressing need to be constantly alert. Let alone, we can safely project months in advance with relatively high accuracy. Bitcoin is an asset which an individual can both trade and invest, however this article will be focused on trading due to the wide volatility in BTC prices over the short-term.
Technical Indicator Analysis of Bitcoin
Technical indicators are often considered self-fulfilling prophecies due to mass-market psychology gravitating towards certain common numbers yielded from them. They are also often discounted when it comes to BTC. That means a trader must be especially aware of these numbers as they can prognosticate market movements. Often, they are meaningless in the larger picture of things.
Volume – derived from the market itself, it is mostly irrelevant. The major problem with volume for stocks is that the US market open causes tremendous volume surges eradicating any intrinsic volume analysis. This does not occur with BTC, as it is open twenty-four-seven. At major highs and lows, the market is typically anemic. Most traders are not active at terminal discretes (peaks and troughs) because of levels of fear. Volume allows us confidence in time and price symmetry market inflection points, if we observe low volume at a foretold range of values. We can rationalize that an absolute discrete is usually only discovered and anticipated by very few traders. As the general market realizes it, a herd mentality will push the market in the direction favorable to defending it. Volume is also useful for swing trading, as chances for swing’s validity increases if an increase in volume is seen on and after the swing’s activation. Volume is steadily decreasing. Lows and highs are reached when volume is lower.
Therefore, due to the relatively high volume on the 12th of March, we can safely determine that a low for BTC was not reached.
VIX – Volatility Index, this technical indicator indicates level of fear by the amount of options-based “insurance” in portfolios. A low VIX environment, less than 20 for the S&P index, indicates a stable market with a possible uptrend. A high VIX, over 20, indicates a possible downtrend. VIX is essentially useless for BTC as BTC-based options do not exist. It allows us to predict the market low for $SPY, which will have an indirect impact on BTC in the short term, likely leading to the yearly low. However, it is equally important to see how VIX is changing over time, if it is decreasing or increasing, as that indicates increasing or decreasing fear. Low volatility allows high leverage without risk or rest. Occasionally, markets do rise with high VIX.
As VIX is unusually high, in the forties, we can be confident that a downtrend for the S&P 500 is imminent.
RSI (Relative Strength Index): The most important technical indicator, useful for determining highs and lows when time symmetry is not availing itself. Sometimes analysis of RSI can conflict in different time frames, easiest way to use it is when it is at extremes – either under 30 or over 70. Extremes can be used for filtering highs or lows based on time-and-price window calculations. Highly instructive as to major corrective clues and indicative of continued directional movement. Must determine if longer-term RSI values find support at same values as before. It is currently at 73.56.
Secondly, RSI may be used as a high or low filter, to observe the level that short-term RSI reaches in counter-trend corrections. Repetitions based on market movements based on RSI determine how long a trade should be held onto. Once a short term RSI reaches an extreme and stay there, the other RSI’s should gradually reach the same extremes. Once all RSI’s are at extreme highs, a trend confirmation should occur and RSI’s should drop to their midpoint.
Trend Definition Analysis of Bitcoin
Trend definition is highly powerful, cannot be understated. Knowledge of trend logic is enough to be a profitable trader, yet defining a trend is an arduous process. Multiple trends coexist across multiple time frames and across multiple market sectors. Like time structure, it makes the underlying price of the instrument irrelevant. Trend definitions cannot determine the validity of newly formed discretes. Trend becomes apparent when trades based in counter-trend inflection points continue to fail. Downtrends are defined as an instrument making lower lows and lower highs that are recurrent, additive, qualified swing setups. Downtrends for all instruments are similar, except forex. They are fast and complete much quicker than uptrends. An average downtrend is 18 months, something which we will return to. An uptrend inception occurs when an instrument reaches a point where it fails to make a new low, then that low will be tested. After that, the instrument will either have a deep range retracement or it may take out the low slightly, resulting in a double-bottom. A swing must eventually form. A simple way to roughly determine trend is to attempt to draw a line from three tops going upwards (uptrend) or a line from three bottoms going downwards (downtrend). It is not possible to correctly draw a downtrend line on the BTC chart, but it is possible to correctly draw an uptrend – indicating that the overall trend is downwards. The only mitigating factor is the impending stock market crash.
Time Symmetry Analysis of Bitcoin
Time is the movement from the past through the present into the future. It is a measurement in quantified intervals. In many ways, our perception of it is a human construct. It is more powerful than price as time may be utilized for a trade regardless of the market inflection point’s price. Were it possible to perfectly understand time, price would be totally irrelevant due to the predictive certainty time affords. Time structure is easier to learn than price, but much more difficult to apply with any accuracy. It is the hardest aspect of trading to learn, but also the most rewarding. Humans do not have the ability to recognize every time window, however the ability to define market inflection points in terms of time is the single most powerful trading edge. Regardless, price should not be abandoned for time alone. Time structure analysis It is inherently flawed, as such the markets have a fail-safe, which is Price Structure. Even though Time is much more powerful, Price Structure should never be completely ignored. Time is the qualifier for Price and vice versa. Time can fail by tricking traders into counter-trend trading. Time is a predestined trade quantifier, a filter to slow trades down, as it allows a trader to specifically focus on specific time windows and rest at others. It allows for quantitative measurements to reach deterministic values and is the primary qualifier for trends. Time structure should be utilized before price structure, and it is the primary trade criterion which requires support from price. We can see price structure on a chart, as areas of mathematical support or resistance, but we cannot see time structure. Time may be used to tell us an exact point in the future where the market will inflect, after Price Theory has been fulfilled. In the present, price objectives based on price theory added to possible future times for market inflection points give us the exact time of market inflection points and price. Time Structure is repetitions of time or inherent cycles of time, occurring in a methodical way to provide time windows which may be utilized for inflection points. They are not easily recognized and not easily defined by a price chart as measuring and observing time is very exact. Time structure is not a science, yet it does require precise measurements. Nothing is certain or definite. The critical question must be if a particular approach to time structure is currently lucrative or not. We will measure it in intervals of 180 bars. Our goal is to determine time windows, when the market will react and when we should pay the most attention. By using time repetitions, the fact that market inflection points occurred at some point in the past and should, therefore, reoccur at some point in the future, we should obtain confidence as to when SPY will reach a market inflection point. Time repetitions are essentially the market’s memory. However, simply measuring the time between two points then trying to extrapolate into the future does not work. Measuring time is not the same as defining time repetitions. We will evaluate past sessions for market inflection points, whether discretes, qualified swings, or intra-range. Then records the times that the market has made highs or lows in a comparable time period to the future one seeks to trade in. What follows is a time Histogram – A grouping of times which appear close together, then segregated based on that closeness. Time is aligned into combined histogram of repetitions and cycles, however cycles are irrelevant on a daily basis. If trading on an hourly basis, do not use hours.
Daily Lows Mode for those Months: 1, 1, 2, 4, 12, 17, 18, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30
Hourly Lows Mode for those Months (Military time): 0100, 0200, 0200, 0400, 0700, 0700, 0800, 1200, 1200, 1700, 2000, 2200
Minute Lows Mode for those Months: 00, 00, 00, 00, 00, 00, 09, 09, 59, 59, 59, 59
Day of the Week Lows (last twenty-six weeks):
Weighted Times are repetitions which appears multiple times within the same list, observed and accentuated once divided into relevant sections of the histogram. They are important in the presently defined trading time period and are similar to a mathematical mode with respect to a series. Phased times are essentially periodical patterns in histograms, though they do not guarantee inflection points Evaluating the yearly lows, we see that BTC tends to have its lows primarily at the beginning of every year, with a possibility of it being at the end of the year. Following the same methodology, we get the middle of the month as the likeliest day. However, evaluating the monthly lows for the past year, the beginning and end of the month are more likely for lows. Therefore, we have two primary dates from our histogram. 1/1/21, 1/15/21, and 1/29/21 2:00am, 8:00am, 12:00pm, or 10:00pm In fact, the high for this year was February the 14th, only thirty days off from our histogram calculations. The 8.6-Year Armstrong-Princeton Global Economic Confidence model states that 2.15 year intervals occur between corrections, relevant highs and lows. 2.15 years from the all-time peak discrete is February 9, 2020 – a reasonably accurate depiction of the low for this year (which was on 3/12/20). (Taking only the Armstrong model into account, the next high should be Saturday, April 23, 2022). Therefore, the Armstrong model indicates that we have actually bottomed out for the year! Bear markets cannot exist in perpetuity whereas bull markets can. Bear markets will eventually have price objectives of zero, whereas bull markets can increase to infinity. It can occur for individual market instruments, but not markets as a whole. Since bull markets are defined by low volatility, they also last longer. Once a bull market is indicated, the trader can remain in a long position until a new high is reached, then switch to shorts. The average bear market is eighteen months long, giving us a date of August 19th, 2021 for the end of this bear market – roughly speaking. They cannot be shorter than fifteen months for a central-bank controlled market, which does not apply to Bitcoin. (Otherwise, it would continue until Sunday, September 12, 2021.) However, we should expect Bitcoin to experience its’ exponential growth after the stock market re-enters a bull market. Terry Laundy’s T-Theory implemented by measuring the time of an indicator from peak to trough, then using that to define a future time window. It is similar to an head-and-shoulders pattern in that it is the process of forming the right side from a synthetic technical indicator. If the indicator is making continued lows, then time is recalculated for defining the right side of the T. The date of the market inflection point may be a price or indicator inflection date, so it is not always exactly useful. It is better to make us aware of possible market inflection points, clustered with other data. It gives us an RSI low of May, 9th 2020. The Bradley Cycle is coupled with volatility allows start dates for campaigns or put options as insurance in portfolios for stocks. However, it is also useful for predicting market moves instead of terminal dates for discretes. Using dates which correspond to discretes, we can see how those dates correspond with changes in VIX. Therefore, our timeline looks like:
2/14/20 – yearly high ($10372 USD)
3/12/20 – yearly low thus far ($3858 USD)
5/9/20 – T-Theory true yearly low (BTC between 4863 and 3569)
LOEx Market Research Report on July 22: BTC has failed to break through $9,400 in the past three weeks
[Today's Hot Tips] 1.[Summary of the main points of the Filecoin Miners Conference: 100,000 F rewards will be distributed to the top 20 miners] On July 22, the Filecoin miner community teleconferencing was held at 9:00, Beijing time. The main points of the conference are summarized as follows:
The hashrate in the reward test is calculated based on the original byte storage, regardless of the difference between real data and verification data.
An important standard for reward test is the success rate (pass/fail rate) of real storage transactions. To obtain test rewards, in addition to meeting the ranking requirements, you must also ensure that the transaction success rate is higher than a standard (standard details to be determined).
The life cycle of the sector miners must ensure that they can convert the committed space into the storage of real customer data through sector upgrades.
The newly added 100,000 F rewards in the reward test will be packaged and ranked according to the whole network block, and will be distributed to the top 20 miners with reference to the reward structure of the main network.
The real trading in the reward test will be completed by the official trading robot, which will be deployed in Europe.
