(London, UK – July 24, 2014) Inside Bitcoins, the leading international conference and expo exploring the business opportunities and threats posed by the growth of cryptocurrencies, debuts in London, 15-16 September, 2014.
Taking place at the Grange St. Pauls Hotel, on the doorstep of the City of London, Inside Bitcoins already has attendees from over fifteen countries registered and is expected to be the largest virtual currency conference in Europe to date. Exhibitors for the event confirmed so far are Butterfly Labs, btc.sx, CoinSimple, Cryptopay, Jumio, meXBT, and Seedcoin.
20+ future-forging sessions, delivered by 40+ Bitcoin visionaries with 400+ Bitcoin enthusiasts will set a new standard for conferences on this topic in the UK. Current speakers include: Gavin Wood, CTO, Ethereum; Steve Waterhouse, Partner, Pantera Capital; Hakim Mamoni, Co-Founder and CTO, Seedcoin; Nicolas Cary, CEO, Blockchain.info; Will O’Brien, CEO & Co-Founder, BitGo. The full agenda and roster of speakers is available at http://insidebitcoins.co.uk/london2014/agenda/
The programme is designed to provide an understanding of where the crypto currency industry is today and the associated business opportunities and threats presented to FinTech and infrastructure start-ups and investors looking to capitalise on the rise of a new industry and major corporations seeking innovative solutions providing cost-savings and customer acquisition opportunities.
London is only one of the participating international cities in the Inside Bitcoins world tour, along with Berlin, Hong Kong, Las Vegas, Melbourne, New York City, Seoul, Singapore and Tel Aviv.
Conference delegates can take advantage of reduced pricing until July 31st, with full pricing and registration details
For complete information on Inside Bitcoins Conference & Expo, visit: http://insidebitcoins.co.uk
Companies interested in sponsoring or exhibiting should contact [email protected]
Inside Bitcoins London is produced by Mediabistro Inc. and Rising Media Ltd.
Everyone knows that when you give your assets to someone else, they always keep them safe. If this is true for individuals, it is certainly true for businesses.
Custodians always tell the truth and manage funds properly. They won't have any interest in taking the assets as an exchange operator would. Auditors tell the truth and can't be misled. That's because organizations that are regulated are incapable of lying and don't make mistakes.
First, some background. Here is a summary of how custodians make us more secure:
Previously, we might give Alice our crypto assets to hold. There were risks:
- Alice might take the assets and disappear.
- Alice might spend the assets and pretend that she still has them (fractional model).
- Alice might store the assets insecurely and they'll get stolen.
- Alice might give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force.
- Alice might lose access to the assets.
But "no worries", Alice has a custodian named Bob. Bob is dressed in a nice suit. He knows some politicians. And he drives a Porsche. "So you have nothing to worry about!". And look at all the benefits we get:
- Alice can't take the assets and disappear (unless she asks Bob or never gives them to Bob).
- Alice can't spend the assets and pretend that she still has them. (Unless she didn't give them to Bob or asks him for them.)
- Alice can't store the assets insecurely so they get stolen. (After all - she doesn't have any control over the withdrawal process from any of Bob's systems, right?)
- Alice can't give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force. (Bob will stop her, right Bob?)
- Alice can't lose access to the funds. (She'll always be present, sane, and remember all secrets, right?)
See - all problems are solved! All we have to worry about now is:
- Bob might take the assets and disappear.
- Bob might spend the assets and pretend that he still has them (fractional model).
- Bob might store the assets insecurely and they'll get stolen.
- Bob might give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force.
- Bob might lose access to the assets.
It's pretty simple. Before we had to trust Alice. Now we only have to trust Alice, Bob, and all the ways in which they communicate. Just think of how much more secure we are!
"On top of that", Bob assures us, "we're using a special wallet structure". Bob shows Alice a diagram. "We've broken the balance up and store it in lots of smaller wallets. That way", he assures her, "a thief can't take it all at once". And he points to a historic case where a large sum was taken "because it was stored in a single wallet... how stupid".
"Very early on, we used to have all the crypto in one wallet", he said, "and then one Christmas a hacker came and took it all. We call him the Grinch. Now we individually wrap each crypto and stick it under a binary search tree. The Grinch has never been back since."
"As well", Bob continues, "even if someone were to get in, we've got insurance. It covers all thefts and even coercion, collusion, and misplaced keys - only subject to the policy terms and conditions." And with that, he pulls out a phone-book sized contract and slams it on the desk with a thud. "Yep", he continues, "we're paying top dollar for one of the best policies in the country!"
"Can I read it?' Alice asks. "Sure," Bob says, "just as soon as our legal team is done with it. They're almost through the first chapter." He pauses, then continues. "And can you believe that sales guy Mike? He has the same year Porsche as me. I mean, what are the odds?"
"Do you use multi-sig?", Alice asks. "Absolutely!" Bob replies. "All our engineers are fully trained in multi-sig. Whenever we want to set up a new wallet, we generate 2 separate keys in an air-gapped process and store them in this proprietary system here. Look, it even requires the biometric signature from one of our team members to initiate any withdrawal." He demonstrates by pressing his thumb into the display. "We use a third-party cloud validation API to match the thumbprint and authorize each withdrawal. The keys are also backed up daily to an off-site third-party."
"Wow that's really impressive," Alice says, "but what if we need access for a withdrawal outside of office hours?" "Well that's no issue", Bob says, "just send us an email, call, or text message and we always have someone on staff to help out. Just another part of our strong commitment to all our customers!"
"What about Proof of Reserve?", Alice asks. "Of course", Bob replies, "though rather than publish any blockchain addresses or signed transaction, for privacy we just do a SHA256 refactoring of the inverse hash modulus for each UTXO nonce and combine the smart contract coefficient consensus in our hyperledger lightning node. But it's really simple to use." He pushes a button and a large green checkmark appears on a screen. "See - the algorithm ran through and reserves are proven."
"Wow", Alice says, "you really know your stuff! And that is easy to use! What about fiat balances?" "Yeah, we have an auditor too", Bob replies, "Been using him for a long time so we have quite a strong relationship going! We have special books we give him every year and he's very efficient! Checks the fiat, crypto, and everything all at once!"
"We used to have a nice offline multi-sig setup we've been using without issue for the past 5 years, but I think we'll move all our funds over to your facility," Alice says. "Awesome", Bob replies, "Thanks so much! This is perfect timing too - my Porsche got a dent on it this morning. We have the paperwork right over here." "Great!", Alice replies.
And with that, Alice gets out her pen and Bob gets the contract. "Don't worry", he says, "you can take your crypto-assets back anytime you like - just subject to our cancellation policy. Our annual management fees are also super low and we don't adjust them often".
