Total Value on Bitcoin’s Lightning Network Reached $12.4 Million - CryptoCrunchApp
Bitcoin’s Lightning Network set a record high Monday as total capacity held in the protocol’s payment channels – sometimes referred to as “total value locked” (TVL) – reached $12.4 million. The total number of bitcoins held on Lightning sits at 1,060, up 24% so far this year. The number of publicly broadcasting nodes, for example, has steadily increased throughout the entire lifetime of the protocol. Currently more than 7,600 nodes are connected to payment channels, up 55% from January.
You've probably been hearing a lot about Bitcoin recently and are wondering what's the big deal? Most of your questions should be answered by the resources below but if you have additional questions feel free to ask them in the comments. It all started with the release of the release of Satoshi Nakamoto's whitepaper however that will probably go over the head of most readers so we recommend the following videos for a good starting point for understanding how bitcoin works and a little about its long term potential:
Limited Supply - There will only ever be 21,000,000 bitcoins created and they are issued in a predictable fashion, you can view the inflation schedule here. Once they are all issued Bitcoin will be truly deflationary. The halving countdown can be found here.
Open source - Bitcoin code is fully auditable. You can read the source code yourself here.
Accountable - The public ledger is transparent, all transactions are seen by everyone.
Decentralized - Bitcoin is globally distributed across thousands of nodes with no single point of failure and as such can't be shut down similar to how Bittorrent works. You can even run a node on a Raspberry Pi.
Censorship resistant - No one can prevent you from interacting with the bitcoin network and no one can censor, alter or block transactions that they disagree with, see Operation Chokepoint.
Push system - There are no chargebacks in bitcoin because only the person who owns the address where the bitcoins reside has the authority to move them.
Low fee scaling - On chain transaction fees depend on network demand and how much priority you wish to assign to the transaction. Most wallets calculate on chain fees automatically but you can view current fees here and mempool activity here. On chain fees may rise occasionally due to network demand, however instant micropayments that do not require confirmations are happening via the Lightning Network, a second layer scaling solution currently rolling out on the Bitcoin mainnet.
Borderless - No country can stop it from going in/out, even in areas currently unserved by traditional banking as the ledger is globally distributed.
Portable - Bitcoins are digital so they are easier to move than cash or gold. They can even be transported by simply memorizing a string of words for wallet recovery (while cool this method is generally not recommended due to potential for insecure key generation by inexperienced users. Hardware wallets are the preferred method for new users due to ease of use and additional security).
Bitcoin.org and BuyBitcoinWorldwide.com are helpful sites for beginners. You can buy or sell any amount of bitcoin (even just a few dollars worth) and there are several easy methods to purchase bitcoin with cash, credit card or bank transfer. Some of the more popular resources are below, also check out the bitcoinity exchange resources for a larger list of options for purchases.
Here is a listing of local ATMs. If you would like your paycheck automatically converted to bitcoin use Bitwage. Note: Bitcoins are valued at whatever market price people are willing to pay for them in balancing act of supply vs demand. Unlike traditional markets, bitcoin markets operate 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. Preev is a useful site that that shows how much various denominations of bitcoin are worth in different currencies. Alternatively you can just Google "1 bitcoin in (your local currency)".
Securing your bitcoins
With bitcoin you can "Be your own bank" and personally secure your bitcoins OR you can use third party companies aka "Bitcoin banks" which will hold the bitcoins for you.
If you prefer to "Be your own bank" and have direct control over your coins without having to use a trusted third party, then you will need to create your own wallet and keep it secure. If you want easy and secure storage without having to learn computer security best practices, then a hardware wallet such as the Trezor, Ledger or ColdCard is recommended. Alternatively there are many software wallet options to choose from here depending on your use case.
If you prefer to let third party "Bitcoin banks" manage your coins, try Gemini but be aware you may not be in control of your private keys in which case you would have to ask permission to access your funds and be exposed to third party risk.
Note: For increased security, use Two Factor Authentication (2FA) everywhere it is offered, including email! 2FA requires a second confirmation code to access your account making it much harder for thieves to gain access. Google Authenticator and Authy are the two most popular 2FA services, download links are below. Make sure you create backups of your 2FA codes.
As mentioned above, Bitcoin is decentralized, which by definition means there is no official website or Twitter handle or spokesperson or CEO. However, all money attracts thieves. This combination unfortunately results in scammers running official sounding names or pretending to be an authority on YouTube or social media. Many scammers throughout the years have claimed to be the inventor of Bitcoin. Websites like bitcoin(dot)com and the btc subreddit are active scams. Almost all altcoins (shitcoins) are marketed heavily with big promises but are really just designed to separate you from your bitcoin. So be careful: any resource, including all linked in this document, may in the future turn evil. Don't trust, verify. Also as they say in our community "Not your keys, not your coins".
Where can I spend bitcoins?
Check out spendabit or bitcoin directory for millions of merchant options. Also you can spend bitcoin anywhere visa is accepted with bitcoin debit cards such as the CashApp card. Some other useful site are listed below.