2.[Vitalik Buterin: Even if the expansion problem is no longer so important, PoS is still very important] On July 22, some Twitter netizens said that the Ethereum Gas fee increase has become ubiquitous. Although some developers said that the Ethereum beacon chain will be launched in November, it will take several years to completely solve the problem. Some netizens also said that the Ethereum Layer 2 expansion protocol, such as Optimistic Rollups and zk-rollup, has done a good job, and may not need ETH 2.0. In response, Vitalik Buterin responded that even though expansion is no longer so important, PoS is still very important. 3. [OMF is about to usher in the cloud mine halving] According to news of LOEx on July 20, OMF (OrtaMineFund) official plan, OMF is about to usher in the cloud mining halving, and all OMF angel holding smart cloud mines will be halved. [Today's market analysis] Bitcoin (BTC)BTC rose slightly from around 9340 USDT in the early morning, rose to 9388.19 USDT and then fell slightly. At present, BTC continues to trade sideways around 9370 USDT. Mainstream currencies basically followed the trend of the market, rising slightly in the early morning and then fell slightly. BTC is currently reported at 9364.7 USDT on LOEx Global, an increase of 0.30% in 24h. Let's take a look at the data on the LOEX main board. The mainstream currencies that have been declining before have generally seen a rise of more than 1%. 1% is insignificant, but it may be a signal for the upswing horn to sound, after all, this round is an overall rise. Although the $9,000 support level has remained strong in the past 50 days, any slight negative indicators will attract more attention from the media and authorities. BTC has been unable to break through the $9,400 level in the past three weeks, leading some analysts to doubt the possibility of a positive breakthrough. We must beware of the increase in the main version, so we must pay attention to its continuous volume performance. If it is an immeasurable increase, it is not necessary to chase it; if it is a continuous increase in volume, we must prepare for the second wave of market launch expectations, and be prepare to attack at any time. So we have to be patient and wait and see. Operation suggestions: Support level: the first support level is 9200 points, the second support level is 9300 integers; Resistance level: the first resistance level is 9400 points, the second resistance level is 9600 points. LOEx is registered in Seychelles. It is a global one-stop digital asset service platform with business distribution nodes in 20 regions around the world. It has been exempted from Seychelles and Singapore Monetary Authority (MAS) digital currency trading services. Provide services and secure encrypted digital currency trading environment for 2 million community members in 24 hours. https://preview.redd.it/djguck53occ51.png?width=610&format=png&auto=webp&s=c5ad3414edbb6c1fd4e33e6d1fe6fa270d5ae267
This Is What The Next Generation Internet Should Look Like
https://preview.redd.it/vmlqzhaijhz41.jpg?width=3000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fddbbddb1b4cbabfedca4bdb330177f4ea01418c Before this thing called the Web was born, there was an era when the Internet was invented in the 1970s, at the peak of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. The United States had a central computer controlling its nuclear weapons. A single attack may paralyze the computer system, making it impossible for them to fight back. Therefore, the US government has established a decentralized system that allows many computers to be distributed throughout the country. If an attack occurs, the defense system will continue to operate to ensure that the two countries can destroy each other. For the Internet, this history is dark, but this is also the origin of decentralized thinking. Then, in 1990, Tim Berners-Lee created the Web. The Web is one of the earliest applications on the Internet. It enables people to obtain information more efficiently. However, it is a relatively specialized tool, mainly used by researchers and students. But then it soon changed. With the popularization of software tools, the Web has gradually entered the eyes of ordinary people. Web Prototype Browsers like Microsoft Internet Explorer brought the web to the public's perspective five years later. Everyone can start surfing the Internet. Although the web design was very bad at that time, the connection method was dial-up Internet access. It took a long time to download a photo, not to mention downloading a video. This is what the web prototype looks like The beginning of the Web is decentralized to some extent, it is driven by the most common computers. There is a photo of Tim‘s computer with a sticker that says Do Not Shut Down, because this computer provides the Internet with power. The beginning of the Web was open source, which means anyone can freely build on this basis, which enables the establishment and development of enterprises like Google and Amazon. The web is initially read-only, people just read data from the network, and do not perform input operations on the network. Classical Internet All this changed around 2005. Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, and other new websites brought the current Web world, also known as the classical Internet. This is the first time anyone can publish content online without the need to understand any computer technology that is too professional. Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are all ways for people to create their own web, which directly determines the result of today's large-scale popularization of the web. Since then, people have begun to see problems with these new websites. Although they make our online life more convenient, they slowly build walled gardens on the open web. We started to deviate from the Web of most early vision. At the same time, computers that used to power the web have gradually evolved into centralized data centers that provide computing power on these platforms. Later, the development of smartphones has accelerated this phenomenon. We access the web through various portable devices to obtain and transmit a large amount of information. Unfortunately, quoting Tony Aube's previous evaluation of today's network, today's Web has collapsed. Now it is like a giant baby. It is already aging before it has experienced sufficient growth. Over the past decade, Internet-based services have tended to be centralized. As the network matures, we gradually tend to rely on a few companies. Google provides the fastest and most convenient search service, gaining 74% control of search traffic. Facebook built the largest social network and gained control of the online identity of 2.2 billion people. Although most people feel that they are enjoying various free Internet services, in fact, free things are often the most expensive. All these services are based on the possession and utilization of the most precious resources of the Internet, and that is data. As early as when the network was first launched, it had no native way to deliver value. People are very cautious about using bank cards online. The best way to make money online is to provide free services and make money through advertising. In such a way that let individual users have been using the free service, and later to make more accurate advertising push, advertising services company gave birth to birth, they open the default web advertising business, while at the same time there are a variety of ad blocker After being born, advertising service providers will also use freely collected user information and network behavior information to conduct user analysis and push advertisements through improved inducement operations. Sometimes he does not hesitate to use false news and other means. The network environment has gradually become dirty, and the cost of obtaining effective information has been gradually increased by advertising. The problem of advertising is only one of the manifestations of data occupation and utilization by centralized organizations. Many more serious problems are gradually revealed and gradually paid attention to, including user data loss, personal data leakage, user behavior data is monitored, and data over-censorship Problems, etc. Every day, every day is not performed in every corner of the world. The entire network world urgently needs a re-upgrade to solve the increasingly serious problem of centralized data. Next Generation Internet (NGI) The classical Internet was gradually formed after people discovered changes in the Web, as the ideas of the classical Internet spread, inevitable problems have arisen, what will Web3.0 look like. At that time, people had a lot of conjectures. People guessed that Web3.0 would be an artificial intelligence web or a virtual reality web. Although we think these are exciting technologies, we don't think they will redefine the web. Last year, there was a large conference called NGI Summit. In the conference, just like the discussion of Web 2.0, the clear information obtained through the discussion of a large number of engineers and researchers is: NGI is to return to the decentralized network In fact, with the emergence of these problems in today's Internet world, a series of seemingly unrelated technologies are also developing on the edge of the technology industry, such as cryptocurrency, blockchain, and distributed storage. NGI is more like a synonym for a better vision of the Internet in the future. NGI is different from the previous generation of internet transformation. The core of NGI is not speeding, performance, or convenience. The actual on many NGI applications compared with today's applications, but also very slow, not convenient. NGI is about ownership and control. It matters who controls the technology and our daily applications, and who owns the data and files generated on the network. It is breaking the momentum that has shaped the network for nearly a decade: the balance between convenience and ownership. We are used to this motivation and take everything for granted: using the network means being monitored, and using the social network means that we give personal data to the platform. How could there be other ways? But NGI refused to accept that it believed that people could benefit from the Internet, but there was no need to hand over data control to a few companies. The power is not above the iron law of the universe, it's just a product of the circumstances of technology, we are in the process to make a choice. NGI is a movement, which aims to build a different technology to make better choices. NGI is not trying to replace the network but to change the underlying architecture while keeping things we like—reform, not revolution. NGI is a set of technologies aimed at reconstructing Internet control rights. These include financial projects (crypto currencies), basic communication technologies (end-to-end encrypted information transfer), mass consumer scenarios (open social networks, p2p markets), and key Internet data file infrastructure (decentralized DNS and distributed storage). NGI should include any technology that is conducive to changing Internet centralization and allowing users to gain control of digital life. Currently, there are many solutions for decentralized computing power, but decentralized storage capacity is still not strong and perfect. Because only if it implements the calculation decentralized and storage decentralized, to truly achieve NGI vision of truly decentralized applications and services, and for user data to truly returned to the user by the user's control. What should decentralized applications and services look like In the NGI network, we should be able to create products and services that are not controlled by any company, but these products and services can still reach the level of centralized companies. Just like Bitcoin, these products are decentralized, although the degree of decentralization necessary for any product and the benefits it may bring will be very different. For example, what might a decentralized video sharing platform look like, it would be similar to YouTube that allows users to share video content, comments, thumbs up, and so on. The platform encourages users to contribute through the built-in incentive mechanism. Users can not only “like” the video, but they can also make a small payment or charge a certain fee for the content creator through the copyright distribution control of the network protocol, without having to consider twists way to perform fan monetization. Even if it only costs a few cents for each like, it is still better than traditional centralized video platforms, because, on these platforms, the creator ’s revenue per million views is only a few thousand dollars, On the decentralized platform, there is no middleman's fee, users can directly use peer-to-peer transactions. The core rules governing decentralized services are defined by open-source agreements. Users use the client of their choice to interact with the protocol. In other words, there will be various apps, but all are connected to the same video network. These clients can provide different functions, but all comply with the same sharing protocol, similar to email clients using the same initial standards. Developers do not need to apply for a license from any centralized organization. They can build their products without worrying about API access being blocked on a certain day. Because no company can turn it off. These are all benefits that a decentralized network has not yet fully recognized. Of course, the products and services created by centralized companies will still be used, but it will only prompt these companies to reduce the control of data and gradually return control to users. Early Internet companies promise " do not BE Evil" For Web3.0 who will have to ensure that the " CAN ' t BE Evil ". What does it mean for users to control data? Today, most user data are controlled by a centralized company, whether it is identity data, stored file data, or user behavior data. In NGI, users will have maximum control over their data. First of all, users can completely use their own identities, rather than the identities provided by third parties, which limits the opportunities for various centralized providers to obtain user identity data. For example, one day you are not satisfied with the service of a chat app and want to switch to other social platforms, then all these data should be able to be taken directly by the user and migrated. You don't even need any help from any intermediate agency. Secondly, based on the construction of a decentralized storage network protocol, when you use social media, video media, rental housing, car rental, and other services, there will be no centralized data storage center to deposit your data and sell it. The reason why these companies collect user data is that these data have great value. In the NGI network, users will get the value of these data. If users want to sell their data, they will directly receive revenue instead of centralized companies. As people try to reform the ownership mechanism of data assets, the production and cooperation relations of the entire network will change substantially. Currently, even with the existence of IPFS, a distributed storage protocol that has been developed for several years, the problem of decentralization of data has not been solved, and real commercial purposes cannot be achieved. Most Dapps are currently only decentralized services. So, when distributed storage can run on a large scale and stable, it may be when NGI can enter the public eye. It is also positive that DSP Lab (Distributed Storage Protocol Lab ) reasons for coming, it is the next generation of internet-based facilities will be file-based data encryption, distribution, storage, sharing some of the columns of the new generation of Internet paradigm to support from NGI Required distributed storage protocol. Although NGI still has a lot of uncertainties, it also faces many problems that need to be solved. But NGI is still the most anticipated future. Blockchain technology is not an end in itself. They only have value if they solve the problem. NGI allows us to face and solve this problem again: The Internet has become too centralized, and it needs to be open. NGI will not stop developing because of a certain technology development bottleneck or technical bottleneck. We can use the knowledge system used in the past years to continue to build these better and newer system versions. NGI is not nothingness, nor utopia, nor can it escape from reality. The current internet also has various human problems. Politics, rights, and control have not disappeared due to the invention of the Internet. What can be determined in NGI is that it contains a design that restricts rights and controls. We have a second chance to build the Internet, but we may not have a third time, so let us take advantage of it and look forward to its arrival. Find us： Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DSP-Labs-110430797334480 Twitter: https://twitter.com/DSP\_Labs Telegram: t.me/DSP_Official Wechat: DSPLabs https://preview.redd.it/kbd1u851lhz41.jpg?width=180&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4f55c298868baee393384bc0c303862c4f539a7a
Sharering (SHR) I believe this one is going to surprise so many. Already generating revenue and doing buybacks every week. Already over 10 000 registered users. Mainnet + app + masternodes and staking before EOY.