How many holes have to exist for your funds to get stolen? Just one.
Why are we taking a powerful offline multi-sig setup, widely used globally in hundreds of different/lacking regulatory environments with 0 breaches to date, and circumventing it by a demonstrably weak third party layer? And paying a great expense to do so?
If you go through the list of breaches in the past 2 years to highly credible organizations
, you go through the list of major corporate frauds (only the ones we know about)
, you go through the list of all the times platforms have lost funds
, you go through the list of times and ways that people have lost their crypto from identity theft, hot wallet exploits, extortion, etc... and then you go through this custodian with a fine-tooth comb and truly believe they have value to add far beyond what you could, sticking your funds in a wallet (or set of wallets) they control exclusively is the absolute worst possible way to take advantage of that security.
The best way to add security for crypto-assets is to make a stronger multi-sig. With one custodian, what you are doing is giving them your cryptocurrency and hoping they're honest, competent, and flawlessly secure. It's no different than storing it on a really secure exchange. Maybe the insurance will cover you. Didn't work for Bitpay in 2015. Didn't work for Yapizon in 2017. Insurance has never paid a claim in the entire history of cryptocurrency. But maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe your exact scenario will buck the trend and be what they're willing to cover. After the large deductible and hopefully without a long and expensive court battle.
And you want to advertise this increase in risk, the lapse of judgement, an accident waiting to happen, as though it's some kind of benefit to customers ("Free institutional-grade storage for your digital assets.")? And then some people are writing to the OSC that custodians should be mandatory for all funds on every exchange platform? That this somehow will make Canadians as a whole more secure or better protected compared with standard air-gapped multi-sig? On what planet?
Most of the problems in Canada stemmed from one thing - a lack of transparency. If Canadians had known what a joke Quadriga was - it wouldn't have grown to lose $400m from hard-working Canadians from coast to coast to coast. And Gerald Cotten would be in jail, not wherever he is now (at best, rotting peacefully). EZ-BTC and mister Dave Smilie would have been a tiny little scam to his friends, not a multi-million dollar fraud. Einstein would have got their act together or been shut down BEFORE losing millions and millions more in people's funds generously donated to criminals. MapleChange wouldn't have even been a thing. And maybe we'd know a little more about CoinTradeNewNote - like how much was lost in there. Almost all of the major losses with cryptocurrency exchanges involve deception with unbacked funds.
So it's great to see transparency reports from BitBuy and ShakePay where someone independently verified the backing. The only thing we don't have is:
- ANY CERTAINTY BALANCES WEREN'T EXCLUDED. Quadriga's largest account was $70m. 80% of funds are in 20% of accounts (Pareto principle). All it takes is excluding a few really large accounts - and nobody's the wiser. A fractional platform can easily pass any audit this way.
- ANY VISIBILITY WHATSOEVER INTO THE CUSTODIANS. BitBuy put out their report before moving all the funds to their custodian and ShakePay apparently can't even tell us who the custodian is. That's pretty important considering that basically all of the funds are now stored there.
- ANY IDEA ABOUT THE OTHER EXCHANGES. In order for this to be effective, it has to be the norm. It needs to be "unusual" not to know. If obscurity is the norm, then it's super easy for people like Gerald Cotten and Dave Smilie to blend right in.
It's not complicated to validate cryptocurrency assets. They need to exist, they need to be spendable, and they need to cover the total balances. There are plenty of credible people and firms across the country that have the capacity to reasonably perform this validation. Having more frequent checks by different, independent, parties who publish transparent reports is far more valuable than an annual check by a single "more credible/official" party who does the exact same basic checks and may or may not publish anything. Here's an example set of requirements that could be mandated:
- First report within 1 month of launching, another within 3 months, and further reports at minimum every 6 months thereafter.
- No auditor can be repeated within a 12 month period.
- All reports must be public, identifying the auditor and the full methodology used.
- All auditors must be independent of the firm being audited with no conflict of interest.
- Reports must include the percentage of each asset backed, and how it's backed.
- The auditor publishes a hash list, which lists a hash of each customer's information and balances that were included. Hash is one-way encryption so privacy is fully preserved. Every customer can use this to have 100% confidence they were included.
- If we want more extensive requirements on audits, these should scale upward based on the total assets at risk on the platform, and whether the platform has loaned their assets out.
There are ways to structure audits such that neither crypto assets nor customer information are ever put at risk, and both can still be properly validated and publicly verifiable. There are also ways to structure audits such that they are completely reasonable for small platforms and don't inhibit innovation in any way. By making the process as reasonable as possible, we can completely eliminate any reason/excuse that an honest platform would have for not being audited. That is arguable far more important than any incremental improvement we might get from mandating "the best of the best" accountants. Right now we have nothing mandated and tons of Canadians using offshore exchanges with no oversight whatsoever.
Transparency does not prove crypto assets are safe. CoinTradeNewNote, Flexcoin ($600k), and Canadian Bitcoins ($100k) are examples where crypto-assets were breached from platforms in Canada. All of them were online wallets and used no multi-sig as far as any records show. This is consistent with what we see globally - air-gapped multi-sig wallets have an impeccable record, while other schemes tend to suffer breach after breach. We don't actually know how much CoinTrader lost because there was no visibility. Rather than publishing details of what happened, the co-founder of CoinTrader silently moved on to found another platform - the "most trusted way to buy and sell crypto" - a site that has no information whatsoever (that I could find) on the storage practices and a FAQ advising that “[t]rading cryptocurrency is completely safe” and that having your own wallet is “entirely up to you! You can certainly keep cryptocurrency, or fiat, or both, on the app.” Doesn't sound like much was learned here, which is really sad to see.
It's not that complicated or unreasonable to set up a proper hardware wallet. Multi-sig can be learned in a single course. Something the equivalent complexity of a driver's license test could prevent all the cold storage exploits we've seen to date - even globally. Platform operators have a key advantage in detecting and preventing fraud - they know their customers far better than any custodian ever would. The best job that custodians can do is to find high integrity individuals and train them to form even better wallet signatories. Rather than mandating that all platforms expose themselves to arbitrary third party risks, regulations should center around ensuring that all signatories are background-checked, properly trained, and using proper procedures. We also need to make sure that signatories are empowered with rights and responsibilities to reject and report fraud. They need to know that they can safely challenge and delay a transaction - even if it turns out they made a mistake. We need to have an environment where mistakes are brought to the surface and dealt with. Not one where firms and people feel the need to hide what happened. In addition to a knowledge-based test, an auditor can privately interview each signatory to make sure they're not in coercive situations, and we should make sure they can freely and anonymously report any issues without threat of retaliation.