Mining bitcoins can be a fun learning experience, but be aware that you will most likely operate at a loss. Newcomers are often advised to stay away from mining unless they are only interested in it as a hobby similar to folding at home. If you want to learn more about mining you can read more here. Still have mining questions? The crew at /BitcoinMining would be happy to help you out. If you want to contribute to the bitcoin network by hosting the blockchain and propagating transactions you can run a full node using this setup guide. If you would prefer to keep it simple there are several good options. You can view the global node distribution here.
Just like any other form of money, you can also earn bitcoins by being paid to do a job.
You can also earn bitcoins by participating as a market maker on JoinMarket by allowing users to perform CoinJoin transactions with your bitcoins for a small fee (requires you to already have some bitcoins.
The following is a short list of ongoing projects that might be worth taking a look at if you are interested in current development in the bitcoin space.
One Bitcoin is quite large (hundreds of £/$/€) so people often deal in smaller units. The most common subunits are listed below:
one bitcoin is equal to 100 million satoshis
1,000 per bitcoin
used as default unit in recent Electrum wallet releases
1,000,000 per bitcoin
colloquial "slang" term for microbitcoin (μBTC)
100,000,000 per bitcoin
smallest unit in bitcoin, named after the inventor
For example, assuming an arbitrary exchange rate of $10000 for one Bitcoin, a $10 meal would equal:
For more information check out the Bitcoin units wiki. Still have questions? Feel free to ask in the comments below or stick around for our weekly Mentor Monday thread. If you decide to post a question in /Bitcoin, please use the search bar to see if it has been answered before, and remember to follow the community rules outlined on the sidebar to receive a better response. The mods are busy helping manage our community so please do not message them unless you notice problems with the functionality of the subreddit. Note: This is a community created FAQ. If you notice anything missing from the FAQ or that requires clarification you can edit it here and it will be included in the next revision pending approval. Welcome to the Bitcoin community and the new decentralized economy!
Thanks to all who submitted questions for Shiv Malik in the GAINS AMA yesterday, it was great to see so much interest in Data Unions! You can read the full transcript here:
Gains x Streamr AMA Recap
https://preview.redd.it/o74jlxia8im51.png?width=1236&format=png&auto=webp&s=93eb37a3c9ed31dc3bf31c91295c6ee32e1582be Thanks to everyone in our community who attended the GAINS AMA yesterday with, Shiv Malik. We were excited to see that so many people attended and gladly overwhelmed by the amount of questions we got from you on Twitter and Telegram. We decided to do a little recap of the session for anyone who missed it, and to archive some points we haven’t previously discussed with our community. Happy reading and thanks to Alexandre and Henry for having us on their channel! What is the project about in a few simple sentences? At Streamr we are building a real-time network for tomorrow’s data economy. It’s a decentralized, peer-to-peer network which we are hoping will one day replace centralized message brokers like Amazon’s AWS services. On top of that one of the things I’m most excited about are Data Unions. With Data Unions anyone can join the data economy and start monetizing the data they already produce. Streamr’s Data Union framework provides a really easy way for devs to start building their own data unions and can also be easily integrated into any existing apps. Okay, sounds interesting. Do you have a concrete example you could give us to make it easier to understand? The best example of a Data Union is the first one that has been built out of our stack. It's called Swash and it's a browser plugin. You can download it here: http://swashapp.io/ And basically it helps you monetize the data you already generate (day in day out) as you browse the web. It's the sort of data that Google already knows about you. But this way, with Swash, you can actually monetize it yourself. The more people that join the union, the more powerful it becomes and the greater the rewards are for everyone as the data product sells to potential buyers. Very interesting. What stage is the project/product at? It's live, right? Yes. It's live. And the Data Union framework is in public beta. The Network is on course to be fully decentralized at some point next year. How much can a regular person browsing the Internet expect to make for example? So that's a great question. The answer is no one quite knows yet. We do know that this sort of data (consumer insights) is worth hundreds of millions and really isn't available in high quality. So With a union of a few million people, everyone could be getting 20-50 dollars a year. But it'll take a few years at least to realise that growth. Of course Swash is just one data union amongst many possible others (which are now starting to get built out on our platform!) With Swash, I believe they now have 3,000 members. They need to get to 50,000 before they become really viable but they are yet to do any marketing. So all that is organic growth. I assume the data is anonymized btw? Yes. And there in fact a few privacy protecting tools Swash supplys to its users. How does Swash compare to Brave? So Brave really is about consent for people's attention and getting paid for that. They don't sell your data as such. Swash can of course be a plugin with Brave and therefore you can make passive income browsing the internet. Whilst also then consenting to advertising if you so want to earn BAT. Of course it's Streamr that is powering Swash. And we're looking at powering other DUs - say for example mobile