I got this stuff from Steve Aitchison, he wrote this review and posted it on Uptrennd. Figured I should put it on here as well since I truly believe this is an incredible moonshot. I'm personally holding SHR myself and am very convinced it will do extremely well. Give a read through it and you will immediatly see why. Enjoy guys. Introduction Imagine for a second the following scenario. You are a 2 car family. One car is used every day going back and forth to work, for shopping, all the little jaunts you and your husband like to go on. Your grown children are at university and come home for the weekends so the other car sits in the driveway all week and doesn’t get used during the week. What a waste of a perfectly good car. You think to yourself we could put that car to good use and actually help to pay for university fees, by renting it out during the week. However, then you think “well it’s only a little Ford Fiesta who’s going to want to rent that.” Well, it turns out a lot of people want to rent it and for a good price: £34 ($40) per day, a possible $800 per month. Peer to peer car sharing has grown massively over the last few years and people are making serious money by letting our vehicles on a daily basis, emulating the Airbnb model. In fact companies like Turo, Getaround and Drivy, which has just been acquired by Getaround for $300 Million, are bringing in serious investors like Toyota, Softbank Vision Fund, Menlo Ventures, and IAC to the tune of over $800 Million. A key difference between rental companies and peer to peer is that they have vastly improved technology with app interfaces that make locating assets and resources, reserving and using them, and making payment convenient and seamless. This, combined with location-specific analytics, allows by-the-minute access to assets and resources (e.g. cars or bicycles) and enables customers to pick up and drop these assets where and when convenient. Car sharing is just one example of an industry that is being disrupted. We have seen, experienced and read about the amazing growth of Airbnb which is now estimated to be valued at $38 Billion. Airbnb has been so successful that companies like booking.com are trying to get in on the act by adopting a similar model when it comes to booking accommodation. There is also the phenomenal rise of bicycle rentals which we see in cities all over the world, not quite the same as peer to peer sharing, but it’s another rental model that is ripe for being disrupted by the new sharing model. With this business model in mind what other areas could it be used in: Transport: Used for the rental of cars, trucks, scooters, trailers, and even heavy vehicles. Delivery Drivers: Facilitate booking and payment for delivery drivers. Agriculture: Garden sharing, seed swap, bee-hive relocation, etc. Finance: Peer to peer lending Food bank, social dining Travel Tours, shared tour groups Real Estate Airbnb, co-housing, co-living, Couchsurfing, shared office space, house swapping. Time: Labour, co-working, freelancing Assets Book swapping, clothes swapping, fractional ownership, freecycling, toy libraries. Transportation Car sharing, ride-sharing, car-pooling, bicycle sharing, delivery company, couriers And so much more! This newly emerging, but highly fragmented sharing industry, is currently worth over $100 billion. It is predicted to grow to at least $335 billion by 2025. As you can see from a few examples above the sharing economy has a lot of room to grow but what it doesn’t have, yet, is a company who can facilitate ALL of the above use cases in one place. That is until now! ShareRing is disrupting the disruptors by bringing everything together in one place and making it easy for you and me to share anything and everything and making it as easy as opening an app on your phone. Business Case The sharing market has exploded over the last several years. This is due, in part, to the digital age we live in, as we now have over 2.82 Billion people with smart phones around the world. It also due to how easy the business model of sharing lends itself to the digital world, and how with the simple installation of an app we can access a plethora of markets to rent almost anything from. Due to this rise of digital platforms and the proliferation of smartphones, revenues coming from sharing economy platforms are only expected to increase. It is estimated to grow to a $335 billion industry in 2025, compared to its $14 billion value in 2014. (PwC UK). The beauty of the sharing economy is that it is a win/win/win situation for the person who wants to rent something for a few days or weeks, the person who is renting out, and the company who facilitates the ease of the transactions between the renter and the person renting out. Typically the renter will save a lot of money whilst renting out someone else’s apartment, car, bicycle, clothes, dog sitting services etc and they can almost be assured of quality due to the social side of the business model with reviews from real people. The person who is renting out can make additional income and will want good reviews and therefore keep the standard of service higher. The company that is facilitating all of this can make a lot of money on transaction fees, as well as from advertising, and partnership deals, and obviously have an exit strategy for possible buyouts. When it comes to looking at the business model, ShareRing fits in to the Commission Based Platform as described in Ritter and Schanz study where they looked at the core difference in difference business models of the sharing economy: Singular Transaction Models, Subscription-Based Models, Commission-Based Platforms and Unlimited Platforms.) Commission Based Platforms are dominated by (at least) triadic relationships amongst providers, intermediaries and consumers with a utility-bound revenue stream. These business models enable their customers to switch between provider and consumer roles by creating and delivering the value proposition. Only a few employees work for the intermediary and the value creation and delivery is externalized. From a consumer perspective, consumers are empowered to collaborate with each other and to design the collaboration terms by negotiating the terms and conditions of the content, creation, distribution and consumption of the value proposition. Depending on the orientation of the value proposition, consumers purchase commodities (Tauschticket, ebay), access commodities in a defined timespan (booking.com, Airbnb) or buy services (uber, turo) from occasional and professional providers found via an intermediary. The intermediary mainly focuses on nurturing a community feeling and reducing exchange insecurity by incorporating rating systems, micro-assurances and standardizations of payment and delivery into the platform. The platform mainly takes commissions for successful matching and executing trade. (Journal of Cleaner Production Volume 213, 10 March 2019, Pages 320-331) The USP of the ShareRing Business Model The USP that ShareRing has is that it brings all of the different forms of sharing together in one app through partnerships and onboarding of users. No other company, to date, is bringing everything together in such a way. However there are other factors that make ShareRing unique, which we will look at. Token Economics SHR is a utility token and will be used to pay for transactions on the network, such as 'new booking', 'add asset', etc. SHR is used by providers to pay for their access to the ShareLedger blockchain, including the addition of assets, renting out of assets, adding attributes, adding smart contracts, and other features. SharePay (SHRP) is used by customers to pay for the rental of assets. Masternodes will also be a main feature of the SHR token. When a transaction fee is incurred, it will be distributed in a way that allows for masternode holders who provide a service to the platform to receive a reward from each transaction. Transaction fees are charged to sharing providers in SHR. The distribution of transaction fees will be as follows: 50% - will be distributed amongst the active masternode holders who host an active node on the blockchain at that point in time (these holders provide a service to the platform). The distribution will be based on a calculation of the Total Amount Staked and the total continuous uptime of the node. 50% - will be provided to ShareRing Ltd (view ShareRing owned masternodes) for various purposes that contribute to working capital and platform growth. Leased Proof of Stake Consensus ShareRing have chosen the Leased Proof-of-Stake protocol as the consensus algorithm for ShareLedger. This choice is based on the practicality and security benefits evident in the Waves platform. It is also much more cost effective than Proof-of-Work (POW), and will not suffer from the current issues Bitcoin and other POW cryptocurrencies are facing such as scalability and electricity consumption. As explained above master nodes will be a main feature but there is the other feature of lightweight nodes. A user with a lightweight node will be able to stake their tokens to a full node of their choosing and participate in reaching consensus. They will also be free to cancel their leasing at any time as there are no contracts or freezing periods. The more tokens that have been staked in a full node, the higher the probability the node will have in producing the next block. Since the reward is given based on the total number of tokens staked in the full node, there will always be a trade-off between the size of the full node and the percentage of the reward. As an average user of the platform, you will not need to have technical knowledge on how to set up a node nor will you have to download the entire blockchain in order to stake your tokens. Only a user who sets up a full node will be required to do this, making it simpler than ever for users to earn a reward for supporting the platform. The return expected for staking is expected to be around 6 - 8% although this has yet to be confirmed. Buybacks ShareRing are currently implementing a series of buybacks which started in the beginning of November: The buyback operation is done at a random time during the week. If there is enough liquidity, SHR tokens will be bought through a single market order at the time of buyback. In case there is not enough liquidity, a limit buy order at last sell order price will be placed on the market, and will remain open until it gets filled. The buyback program was implemented to test the API purchase process for when live transactions occur on ShareLedger The Buyback Program is expected to:
Reduce the supply of ShareTokens available in both public and private markets
Bring New capital and fund inflows into the Shareledger
Substantially magnify value creation for the ShareToken holders
The Token Flow ShareRing will bring in hundreds of merchants to list their rental products, either exclusively or as part of an aggregator system e.g. When you look at the likes of trivago.com they will list the best hotel prices from multiple merchants who are listed on their website. Essentially ShareRing will become part of the aggregator ecosystem and be listed on sites like trivago.com as well as have exclusive agreements with merchants who are listed directly on their app. ShareRing’s USP is that they have everything on one place as well as their OneID module with means buyers can get a hotel, rent a car, rent their ski equipment, book events all through the one app and using the OneID. With that in mind they are going to attract a lot of merchants. This is where it gets exciting so pay attention to this part. When a merchant is part of the ShareRing ecosystem and a buyer rents something from that merchant ShareRing will take a small % commission from that transaction. So say someone books a hotel for $100 for the night, ShareRing might take $0.50 as a commission. What ShareRing will then do is go to one of the exchanges that ShareRing (SHR) is listed on and buy SHR tokens directly using an API system using USDT. Now, the actual commission has not been disclosed yet however if we assume even a 0.25% commission that means for every $100 Million worth of bookings made through the app will net ShareRing $250,000 which means buy backs of $250,000 for the SHR token, which increases the liquidity of SHR on the exchanges. If you think $100 Million of bookings is a lot, booking.com customers book around 1.5 Million rooms per day, if we estimate an average of $50 per room that is $75 million of bookings PER DAY or $2 Billion worth of bookings per month. This revenue coupled with revenue from OneID and eVOA makes ShareRing profitable almost from day one of the app going live. OneID And eVOA Another exciting development from the ShareRing team is the collaboration between ShareRings Self Sovereign Identity protocol and third party providers to bring OneID and eVOA which will utilise OneID With the huge rise in E-commerce and with over 2.82 billion people who now own a smartphone we are entrusting our personal information to more and more centralised entities. These entities are frequently hacked and our information is leaked to outside parties. ShareRing aims to tackle this with their service OneID module. ShareRing’s OneID solution protects users' data by handling Know Your Customer (KYC) information through third parties and ShareRing’s Self Sovereign Identity Protocol. ShareRing does not hold any identifying information anywhere on its servers. It provides the ultimate security for the renter and also the provider, as the Protocol encrypts and stores your data in a secure manner within your device. Essentially, this means that it is near impossible for a hack or data leak to happen, simply because there is no centralized server of data for hackers to exploit. The OneID module is very easy to use. The end-user needs to complete their ID submission only once, with the entire submission process requiring less than two minutes to complete. Once this step has been completed, the customers KYC is destroyed by the 3rd party document verification system and the OneID module allows merchants to verify a customer’s identity via a hashed verification packet, stored on the users device and ShareLedger. This removes the need for merchants to store or see personal information; safeguarding both merchants and users from fraud. To create your ShareRing OneID, simply:
Take a picture of your government ID document
Take a selfie
Confirm and submit your details
This is something I am really excited about for ShareRing and they already have made partnerships for other companies to use this feature which is another income stream for ShareRing. eVOA E-Visa On Arrival allows applicants to apply online and receive a travel authorisation before departure – this eVOA can be shown at dedicated Thailand immigration counters on arrival at major Thailand airports, allowing travellers to pass through in minutes. OneID system is scheduled to become the lynchpin technology in Thailand’s electronic Visa On Arrival (eVOA) system; one of only two companies to partner with Thai authorities to provide this service. The new Visa system eliminates much of the hassle involved in entering the country: This is a strong validation of the OneID system - immigration controls are some of the most scrutinized processes in any branch of government, and if the OneID solution can operate to their standards then it is truly business-ready. As explained by our COO, Rohan Le Page: “We are providing our OneID product for Thailand e-VOA (Visa On Arrival) that allows 5 Million travellers from 20 countries including China and India to complete the visa process on their mobile through our app. This provides a streamlined immigration process that negates the need for an expensive and time-consuming process when you get off the plane. Additionally, fraud is mitigated with several extra layers of security in the back end including our blockchain (ShareLedger) consensus model that makes all data immutable and all but impossible to hack.” Profit Margins on OneID So how does ShareRing make money from OneID and eVOA? With each application for an eVOA using the OneID module ShareRing will make an undisclosed commission. The e-VOA is available to citizens of 21 different countries and is intended for those who will be holidaying in Thailand and not working in the country. This means that each eVOA will last for a period of around 15 days which effectively means that ShareRing will get commission multiple times from each person travelling to one of the 21 countries listed below: Andorra, Bhutan, Bulgaria, China, Ethiopia, Fiji, India, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Maldives, Malta, Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Republic of Cyprus Romania, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan The profits on this alone, according to projections, are worth millions of dollars per year to ShareRing, with a healthy growth of about 35% in raw profit over the next 5 years, ultimately netting the company about $1.5 million profit per quarter. The ShareLedger Blockchain Platform ShareRing will utilize the registered intellectual property from the existing KeazACCESS framework (KEAZ: A car sharing company founded by Tim Bos) as well as improving it the blockchain experience in their team. It will consist of fo the primary elements: SharePay (SHRP) – SharePay is the base currency that will allow users of the ShareRing platform to pay for the use of third party assets. ShareToken (SHR) ShareToken (SHR) is the digital utility token that drives sharing transactions to be written to the ShareRing ledger that is managed by the ShareRing platform. Account – This will be a standard account, which such an account being represented by a 24-byte address. The account will contain 4 general fields: SHRP – SharePay token balance SHR – ShareToken balance ASSETS – linked/owned by the account (see below for definition of an Asset) ATTRIBUTES – Any additional attributes that are associated with this account. These attributes may be updated or added by Sharing Economy providers that utilise the ledger such as ID checks by rental companies. These attributes may be ‘global’ (i.e. used by any sharing providers) or ‘local’ (i.e. used by a specific sharing provider). Assets – An asset represents a tangible real-world or digital asset that is being shared, such as a car, a house, industrial machinery, an e-book, and so on. Smart Contracts – Similar to a number of other blockchain platforms, such as Ethereum and NEO, the ShareLedger blockchain will feature highly customisable smart contracts. These Smart Contracts will allow for decentralised autonomous applications that can be attached to an asset and/or account. Every smart contract will be Turing complete, meaning it will have the ability to implement sophisticated logic to manage the sharing of the assets. The smart contracts will be tested and reviewed by ShareRing in a sandbox as well as audited by reputable third-party code auditors prior to implementation. Proof of Stake Consensus ShareRing have chosen the Leased Proof-of-Stake protocol as the consensus algorithm for ShareLedger. This choice is based on the practicality and security benefits evident in the Waves platform. It is also much more cost effective than Proof-of-Work (POW), and will not suffer from the current issues Bitcoin and other POW cryptocurrencies are facing such as scalability and electricity consumption. The ShareRing App At the heart of the ShareRing project lies the ShareRing app: A universal ‘ShareRing’ app is being developed that will allow anyone to easily see and use any sharing services around them. Each partner will have the option of developing a ‘mini’ app within the ShareRing app that will have functionalities specific to that partner. The app will use geolocation-based services to display the ShareRing services that are nearby Social Media Presence Coming from a social media background I feel this is an extremely important area to look into, especially in the crypto world. ShareRing has done an okay job in growing their social media presence however I feel it could be much better. Here is a look at some of the key stats for their online social media presence: Youtube: 191 Subscribers Instagram: 238 Followers Linkedin: 376 Followers Telegram: 6,525 members (very active) Twitter: 2,216 Followers (Fairly regular updates) Facebook: 1,965 Followers Whilst social media may not be a priority just now I feel there has to be a big presence with image-based platforms and video-based platforms. Youtube and Instagram should be made a priority here as it spans all generations: Other News on ShareRing There is a lot of stuff going on at the moment with ShareRing which is what makes it an exciting prospect. Rather than give information on each of them here are some highlights provided by the ShareRing team.: - ShareRing's revolutionary ID management based module OneID. - Worlds first Blockchain based eVOA in place with major Thai company targeting 5 to 10 million travellers from 20 countries. - 2.6 million International Hotels/ Accommodation coming on to the Platform. Lots more to come! - Partnership with HomeAway - 200,000 Activites, Tours and Events added to the ShareRing App - Multi Global Car Sharing Partnerships - 1 Partner Directly Integrating SHR's OneID consisting of 1.2 million Vehicles across 150 Countries - Luxury Car Brand Sharing Platform purely based on SHR - SHR payment system SHRP available in 10% Taxi Terminals in Australia - SHRP available in 10,000 EFTPOS Terminals Australia wide - White Labelling Services incorporating ShareRings revolutionary OneID - 20 Significant Unannounced Partnerships, more to come! - Major Partners include - - BYD (Largest Electric Car Maker in the World) - DJI (Largest Drone Maker in the World) - Keaz (300 locations around the world) - Yogoo EV Car Sharing - MOBI Alliance Member Overview of Positives and Negatives Negatives Social Media and marketing possibly needs to be ramped up in order to bring more awareness to the project. The roadmap and white paper has not been updated recently for 2019/2020 but this I believe is coming soon. Positives With a low market cap project like ShareRing the risk to reward ratio is very good for retail and institutional investors. Technical analysis of current prices, currently at 31 Satoshi, is also very good with resistance levels at 50, 77 and 114 Satoshi which would be nearing its all time high. Referral program will increase the numbers of users that are currently using the site. If ShareRing can capture even a small % of the overall sharing market then success looks assured. There are 20 new announcements coming up and with Tim Bos looking for more partnerships it seems likely that ShareRing will break ATH prices soon. Great long term hold, in my opinion. Realistic Expectations of ROI Short term (4 weeks - 12 weeks) Short term looks great for ShareRing both from a TA point of view and a fundamental point of view. With lots of news still to come out about ShareRing there is not going to be a shortage of fundamentals to drive the price up. From a TA point of view the next line of resistance stands at around the 50 Satoshi level which would complete a massive cup and handle formation from August 24th of this year. After that we are looking at resistances of 77 and 114 to reach near the all time highs which i expect ShareRing to reach going into 2020. Long term (6 Months - 2 Years) If ShareRing can onboard users and keep on making partnerships at the same rate there will be no stopping it. It’s all about onboarding the users and utilising the most powerful marketing tool ever - word of mouth! When a great app is realised with great and useful functionality then it tends to go viral and I am hoping this happens for ShareRing. With a market cap at the moment of just under $6 Million then I don’t think it’s crazy to talk about 1000% increases in the next 2 years and I really believe that is being extremely conservative, given where we think crypto is heading as a whole.