A proper multi-sig has each signature held by a separate person and is governed by policies and mutual decisions instead of a hierarchy. It includes at least one redundant signature. For best results, 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7.
History has demonstrated over and over again the risk of hot wallets even to highly credible organizations. Nonetheless, many platforms have hot wallets for convenience. While such losses are generally compensated by platforms without issue (for example Poloniex, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Gatecoin, Coincheck, Bithumb, Zaif, CoinBene, Binance, Bitrue, Bitpoint, Upbit, VinDAX, and now KuCoin), the public tends to focus more on cases that didn't end well. Regardless of what systems are employed, there is always some level of risk. For that reason, most members of the public would prefer to see third party insurance.
Rather than trying to convince third party profit-seekers to provide comprehensive insurance and then relying on an expensive and slow legal system to enforce against whatever legal loopholes they manage to find each and every time something goes wrong, insurance could be run through multiple exchange operators and regulators, with the shared interest of having a reputable industry, keeping costs down, and taking care of Canadians. For example, a 4 of 7 multi-sig insurance fund held between 5 independent exchange operators and 2 regulatory bodies. All Canadian exchanges could pay premiums at a set rate based on their needed coverage, with a higher price paid for hot wallet coverage (anything not an air-gapped multi-sig cold wallet). Such a model would be much cheaper to manage, offer better coverage, and be much more reliable to payout when needed. The kind of coverage you could have under this model is unheard of. You could even create something like the CDIC to protect Canadians who get their trading accounts hacked if they can sufficiently prove the loss is legitimate. In cases of fraud, gross negligence, or insolvency, the fund can be used to pay affected users directly (utilizing the last transparent balance report in the worst case), something which private insurance would never touch. While it's recommended to have official policies for coverage, a model where members vote would fully cover edge cases. (Could be similar to the Supreme Court where justices vote based on case law.)
Such a model could fully protect all Canadians across all platforms. You can have a fiat coverage governed by legal agreements, and crypto-asset coverage governed by both multi-sig and legal agreements. It could be practical, affordable, and inclusive.
Now, we are at a crossroads. We can happily give up our freedom, our innovation, and our money. We can pay hefty expenses to auditors, lawyers, and regulators year after year (and make no mistake - this cost will grow to many millions or even billions as the industry grows - and it will be borne by all Canadians on every platform because platforms are not going to eat up these costs at a loss). We can make it nearly impossible for any new platform to enter the marketplace, forcing Canadians to use the same stagnant platforms year after year. We can centralize and consolidate the entire industry into 2 or 3 big players and have everyone else fail (possibly to heavy losses of users of those platforms). And when a flawed security model doesn't work and gets breached, we can make it even more complicated with even more people in suits making big money doing the job that blockchain was supposed to do in the first place. We can build a system which is so intertwined and dependent on big government, traditional finance, and central bankers that it's future depends entirely on that of the fiat system, of fractional banking, and of government bail-outs. If we choose this path, as history has shown us over and over again, we can not go back, save for revolution. Our children and grandchildren will still be paying the consequences of what we decided today.
Or, we can find solutions that work. We can maintain an open and innovative environment while making the adjustments we need to make to fully protect Canadian investors and cryptocurrency users, giving easy and affordable access to cryptocurrency for all Canadians on the platform of their choice, and creating an environment in which entrepreneurs and problem solvers can bring those solutions forward easily. None of the above precludes innovation in any way, or adds any unreasonable cost - and these three policies would demonstrably eliminate or resolve all 109 historic cases as studied here
- that's every single case researched so far going back to 2011. It includes every loss that was studied so far not just in Canada but globally as well.
Unfortunately, finding answers is the least challenging part. Far more challenging is to get platform operators and regulators to agree on anything. My last post
got no response whatsoever, and while the OSC has told me they're happy for industry feedback, I believe my opinion alone is fairly meaningless. This takes the whole community working together to solve. So please let me know your thoughts. Please take the time to upvote and share this with people. Please - let's get this solved and not leave it up to other people to do.
Facts/background/sources (skip if you like):
- The inspiration for the paragraph about splitting wallets was an actual quote from a Canadian company providing custodial services in response to the OSC consultation paper: "We believe that it will be in the in best interests of investors to prohibit pooled crypto assets or ‘floats’. Most Platforms pool assets, citing reasons of practicality and expense. The recent hack of the world’s largest Platform – Binance – demonstrates the vulnerability of participants’ assets when such concessions are made. In this instance, the Platform’s entire hot wallet of Bitcoins, worth over $40 million, was stolen, facilitated in part by the pooling of client crypto assets." "the maintenance of participants (and Platform) crypto assets across multiple wallets distributes the related risk and responsibility of security - reducing the amount of insurance coverage required and making insurance coverage more readily obtainable". For the record, their reply also said nothing whatsoever about multi-sig or offline storage.
- In addition to the fact that the $40m hack represented only one "hot wallet" of Binance, and they actually had the vast majority of assets in other wallets (including mostly cold wallets), multiple real cases have clearly demonstrated that risk is still present with multiple wallets. Bitfinex, VinDAX, Bithumb, Altsbit, BitPoint, Cryptopia, and just recently KuCoin all had multiple wallets breached all at the same time, and may represent a significantly larger impact on customers than the Binance breach which was fully covered by Binance. To represent that simply having multiple separate wallets under the same security scheme is a comprehensive way to reduce risk is just not true.
- Private insurance has historically never covered a single loss in the cryptocurrency space (at least, not one that I was able to find), and there are notable cases where massive losses were not covered by insurance. Bitpay in 2015 and Yapizon in 2017 both had insurance policies that didn't pay out during the breach, even after a lengthly court process. The same insurance that ShakePay is presently using (and announced to much fanfare) was describe by their CEO himself as covering “physical theft of the media where the private keys are held,” which is something that has never historically happened. As was said with regard to the same policy in 2018 - “I don’t find it surprising that Lloyd’s is in this space,” said Johnson, adding that to his mind the challenge for everybody is figuring out how to structure these policies so that they are actually protective. “You can create an insurance policy that protects no one – you know there are so many caveats to the policy that it’s not super protective.”
- The most profitable policy for a private insurance company is one with the most expensive premiums that they never have to pay a claim on. They have no inherent incentive to take care of people who lost funds. It's "cheaper" to take the reputational hit and fight the claim in court. The more money at stake, the more the insurance provider is incentivized to avoid payout. They're not going to insure the assets unless they have reasonable certainty to make a profit by doing so, and they're not going to pay out a massive sum unless it's legally forced. Private insurance is always structured to be maximally profitable to the insurance provider.