applications. The holy grail might be having already existing apps and platforms out there, integrating DU tech into their apps so people can consent (or not) to having their data sold - and then getting a cut of that revenue when it does sell. The other thing to recognise is that the big tech companies monopolise data on a vast scale - data that we of course produce for them. That is stifling innovation. Take for example a competitor map app. To effectively compete with Google maps or Waze, they need millions of users feeding real time data into it. Without that - it's like Google maps used to be - static and a bit useless. Right, so how do you convince these big tech companies that are producing these big apps to integrate with Streamr? Does it mean they wouldn't be able to monetize data as well on their end if it becomes more available through an aggregation of individuals? If a map application does manage to scale to that level then inevitably Google buys them out - that's what happened with Waze. But if you have a data union which bundles together the raw location data of millions of people then any application builder can come along and license that data for their app. This encourages all sorts of innovation and breaks the monopoly. We're currently having conversations with Mobile Network operators to see if they want to pilot this new approach to data monetization. And that's what even more exciting. Just be explicit with users - do you want to sell your data? Okay, if yes, then which data point do you want to sell. Then the mobile network operator (like T-mobile for example) then organises the sale of the data of those who consent and everyone gets a cut. Streamr - in this example provides the backend to port and bundle the data, and also the token and payment rail for the payments. So for big companies (mobile operators in this case), it's less logistics, handing over the implementation to you, and simply taking a cut? It's a vision that we'll be able to talk more about more concretely in a few weeks time 😁 Compared to having to make sense of that data themselves (in the past) and selling it themselves Sort of. We provide the backened to port the data and the template smart contracts to distribute the payments. They get to focus on finding buyers for the data and ensuring that the data that is being collected from the app is the kind of data that is valuable and useful to the world. (Through our sister company TX, we also help build out the applications for them and ensure a smooth integration). The other thing to add is that the reason why this vision is working, is that the current data economy is under attack. Not just from privacy laws such as GDPR, but also from Google shutting down cookies, bidstream data being investigated by the FTC (for example) and Apple making changes to IoS14 to make third party data sharing more explicit for users. All this means that the only real places for thousands of multinationals to buy the sort of consumer insights they need to ensure good business decisions will be owned by Google/FB etc, or from SDKs or through this method - from overt, rich, consent from the consumer in return for a cut of the earnings. A couple of questions to get a better feel about Streamr as a whole now and where it came from. How many people are in the team? For how long have you been working on Streamr? We are around 35 people with one office in Zug, Switzerland and another one in Helsinki. But there are team members all over the globe, we’ve people in the US, Spain, the UK, Germany, Poland, Australia and Singapore. I joined Streamr back in 2017 during the ICO craze (but not for that reason!) And did you raise funds so far? If so, how did you handle them? Are you planning to do any future raises? We did an ICO back in Sept/Oct 2017 in which we raised around 30 Millions CHF. The funds give us enough runway for around five/six years to finalize our roadmap. We’ve also simultaneously opened up a sister company consultancy business, TX which helps enterprise clients implementing the Streamr stack. We've got no more plans to raise more! What is the token use case? How did you make sure it captures the value of the ecosystem you're building The token is used for payments on the Marketplace (such as for Data Union products for example) also for the broker nodes in the Network. ( we haven't talked much about the P2P network but it's our project's secret sauce). The broker nodes will be paid in DATAcoin for providing bandwidth. We are currently working together with Blockscience on our tokeneconomics. We’ve just started the second phase in their consultancy process and will be soon able to share more on the Streamr Network’s tokeneconoimcs. But if you want to summate the Network in a sentence or two - imagine the Bittorrent network being run by nodes who get paid to do so. Except that instead of passing around static files, it's realtime data streams. That of course means it's really well suited for the IoT economy. Well, let's continue with questions from Twitter and this one comes at the perfect time. Can Streamr Network be used to transfer data from IOT devices? Is the network bandwidth sufficient? How is it possible to monetize the received data from a huge number of IOT devices? From u/EgorCypto Yes, IoT devices are a perfect use case for the Network. When it comes to the network’s bandwidth and speed - the Streamr team just recently did extensive research to find out how well the network scales. The result was that it is on par with centralized solutions. We ran experiments with network sizes between 32 to 2048 nodes and in the largest network of 2048 nodes, 99% of deliveries happened within 362 ms globally. To put these results in context, PubNub, a centralized message brokering service, promises to deliver messages within 250 ms — and that’s a centralized service! So we're super happy with those results. Here's a link to