*These questions are sourced directly from Telegram Q: When you say RenVM is Trustless, Permissionless, and Decentralized, what does that actually mean? A: Trustless = RenVM is a virtual machine (a network of nodes, that do computations), this means if you ask RenVM to trade an asset via smart contract logic, it will. No trusted intermediary that holds assets or that you need to rely on. Because RenVM is a decentralized network and computes verified information in a secure environment, no single party can prevent users from sending funds in, withdrawing deposited funds, or computing information needed for updating outside ledgers. RenVM is an agnostic and autonomous virtual broker that holds your digital assets as they move between blockchains. Permissionless = RenVM is an open protocol; meaning anyone can use RenVM and any project can build with RenVM. You don't need anyone's permission, just plug RenVM into your dApp and you have interoperability. Decentralized = The nodes that power RenVM ( Darknodes) are scattered throughout the world. RenVM has a peak capacity of up to 10,000 Darknodes (due to REN’s token economics). Realistically, there will probably be 100 - 500 Darknodes run in the initial Mainnet phases, ample decentralized nonetheless. Q: Okay, so how can you prove this? A: The publication of our audit results will help prove the trustlessness piece; permissionless and decentralized can be proven today. Permissionless = https://github.com/renproject/ren-js Decentralized = https://chaosnet.renproject.io/ Q: How does Ren sMPC work? Sharmir's secret sharing? TSS? A: There is some confusion here that keeps arising so I will do my best to clarify.TL;DR: *SSS is just data. It’s what you do with the data that matters. RenVM uses sMPC on SSS to create TSS for ECDSA keys.*SSS and TSS aren’t fundamental different things. It’s kind of like asking: do you use numbers, or equations? Equations often (but not always) use numbers or at some point involve numbers. SSS by itself is just a way of representing secret data (like numbers). sMPC is how to generate and work with that data (like equations). One of the things you can do with that work is produce a form of TSS (this is what RenVM does). However, TSS is slightly different because it can also be done *without* SSS and sMPC. For example, BLS signatures don’t use SSS or sMPC but they are still a form of TSS. So, we say that RenVM uses SSS+sMPC because this is more specific than just saying TSS (and you can also do more with SSS+sMPC than just TSS). Specifically, all viable forms of turning ECDSA (a scheme that isn’t naturally threshold based) into a TSS needs SSS+sMPC. People often get confused about RenVM and claim “SSS can’t be used to sign transactions without making the private key whole again”. That’s a strange statement and shows a fundamental misunderstanding about what SSS is. To come back to our analogy, it’s like saying “numbers can’t be used to write a book”. That’s kind of true in a direct sense, but there are plenty of ways to encode a book as numbers and then it’s up to how you interpret (how you *use*) those numbers. This is exactly how this text I’m writing is appearing on your screen right now. SSS is just secret data. It doesn’t make sense to say that SSS *functions*. RenVM is what does the functioning. RenVM *uses* the SSSs to represent private keys. But these are generated and used and destroyed as part of sMPC. The keys are never whole at any point. Q: Thanks for the explanation. Based on my understanding of SSS, a trusted dealer does need to briefly put the key together. Is this not the case? A: Remember, SSS is just the representation of a secret. How you get from the secret to its representation is something else. There are many ways to do it. The simplest way is to have a “dealer” that knows the secret and gives out the shares. But, there are other ways. For example: we all act as dealers, and all give each other shares of our individual secret. If there are N of us, we now each have N shares (one from every person). Then we all individually add up the shares that we have. We now each have a share of a “global” secret that no one actually knows. We know this global secret is the sum of everyone’s individual secrets, but unless you know every individual’s secret you cannot know the global secret (even though you have all just collectively generates shares for it). This is an example of an sMPC generation of a random number with collusion resistance against all-but-one adversaries. Q: If you borrow Ren, you can profit from the opposite Ren gain. That means you could profit from breaking the network and from falling Ren price (because breaking the network, would cause Ren price to drop) (lower amount to be repaid, when the bond gets slashed) A: Yes, this is why it’s important there has a large number of Darknodes before moving to full decentralisation (large borrowing becomes harder). We’re exploring a few other options too, that should help prevent these kinds of issues. Q: What are RenVM’s Security and Liveliness parameters? A: These are discussed in detail in our Wiki, please check it out here: https://github.com/renproject/ren/wiki/Safety-and-Liveliness#analysis Q: What are the next blockchain under consideration for RenVM? A: These can be found here: https://github.com/renproject/ren/wiki/Supported-Blockchains Q: I've just read that Aztec is going to be live this month and currently tests txs with third parties. Are you going to participate in early access or you just more focused on bringing Ren to Subzero stage? A: At this stage, our entire focus is on Mainnet SubZero. But, we will definitely be following up on integrating with AZTEC once everything is out and stable. Q: So how does RenVM compare to tBTC, Thorchain, WBTC, etc..? A: An easy way to think about it is..RenVM’s functionality is a combination of tBTC (+ WBTC by extension), and Thorchain’s (proposed) capabilities... All wrapped into one. Just depends on what the end-user application wants to do with it. Q1: What are the core technical/security differences between RenVM and tBTC?A1: The algorithm used by tBTC faults if even one node goes offline at the wrong moment (and the whole “keep” of nodes can be penalised for this). RenVM can survive 1/3rd going offline at any point at any time. Advantage for tBTC is that collusion is harder, disadvantage is obviously availability and permissionlessness is lower. tBTC an only mint/burn lots of 1 BTC and requires an on-Ethereum SPV relay for Bitcoin headers (and for any other chain it adds). No real advantage trade-off IMO. tBTC has a liquidation mechanism that means nodes can have their bond liquidated because of ETH/BTC price ratio. Advantage means users can get 1 BTC worth of ETH. Disadvantage is it means tBTC is kind of a synthetic: needs a price feed, needs liquid markets for liquidation, users must accept exposure to ETH even if they only hold tBTC, nodes must stay collateralized or lose lots of ETH. RenVM doesn’t have this, and instead uses fees to prevent becoming under-collateralized. This requires a mature market, and assumed Darknodes will value their REN bonds fairly (based on revenue, not necessarily what they can sell it for at current —potentially manipulated—market value). That can be an advantage or disadvantage depending on how you feel. tBTC focuses more on the idea of a tokenized version of BTC that feels like an ERC20 to the user (and is). RenVM focuses more on letting the user interact with DeFi and use real BTC and real Bitcoin transactions to do so (still an ERC20 under the hood, but the UX is more fluid and integrated). Advantage of tBTC is that it’s probably easier to understand and that might mean better overall experience, disadvantage really comes back to that 1 BTC limit and the need for a more clunky minting/burning experience that might mean worse overall experience. Too early to tell, different projects taking different bets. tBTC supports BTC (I think they have ZEC these days too). RenVM supports BTC, BCH, and ZEC (docs discuss Matic, XRP, and LTC). Q2: This are my assumed differences between tBTC and RenVM, are they correct? Some key comparisons: -Both are vulnerable to oracle attacks -REN federation failure results in loss or theft of all funds -tBTC failures tend to result in frothy markets, but holders of tBTC are made whole -REN quorum rotation is new crypto, and relies on honest deletion of old key shares -tBTC rotates micro-quorums regularly without relying on honest deletion -tBTC relies on an SPV relay -REN relies on federation honesty to fill the relay's purpose -Both are brittle to deep reorgs, so expanding to weaker chains like ZEC is not clearly a good idea -REN may see total system failure as the result of a deep reorg, as it changes federation incentives significantly -tBTC may accidentally punish some honest micro-federations as the result of a deep reorg -REN generally has much more interaction between incentive models, as everything is mixed into the same pot. -tBTC is a large collection of small incentive models, while REN is a single complex incentive model A2: To correct some points: The oracle situation is different with RenVM, because the fee model is what determines the value of REN with respect to the cross-chain asset. This is the asset is what is used to pay the fee, so no external pricing is needed for it (because you only care about the ratio between REN and the cross-chain asset). RenVM does rotate quorums regularly, in fact more regularly than in tBTC (although there are micro-quorums, each deposit doesn’t get rotated as far as I know and sticks around for up to 6 months). This rotation involves rotations of the keys too, so it does not rely on honest deletion of key shares. Federated views of blockchains are easier to expand to support deep re-orgs (just get the nodes to wait for more blocks for that chain). SPV requires longer proofs which begins to scale more poorly. Not sure what you mean by “one big pot”, but there are multiple quorums so the failure of one is isolated from the failures of others. For example, if there are 10 shards supporting BTC and one of them fails, then this is equivalent to a sudden 10% fee being applied. Harsh, yes, but not total failure of the whole system (and doesn’t affect other assets). Would be interesting what RenVM would look like with lots more shards that are smaller. Failure becomes much more isolated and affects the overall network less. Further, the amount of tBTC you can mint is dependent on people who are long ETH and prefer locking it up in Keep for earning a smallish fee instead of putting it in Compound or leveraging with dydx. tBTC is competing for liquidity while RenVM isn't. Q: I understand correctly RenVM (sMPC) can get up to a 50% security threshold, can you tell me more? A: The best you can theoretically do with sMPC is 50-67% of the total value of REN used to bond Darknodes (RenVM will eventually work up to 50% and won’t go for 67% because we care about liveliness just as much as safety). As an example, if there’s $1M of REN currently locked up in bonded Darknodes you could have up to $500K of tokens shifted through RenVM at any one specific moment. You could do more than that in daily volume, but at any one moment this is the limit.Beyond this limit, you can still remain secure but you cannot assume that players are going to be acting to maximize their profit. Under this limit, a colluding group of adversaries has no incentive to subvert safety/liveliness properties because the cost to attack roughly outweighs the gain. Beyond this limit, you need to assume that players are behaving out of commitment to the network (not necessarily a bad assumption, but definitely weaker than the maximizing profits assumption). Q: Why is using ETH as collateral for RenVM a bad idea? A: Using ETH as collateral in this kind of system (like having to deposit say 20 ETH for a bond) would not make any sense because the collateral value would then fluctuate independently of what kind of value RenVM is providing. The REN token on the other hand directly correlates with the usage of RenVM which makes bonding with REN much more appropriate. DAI as a bond would not work as well because then you can't limit attackers with enough funds to launch as many darknodes as they want until they can attack the network. REN is limited in supply and therefore makes it harder to get enough of it without the price shooting up (making it much more expensive to attack as they would lose their bonds as well). A major advantage of Ren's specific usage of sMPC is that security can be regulated economically. All value (that's being interopped at least) passing through RenVM has explicit value. The network can self-regulate to ensure an attack is never worth it. Q: Given the fee model proposal/ceiling, might be a liquidity issue with renBTC. More demand than possible supply?A: I don’t think so. As renBTC is minted, the fees being earned by Darknodes go up, and therefore the value of REN goes up. Imagine that the demand is so great that the amount of renBTC is pushing close to 100% of the limit. This is a very loud and clear message to the Darknodes that they’re going to be earning good fees and that demand is high. Almost by definition, this means REN is worth more. Profits of the Darknodes, and therefore security of the network, is based solely on the use of the network (this is what you want because your network does not make or break on things outside the systems control). In a system like tBTC there are liquidity issues because you need to convince ETH holders to bond ETH and this is an external problem. Maybe ETH is pumping irrespective of tBTC use and people begin leaving tBTC to sell their ETH. Or, that ETH is dumping, and so tBTC nodes are either liquidated or all their profits are eaten by the fact that they have to be long on ETH (and tBTC holders cannot get their BTC back in this case). Feels real bad man. Q: I’m still wondering which asset people will choose: tbtc or renBTC? I’m assuming the fact that all tbtc is backed by eth + btc might make some people more comfortable with it. A: Maybe :) personally I’d rather know that my renBTC can always be turned back into BTC, and that my transactions will always go through. I also think there are many BTC holders that would rather not have to “believe in ETH” as an externality just to maximize use of their BTC. Q: How does the liquidation mechanism work? Can any party, including non-nodes act as liquidators? There needs to be a price feed for liquidation and to determine the minting fee - where does this price feed come from? A: RenVM does not have a liquidation mechanism. Q: I don’t understand how the price feeds for minting fees make sense. You are saying that the inputs for the fee curve depend on the amount of fees derived by the system. This is circular in a sense? A: By evaluating the REN based on the income you can get from bonding it and working. The only thing that drives REN value is the fact that REN can be bonded to allow work to be done to earn revenue. So any price feed (however you define it) is eventually rooted in the fees earned. Q: Who’s doing RenVM’s Security Audit? A: ChainSecurity | https://chainsecurity.com/ Q: Can you explain RenVM’s proposed fee model? A: The proposed fee model can be found here: https://github.com/renproject/ren/wiki/Safety-and-Liveliness#fees Q: Can you explain in more detail the difference between "execution" and "powering P2P Network". I think that these functions are somehow overlapping? Can you define in more detail what is "execution" and "powering P2P Network"? You also said that at later stages semi-core might still exist "as a secondary signature on everything (this can mathematically only increase security, because the fully decentralised signature is still needed)". What power will this secondary signature have? A: By execution we specifically mean signing things with the secret ECDSA keys. The P2P network is how every node communicates with every other node. The semi-core doesn’t have any “special powers”. If it stays, it would literally just be a second signature required (as opposed to the one signature required right now). This cannot affect safety, because the first signature is still required. Any attack you wanted to do would still have to succeed against the “normal” part of the network. This can affect liveliness, because the semi-core could decide not to sign. However, the semi-core follows the same rules as normal shards. The signature is tolerant to 1/3rd for both safety/liveliness. So, 1/3rd+ would have to decide to not sign. Members of the semi-core would be there under governance from the rest of our ecosystem. The idea is that members would be chosen for their external value. We’ve discussed in-depth the idea of L<3. But, if RenVM is used in MakerDAO, Compound, dYdX, Kyber, etc. it would be desirable to capture the value of these ecosystems too, not just the value of REN bonded. The semi-core as a second signature is a way to do this. Imagine if the members for those projects, because those projects want to help secure renBTC, because it’s used in their ecosystems. There is a very strong incentive for them to behave honestly. To attack RenVM you first have to attack the Darknodes “as per usual” (the current design), and then somehow convince 1/3rd of these projects to act dishonestly and collapse their own ecosystems and their own reputations. This is a very difficult thing to do. Worth reminding: the draft for this proposal isn’t finished. It would be great for everyone to give us their thoughts on GitHub when it is proposed, so we can keep a persistent record. Q: Which method or equation is used to calculate REN value based on fees? I'm interested in how REN value is calculated as well, to maintain the L < 3 ratio? A: We haven’t finalized this yet. But, at this stage, the plan is to have a smart contract that is controlled by the Darknodes. We want to wait to see how SubZero and Zero go before committing to a specific formulation, as this will give us a chance to bootstrap the network and field inputs from the Darknodes owners after the earnings they can make have become more apparent.