- The circumvention of multi-sig was a key factor in the massive Bitfinex hack of over $60m of bitcoin, which today still sits being slowly used and is worth over $3b. While Bitfinex used a qualified custodian Bitgo, which was and still is active and one of the industry leaders of custodians, and they set up 2 of 3 multi-sig wallets, the entire system was routed through Bitfinex, such that Bitfinex customers could initiate the withdrawals in a "hot" fashion. This feature was also a hit with the hacker. The multi-sig was fully circumvented.
- Bitpay in 2015 was another example of a breach that stole 5,000 bitcoins. This happened not through the exploit of any system in Bitpay, but because the CEO of a company they worked with got their computer hacked and the hackers were able to request multiple bitcoin purchases, which Bitpay honoured because they came from the customer's computer legitimately. Impersonation is a very common tactic used by fraudsters, and methods get more extreme all the time.
- A notable case in Canada was the Canadian Bitcoins exploit. Funds were stored on a server in a Rogers Data Center, and the attendee was successfully convinced to reboot the server "in safe mode" with a simple phone call, thus bypassing the extensive security and enabling the theft.
- Over $200m has been stolen impersonating users of cryptocurrency platforms by one group alone. Here's a list of 10 social engineering attacks against corporate companies. Here's an even larger case. While verification methods are improving, so are methods of identity theft and social engineering. We now have sim swapping and deep fake videos to contend with. Hackers have massive database sets of personal information they can utilize. As the sums at stake increase, so to will the level of effort criminals are willing to undertake. Obscurity for an insecure system will only postpone an attack until the "jackpot" is large enough.
- The very nature of custodians circumvents multi-sig. This is because custodians are not just having to secure the assets against some sort of physical breach but against any form of social engineering, modification of orders, fraudulent withdrawal attempts, etc... If the security practices of signatories in a multi-sig arrangement are such that the breach risk of one signatory is 1 in 100, the requirement of 3 independent signatures makes the risk of theft 1 in 1,000,000. Since hackers tend to exploit the weakest link, a comparable custodian has to make the entry and exit points of their platform 10,000 times more secure than one of those signatories to provide equivalent protection. And if the signatories beef up their security by only 10x, the risk is now 1 in 1,000,000,000. The custodian has to be 1,000,000 times more secure. The larger and more complex a system is, the more potential vulnerabilities exist in it, and the fewer people can understand how the system works when performing upgrades. Even if a system is completely secure today, one has to also consider how that system might evolve over time or work with different members.
- By contrast, offline multi-signature solutions have an extremely solid record, and in the entire history of cryptocurrency exchange incidents which I've studied (listed here), there has only been one incident (796 exchange in 2015) involving an offline multi-signature wallet. It happened because the customer's bitcoin address was modified by hackers, and the amount that was stolen ($230k) was immediately covered by the exchange operators. Basically, the platform operators were tricked into sending a legitimate withdrawal request to the wrong address because hackers exploited their platform to change that address. Such an issue would not be prevented in any way by the use of a custodian, as that custodian has no oversight whatsoever to the exchange platform. It's practical for all exchange operators to test large withdrawal transactions as a general policy, regardless of what model is used, and general best practice is to diagnose and fix such an exploit as soon as it occurs.
- False promises on the backing of funds played a huge role in the downfall of Quadriga, and it's been exposed over and over again (MyCoin, PlusToken, Bitsane, Bitmarket, EZBTC, IDAX). Even today, customers have extremely limited certainty on whether their funds in exchanges are actually being backed or how they're being backed. While this issue is not unique to cryptocurrency exchanges, the complexity of the technology and the lack of any regulation or standards makes problems more widespread, and there is no "central bank" to come to the rescue as in the 2008 financial crisis or during the great depression when "9,000 banks failed".
- In addition to fraudulent operations, the industry is full of cases where operators have suffered breaches and not reported them. Most recently, Einstein was the largest case in Canada, where ongoing breaches and fraud were perpetrated against the platform for multiple years and nobody found out until the platform collapsed completely. While fraud and breaches suck to deal with, they suck even more when not dealt with. Lack of visibility played a role in the largest downfalls of Mt. Gox, Cryptsy, and Bitgrail. In some cases, platforms are alleged to have suffered a hack and keep operating without admitting it at all, such as CoinBene.
- It surprises some to learn that a cryptographic solution has already existed since 2013, and gained widespread support in 2014 after Mt. Gox. Proof of Reserves is a full cryptographic proof that allows any customer using an exchange to have complete certainty that their crypto-assets are fully backed by the platform in real-time. This is accomplished by proving that assets exist on the blockchain, are spendable, and fully cover customer deposits. It does not prove safety of assets or backing of fiat assets.
- If we didn't care about privacy at all, a platform could publish their wallet addresses, sign a partial transaction, and put the full list of customer information and balances out publicly. Customers can each check that they are on the list, that the balances are accurate, that the total adds up, and that it's backed and spendable on the blockchain. Platforms who exclude any customer take a risk because that customer can easily check and see they were excluded. So together with all customers checking, this forms a full proof of backing of all crypto assets.
- However, obviously customers care about their private information being published. Therefore, a hash of the information can be provided instead. Hash is one-way encryption. The hash allows the customer to validate inclusion (by hashing their own known information), while anyone looking at the list of hashes cannot determine the private information of any other user. All other parts of the scheme remain fully intact. A model like this is in use on the exchange CoinFloor in the UK.
- A Merkle tree can provide even greater privacy. Instead of a list of balances, the balances are arranged into a binary tree. A customer starts from their node, and works their way to the top of the tree. For example, they know they have 5 BTC, they plus 1 other customer hold 7 BTC, they plus 2-3 other customers hold 17 BTC, etc... until they reach the root where all the BTC are represented. Thus, there is no way to find the balances of other individual customers aside from one unidentified customer in this case.
- Proposals such as this had the backing of leaders in the community including Nic Carter, Greg Maxwell, and Zak Wilcox. Substantial and significant effort started back in 2013, with massive popularity in 2014. But what became of that effort? Very little. Exchange operators continue to refuse to give visibility. Despite the fact this information can often be obtained through trivial blockchain analysis, no Canadian platform has ever provided any wallet addresses publicly. As described by the CEO of Newton "For us to implement some kind of realtime Proof of Reserves solution, which I'm not opposed to, it would have to ... Preserve our users' privacy, as well as our own. Some kind of zero-knowledge proof". Kraken describes here in more detail why they haven't implemented such a scheme. According to professor Eli Ben-Sasson, when he spoke with exchanges, none were interested in implementing Proof of Reserves.