the paper: https://medium.com/streamrblog/streamr-network-performance-and-scalability-whitepaper-adb461edd002 While we're on the technical side, second question from Twitter: Can you be sure that valuable data is safe and not shared with service providers? Are you using any encryption methods? From u/ CryptoMatvey Yes, the messages in the Network are encrypted. Currently all nodes are still run by the Streamr team. This will change in the Brubeck release - our last milestone on the roadmap - when end-to-end encryption is added. This release adds end-to-end encryption and automatic key exchange mechanisms, ensuring that node operators can not access any confidential data. If BTW - you want to get very technical the encryption algorithms we are using are: AES (AES-256-CTR) for encryption of data payloads, RSA (PKCS #1) for securely exchanging the AES keys and ECDSA (secp256k1) for data signing (same as Bitcoin and Ethereum). Last question from Twitter, less technical now :) In their AMA ad, they say that Streamr has three unions, Swash, Tracey and MyDiem. Why does Tracey help fisherfolk in the Philippines monetize their catch data? Do they only work with this country or do they plan to expand? From u/ alej_pacedo So yes, Tracey is one of the first Data Unions on top of the Streamr stack. Currently we are working together with the WWF-Philippines and the UnionBank of the Philippines on doing a first pilot with local fishing communities in the Philippines. WWF is interested in the catch data to protect wildlife and make sure that no overfishing happens. And at the same time the fisherfolk are incentivized to record their catch data by being able to access micro loans from banks, which in turn helps them make their business more profitable. So far, we have lots of interest from other places in South East Asia which would like to use Tracey, too. In fact TX have already had explicit interest in building out the use cases in other countries and not just for sea-food tracking, but also for many other agricultural products. (I think they had a call this week about a use case involving cows 😂) I recall late last year, that the Streamr Data Union framework was launched into private beta, now public beta was recently released. What are the differences? Any added new features? By u/Idee02 The main difference will be that the DU 2.0 release will be more reliable and also more transparent since the sidechain we are using for micropayments is also now based on blockchain consensus (PoA). Are there plans in the pipeline for Streamr to focus on the consumer-facing products themselves or will the emphasis be on the further development of the underlying engine?by u/ Andromedamin We're all about what's under the hood. We want third party devs to take on the challenge of building the consumer facing apps. We know it would be foolish to try and do it all! As a project how do you consider the progress of the project to fully developed (in % of progress plz) by u/ Hash2T We're about 60% through I reckon! What tools does Streamr offer developers so that they can create their own DApps and monetize data?What is Streamr Architecture? How do the Ethereum blockchain and the Streamr network and Streamr Core applications interact? By u/ CryptoDurden We'll be releasing the Data UNion framework in a few weeks from now and I think DApp builders will be impressed with what they find. We all know that Blockchain has many disadvantages as well, So why did Streamr choose blockchain as a combination for its technology? What's your plan to merge Blockchain with your technologies to make it safer and more convenient for your users? By u/noonecanstopme So we're not a blockchain ourselves - that's important to note. The P2P network only uses BC tech for the payments. Why on earth for example would you want to store every single piece of info on a blockchain. You should only store what you want to store. And that should probably happen off chain. So we think we got the mix right there. What were the requirements needed for node setup ? by u/ John097 Good q - we're still working on that but those specs will be out in the next release. How does the STREAMR team ensure good data is entered into the blockchain by participants? By u/ kartika84 Another great Q there! From the product buying end, this will be done by reputation. But ensuring the quality of the data as it passes through the network - if that is what you also mean - is all about getting the architecture right. In a decentralised network, that's not easy as data points in streams have to arrive in the right order. It's one of the biggest challenges but we think we're solving it in a really decentralised way. What are the requirements for integrating applications with Data Union? What role does the DATA token play in this case? By u/JP_Morgan_Chase There are no specific requirements as such, just that your application needs to generate some kind of real-time data. Data Union members and administrators are both paid in DATA by data buyers coming from the Streamr marketplace. Regarding security and legality, how does STREAMR guarantee that the data uploaded by a given user belongs to him and he can monetize and capitalize on it? By u/kherrera22 So that's a sort of million dollar question for anyone involved in a digital industry. Within our system there are ways of ensuring that but in the end the negotiation of data licensing will still, in many ways be done human to human and via legal licenses rather than smart contracts. at least when it comes to sizeable data products. There are more answers to this but it's a long one! Okay thank you all for all of those! The AMA took place in theGAINS Telegramgroup 10/09/20. Answers by Shiv Malik.
I have a new project I'm working on. Looking for game developers (pixijs construct or unity) interested in contributing to a game. This project includes cryptocurrency (Bitcoin Cash) for micropayments.