A (hopefully mathematically neutral) comparison of Lightning network fees to Bitcoin Cash on-chain fees.
A side note before I begin For context, earlier today, sherlocoinmade a post on this sub asking if Lightning Network transactions are cheaper than on-chain BCH transactions. This user also went on to complain on /bitcointhat his "real" numbers were getting downvoted I was initially going to respond to his post, but after I typed some of my response, I realized it is relevant to a wider Bitcoin audience and the level of analysis done warranted a new post. This wound up being the longest post I've ever written, so I hope you agree. I've placed the TL;DR at the top and bottom for the simple reason that you need to prepare your face... because it's about to get hit with a formidable wall of text. TL;DR: While Lightning node paymentsthemselvescost less than on-chain BCH payments, the associated overhead currently requires a LN channel to produce 16 transactions just to break-even under ideal 1sat/byte circumstances and substantially more as the fee rate goes up. Further, the Lightning network can provide no guarantee in its current state to maintain/reduce fees to 1sat/byte. Let's Begin With An Ideal World Lightning network fees themselves are indeed cheaper than Bitcoin Cash fees, but in order to get to a state where a Lightning network fee can be made, you are required to open a channel, and to get to a state where those funds are spendable, you must close that channel. On the Bitcoin network, the minimum accepted fee is 1sat/byte so for now, we'll assume that ideal scenario of 1sat/byte. We'll also assume the open and close is sent as a simple native Segwit transaction with a weighted size of 141 bytes. Because we have to both open and close, this 141 byte fee will be incurred twice. The total fee for an ideal open/close transaction is 1.8¢ For comparison, a simple transaction on the BCH network requires 226 bytes one time. The minimum fee accepted next-block is 1sat/byte. At the time of writing an ideal BCH transaction fee costs ~ 0.11¢ This means that under idealized circumstances, you must currently make at least 16 transactions on a LN channel to break-even with fees Compounding Factors Our world is not ideal, so below I've listed compounding factors, common arguments, an assessment, and whether the problem is solvable. Problem 1: Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash prices are asymmetrical. Common arguments:
BTC: If Bitcoin Cash had the same price, the fees would be far higher
Yes, this is true. If Bitcoin Cash had the same market price as Bitcoin, our ideal scenario changes substantially. An open and close on Bitcoin still costs 1.8¢ while a simple Bitcoin Cash transaction now costs 1.4¢. The break-even point for a Lightning Channel is now only 2 transactions. Is this problem solvable? Absolutely. Bitcoin Cash has already proposed a reduction in fees to 1sat for every 10 bytes, and that amount can be made lower by later proposals. While there is no substantial pressure to implement this now, if Bitcoin Cash had the same usage as Bitcoin currently does, it is far more likely to be implemented. If implemented at the first proposed reduction rate, under ideal circumstances, a Lightning Channel would need to produce around 13 transactions for the new break even. But couldn't Bitcoin reduce fees similarly The answer there is really tricky. If you reduce on-chain fees, you reduce the incentive to use the Lightning Network as the network becomes more hospitable to micropaments. This would likely increase the typical mempool state and decrease the Lightning Channel count some. The upside is that when the mempool saturates with low transaction fees, users are then re-incentivized to use the lightning network after the lowes fees are saturated with transactions. This should, in theory, produce some level of a transaction fee floor which is probably higher on average than 0.1 sat/byte on the BTC network. Problem 2: This isn't an ideal world, we can't assume 1sat/byte fees Common arguments:
BCH: If you tried to open a channel at peak fees, you could pay $50 each way BTC: LN wasn't implemented which is why the fees are low now
Both sides have points here. It's true that if the mempool was in the same state as it was in December of 2017, that a user could have potentially been incentivized to pay an open and close channel fee of up to 1000 sat/byte to be accepted in a reasonable time-frame. With that being said, two factors have resulted in a reduced mempool size of Bitcoin: Increased Segwit and Lightning Network Usage, and an overall cooling of the market. I'm not going to speculate as to what percentage of which is due to each factor. Instead, I'm going to simply analyze mempool statistics for the last few months where both factors are present. Let's get an idea of current typical Bitcoin network usage fees by asking Johoe quick what the mempool looks like. For the last few months, the bitcoin mempool has followed almost the exact same pattern. Highest usage happens between 10AM and 3PM EST with a peak around noon. Weekly, usage usually peaks on Tuesday or Wednesday with enough activity to fill blocks with at least minimum fee transactions M-F during the noted hours and usually just shy of block-filling capacity on Sat and Sun. These observations can be additionally evidenced by transaction counts on bitinfocharts. It's also easier to visualize on bitinfocharts over a longer time-frame. Opening a channel Under pre-planned circumstances, you can offload channel creation to off-peak hours and maintain a 1sat/byte rate. The primary issue arises in situations where either 1) LN payments are accepted and you had little prior knowledge, or 2) You had a previous LN pathway to a known payment processor and one or more previously known intermediaries are offline or otherwise unresponsive causing the payment to fail. Your options are: A) Create a new LN channel on-the-spot where you're likely to incur current peak fee rates of 5-20sat/byte. B) Create an on-chain payment this time and open a LN channel when fees are more reasonable. C) Use an alternate currency for the transaction. There is a fundamental divide among the status of C. Some people view Bitcoin as (primarily) a storage of value, and thus as long as there are some available onramps and offramps, the currency will hold value. There are other people who believe that fungibility is what gives cryptocurrency it's value and that option C would fundamentally undermine the value of the currency. I don't mean to dismiss either argument, but option C opens a can of worms that alone can fill economic textbooks. For the sake of simplicity, we will throw out option C as a possibility and save that debate for another day. We will simply require that payment is made in crypto. With option B, you would absolutely need to pay the peak rate (likely higher) for a single transaction as a Point-of-Sale scenario with a full mempool would likely require at least one confirm and both parties would want that as soon as possible after payment. It would not be unlikely to pay 20-40 sat/byte on a single transaction and then pay 1sat/byte for an open and close to enable LN payments later. Even in the low end, the total cost is 20¢ for on-chain + open + close. With present-day-statistics, your LN would have to do 182 transactions to make up for the one peak on-chain transaction you were forced to do. With option A, you still require one confirm. Let's also give the additional leeway that in this scenario you have time to sit and wait a couple of blocks for your confirm before you order / pay. You can thus pay peak rates alone and not peak + ensure next block rates. This will most likely be in the 5-20 sat/byte range. With 5sat/byte open and 1sat/byte close, your LN would have to do 50 transactions to break even In closing, fees are incurred by the funding channel, so there could be scenarios where the receiving party is incentivized to close in order to spend outputs and the software automatically calculates fees based on current rates. If this is the case, the receiving party could incur a higher-than-planned fee to the funding party. With that being said, any software that allows the funding party to set the fee beforehand would avoid unplanned fees, so we'll assume low fees for closing. Is this problem solvable? It depends. In order to avoid the peak-fee open/close ratio problem, the Bitcoin network either needs to have much higher LN / Segwit utilization, or increase on-chain capacity. If it gets to a point where transactions stack up, users will be required to pay more than 1sat/byte per transaction and should expect as much. Current Bitcoin network utilization is close enough to 100% to fill blocks during peak times. I also did an export of the data available at Blockchair.com for the last 3000 blocks which is approximately the last 3 weeks of data. According to their block-weight statistics, The average Bitcoin block is 65.95% full. This means that on-chain, Bitcoin can only increase in transaction volume by around 50% and all other scaling must happen via increased Segwit and LN use. Problem 3: You don't fully control your LN channel states. Common arguments:
BCH: You can get into a scenario where you don't have output capacity and need to open a new channel. BCH: A hostile actor can cause you to lose funds during a high-fee situation where a close is forced. BTC: You can easily re-load your channel by pushing outbound to inbound. BCH: You can't control whether nodes you connect to are online or offline.
There's a lot to digest here, but LN is essentially a 2-way contract between 2 parties. Not only does the drafting party pay the fees as of right now, but connected 3rd-parties can affect the state of this contract. There are some interesting scenarios that develop because of it and you aren't always in full control of what side. Lack of outbound capacity First, it's true that if you run out of outbound capacity, you either need to reload or create a new channel. This could potentially require 0, 1, or 2 additional on-chain transactions. If a network loop exists between a low-outbound-capacity channel and yourself, you could push transactional capacity through the loop back to the output you wish to spend to. This would require 0 on-chain transactions and would only cost 1 (relatively negligible) LN fee charge. For all intents and purposes... this is actually kind of a cool scenario. If no network loop exists from you-to-you, things get more complex. I've seen proposals like using Bitrefill to push capacity back to your node. In order to do this, you would have an account with them and they would lend custodial support based on your account. While people opting for trustless money would take issue in 3rd party custodians, I don't think this alone is a horrible solution to the LN outbound capacity problem... Although it depends on the fee that bitrefill charges to maintain an account and account charges could negate the effectiveness of using the LN. Still, we will assume this is a 0 on-chain scenario and would only cost 1 LN fee which remains relatively negligible. If no network loop exists from you and you don't have a refill service set up, you'll need at least one on-chain payment to another LN entity in exchange for them to push LN capacity to you. Let's assume ideal fee rates. If this is the case, your refill would require an additional 7 transactions for that channel's new break-even. Multiply that by number of sat/byte if you have to pay more. Opening a new channel is the last possibility and we go back to the dynamics of 13 transactions per LN channel in the ideal scenario. Hostile actors There are some potential attack vectors previously proposed. Most of these are theoretical and/or require high fee scenarios to come about. I think that everyone should be wary of them, however I'm going to ignore most of them again for the sake of succinctness. This is not to be dismissive... it's just because my post length has already bored most casual readers half to death and I don't want to be responsible for finishing the job. Pushing outbound to inbound While I've discussed scenarios for this push above, there are some strange scenarios that arise where pushing outbound to inbound is not possible and even some scenarios where a 3rd party drains your outbound capacity before you can spend it. A while back I did a testnet simulation to prove that this scenario can and will happen it was a post response that happened 2 weeks after the initial post so it flew heavily under the radar, but the proof is there. The moral of this story is in some scenarios, you can't count on loaded network capacity to be there by the time you want to spend it. Online vs Offline Nodes We can't even be sure that a given computer is online to sign a channel open or push capacity until we try. Offline nodes provide a brick-wall in the pathfinding algorithm so an alternate route must be found. If we have enough channel connectivity to be statistically sure we can route around this issue, we're in good shape. If not, we're going to have issues. Is this problem solvable? Only if the Lightning network can provide an (effectively) infinite amount of capacity... but... Problem 4: Lightning Network is not infinite. Common arguments:
BTC: Lightning network can scale infinitely so there's no problem.