- And yet, Kraken's places their reasoning on a page called "Proof of Reserves". More recently, both BitBuy and ShakePay have released reports titled "Proof of Reserves and Security Audit". Both reports contain disclaimers against being audits. Both reports trust the customer list provided by the platform, leaving the open possibility that multiple large accounts could have been excluded from the process. Proof of Reserves is a blockchain validation where customers see the wallets on the blockchain. The report from Kraken is 5 years old, but they leave it described as though it was just done a few weeks ago. And look at what they expect customers to do for validation. When firms represent something being "Proof of Reserve" when it's not, this is like a farmer growing fruit with pesticides and selling it in a farmers market as organic produce - except that these are people's hard-earned life savings at risk here. Platforms are misrepresenting the level of visibility in place and deceiving the public by their misuse of this term. They haven't proven anything.
- Fraud isn't a problem that is unique to cryptocurrency. Fraud happens all the time. Enron, WorldCom, Nortel, Bear Stearns, Wells Fargo, Moser Baer, Wirecard, Bre-X, and Nicola are just some of the cases where frauds became large enough to become a big deal (and there are so many countless others). These all happened on 100% reversible assets despite regulations being in place. In many of these cases, the problems happened due to the over-complexity of the financial instruments. For example, Enron had "complex financial statements [which] were confusing to shareholders and analysts", creating "off-balance-sheet vehicles, complex financing structures, and deals so bewildering that few people could understand them". In cryptocurrency, we are often combining complex financial products with complex technologies and verification processes. We are naïve if we think problems like this won't happen. It is awkward and uncomfortable for many people to admit that they don't know how something works. If we want "money of the people" to work, the solutions have to be simple enough that "the people" can understand them, not so confusing that financial professionals and technology experts struggle to use or understand them.
- For those who question the extent to which an organization can fool their way into a security consultancy role, HB Gary should be a great example to look at. Prior to trying to out anonymous, HB Gary was being actively hired by multiple US government agencies and others in the private sector (with glowing testimonials). The published articles and hosted professional security conferences. One should also look at this list of data breaches from the past 2 years. Many of them are large corporations, government entities, and technology companies. These are the ones we know about. Undoubtedly, there are many more that we do not know about. If HB Gary hadn't been "outted" by anonymous, would we have known they were insecure? If the same breach had happened outside of the public spotlight, would it even have been reported? Or would HB Gary have just deleted the Twitter posts, brought their site back up, done a couple patches, and kept on operating as though nothing had happened?
- In the case of Quadriga, the facts are clear. Despite past experience with platforms such as MapleChange in Canada and others around the world, no guidance or even the most basic of a framework was put in place by regulators. By not clarifying any sort of legal framework, regulators enabled a situation where a platform could be run by former criminal Mike Dhanini/Omar Patryn, and where funds could be held fully unchecked by one person. At the same time, the lack of regulation deterred legitimate entities from running competing platforms and Quadriga was granted a money services business license for multiple years of operation, which gave the firm the appearance of legitimacy. Regulators did little to protect Canadians despite Quadriga failing to file taxes from 2016 onward. The entire administrative team had resigned and this was public knowledge. Many people had suspicions of what was going on, including Ryan Mueller, who forwarded complaints to the authorities. These were ignored, giving Gerald Cotten the opportunity to escape without justice.
- There are multiple issues with the SOC II model including the prohibitive cost (you have to find a third party accounting firm and the prices are not even listed publicly on any sites), the requirement of operating for a year (impossible for new platforms), and lack of any public visibility (SOC II are private reports that aren't shared outside the people in suits).
- Securities frameworks are expensive. Sarbanes-Oxley is estimated to cost $5.1 million USD/yr for the average Fortune 500 company in the United States. Since "Fortune 500" represents the top 500 companies, that means well over $2.55 billion USD (~$3.4 billion CAD) is going to people in suits. Isn't the problem of trust and verification the exact problem that the blockchain is supposed to solve?
- To use Quadriga as justification for why custodians or SOC II or other advanced schemes are needed for platforms is rather silly, when any framework or visibility at all, or even the most basic of storage policies, would have prevented the whole thing. It's just an embarrassment.
- We are now seeing regulators take strong action. CoinSquare in Canada with multi-million dollar fines. BitMex from the US, criminal charges and arrests. OkEx, with full disregard of withdrawals and no communication. Who's next?
- We have a unique window today where we can solve these problems, and not permanently destroy innovation with unreasonable expectations, but we need to act quickly. This is a unique historic time that will never come again.
| || |https://medium.com/@CryptoSeq/large-enterprise-adoption-of-blockchain-is-happening-enabled-by-quant-networks-overledger-32321b650115 submitted by xSeq22x to QuantNetwork [link] [comments]
This is Part Two in the mini-series looking at Quant Network. You can see Part One here
as well as links to other articles at the bottom of this post.
Quant Network have achieved incredible levels of adoption since launching Overledger less than a year ago. Their growth strategy is to partner with multinational global organisations with huge amounts of employees to then host / implement / take Overledger to each of their own clients. So one Partnership, leads to exponentially more and is the fastest way to scale rather than trying to partner with each customer individually. This is how companies such as Oracle grew so fast and Microsoft with their Partner Network.
“ These are multinational global organisations with 100,000 + employees, this is the scale that we are working towards to take Overledger to the mass market. We can’t do it one by one in each country and sign them up but we can partner with someone that has 100 customers and they can take it to all their customers as well which helps with the adoption of our technology” — Gilbert Verdian
Let’s start with arguably the biggest partnership for any Blockchain company listed on Coinmarketcap, the leading Financial Network Provider in Europe, SIA.
- Provide the leading Financial Network in Europe with more than 100 Tier 1 banks connected, 44 Trading venues (including the main international stock markets in Milan, Rome, London, Frankfurt and New York) and other financial institutions covering the entire trading process from pre-trading to post-trading
- process 14 Billion institutional services transactions, 7.2 billion card transactions, 3 billion payments, 51.7 billion financial transactions and carried 1,204 terabytes of data on the network
- SIA in partnership with Colt and SWIFT are the only two network providers awarded a 10 year tender commissioned by the European Central Bank for the provisioning of connectivity services allowing European central and commercial banks, central depositories, automated clearing houses and other payment service providers to connect directly to Eurosystem market infrastructures through a single access interface (Eurosystem Single Market Infrastructure Gateway — ESMIG).