Summary of Tau-Chain Monthly Video Update - July 2020
Karim Agoras Live: Five functionalities complete: 1. Registration 2. Login 3. User Profile Page 4. Calendar 5. Categories List 6. Wallet Screen Payments: Decided that implementing lightning would be too complex. Instead, we decided to implement our own micropayment mechanism using the native BTC multisig addresses. We are going to use the Omni wallet for payments. TML: Continued debugging, getting a TML demo and test cases ready. Hiring: More hiring efforts to increase team size. Timelines: Committing ourselves to a release of Agoras Live and a basic version of discussions in TML in 2020. Umar: Been working on making improvements to the context free grammar parsing. We now are able to add constraints to productions in the grammar, allowing us to recognize grammars that are context sensitive. Developed test cases for that, too. Tomas: Fixed issues in TML and ran several steps in a TML program. Now adding more tests to make sure everything is stable and won’t break. Also been working on a TML tutorial, a recorded script based on the intro to TML which was contained in the TML Playground. Also new features are going to be covered such as arithmetics. Kilian: More outreach & follow-ups to potential partner universities. Positive response by a professor based in Toronto, presented to him our project. Also, response by KULeuven, Belgium, who unfortunately don’t see a good fit in our project. We’ve had one applicant for the IDNI Grant program and currently are evaluating his proposal. Also, we’ve had an applicant from Bangalore, India for the IDNI Ambassador program and we also have been discussing his proposal. Translation Bounties: We’ve had the blog post “The New Tau” translated to Chinese and have been reviewing the translation. We are going to publish the translation on our website and on the Bitcointalk Chinese forum section. Still to be claimed: German translation of “The New Tau”. Done more effort on reach out to potential tribe channels: Research groups, LinkedIn groups, Facebook groups. Most represented keywords: Complex Adaptive Systems, NLP, Computational Linguistics. Usual feedback: Likes but no further interaction. Created an FAQ answering all possible questions surrounding IDNI, Tau & Agoras Idea: Hosting a virtual panel to spread the word about our project among the scientific community, as well as to create some visual content for our community. Two professors are interested in participating, one from Argentina with a focus in semantic parsing, the other one from the University of Washington with a focus on human-computer interaction and social computing. First step: organizing a pre-panel discussion where in 1on1 calls with the professors we get an opinion of them about what we are doing. Andrei: Agoras Live: Implemented mail system so users now get their mails (e.g. registration email). Improved UX together with Mo’az, e.g. user profiles. Token creation for accessing calls to identify and charge users. Customized Jitsi interface to suit our needs: E.g. display of how much time passed in a call and how much it costs. Next up: Further improve UX; make sure everything works as intended. Mo’az: Almost finished the IDNI website. Added two more pages: Events & Bounties in collaboration with Fola & Kilian. Agoras Live: Finetuned all the website’s components in collaboration with Andrei. Juan: Continued working on the payments system for Agoras Live. Had some delays due to the complexity of debugging such applications. Still, we made significant progress and got the funding transactions implemented over the Lightning network through the Omni layer. Spent time analyzing the minimum amount of BTC to pay for the fees associated to the Omni transactions. We aren’t using segregated witness native addresses and instead are using embedded segregated witness. So transaction sizes are enlarged and transaction fees are a bit higher. So there is a bit of finetuning analysis needed in order to enable the multisig address to pay for the closing & refund transactions. So to provide payment channels over the Omni layer, the main remaining technical detail we have to solve at this point is the closing transaction & the refund transaction. Fola: Have been continuing to look for great talent in different areas. Continued working on website with Mo’az and Kilian. Been working on the branding for Tau & Agoras. Been getting external support to make sure the branding for Tau & Agoras will be as professional as it can be. Working on marketing efforts needed for the release of Agoras Live to get the media pack for marketing ready. Working together with external people to put a plan together for listing the Agoras token on more prominent exchanges as we get closer to release of Agoras Live. Ohad: Continued working on restricted versions of second-order logic to understand how to implement them. There is a translation in the literature about how to convert second-order logic by Horn into Datalog. Also, I have been revisiting papers that deal with descriptive complexity of higher-order logic. They mention that they have a translation from second-order logic to QBF. I wasn’t able to find where they explain this translation but I wrote one of them and he said he will send me the paper. If so, that will be very good because we already have a QBF solver. Any binary decision diagram is already a QBF solver, so we can just translate arbitrary second-order logic formulas into QBF. This will be very helpful for us to implement second-order logic. Also, those papers mention several aspects that are relevant for self-interpretation, the laws of laws. Apparently, they suggest that certain fragments of higher-order logic may also support the laws of laws. But this is part of the papers that I didn’t have access to, so I have to wait to get further clarification. I also pushed the whitepaper significantly this month and hope we will be finishing it soon. Also, I was thinking about some optimizations for the parser and also was looking into the Lightning network. It was my mistake that I haven’t done so beforehand and if I had done it beforehand, I would have understood earlier, that Lightning is too much. It is too drastic of a change to how traditional payments work and there apparently is no reason to believe that it is secure. So I’m glad I discovered better now than later that it’s not something we’d like to rely on, although we can have it as an optional feature. Q&A: Q: With the project development taking longer than other projects such as Tezos, when can AGRS holders expect something to be released and, how can you reassure us that we made the right decision? A: With regards to when we see some releases, it seems that we will see some releases in 2020. For comparing to Ethereum and Tezos: Let’s first talk about funding. Both projects had a lot