Unfortunately, LN is not infinitely scalable. In fact, finding a pathway from one node to another is roughly the same problem as the traveling salesman problem.Dijkstra's algorithm which is a problem that diverges polynomially. The most efficient proposals have a difficulty bound by O(n^2). Note - in the above I confused the complexity of the traveling salesman problem with Dijkstra when they do not have the same bound. With that being said, the complexity of the LN will still diverge with size In lay terms, what that means is every time you double the size of the Lightning Network, finding an indirect LN pathway becomes 4 times as difficult and data intensive. This means that for every doubling, the amount of traffic resulting from a single request also quadruples. You can potentially temporarily mitigate traffic by bounding the number of hops taken, but that would encourage a greater channel-per-user ratio. For a famous example... the game "6 degrees of Kevin Bacon" postulates that Kevin Bacon can be connected by co-stars to any movie by 6 degrees of separation. If the game is reduced to "4 degrees of Kevin Bacon," users of this network would still want as many connections to be made, so they'd be incentivized to hire Kevin Bacon to star in everything. You'd start to see ridiculous mash-ups and reboots just to get more connectivity... Just imagine hearing Coming soon - Kevin Bacon and Adam Sandlar star in "Billy Madison 2: Replace the face." Is this problem solvable? Signs point to no. So technically, if the average computational power and network connectivity can handle the problem (the number of Lightning network channels needed to connect the world)2 in a trivial amount of time, Lightning Network is effectively infinite as the upper bound of a non-infinite earth would limit time-frames to those that are computationally feasible. With that being said, BTC has discussed Lightning dev comments before that estimated a cap of 10,000 - 1,000,000 channels before problems are encountered which is far less than the required "number of channels needed to connect the world" level. In fact SHA256 is a newer NP-hard problem than the traveling saleseman problem. That means that statistically, and based on the amount of review that has been given to each problem, it is more likely that SHA256 - the algorithm that lends security to all of bitcoin - is cracked before the traveling salesman problem is. Notions that "a dedicated dev team can suddenly solve this problem, while not technically impossible, border on statistically absurd. Edit - While the case isn't quite as bad as the traveling salesman problem, the problem will still diverge with size and finding a more efficient algorithm is nearly as unlikely. This upper bound shows that we cannot count on infinite scalability or connectivity for the lightning network. Thus, there will always be on-chain fee pressure and it will rise as the LN reaches it's computational upper-bound. Because you can't count on channel states, the on-chain fee pressure will cause typical sat/byte fees to raise. The higher this rate, the more transactions you have to make for a Lightning payment open/close operation to pay for itself. This is, of course unless it is substantially reworked or substituted for a O(log(n))-or-better solution. Finally, I'd like to add, creating an on-chain transaction is a set non-recursive, non looping function - effectively O(1), sending this transaction over a peer-to-peer network is bounded by O(log(n)) and accepting payment is, again, O(1). This means that (as far as I can tell) on-chain transactions (very likely) scale more effectively than Lightning Network in its current state. Additional notes: My computational difficulty assumptions were based on a generalized, but similar problem set for both LN and on-chain instances. I may have overlooked additional steps needed for the specific implementation, and I may have overlooked reasons a problem is a simplified version requiring reduced computational difficulty. I would appreciate review and comment on my assumptions for computational difficulty and will happily correct said assumptions if reasonable evidence is given that a problem doesn't adhere to listed computational difficulty. TL;DR: While Lightning node paymentsthemselvescost less than on-chain BCH payments, the associated overhead currently requires a LN channel to produce 16 transactions just to break-even under ideal 1sat/byte circumstances and substantially more as the fee rate goes up. Further, the Lightning network can provide no guarantee in its current state to maintain/reduce fees to 1sat/byte.
https://preview.redd.it/6in97egosnx31.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=d2e4d1b052b295cb3da49f604fab7a6113321210 I wrote this lecture on the methodology of successful trading, and more specifically on tactics, strategies, subtleties and recommendations, based on 2 years of work on Bitmex, Binance, Gate, Okex bitcoin cryptocurrency exchanges in real combat conditions. Guided by this technique, I managed to earn 500% in excess of the deposit for 7 days of trading (i.e. I increased the deposit amount by 5 times!). These are not fairy tales, but reality, that is, confirming statistics of exchange transactions on the account of the crypto-exchange.
I believethat the knowledge provided in this course will help a beginner tomaster successful tradingonly if the course is not only read, but also outlined. It will be important to follow punctually, commenting on your actions in your notes.
In separate consultations, I could give personal instructions on the nuances of technical analysis on various timeframes, signals on entry points, information on trade automation software (algorithmic trading robots), and other tools useful in the work of a trader. But, despite a lot of additional software, my experience has shown that the most effective speculation model on the cryptocurrency and stock exchange, which everyone chooses for themselves based on practical experience, is directly in the online trading mode on exchange terminals. Each exchange is good in its own way, but also has its drawbacks. I chose the best solution for myself and am sure that this is temporary. Perhaps in the future there will be more progressive decentralized exchanges with good liquidity and they will replace the existing platforms managed by market leaders. Various digital designations, such as: — in what percentage of the deposit do you enter into a particular transaction; — where to put stop limit or market (Market) (market) orders (and whether to place them at all), where to exit the transaction and how. Again, I note that all the selected values are usually individual and depend both on the time trading intervals (TimeFrame) (1m 3m 15m 1h 3h 4h 6h 1 d 1w 1m) and on the deductible amount of the bet in % percentage of the amount of your deposit. It is important to remember that trading in the cryptocurrency market is a high-risk investment activity that everyone chooses and carries out at their own risk. Remember that with a big bet on the whole, as they say, a patty, and even with 100x-500x leverage, you risk losing your entire deposit right away. An exchange machine or a well-tuned and trained professional broker robot does not cost anything to go against the trend with a tidbit — easy prey. Do not be hamsters i.e. naive simpletons — do not merge the deposit into zero due to elementary greed, incontinence, ardor and other factors that contradict the qualities that a professional trader needs to succeed in trading, namely: cold-bloodedness, endurance, accuracy, punctuality, tact, quick reaction , the ability to quickly enter numbers and timely press the desired buttons.
You ask me: “Hey … guy, you are so smart … I wonder how much you earned from trading or how much you earn or why you don’t do it yourself … why do you need competitors?” — I will answer you: it is no secret that AI (artificial intelligence) has been working on the exchange for a long time and it is constantly improving, but this still does not prevent a person from continuing to beat him. I hope that in the future this trend will not stop otherwise — we have disappeared. And as regards competition — do not worry so much for me, because there is still a trading idea, program or terminal that I have not yet implemented and not reported in this guide after its publication and, perhaps, it will not deprive me of future trading opportunities.
So, the instructions that I follow in the process of trading cryptocurrencies on the exchange terminal in online mode.
It is necessary to wait for the moment of the entry point. You need to enter the deal only then, you feel it and foreseen it in advance according to the levels of the daily period.
It is necessary to carefully weigh their capabilities, ie to consider funds, understanding that futures trading (with leverage) leads to greater risks of liquidation / margin call (MarginCall).
During growth, you need to fix profit and try to sell at a pullback. It is always possible to re-enter a deal, but it is unlikely to return lost profits, instead, you can get several hours of dead weight in the price movement opposite from the planned direction.
It is very important to have cost control, namely, the timely Stop Limit (stop trade order) + sliding Stop Loss (the same thing, only with insurance against a sharp price movement).
It is easy to understand the wave component and accept the movement by levels — press exit buttons in time at 2% and + 10% according to the 1 to 5 principle (we risk one part of the deposit against 5). The Pareto effect has not been canceled: 20% activity, gives 80% effectiveness.
To work with Japanese candles, the ability to draw support levels and resistance lines is enough, but this is not enough for a professional, because the presence of modern advanced indicators, such as MACD, SRSI, Ichimoku Cloud / Signal, horizontal and vertical volume indicator and so on, is very important. Everyone chooses for themselves the indicator that brings more profit to a certain trading range. But remember — the main criterion for success is an understanding of the laws of the market and trade by market. Perhaps this applies to the field of extrasensory perception, metaphysics, and other obscure and hard to prove phenomena and sciences, but one way or another — intuition is clear and has a place to be.
In no case should you enter into short-term breakthrough deals on minute trading with market uncertainty. The situation where minute fluctuations may seem like reversal movements is often quite misleading. If you are in a pose (bull — for growth / long or bear — for fall / short) do not retreat and the market will not slow you to please you with profit. Often, a stock price feed / the same chart manipulates the minds of players, displaying false breakdowns and minute movements, on the basis of which you can not rely on a trend change (this lie is especially evident in minute time intervals / timeframes). In such cases, make decisions only at fundamental levels. On the hourly chart you will see a more truthful picture, because globally, on markets other than minute timeframes, the market is less susceptible to momentary manipulations. This knowledge will give you firmness in the intention and decision-making to remain in the chosen position and not to respond to minor market manipulations. During the day, you may repeatedly wish to unreasonably enter into such transactions, but remember that in this case you will be guaranteed to drain the deposit. Remember — the market from the middle of the trend will go up up or down and hit the stop limit order placed by you (if you play with a large leverage not for your money), after which it will go in the right direction you have chosen. Although in general the situation is banal — you are led by the nose like thousands as well as you. The only true method is to use common sense and avoid uncertainty when trying to enter a pose. A historical analysis of prices, the frequency of ranges (delta) of ups and downs, the degree of volatility and fundamental approaches — to help you. I also want to add that success is in your hands and it consists in the realization of the need not to merge a deposit under any circumstances.
You cannot leave the market unattended, the alarm of the price change alarm is not in your favor or without a stop limit at a reliable exchange platform (broker).
Once again I repeat, you must be prepared in advance for the fact that the market is deceiving and unexpected movements can often occur and your task is to secure your funds with a stop on the market or to fix profit by a floating stop or a fixed stop limit.
Risk management — the basis of success in trading when trading with leverage (margin trading). It is usually recommended to go into a deal at 2% of the deposit with x leverage and stop from profit in the ratio of 1 to 5. What does this mean and why is this risk / profit sharing technique so important?It is necessary to clearly calculate probabilistic lumbago in order to avoid elimination. I recommend you not to rush into bets, but to take a sheet of paper and bargain virtually in order to understand whether your calculations were correct. A virtual game is worth nothing, but it will save you money and keep the deposit safe and sound.
The wave theory assumes entry into the transaction after completion and a clear change in the previous trend based on signals and the news background, incl. experience of the current subject of trade — the operator pushing the buttons. For example, in the absence of price movement in the direction of the RSI indicator, analysis of all time frames with indicators, fibonacci levels, correction degree phase, time of day in time zones, stock and commodity market readings.
It is important, before starting trading, test the presence of a manipulator on the market using the method of high rates. If you are looking for an entry into a major deal in a few weeks, keep in mind that a stop with a loss can be a significant amount in the money equivalent that you are ready to lose, and if the deal does not take place in your favor, you must set yourself up in advance for what it should be. Because a successful trader is not one who regularly guesses successful transactions, but one who successfully completes one out of five transactions according to risk management and the calculation of the leverage calculator in accordance with the chosen strategy.
A lost position can be closed without waiting for the reverse restoration of the bidding process, thus manually participating in the balance adjustment or by setting a stop limit order in advance or after the bid in case of further decline or growth.
There is an assumption that at the end of the working day, with a likely depreciation, traders convert stocks into fiat (money), which contributes to a depreciation, but this is not accurate)
Incorrect entry into the transaction. How important is it to exit an unsuccessful transaction as early as possible or at the first rollback to change the direction of the trend or wait to determine a new entry point.
The presence of two accounts on the exchange terminal is possibleand desirable in order to be able to remain in a winning position regardless of the success of the initially selected trading direction (a technique requiring careful verification by personal experience with a clear definition of the margin leverage and % of the entry into the transaction from the deposit balance to minimize the risk of loss).Successful trading does not consist in the ability to conclude as many successful trades as possible, but in minimizing losses.
Technology is improving and strategies are changing. Before entering a transaction, it is necessary to carefully analyze the current market situation using a comparative analysis, studying the general news background (guided by the ***“buy for expectations — sell on the news”***postulate), detecting a flat (sideways), determining the level of instrument volatility (gold, oil, funds , bitcoins / cryptocurrencies — digital coins, etc.)
Immediately put a stop — is a guarantee of success or a drain of the deposit? After all, how to cope with their own feelings and not get into anxiety about a successful or unsuccessful transaction? The gradual entry scheme works well.
Coins. We look at the trading delta with the help of a robot scanner and make a decision based on all the above criteria in the course. It has been noticed that amateurs buy coins in the hope of growth. Remember, the market for altcoins is not growing now.
A favorable time for earning is at the time of a flat, which usually occurs after the rising flag or the implementation of a bull pennant figure, etc. It will be more clear to observe the schedule in real mode and make the required notes in your own mind.
On the cryptocurrency market, some laptop microprocessors are heated and the fan turns on at peak times. This indicates the beginning of a sharp movement and is a signal to enter the deal. Therefore, you can not only observe the behavior of the market, but now also listen (this is my personal note, it is unlikely that you will find such information somewhere else, as they say — an exclusive / VIP signal;)).