- SIA’s SIAchain is the leading blockchain architecture in Europe connecting 570 Banks, Central Banks, Trading Venues and other Financial Institutions using R3’s Corda, Permissioned variants of Ethereum and Hyperledger Fabric.
- SIA have Integrated Overledger into the leading blockchain architecture in Europe SIAchain so that all of the 570 banks, Central Banks, Trading venues etc can benefit from Blockchain Interoperability.
“Since the European launch of our private infrastructure SIAchain, we are at the forefront of innovation in blockchain technology with the aim of supporting financial markets with a high-performance and secure architecture and a clear governance model. We actively continue on our path of innovation and the achievement of a fully interoperable blockchain network is the foremost objective we want to reach with the collaboration of Quant Network and its disruptive vision on DLT”, says Daniele Savarè, Innovation & Business Solutions Director, SIA. https://youtu.be/0cNmGrLPoTo
So what we’ve done is instead of just announcing one client and one thing, we’re announcing that we’re working with SIA. So, SIA is the leading European payment infrastructure. And what we’re doing with SIA is interconnecting blockchain networks with SIA, and doing settlements, which are central bank settlements, with the central bank in Italy. So what Overledger is doing is we’re actually bringing blockchain and interoperability to all of SIA’s clients, which are 580 banks. So, Overledger could be rolled out to all these institutions, financial services, banks, at scale, and have interoperability to get the benefits of this. To read more see my other article which goes into more details about SIA here https://preview.redd.it/dbpfz3914pn31.png?width=1148&format=png&auto=webp&s=f9e6b3db87954f2e86a4ce2e060646fa440e8543
Quant Network are working with AX Trading to bring more digital assets, securities and tokenised assets to their existing 800 institutional traders in an already live and connected FINRA and SEC regulated exchange. AX Trading is not just about trading securities but other digital assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum and potentially even Quant in the Future.
- an SEC-registered broker-dealer and Alternative Trading System (ATS) Operator. They are a member of FINRA and SIPC regulated authorities.
- Have investors and sponsored brokers such as Credit Suisse, (a multinational investment Bank and Financial services company worth $27.5 billion).
- AX currently have over 800 Institutional traders (these are not individuals, but corporations such as hedge funds, banks, investment banks, pension funds, insurance companies, endowment funds etc).
- AX Trading have also partnered with Euronext, the largest Stock Exchange in Europe with a market cap of $4.65 trillion as of 2018, in the creation of Euronext Block which utilises AX Trading.
- This is a multi-trillion dollar market with huge global enterprises, traditional exchanges and global banks are all adopting DLT at a rapid pace and going into production at scale in a matter of months
Overledger a blockchain operating system, will enable universal interoperability for regulatory-compliant security tokens and digital assets to be traded on AX ATS, a regulated secondary trading market. AX intends to integrate Overledger to help foster the evolution of traditional capital markets infrastructure to facilitate the mass implementation of regulated digital assets. With the increased market adoption of digital assets and banking “coins” such as JPMorgan Coin, AX and Quant Network are at the forefront to enable the transferability and movement of digital assets George O’Krepkie, AX CEO said: “we look forward to partnering with Quant. Their technology will allow our blockchain agnostic security token exchange to communicate seamlessly with issuers, traders, investors, and regulators across different blockchain protocols. This is a key technological breakthrough that will help us bring the benefits of security tokens to Main Street and Wall Street.” To read more see my other article which goes into more details about Wall Street 2.0: Enabled by Quant Network’s Partnership with SEC & FINRA registered AX Trading here https://preview.redd.it/on9hbjk54pn31.png?width=1286&format=png&auto=webp&s=ca9ed465376e483801cf87e8933f0e718be915b4
- Oracle are the second largest software company in the world, second only to Microsoft and worth $174.5 billion.
- Quant Network are an Oracle Fintech Partner. Oracle are jointly going to market with Quant Network and taking Overledger directly to their 480,000 clients globally.
- On the week commencing the 23rd September 2019 Quant Network and Oracle will be showcasing Overledger at the largest Financial event of the year SIBOS. SIBOS is a very exclusive financial services only event that only institutions that are connected to SWIFT can attend. The only 2 Blockchain firms attending are Quant Network and Ripple.
At Sibos 2019 Oracle is excited to feature 10 of our fintechs that have proven they are enterprise cloud ready and span a wide range of digital transformation themes including several available on Oracle’s Open Banking API ecosystem. Discover how you can accelerate your digital banking journey with a wide range of proven Oracle fintech solutions that meet the security, performance, and compliance needs for today’s Adaptive Bank — Oracle SIBOS 2019 Blockchain Enables Trustworthy Transactions The potential uses of blockchain technologies are seemingly endless, from providing easy access to online payments to creating connected economies. But one of blockchain’s standout promises is to automate trust by providing an incorruptible platform for transactions. Quant’s Overledger is the world’s first blockchain operating system. It’s designed to provide any network in the world with a gateway to all other blockchains, and therefore enable companies to develop new solutions by incorporating features from multiple blockchain applications. — https://blogs.oracle.com/startup/innovation-pays%3a-the-five-fintech-startups-making-money-more-interesting https://preview.redd.it/bv0hxxr84pn31.png?width=1100&format=png&auto=webp&s=8e67dd4a7b23eae444ed1ed9e7f7bda972236280
- Crowdz are the leading blockchain-based trade finance company
- Headed by Cisco’s former global supply-chain leader
- In business since 2014, with 270+ beta clients
- partnered with Barclaycard, part of Barclays Bank, to integrate into their payment solutions
- Recently received $5.5 million Series A Investment from Barclays Bank and BOLD Capital Partners, with additional investments coming from TFX Capital Partners, Techstars Ventures, and First Derivatives
- In talks with the Korean Government about using their tech.
Payson Johnston, President and CEO of Crowdz, a Silicon Valley trade-finance and financial-technology company, stated that, “Although Crowdz uses the Ethereum blockchain as the foundation for our Invoice Auction Exchange, we have needed a solution that allows for invoices and other documents to be transferred from one blockchain to another — for example, among Hyperledger, Corda, and EOS. With the Overledger solution from Quant Network, it is now possible to pass data among different blockchains. Crowdz looks forward to working with Quant Network to enable the true multi-blockchain environment that our customers demand.” You can read more about the announcement here
AuCloud and UKCloud
- UKCloudX is the UK Sovereign High assurance cloud services designed for the UK’s most sensitive and mission critical systems from Defence, National Security to wider Government requirements.
- AUCloud is Australia’s sovereign cloud Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) provider, exclusively focused on the Australian Government (Federal, State and Local) and Critical National Industry (CNI) communities.
