South Korea has seen some increased trading volumes recently in an otherwise stable crypto market even as stock volatility continues.
It appears the government there is warming up to this space in general and ICOs in particular. Min Byung-doo, a member of South Korea’s ruling Minjoo Party, says:
“I don’t think people would be jumping into these markets without careful consideration. I think the vaccine has succeeded, and it’s now time to open up the market…
A number of countries including Switzerland, Malta, Estonia and Singapore have recently tried to bring ICOs within the boundaries of existing institutional frameworks, as well as France, who recently passed a new law. It seems that many countries have started focusing on the potential of ICOs.
Over the last two years, the total funds raised through ICOs were far higher than the figures for venture capital or angel investment. The trend is changing. All around the world, people are applying for blockchain-related patents and trying to come up with new business models. They believe that a new coin will emerge that takes things to the next level, and we have no reason to stand in the way of that possibility.”
UK, on the other hand, is seemingly moving in the opposite direction as Theresa May’s government signaled a cooling tone in a new report.
“The Taskforce therefore considers that, in many cases, the risks posed by the current generation of cryptoassets outweigh any potential benefits,” they say.
Not that we expect anything else from Maybot, whose political career is on a shelf-life, with the 62 year old likely having no clue whatever of just what is code.
Fujitsu might. They’ve made a somewhat interesting announcement which seems to suggest Japanese banks plan to launch a stable coin of sorts, but on a private blockchain.
This appears to be closed to just banks, with it limited to payments between themselves. Fujitsu says:
“This field trial, based on the participation of the board of directors, will use a dedicated ‘digital currency’ for interbank settlements to evaluate the functionality of the system as an economical new interbank funds transfer settlement system for small-scale transactions using a real time gross settlement (RTGS) method. The participants will also use the trial to confirm the viability of blockchain technology in this context.”
This should have no effect on global warming – or really much else – unlike bitcoin which is now being blamed for having the potential to single handedly increase global temperatures by 2 degrees.
“We don’t have a single thing – not agriculture, not transportation – that we can think of that in two decades would be enough to warm the planet by two degrees. But Bitcoin can,” lead author Camilo Mora of the University of Hawaii said.
The conclusions have been criticized as speculative, with the authors engaging in much extrapolation regarding potential growth in bitcoin’s energy usage, while seemingly ignoring a trend towards carbon neutral electricity generation.
“A new revolution in the history of energy is well under way, and yet energy transactions are still lumbering along on the same monetary platforms that powered the soon-to-be bygone era of fossil fuels.
Now just imagine how quickly the renewable energy transition could accelerate when you throw in a bit of 21st century software.”
So opens a brief interview with Power Ledger’s Chairman and co-founder Dr. Jemma Green. They’re trying to make energy markets more liquid, especially where it concerns renewables where established and hard to change practices are not yet set.
The task is fairly difficult. Previous reports of blockchain start-ups entering the energy market have suggested most are not quite making any money, but there is one or two that may have some promise. Many will fail for few to succeed, ever thus.
In a somewhat interesting turn of events, with conceptual implications beyond petty Core and Cash, Bitmain has apparently decided to no longer include Segregated Witnesses (SegWit) transactions.
“Antpool found four consecutive blocks, so there were a lot of segwit transactions accumulating in the mempool that they didn’t take. Their block 547,566 with 0.04 BTC fee, accepted mostly low fee transaction. The next block by btc.com had 0.24 BTC fee,” says a bitcoiner.
Segwit, as you may know, is a trick of sorts whereby certain data is not accounted in the fee calculations, with fees usually calculated based on the amount of bytes contained in the transaction.
The witness/signature data still has to be processed, but it can be discarded later on so they’ve kind of told the code to pretend those bytes don’t exist, like the ancients of old would sometime say there won’t be a Sunday this week, we jump straight to Monday – as Plutarch tells it anyway.
Miners technically don’t have to include any transaction at all, and in some relatively rare instances where they quickly find one block after the other, they don’t.