You can still write a lot about time, how much can or should be spent on the monitor, on which timeframes to trade and which strategies to follow, but everyone should choose this independently and preferably, under the guidance of a specialist, because what is applicable to one is to the other — contraindicated.
In fact, any market situation should be beneficial for you due to successful risk management*!*For successful online trading, it is very important to use candlestick and technical analysis*, which help to more accurately determine the entry point to the transaction (purchase or sale).*You cannot act at random when the market is hard to predict and often ready to follow your footsteps.If you lose, then I do not recommend immediately going to recoup*, because trade should ultimately be break even. In ardor, you are likely to enter into an unsuccessful deal and lose even more than before. This situation will make you very sad, so do not make this mistake. She is famous.*Use amodern powerful laptop or desktop computer with a convenient side numeric keypad, a large screen and a convenient manipulator (mouse)so that when you press the buttons you have as little physical braking and stops as possible.Practice in advance to work in the browser on the exchange terminal without making a deposit on futures trading from the exchange wallet. This training practice will reduce your losses.
Hello from Ukraine, Kramatorsk city ( “War is peace / freedom is slavery [and] ignorance is strength.”) Reslav Cryptotrader (if you need find me look around — me be i near ;). To be continued… http://twitter.com/reslav1 P.S.: Nowadays, money strives to be counted more and more. Using the information technology of databases with indexes, it has become possible to automatically and instantly capture and display the information that was previously collected by entire departments of the state within a month and after manual entry was displayed on the screens of industrial monitors and public television. The era of the Internet has come, the time of the accessibility and decentralization of information. Today we see stock chart quotes of stock prices of leading world companies online. Everyone has the opportunity to invest their money in these stocks and earn on the difference in exchange rates of their value. A speculative market was formed on this basis, where leaders appeared who were able to act most efficiently and, accordingly, earn money. Many specialists are studying the nature of success in speculative markets. Many works on methods of achieving success in trading are morally obsolete due to the emergence of new technologies for calculating and controlling the money supply, for example, such as Bitcoin. After all, back in 2009 for 1309.03 BTC they gave 1 dollar. Today 1 BTC costs $ 9,000. This is due to the fact that since the appearance of bitcoin has never been hacked and the technology has shown its reliability and consistency, as a measure of the money invested in it. I will not go into the details and subtleties of Bitcoin technology, but I will note one thing — this is cryptographic software that was used in the banking sector as Swift payments, but transformed into a P2P peer-to-peer network of private computers, as a result, like Bittorent, it became public, hard controlled, commons. Bitcoin provides for a complexity bomb, which complicates each year, and therefore makes it more expensive, its limited production, and this is one of the main reasons for its rise in price. As well as the fact that Bitcoin is convenient for storing funds, as it is liquid and it can be easily sent without quantity restrictions and with high transaction (transfer) speed. All details about Bitcoin are available in open sources and you can find out everything about it on the Internet, as well as the alternative coin market (altcoins / coins), such as Ethereum, USDT (dollar tokens confirmed by a US company with real dollars in bank accounts) etc. Around this market of bitcoin cryptocurrencies, the same speculative matrix (network / exchange) arose as around ordinary currencies and created such a strong competition for traditional assets that many governments adopted it and began to use and implement technologies that arose in their turn base. Cryptocurrencies or blockchain (cryptographic chain / blocks / chain) began to be introduced in public sectors of the economy for calculating and controlling public commons, such as electricity, land, etc. Further, on the basis of this market, the need for regulation arose and the US authorities were very worried about the uncontrolled development of technology, on the basis of which a news background (negative or positive) arose, which powerfully affects cryptocurrency rates. In the era of information, this network began to act as a money pump, skillfully pumping money from the hands of inept speculators into the pockets of experienced traders. As a result of reading a lot of books, watching various telecasts in the industry of bitcoin trading analytics, I came to the conclusion that successfully trading cryptocurrencies is akin to art and as statistics have shown, only 20% in 2–3 years are able to consistently earn money, and of which, in turn, only 2 -3% become billionaires. I bring to your attention a technique by which you can enter the ranks of these 20% successful traders and possibly, jointly, open the door to those notorious 2–3% successful traders who are fortunate enough to touch the notorious golden fleece and discover the world of unlimited financial opportunities. All knowledge is available in open sources and collected by me in the book “Basics of Bitcoin Trading from Reslav” (2019), most of them are available.
Establishing a smart contract commercial scenario: Chainlink, Zk-Snarks and sharding technology work together to make the ultimate killer
This text was translated from Chinese, open following link in Chrome and translate to see all images: https://bihu.com/article/1242138347 EDIT: found an English text with pictures: https://medium.com/@rogerfeng/making-smart-contracts-work-for-business-how-chainlink-zk-snarks-sharding-finally-delivered-8f268af75ca2 Author: Feng Jie translation: Liu Sha “The highest state of technology is to integrate into the various scenes of everyday life, to fade away from high-tech outerwear and become a part of everyday life.” – Mark Weiser People in the future will not even think that smart contracts are "innovative." By that time, smart contracts would permeate every aspect of life, and people couldn't even imagine what the era of non-digital currency would look like. Later historians may divide human business history into two eras, the pre-smart contract era and the post-smart contract era. After all, digital money has brought unprecedented changes to the nature and patterns of business practices in the real world. An anonymous member of the Chainlink community once said: "Smart contracts can change the DNA of the business." Of course, like all the technological revolutions of the past, smart contracts also need to reach a "tipping point" to truly achieve large-scale applications. So we need to ask ourselves two questions:
What exactly is this so-called tipping point?
As of August 2019, have we reached this tipping point?
To reach the tipping point means unlocking the ultimate nirvana of business. Tipping point We can think about this issue from the perspective of mainstream companies. Imagine what a perfect smart contract platform should look like. What characteristics should this platform have? Or what features must be possessed? To reach the tipping point, you must establish a public chain with the following four characteristics:
In addition to the cryptocurrency, the transaction can also be settled in mainstream legal currency and comply with the regulatory requirements of financial markets such as ISO 20022.
Achieve scalability without sacrificing decentralization or security, that is, solving the "impossible triangle problem."
Connect the external data under the chain, that is, solve the "prophecy problem."
Now that we have Chainlink, zk-snarks and sharding technology, we have reached this tipping point. Next, let's explore how this ultimate nirvana is actually made. Our discussion will be mainly from the perspective of Ethereum, which is still the top smart contract platform for community size and mainstream applications. So what about the private chain? Before delving into it, I want to take the time to solve an unavoidable problem. The mainstream view has always believed that the private chain is a more suitable solution for the enterprise. Therefore, we first dialectically analyze the two advantages and two major drawbacks of the private chain. Disadvantages
Centralization leads to relatively lower security
It's not surprising that IBM and Maersk's blockchain freight alliances have a hard time finding customers who are willing to join. How can other freight companies be willing to let their biggest competitors (Maersk) verify their trading data? Only madmen dare to do this.
The staking of the horses occupy the hills:
This problem is even more serious than centralization. John Wolpert, co-founder of the IBM blockchain, wrote an excellent article called Breaking the Barriers to Realize Security: Why Companies Should Embrace the Ethereum Public Chain, which he covered in detail in the article. If every company builds its own private chain, it will lead to chaos in the mountains. Today's B2B ecosystem is very complex. Imagine the innumerable private chains of the world intertwined to form a huge "spider web." This is not only cost-effective, but also not scalable. The starting point of the blockchain is to break down barriers instead of building more barriers. "One day, one of your big buyers called you to ask if you want to join their private chain. You promised. The next day you received a call from the wholesaler to ask you the same question. Then came the supplier, freight. Business, insurance company or even bank, and each company may have several private chains! Finally you have to invest a lot of time and cost to operate dozens of blockchains every day . If there are partners to let you join them at this time The private chain, you might say "Forget it, or fax me the order!" ”—Paul Brody (Ernst & Young) “Every time you connect two private chains through a system integrator, you have to pay a lot of money .” Advantage
Scalability: With the Ethereum public chain implementing fragmentation technology, this advantage is rapidly shrinking.
Privacy protection: At this stage, the classification of public chain / private chain is actually not very accurate. The Aztec , Zether, and Nightfall protocols (both based on the zk-snarks protocol) effectively provide a "private chain model" for the Ethereum public chain, allowing it to switch between the public and private chains. Therefore, a more accurate classification should be the alliance chain and the public chain.
By 2020, the label of the public chain/private chain will gradually disappear. The public and private chains will no longer be two opposing concepts. Instead, the concept of publicly traded/private transactions and confidential contracts/open contracts is changed, and the scope of these transactions and contracts varies according to specific needs, either bilaterally or multilaterally or even publicly. All in all, the private chain has two major drawbacks compared to the public chain. Not only that, but the two major advantages of the private chain are also rapidly disappearing. “Technology will evolve over time, so there will be a variety of solutions to solve existing problems. Ultimately, the public-chain platform will have the same performance, scalability and data privacy as the private chain, while at the same time ensuring security and Decentralized." Feature 1: Privacy protection (predictive machine and public chain privacy) Enigma founder Guy Zyskind once joked in his MIT graduation thesis that smart contracts can only become commercially valuable if they become "confidential contracts." He later proposed that zk-snarks and Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) are the most promising solutions. He said nothing wrong. What is zk-snarks ? Zk-snarks is a zero-knowledge proof mechanism (ZPK). So what is the zero-knowledge proof mechanism? In short: a zero-knowledge proof mechanism allows you to prove that you own certain information without revealing the content of the information. Vitalik Buterin explained this concept in detail from a technical point of view in an article published in 2017. Hackernoon also wrote an excellent article explaining the concept in an easy-to-understand way with the example of a five-year-old child and Halloween candy. What is the trusted execution environment? The trusted execution environment lets the code run on closed hardware, and 1 ) The guarantee result cannot be tampered with 2 ) Protecting absolute privacy, even hardware running code can't get confidential information. The most well-known trusted execution environment is Intel SGX. Chainlink has established a partnership with Intel SGX after acquiring Tom Crier. Ernst & Young released the Nightfall agreement on Github on May 31, 2019. A well-known accounting firm with a history of 100 years will choose to add privacy features to the public chain instead of developing a private chain. This is a problem. Since then, the community has been actively developing on this basis, not only to improve the code, but also to develop a plug-and-play Truffle Box for those who are not good at writing code. Blockchain communities and businesses generally rarely collaborate, so these collaborations fully demonstrate the popularity of Nightfall. Prior to this, two zk-snark-based Ethereum public chain privacy protocols were introduced, namely AZTEC (Consensys) and Zether (Stanford, JPMorgan Chase). An obvious trend is slowly taking shape. In the field of oracles, Chainlink uses both zero-knowledge proof and a trusted execution environment to complement each other. Trusted execution environments guarantee data privacy, even for nodes that cannot access data (this feature is critical for bank accounts and API keys). Chainlink is still trying to implement a trusted execution environment, and nodes can access data temporarily, so authentication services are also needed. Although the credible execution environment is almost 100% foolproof, in theory, a strong shield has a spear that can penetrate it. Therefore, the team is currently trying to run zk-snarks in a trusted execution environment (Thomas Hodges mentioned this in the 2019 Trufflecon Q&A session). The combination of the two can form a very robust and complete system. The attacker must find a way to strip all the layers of an onion at the same time to make any effective attack (and it is already difficult to peel off a layer of skin). “Chainlink combines a trusted execution environment with zero-knowledge proof to build what we call a defense-in-depth system, which means they provide all the tools needed for smart contract developers, including trusted execution environments, multiple nodes, and Data sources, fine margins, reputation systems, asymmetric encryption, zero-knowledge proofs, WASM, and OTP+RNG, these features allow smart contract developers to adjust the confidentiality and cost of contracts based on specific budget and security needs. Machine, Chainlink and its four major application scenarios》 In the future, zk-snarks may be upgraded to zk-starks (a fully transparent zero-knowledge proof mechanism) that protects the system from quantum computer attacks. And the best thing about zk-starks is that it's more scalable than zk-snarks. In other words, it can better protect privacy, and the cost of gas will not increase. If you want to learn more about zk-starks, you can read a popular science article written by Adam Luciano. Feature 2: Scalability (scalability of predictive machines and public chains) To understand this problem, we can make an analogy like this: A public chain is like a large enterprise, and every employee (ie, a node) must attend each meeting (ie, confirm each transaction). Imagine how inefficient this company is! Only customers who have a lot of money (ie gas fees) can get their requests to the forefront. And this is not the most serious problem. The most serious problem is that the more employees (ie nodes) who join the company, the harder it is for the company to function properly! In the end, the company not only failed to expand linearly, but also became smaller and smaller. Although this guarantees decentralization and security to the greatest extent, the price is completely abandoning scalability. There are various temporary fire fighting solutions, but no one solution can completely solve this "impossible triangle problem." For example, EOS uses the DPOS mechanism (share authorization certification mechanism), where only 21 super nodes (many of which are well-known nodes) are responsible for verifying all transactions. Sidechains (such as Bitcoin's Lightning Network and Ethereum's lightning network) guarantee scalability and decentralization at the expense of security. So how to use the fragmentation technology to solve this problem? Let's make another analogy: In reality, there is only one company that