- AuCloud integrate Overledger onto the AUCloud platform to provide highly secure and interoperable Blockchain-as-a-Service for Australian Government and Defence and the critical national industries and supply chains that serve the nation.
Scott Wilkie, Director of AUCloud stated that Australian Government, Department of Defence and major industries are using or testing blockchain to interact with their supply chain, critical infrastructure, national record keeping and financial services. These organisations require the interoperable functionality that can only come with an operating system like Overledger and the security of the leading sovereign Australian cloud platform. Without Overledger, none of these projects or systems will be able to communicate with each other or enable cross party collaboration. Brad Bastow, CTO AUCloud (previously CTO Department of the Prime Minster & Cabinet) stated that “applying world leading blockchain technologies to enhancing the cyber security of cloud IaaS and PaaS can significantly improve the ease of adoption and reduces risks for all government users and citizens. We aim to bring the most effective and assured technologies as-a-Service and Quant Network have some of the most advanced blockchain technology in the world in this respect.” You can read more about the announcement here
- A Cloud-based, smart-contract-as-a-service (SCaas) platform. enabling users across a variety of skill sets to implement DAPPs.
- formed from a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) grant in 2017 originally developed by ITAMCO and the University of Notre Dame
- Awarded a grant from the Department of Energy to develop a platform for a blockchain solution for the solar energy market.
- Their platform is available on Azure and are Microsoft Start Up Partners with a former Microsoft Global Exec Joining SIMBA Chain.
- Some of their other partnerships include the Government Blockchain Association, Air Force Research Laboratory, Caterpillar, SAP and EY
- Recently announced they are starting to develop on Quant Network’s Overledger to enable connection to all of the blockchains currently connected through Overledger and provide interoperability between them.
- an AI-powered decentralized investment and financing ecosystem, which allows corporates to quickly, cheaply and safely raise funds, whether it be equity, debt or tokens.
- Selected as 1 of 15 Best Early-Stage startups at Money 20/20, Europe’s Largest Finetech Conference.
- Joined Kickstart Innovation, one of Europe’s largest multi-corporate accelerators.
- Joined Level39 Europe’s largest Fintech Accelerator
- Partnered with Holochain, Elastos and Portugal Finlab
- have more than 35 years combined experience in capital markets at top investment banks (Goldman, JP Morgan, Barclays…) and more than 10 years in AI, IT and software development (Barclays, VINCI, PostNL…).
“AllianceBlock will use Overledger to leverage multiple blockchains and create multi-chains token swaps. This partnership offers the possibility to open a new set of real-world applications leveraging different features from different chains. AllianceBlock is delighted about this partnership which will help blockchain projects and SMEs wield blockchain technology very easily” said Rachid Ajaja, Co-founder of AllianceBlock.
Jiangsu Huaxin Blockchain Institute
- the first state-owned research hub dedicated to exploring blockchain technology for the Chinese Ministry of Commerce with over 100 employees.
- high-tech R & D institution backed by the provincial government in Jiangsu, the second highest GDP grossing province in China
- Backed by parent company Beijing Huaxin Electronics Enterprise Group, a conglomerate that has incubated and invested in numerous IT and telecommunications companies
- China’s official institution for blockchain development, signed an agreement to collaborate on the development of innovations like distributed computing and quantum cryptography to revolutionize the next generation of distributed ledger technology (DLT) protocols.
- Quant Network have signed a MoU for a 5 year cooperation
Atlantic Power Exchange
- An Early Stage start-up developing P2P energy software enabling automated trading of green and sustainable electricity over the blockchain
- Creating an Upstream Energy exchange which interconnects existing P2P exchanges (like PowerLedger, WePower, GridSingularity etc) to multiple stakeholders, suppliers and customers in Australia.
- All Built on Overledger
Managing Director of Rockefeller Capital Joins the Board of Quant Network
- Rockefeller Capital Management is a leading independent financial services firm led by President & Chief Executive Officer Gregory J. Fleming, offering global family office, wealth management, asset management and strategic advisory services to ultra-high-net-worth individuals, families, institutions and corporations
- Rockefeller Capital Management manages over $19 Billion in Assets with the aim of expanding this to $100 billion within 5 years.
Guy Dietrich, Managing Director, Rockefeller Capital commented:
“I’m delighted to join the Board of Quant Network. This is an exceptional team of experienced professionals in the cybersecurity and blockchain industry.”
Guy Dietrich recently personally attended meetings with the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) with Gilbert.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
Gilbert Verdian is the founder of ISO TC 307, the global standard for Blockchain and Distributed Ledger Technologies which 55 countries are currently working towards. Gilbert is the chairman for the TC 307 Working Group for Interoperability of blockchain and distributed ledger technology systems
European’s Union INATBA
Quant Network is a founding member in the European Union’s launch of the International Association for Trusted Blockchain Applications (INATBA). Other members of INATBA include Accenture, Accord Project, Alastria,Banco Santander, BBVA, Consensys, Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, Fujitsu, IOTA, Ledger, SAP, SIA, Swift, Telefonica, We.Trade and many more. INATBA is a collaboration of 26 EU countries to develop EU blockchain regulation and prepare the launch of EU-wide blockchain applications
- Quant Network accepted as a company guarantor of Pay.UK, the UK’s largest payment network, alongside banks and other FinTech companies
- Through this relationship, Quant Network will shape the payment ecosystem to promote competition, innovation and openness, as well as setting the strategic direction of the Payments infrastructure and adopting the New Payments Architecture (NPA).
You can read more about it here
and here https://preview.redd.it/10okaogo4pn31.png?width=1454&format=png&auto=webp&s=99f7696dd6994b74960d2d017cb06d97304221a4
- consortium for blockchain innovation in the mobility industry. The consortium was founded by leading automakers including Renault, Ford, GM, and BMW, and now represents more than 80 percent of global auto manufacturing by volume. Other members include Bosch, IBM, Cognizant, Accenture, Consensys, IOTA, R3, VeChain, Hyperledger, Ocean Protocol and Honda (Full list can be seen here)
- Overledger operating system will enable interconnectivity and interoperability of data between manufacturers, devices, transportation and autonomous vehicles
- Quant Network has joined Hyperledger where more than 270 organisations are now contributing to the growth of Hyperledger’s open source distributed ledger frameworks and tools. Some of the companies involved are Accentrue, Airbus, American Express, Baidu, Cisco, Deutsche Bank, DTCC, Fujitsu, Hitachi, IBM, Intel, J.P.Morgan, SAP, BBVA, Bosch, Deloitte, Fedex, Huawei, Lenovo, NTT Data, Oracle, PWC, R3, Ripple, Samsung, We.trade, Bank of England, Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, Federal Reserve, MOBI etc. Full list of members can be seen here.