of money. For Ethereum, the reason for is that it has probably done one of the most aggressive marketing campaigns in history. It was completely lacking any kind of honesty. It was simply aggressive. None of Ethereum’s visions and promises became true. It simply became an insecure platform for scams. None of their vision of creating a world computer, of creating a better society, a better currency, became true. Because of this aggressive marketing, they not only raised a lot of money, they also took the price to be so high in the market. If you remember the campaign of the flipping, they did a whole campaign on how they would overtake the marketcap of Bitcoin. For Tezos, they made maybe the largest ICO in history in terms of money, mainly because they came at the right time, at the top of the bubble in 2017, and also their promises for better coordination didn’t come true. Their solution is based on voting and based on Turing completeness and the only reason why they managed to gain such a market cap as of today, is not because they offer better currency, better society, better anything. It basically is a Ponzi-scheme because they offer very high interest rate by very high inflation (5,51%). The only reason why people buy Tezos is to get into this Ponzi-scheme. Because both Tezos and Ethereum lack any true economical or technological substance, their value will not sustain and this is true for almost all projects in the cryptocurrency world. In the software, high-tech market, if you come up with good tech and you do all the right things, you succeed big time. But if you don’t have it and you are purely relying on brainwashing people, it will not sustain. Of course, our solution is so disruptive and sustainable. We offer to do advancements for humanity and for economy. Q: What three subjects would you first like to see discussed on Tau? A: Of course, picking three subjects now is a bit speculative, but the first thing that comes to mind is the definitions of what good and bad means and what better and worse means. The second subject is the governance model over Tau. The third one is the specification of Tau itself and how to make it grow and evolve even more to suit wider audiences. The whole point of Tau is people collaborating in order to define Tau itself and to improve it over time, so it will improve up to infinity. This is the main thing, especially initially, that the Tau developers (or rather users) advance the platform more and more. Q: What is stopping programmers using TML right now? If nothing, what is your opinion on why they aren’t? A: There is nothing essentially missing in TML in order to let it release. And in fact, we are now working towards packaging it and bringing it towards a release level. For things like documentation, bug fixes, minor features, minor optimizations. We indeed actively work towards releasing TML 1.0 and then we can publish it in e.g. developers channels for them to use it.
✎✎ bitcoin technical support number +𝟏(𝟖𝟑𝟑) 𝟐𝟑𝟐-𝟑𝟑𝟖𝟔 🖰︎ 🖰︎call now covid-19 support ~
~bitcoin technical support number +𝟏(𝟖𝟑𝟑) 𝟐𝟑𝟐-𝟑𝟑𝟖𝟔 🖰︎ 🖰︎ call now covid-19 support ~ ~bitcoin technical support number +𝟏(𝟖𝟑𝟑) 𝟐𝟑𝟐-𝟑𝟑𝟖𝟔 🖰︎ 🖰︎ call now covid-19 support ~ bitcoin support number bitcoin technical support number. bitcoin helpline number bitcoin toll free number bitcoin customer care number Bitcoin doesn't witness genuine updates regularly. All things considered, a significant change could happen in 2020. bitcoin technical support number. Schnorr, Taproot, and Tapscript are totally expected to be remembered for a similar redesign of the Bitcoin organize. A concluded proposition for the actuation of these enhancements by Bitcoin hubs could be prepared as ahead of schedule as this year. Presently, designers are investigating code identified with these likely changes. bitcoin technical support number. Lightning Network and Liquid Sidechain Adoption Improvements are likewise occurring on layers over the base Bitcoin convention. The Lightning Network has been advertised as an answer for quicker, less expensive . Bitcoin micropayments for various years at this point, and Blockstream's Liquid sidechain has seen development as far as the measure of Bitcoin and Tether US accessible on the stage in the course of recent months. bitcoin technical support number. Despite the fact that the Lightning Network has appreciated a more prominent degree of consideration as yet, it might be Liquid that takes the spotlight in 2020. Fluid could be useful in bringing down clog on the base Bitcoin blockchain in a circumstance where there is a lot of hypothesis around the Bitcoin cost, conceivably because of the dividing. In a situation where interest for square space remains moderately stale, it's conceivable that neither of these auxiliary. bitcoin technical support number. Bitcoin convention layers will see a lot of development this year, as the motivation to change old propensities is a lot more vulnerable. Institutional Money What's more, obviously, the last Bitcoin pattern to watch in 2020 is selection by institutional financial specialists. Appropriation from foundations has been advertised for a long time, however this isn't something that occurs without any forethought. bitcoin technical support number.
Aave - an open source and non-custodial protocol to earn interest on deposits & borrow assets
Akropolis - an undercollateralised lending protocol aiming at DeFi yield optimisation and interest-rate sharing
Atomic Loans - a lending platform that accepts trustless BTC collateral via custom Bitcoin scripts
bZx - a decentralized protocol that enables lending and borrowing for margin trading
Compound - an open-source money market protocol on Ethereum that lets users lend or borrow assets against collateral
DeFiner - a globally available, decentralized lending marketplace to securely borrow and lend digital assets through smart-contracts
Force Protocol - an open financial platform providing a wide range of financial services including lending, banking and stablecoins
Maker - a decentralized credit platform on Ethereum that supports Dai, a stablecoin whose value is pegged to USD and backed in ETH or BAT
Nitrogen Network - a decentralized P2P network for secured loans
Swap Rate - a DeFi interest rate swap tool built on the Opium protocol
Augur - a decentralized oracle and peer-to-peer protocol for prediction markets on Ethereum that lets anyone create a market around the outcome of any real-world event
ACO - a decentralized and non-custodial options trading protocol
Balancer - a non-custodial portfolio manager, liquidity provider, and price sensor
Bancor - a protocol on Ethereum for non-custodial token exchange using pooled liquidity
DeversiFi - a high-speed, non-custodial Layer 2 exchange built with STARKs technology, allowing for 9,000+ tps with deep liquidity, low fees, privacy and speed.