is not too much to ask everyone to attend all meetings, that is, small start-ups (that is, private chains that limit the number of nodes). In most cases, large companies divide employees into thousands of teams (ie, shards), and each team's principal (ie, the certifier) is responsible for reporting to the senior management (ie, the main chain). If people from different teams need to collaborate (and sometimes also), then they can collaborate by cross-shard receipts. If a new employee joins the company, the team can be re-segmented (ie re-sharding). This allows for linear expansion. In fact, the process of developing a start-up to a large enterprise is surprisingly similar to the process of Ethereum 1.0 developing into Ethereum 2.0. “The Ethereum 1.0 period is that several people who are alone are trying to build a world computer; and Ethereum 2.0 will really develop into a world computer.” Vitalik Buterin said in the first piece of the workshop. Since Ethereum was not originally built on the principle of fragmentation, it takes seven steps to achieve the goal (this is a bit like the word morphing solitaire game). The first step is planned for January 3, 2020. At the same time, developers can use many other blockchain platforms designed based on the fragmentation principle. Some platforms, including Zilliqa and Quarkchain, are already compatible with Chainlink. If you want to see more in-depth technical analysis of shards, check out an article by Ramy Zhang. In the field of oracles, Chainlink has the following two characteristics: 1 ) Use Schnorr threshold signatures to quickly reach consensus in a cost-effective manner. The next version of the chain only needs 16,000 gas. 2 ) We have previously discussed the need to use trusted execution environment hardware to ensure that nodes cannot access sensitive data. Since you have hardware in your hand, you can use it to do some actual computing work, so that you can properly reduce the amount of computation on the smart contract platform. "With the SGX system (Town Crier) and zero-knowledge proof technology, the oracle can be truly reliable and confidential, so the boundaries between the oracle and the smart contract are beginning to flow... Our long-term strategy... is to let The predictor becomes the key chain of computing resources used by most smart contracts. We believe that the way to achieve this goal is to perform chain operations in the oracle to meet various computing needs, and then send the results to the smart contract."Chainlink White Paper, Section 6.3 (26 pages) Of course, this “long-term strategy” has certain risks, unless Chainlink can implement a trusted execution environment and its service provider ecosystem can achieve a qualitative leap. However, the Chainlink team's vision is absolutely forward-looking: under-chain computing is a key factor in ensuring that blockchains are not dragged down by large amounts of IoT data. The Internet of Things has dramatically increased the current state of big data. At present, most of the data is still generated on the software side, and it is not real-time data, and most of the data in the future will be real-time data generated on the sensor side. One of the big drawbacks of real-time data is that it increases storage pressure. For example, Coughlin Associates expects an unmanned car to generate 1G of data per second. This means that the same car will produce 3.6T data per hour! The only viable solution is to do real-time analysis of the data, rather than storing the data first. In the Global Cloud Index: 2016-2021 Forecast and Methodology White Paper, Cisco predicts that more than 90% of data in 2021 will be analyzed in real time without storage. That is to say, the essence of data is that it can only exist in just one instant. The nature of the blockchain is not to be modified, so the two are as incompatible as water and oil. The solution is to analyze the raw data under the chain, extract the meaningful results and send them to the blockchain. The combination of fragmentation technology and trusted execution environment forms a new computing architecture, similar to the cloud computing-fog computing-edge computing architecture. It should be noted here that it is good to improve computing power, but this is not the main purpose of the blockchain. The fundamental purpose of the blockchain is not to reduce the original cost of computing and data storage. After all, technology giants such as Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Salesforce, Tencent, Alibaba, and Dropbox have built world-class cloud services. The centralized server wins high computational efficiency (but the blockchain will greatly improve the computational efficiency through fragmentation technology, and will catch up with it one day). The value of the blockchain is to reduce the cost of building trust. Nick Szabo calls it "social scalability" (this is a relative concept to the "operational" scalability we have been talking about). Vitalik Buterin also made it clear that the meaning of smart contracts is to accept small arithmetic delay penalties in exchange for a substantial reduction in "social costs." Alex Coventry of the Chainlink team once raised the question: "We have missed many opportunities for cooperation and reciprocity because we can't confirm whether the other party will fulfill the promise?" Is there any potential for data storage projects like Siacoin and IPFS? What about decentralized computing projects like SONM and Golem? Siacoin 's core value proposition is not that its computing efficiency is higher than traditional cloud services. The cost of computing is required to split, repeat, and reassemble data. And companies are more capable of buying the latest and greatest hardware than individuals. Siacoin's core value proposition is to process data in an Airbnb-like mode, so management fees will be lower than traditional models. It also generates additional social value, such as flood control, privacy and security, and anti-censorship. The same is true of Golem and SONM. Even with the most efficient protocol, it is inevitable that a small amount of delay will be imposed and fined to coordinate the hardware of different geographical locations. Therefore, under the condition that all other conditions are equal, the centralized hardware still has the advantage of faster computing speed. However, the core value proposition of the above project is to use the Airbnb-like model to reduce management costs. We must strictly distinguish between "social scalability" and "operational scalability", and the two cannot be confused. I will explain these two concepts in detail when I discuss "Magic Bus and Lightweight Library" later. Feature 3: Compatible with legal currency Most mainstream companies do not regard cryptocurrencies as "real currencies." In addition, even if someone wants to use cryptocurrency for trading, it is very difficult to actually operate because of its high price volatility. I discussed the “price volatility problem” in detail in Chapters 8 and 9 of the previous article. These problems do not completely erase the existence value of cryptocurrencies, because cryptocurrencies also have many advantages that legal currency does not have. I am just emphasizing what we need to know more about the comfort zone of mainstream companies. Chainlink acts as a universal API connector that triggers open banking payments. Chainlink is fully compliant with ISO 20022 and has established a long-term partnership with SWIFT (it is worth mentioning that SWIFT has not been updated for a long time and hopes to be updated after the SIBOS 2019 conference). PSD2 will take effect on September 14, 2019. All banks in the EU will all comply with this new regulation by then. In other words, the bank must put all account data in the "front end" and can be called through the API. The approved third party (ie, the Chainlink node) can trigger the payment directly without the payment service provider. Although the United States and Japan have not adopted similar laws, many banks still spontaneously promote the development of open banks. Banks open APIs to third-party developers to create new revenue streams and customer experiences that ultimately increase profitability. In addition, this will allow banks to better respond to competitors in the mobile payment and financial technology sectors in an APP-centric economic model. As this open banking revolution continues, Chainlink will connect smart contracts with the world's major currencies (US dollar, euro, yen, etc.). Only one external adapter is required to connect to the authenticated API. From a programming perspective, it is relatively simple to allow everyone in the community to contribute code to the code base (and thus achieve scalability). Chainlink has released adapters for PayPal and Mister Tango (European version of PayPal). Feature 4: Data connection with the chain Chainlink has been working on solving the "prophecy problem" and successfully succeeded on the main online line on May 30, 2019. Chainlink has made many achievements in just a few months. Provable (formerly Oraclize) was successfully used on the Chainlink node and finally settled the debate about whether the predictor should be centralized or decentralized. Synthetic Ether lost 37 million Ethercoins in a hack because it did not connect to Chainlink. Fortunately, the money was finally recovered and did not cause any loss. This lesson illustrates the importance of decentralized oracles. In addition, both Oracle and Google have partnered with Chainlink to monetize their API data and create a virtuous circle to capture the market opportunities that Facebook missed. There are new nodes coming online every week, and the network activity has been very high. The Chainlink team maintains a list of certified nodes in the documentation and Twitter releases. Twitter user CryptoSponge also set up a new development for the Tableau push update Chainlink team: Regarding the importance of the current stage in the history of blockchain development, Brad Huston summed it up very brilliantly: "The biggest problem with cryptocurrencies is to build bridges between cryptocurrencies, fiat currencies and big data. Chainlink is very beautifully narrowing the distance between the three. Now it can even be said: 'The bridge has been built.'" Magic bus and lightweight library Let's summarize what we discussed earlier. The real purpose of the blockchain is to reduce the cost of building trust and achieve "social scalability." Therefore, according to this logic, the main application scenarios of platforms such as Ethereum 2.0 and Zilliqa should be in the B2B field. I quote a sentence I wrote in a previous article: “My conclusion is: If the smart contract is successful, it will also succeed in the B2B field first.” The private chain itself is self-contradictory and destined to fail. It has led to the phenomenon of occupying the hills, thus increasing the social cost, which is in opposition to B2B itself, and ultimately it is self-restraint. ” Before the emergence of fragmentation technology, even simple games (ie, etheric cats) could not be smoothly run on the public chain, let alone dealing with complex B2B contracts and even changing commercial DNA. With the sharding technology, everything is ready. Despite this, we can't use Ethereum 2.0 as an all-powerful platform. Just now we said that although it is a good thing to speed up the calculation, this is not the real purpose of Ethereum 2.0. And before we also said that due to the irreversible modification of the blockchain, it is not good to deal with a large number of fleeting real-time data of the Internet of Things. In other words, we must be soberly aware that Ethereum 2.0 will not replace traditional web 2.0. Instead, we should make better use of the real advantages of Ethereum 2.0: “There is a new concept now, that is to think of the Ethereum main network as a global bus... We use the Ethereum 2.0 main network to treat various business resources as a working group on Slack: it can be easily built and integrated. And restructuring. The SAP inventory management system in your company, the dealer's JD Edwards ERP system, and the financial technology partner's tall blockchain system can seamlessly interface, eliminating the need to develop an infrastructure specifically for each partner." - John Wolper describes his ideal "magic bus" Ethereum 2.0 should be an integration center, not a data center or computing center. It should be a library built specifically to store B2B contract terms (to be honest, even with fragmentation technology, the amount of data is large enough). We should not expect Ethereum 2.0 to be an all-powerful platform, but rather develop it into a "lightweight library." If we reorder the pyramid model just now, the architecture of the magic bus is obvious: Of course, the positional relationship in the above model is not static. With the development of 5G technology, edge computing and IoT sensors, they may bypass the cloud to directly interact (or even bypass the fog end). If the collaboration between Iotex and Chainlink is successful, then the edge can interact directly with the trusted execution environment. Time will tell if Airbnb's shared data storage and computing model can make management costs lower than the current mainstream Web 2.0 model. Time will also prove whether the market really needs anti-censorship, anti-tampering, security protection and privacy protection. Do users really care about these social values and are willing to pay for them? Do they think these are just the icing on the cake or the most fundamental value? in conclusion Whether it is the battle between web2.0 and web3.0 or the battle between cryptocurrency and legal currency, one thing is beyond doubt: We have reached the tipping point, and the era of smart contracts with commercial value has arrived. In fact, the only problem at the moment is the time issue, and the main roadblocks have been basically cleared.
When will Ethereum 2.0 finish these 7 stages and be officially released?
When will Chainlink use a trusted execution environment on a large scale? If the cooperation between Intel SGX and Town Crier fails, what alternative plans are there? Will Chainlink communicate with other blockchain teams that plan to use a trusted execution environment (such as Dawn Song's Oasis Labs)?
At present, the main technical problems in the ecosystem have been solved, and now it is only necessary to recruit a group of enthusiastic developers to do the work of “connecting the line”. Digital currency has changed commercial DNA, and the future is full of possibilities. The only thing that hinders us now is our own imagination. The future is infinitely imaginative, and the future will be the world of developers. Dapps is already overwhelming. There is no doubt that we have found the ultimate nirvana. This text was translated from Chinese, open following in Chrome and translate to see all images: https://bihu.com/article/1242138347
A basic break even (BE) cost for one unit is therefore given by setting the difference between income and electricity and acquisition costs to zero such that . 0.24 BTC * BE -USD 680 -USD 780 -USD ... Break Even Calculator. A simple break even calculator to help you plan and budget your proposal or new business idea. You will need fixed cost, variable cost and unit price to perform your breakeven analysis. The break even point is the number of sales you need to make zero profit and zero loss. Also included is the margin percentage and markup ... Profits in cryptos: Easy come, maybe; easy go, certainly. News came this week that bitcoin mining just ain’t what it used to be. More to the point: Like any commodity, there’s a break-even ... 💡 hier eine Beispielrechnung von Anfang März 2018 für Bitcoin (z.B.) ... Die Zeit als zu berücksichtigender Faktor in der Berechnung von Wirtschaftlichkeit und Break-Even. Im Grunde stellt sie das Maß aller Faktoren her. Strom wird nach kW pro Stunde berechnet, die Hashrate pro Sekunde, die Hardware nach ihrer tatsächlichen Laufzeit bzw. Arbeitszeit und der Wert eines Coins hat sich in ... Bitcoin and Altcoins Price Analysis: Breakout Levels to Watch. By Big Pippin. September 9, 2020 5:19 AM UTC in Technical Analysis. Partner Center Find a Broker. I’m seeing a lot of consolidation for bitcoin and its peers lately. Better keep tabs on these breakout levels on the short-term charts! ETH is at the bottom of the crypto pile with a 23.21% drop in price, followed by LTC which is ...
Break Even Calculator Crypto Academy Bitcoin and ...
This video shows how to set up a break even analysis and produce a graph using Excel. For videos about how to calculate the Break even point and draw the gra... Live Bitcoin Liquidation Watch: June 1 2020 IntroToCryptos 217 watching Live now 🔴 2 Easy Steps: Break Even Analysis for Cost Volume Profit Analysis Tutorial - Duration: 7:34. Altrady - Crypto Academy brings you a step by step process to set up your Altrady crypto trading experience! Altrady, is your choice to trade cryptocurrency ... Fit für die Prüfung? www.heidicker.de Hinweise zur Break even Analyse. Launching a business can be exhilarating and terrifying. In the early days of getting your company off the ground, there is a period of time before you will ...