- Working with the Hyperledger Quilt team to enhance Blockchain Interoperability capability for Hyperledger members
- The Accord Project is the organization for the development of techno-legal standards for smart legal contracts and distributed ledger applications in the legal industry
- The Project operates in collaboration with IEEE, the International Association for Contract and Commercial Management, Hyperledger, R3, Decentralized Identity Foundation, and a number of leading trade associations, industry and standards organizations, and world leading law firms.
- Quant Network have joined the Accord Project and are providing the Technology with Overledger and Treaty Contracts.
As well as many being worked on and yet to be publicly announced:
- Indian Multinational IT Service and consulting company with offices in 44 countries and 137,000+ employees
- Among the top 20 largest publicly traded companies in India with a market cap of $18.7 Billion and revenue of $9 billion.
- Customers include 250 of the Fortune 500 and 650 of the Global 2000 companies.
we are really looking at ASIA, especially around Singapore, Hong Kong and we are working with partners to go there, just yesterday we had a meeting with a $8 billion company based in the ASIA region and they want to use Overledger for their clients and they are going to help us expand to that region, once we partner with the right bigger players https://youtu.be/G1b9TX6rcuI https://preview.redd.it/ac3f0yjv4pn31.png?width=827&format=png&auto=webp&s=dc1bfde0a476ee6ffbcb15284236dbb5d9d508e9
2 of the Big 4 Global Consultancy Firms are taking Quant Network’s Overledger to their clients.
The Big 4 Global Consultancy firms are huge and consist of Deloitte, PwC, EY and KPMG. They offer a range of services from offering consultancy advice on what to use, assisted prototyping right through to the delivery of production-ready enterprise solutions. Previously Gilbert was the Director of Cybersecurity at PwC and a Senior Manager of Security at EY
plus Lara Verdian was the director for Deloitte Access Economics at Deloitte. https://preview.redd.it/2hklfapx4pn31.png?width=697&format=png&auto=webp&s=d8181a12c888de00f4cbc6a4ff639697acc4deee
Quant Network are currently working with 2 of the above 4 global consultancy firms who are taking Overledger to their clients.
As well as many other consultancy firms: https://preview.redd.it/usoyx5b15pn31.png?width=1215&format=png&auto=webp&s=a60b243d74e50dbc97ada380001f6f9396c8bb5b
- Quant are working the Government of Armenia in Health, futureproofing the eHealth Strategy with Blockchain
- Working with huge Conglomerates to establish a new consortium in Healthcare
They are also in talks with Traditional Exchanges such as the Swiss Stock Exchange SDX Platform and others as well as Large asset management firms https://preview.redd.it/cn3ylk295pn31.png?width=1254&format=png&auto=webp&s=1b24c2088383aa5438b9d97bd54c34867b1cb137
As well as various Governments including the Australian Treasury with DATA61 regarding open banking and consumer data rights, the UK’s HMRC, Central Banks, Global companies in Korea, Insurance Companies, Airlines and Logistic companies. https://preview.redd.it/t35ctv3b5pn31.png?width=1237&format=png&auto=webp&s=311762c9dbdc2755001b9b1a426dbe0206105574
It’s truly remarkable what they have achieved in such a short space of time, working non-stop all around the globe, working with enormous Global organisations, Leading Financial Institutions, Governments and Health. Quant Network is enabling the mass adoption of Blockchain, bridging all blockchains and offchain networks together (as well as plans to connect directly to the Internet) to achieve the true potential of this revolutionary technology.
In the last article of this mini-series I will take a closer look at the tokenomics of the QNT token and why there isn’t another utility token with as much value as QNT. With a tiny total supply of just 14.6 million QNT tokens, with no inflation, Supply reducing further as tokens are taken out circulation with licensing and strong demand / usage for the token, as well as minimum QNT holdings for wallets to benefit from Universal Interoperability.
Part One — Blockchain Fundamentals
Part Two — The Layers Of Overledger
Part Three — TrustTag and the Tokenisation of data
Part Four — Features Overledger provides to MAPPs
Part Five — Creating the Standards for Interoperability
Part Six — The Team behind Overledger and Partners
Part Seven — The QNT Token
Part Eight — Enabling Enterprise Mass Adoption Quant Network Enabling Mass Adoption of Blockchain at a Rapid Pace Quant Network Partner with SIA, A Game Changer for Mass Blockchain Adoption by Financial Institutions
Part One of this mini Series — What is a blockchain operating system and what are the benefits? Introducing Overledger from Quant Network Wall Street 2.0: How Blockchain will revolutionise Wall Street and a closer look at Quant Network’s Partnership with AX Trading
Bitcoin volatility. Bitcoin Volatility Hits 23-Month Low as the Cryptocurrency Shrugs Off BitMEX, Trump’s Illness. Zack Voell Oct 4, 2020 ... Bitcoin Conference CC Forum London: Bitcoin Basher Nouriel Roubini At Work Again. Bitcoin critic Nouriel Roubini, aka Dr. Doom, hasn’t changed his mind on the utility and intrinsic value of cryptocurrencies. Keep up to date with the latest bitcoin event news on CoinDesk. You can also check out local Bitcoin Meetups in your area. CoinDesk also runs the Consensus Conference and an ‘Expert Briefings ... Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer version of electronic cash that allows payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution. The network timestamps transactions by hashing them into an ongoing chain of hash-based proof-of-work, forming a record that cannot be changed without redoing the proof-of-work. – Satoshi Nakamoto Bitcoin is a “crypto currency”, a decentralized electronic payment scheme based on cryptography. It implements a particular type of peer-to-peer payment system. Bitcoin depends on well-known...
CoinSummit London 2014 - When Will Wall Street Join the Party? - Duration: 30:15. CoinSummit 1,480 views. 30:15. Negotiation Skills: Former FBI Negotiator Chris Voss At The Australia Real Estate ... Alex Preukschat presenting Bitcoin Comic at CoinSummit London. Day 3 of Bitcoin 2014 Conference was held on May 17, 2014. -Startup Challenge -Closing Session -Annual Members Meeting CryptoCurrency Convention 4/9/14 - Michael Brown TimeKoin Join us at our Next EVENT located in London, UK 2014. DATE: October 22nd, 2014 LOCATION: The British Museum Great Russell St, London WC1B ... CoinSummit London 2014 - Roger Ver - The Future Is Ours - Duration: 10:12. ... Texas Bitcoin Conference 14,713 views. 29:32. Sticker shock: Why are glasses so expensive? - Duration: 12:56. CBS ...