Usually, however, they do because transactions come with a fee or a bounty attached. As there is no reason to not include the transactions, miners thus process them all.
Beyond that, it gets more subjective and more complicated as far as our analysis is concerned, but plain incentives are for Proof of Work (PoW) miners to increase fees as much as they can.
There may be pressures from other aspects, including network utility, thus usage, thus price of the base reward, but where it concerns cheaper segwit transactions compared to normal transactions, that extra pressure might not apply.
Then of course there’s the fact Bitmain holds a million Bitcoin Cash or so, but any competition in that aspect would be tampered by practical considerations of bitcoin still leading the market.
If we add here the potential twisting by Bitcoin Core “marketeers,” then any analysis becomes difficult, but suffices to say we really can’t wait for the Proof of Stake (PoS) Beacon Chain.
“Alrosa will join industry leaders… in creating the blockchain platform by the industry, for the industry.”
So says the world’s second biggest diamonds mining firm as it joins a blockchain project by the world’s biggest diamonds mining firm, De Beer.
A blockchain by the industry and for the industry isn’t quite how all this works. The whole point of the public blockchain is kind of the opposite.
And it mainly works with natively digital aspects. There might be some efficiency where human input is required, but “enabling people to enjoy the product without any doubts about ethical issues or undisclosed synthetics” wouldn’t quite have much to do with the blockchain because undisclosed synthetics can remain undisclosed to the blockchain.
If human input is required, then we have to trust the human and we have to trust the input, with the blockchain benefits being only afterwards in as far as we can be sure what was entered wasn’t changed without leaving a record. Something which can have its own problems, like typos.
That’s perhaps shown by what happened recently to a small token of which no one had heard of until today.
Oyster Pearl (PRL) apparently raised only 10 eth according to Santiment, and currently has no known capital, with its market cap falling from circa $200 million earlier this year to now $6 million.
It appears, from a very surface look, that their smart contract had an over-ruling key. As you may know, smart contracts are Turing complete. So you can code whatever you want there, including that everyone should follow the rules, but my key can overturn any of the rules if I want to.
That’s what was coded in this smart contract, with that key used to effectively print money out of thin air.
You’ve all probably recently seen screenshots of USDC’s smart contract having blacklisting functions. Vitalik Buterin said we can at least see that there is such function, which is an improvement he argues.
He might be right, but on the other hand we can see banks printing money too. The real differentiator here may be choice and permissionless. There’s little we can do about banks, but for smart contracts we can freely choose what we want.
Speaking of Buterin, he is happy today because Vyper is on Devcon’s stage. That’s kind of Solidity’s sister, Vyper so being a smart contracts coding language.
It never caught on as much as Solidity because who wants to code on a snake. Words mean things. Rename it to Buterin and top spot guaranteed.
Zooko Wilcox-O’Hearn is also happy today because Parity has apparently launched a Zcash client.
Parity now has, if memory recalls well, a bitcoin client, a bitcoin cash client, a Zcash client and even an ETC client. Soon presumably they’ll have a Polkadot client, with their eth client being just kind of one of many.
Making it not quite something we wanted to end on, but we expected some elaboration from the CFA Institute stating: “Bitcoin is a currency that obviates the need for trust in accounting and finance and in transactions.” Unfortunately they provided no such elaboration.
While DLA Piper’s claim that “companies headquartered abroad may nonetheless be subject to US securities laws if their activity – including server locations and blockchain validation node clusters – indicate that sales were conducted in the United States,” turned to have quite a lot of qualifications.
Such as Arthur Breitman of Tezos lives in California, the website was hosted on a server in Arizona, and the marketing “almost exclusively targeted United States residents.”
Much development, therefore, on what appears like a quiet day. A lot more might perhaps be expected tomorrow as Devcon opens, but it is coders first this year so we don’t quite expect fireworks.
Not that we’re interested in them. We instead want more detail on this eth 2.0 transformation, so these pages might be quiet as we focus on the big event, depending of course on how it all develops.
Tweet us your Halloween pictures though, make it a festival.