DEX AG - a trading interface that finds you the best price from 11 different DEXes
dYdX - a non-custodial trading platform on Ethereum geared toward experienced traders
Gnosis Protocol - a fully decentralized trading protocol that allows anyone to add any trading token pair
Hegic - an on-chain peer-to-pool options trading protocol built on Ethereum
Helena - a smart contract platform with gamified prediction markets
Jelly Swap - a peer to peer trading tool across different blockchains using atomic swaps
KyberSwap - a permissionless cross-chain atomic swap protocol, enabling trading of tokens across different chains
Leverj - a secure and decentralized high performance plasma based exchange
Local Ethereum - a non - custodial peer-to-peer ETH marketplace featuring end to end encryption and on -chain escrow.
Loopring DEX - a non-custodial Layer 2 DEX built on top of the Looping protocol
Market Protocol - a protocol on Ethereum which offers tokenized leverage trading of any asset through synthetic pricing
MCDEX - a decentralized derivatives trading platform for perpetuals & futures
MerkleX - a decentralized exchange that uses a decentralized clearing network. Merklex allows traders to set limits on what can happen to their funds.
Nuo Network - a non-custodial platform on Ethereum that provides a decentralized debt marketplace. Users can lend, borrow, or margin trade any supported cryptoasset
Ren - a provider of inter-blockchain liquidity for all decentralized applications
Set Protocol - a protocol designed to create, manage, and obtain baskets of tokenized assets
Synthetix - a decentralized platform on Ethereum for the creation of Synths: on-chain synthetic assets that track the value of real-world assets
Tokenlon - a DEX with off-chain matching, and on-chain settlment via 0x
UMA - a decentralized protocol to enable the creation, maintenance, and settlement of financial contracts for any underlying asset
Uniswap - a fully decentralized on-chain protocol for token exchanges on Ethereum that uses liquidity pools instead of order books
Veridex - a Mesh connected 0x relayer with trading, swap and market making tools
Flexa - a payment network that enables merchants to accept digital currencies without the risk of fraud or volatility through off-chain collateralization.
Fuse - a blockchain payment integration for businesses
Request Network - an open network for transaction requests. It allows anyone to create, store and access invoices and receipts in a universal, decentralized network.
Alpha Wallet - a mobile-based wallet built for Dapps. Do everything with only a few taps.
Argent - a secure smart contract wallet built for simplicity, security and usability.
Ash - a wallet interface focused on DeFi asset management powered by Melon Protocol
Atomex - a multicurrency HD wallet with built-in hybrid atomic swap exchange
Coinbase Wallet - a non-custodial, DeFi enabled mobile wallet that lets you securely store your tokens and collectibles
DEXWallet - a mobile wallet for decentralized finance
Eidoo - a non-custodial wallet that allows users to store, exchange and transact cryptoassets with a wide range of DeFi services and tools
Math Wallet - a multi-chain non-custodial wallet with embedded browser functionality and DApp store
Meet.One - a multi-chain DeFi wallet, non-custodial and easy-to-use
Monolith - a decentralised banking alternative, powered by Ethereum
My Crypto - an easy to use app that helps you create, import, and manage all your wallets
My Ether Wallet - a free, easy-to-use and open-source client-side interface that helps you interact with the Ethereum blockchain
Gnosis Safe - a secure way to manage funds and interact with decentralized applications on Ethereum
HB Wallet - a non-custodial DeFi-enabled wallet available on multiple platforms
Poketto - a wallet that you can actually show to your parents
Bamboo Relay - a 0x relayer built to trade, lend, and borrow tokens directly from your wallet.
Dca.land - an automated & decentralized dollar cost averaging tool
DDEX - Decentralized Margin TradingTrade with leverage and earn passive income in DeFi
DeBank - an all-in-one DeFi wallet with on-chain DeFi stats
DeFi Saver - an easy to use management portal for MakerDAO CDPs and compound protfolios
DeFi Snap - a simple dashboard that helps visualize all DeFi assets and liabilities
dForce Network - a decentralized finance protocol, starting with the first synthetic indexed stablecoin - USDx
Dharma - a peer-to-peer marketplace on Ethereum for non-custodial lending and borrowing of cryptocurrencies built on an extensible open source protocol
EasyCDP - an interface for MakerDAO that vastly simplifies the process of opening and managing a CDP
FiatDex Gateway - a simple browser-based interface to interact with the FiatDex protocol which allows users to trustlessly swap fiat to crypto
Frontier - a mobile interface integrating all DeFi Protocols and Wallets, enabling users to Track, View & Manage positions in real-time without giving away their private keys
InstaDApp - an intuitive interface on top of the MakerDAO protocol that’s optimized for users lacking advanced technical or financial experience
iearn.finance - a simplified aggregator that optimizes lending into the highest yielding protocols
Melon - an open-source, community-run protocol for asset management on Ethereum. Melon lets users create, manage, and invest in decentralized funds composed of ETH and ERC20s
Totle - a decentralized liquidity provider where you can swap and transfer tokens while automatically getting the best prices from decentralized exchanges
Unspent - a dashboard for all crypto and open finance activity: investing, trading, lending & borrowing
Zerion - an easy to use trustless banking interface utilizing popular DeFi protocols
0x - a protocol for p2p exchange of tokenized assets. ZRX is the governance token that allows to vote on protocol upgrades, and earn liquidity rewards shared by liquidity providers.
Ampleforth - a digital-asset-protocol for smart commodity-money.
Augmint - a smart contract platform that issues stable tokens targeted 1:1 to the EUR backed by collateral
Betoken - An open crypto fund managed by code and meritocracy
Connext - a non-custodial layer 2 payment-channel technology that enables off-chain, instant payments with low (or zero) transaction costs, helping scale the Ethereum network and paving the way for use cases like micropayments
DAI - a decentralized stablecoin soft-pegged to the US Dollar
DFOhub - an Ethereum-based Research & Development project that provides a framework for DFO's, on-chain companies with proprietary assets and voting tokens as programmable equities
EPNS - a service that allows dApps, Smart Contracts & Services to send push notifications to their users in a decentralized way
Lightning Network - a Layer 2 protocol on top of Bitcoin that seeks to improve scalability by moving small and frequent transactions off-chain, allowing for fast peer-to-peer transactions and low fees.
Liquidity Network - a Layer 2 scalability solution that enables gas-less, near-instant trustless transactions & token swaps
Loom Network - a DPOS layer 2 scaling solution that allows developers to run large-scale applications on top of Ethereum
Loopring - an open source protocol for decentralized exchanges designed to provide matching-as-a-service, and its orders are unidirectional and do not differentiate takers and makers giving complete control to traders
mStable - a single standard unifying stablecoins swapping and lending that also reduces friction and fragmentation
Neutral - a meta-stablecoin system built using a basket of multiple stablecoins to generate a lower volatility token with a reduced risk profile
Nest - a decentralized and transparent price oracles network
Nexus Mutual - a decentralized insurance platform where people can share risk particularly against smart contract bugs, failure or other black swan events
Opyn - an insurance and risk management layer for DeFi
PhishFort Protect - a crypto open source browser plugin that protects users in the DeFi space from phising
pToken - a trustless and trasparent 2-way peg to teleport tokens across blockchains, without friction
rDAI - a DeFi primitive that splits principal and interest in DeFi investments, and streams accrued interest to chosen addresses
Reserve - a decentralized stablecoin protocol enabling global and frictionless payments
Tokentax - an easy to use cryptocurrency & DeFi taxes calculator
USDx - USDx is a decentralized and synthetic indexed stablecoin introduced by dForce. USDx's underlying stablecoins include USDC, TUSD and PAX
WBTC - an ERC20 token that is backed 1:1 by bitcoin.
xDai - an Ethereum sidechain with 5-second block times, low gas prices, and a native token that’s also called xDai.
0x Tracker - a trade explorer for 0x protocol and decentralized ERC20 token price index
Coin Interest Rate - a dashboard showcasing borrowing and lending rates for USDC and DAI
DefiScan - a read-only DeFi profile explorer for Compound, Uniswap, and SpankChain
Etherscan - a block explorer and muti-purpose analytics platform for Ethereum
Eth Gas Station - a consumer oriented metrics & analytics platform for the Ethereum gas market
Loan Scan - a dashboard showing the best rates to earn passive income or lowest rates to borrow crypto
UniswapROI - a calculator to help you analyze your investments in Uniswap and find the best liquidity pools
Whois0x - a database of wallet addresses and their linked social media accounts that also provides easy to understand DeFi stats for each address
Defi Nerd - a lending & borrowing reviews and rates comparison ressource for crypto assets
DeFi Prime - a list of the best Decentralized Finance Products
Defi Rate - a trusted resource for DeFi research, news and interviews with a strong focus on lending rates
EthHub Weekly Newsletter - a trusted resource on all things Ethereum
Chris Blec - a collection of demos for various DeFi products, targeted to beginner & intermediate users.
Into the Ether Podcast - a podcast focusing on all things related to Ethereum, the leading blockchain for decentralized applications.
Wyre Podcast - a podcast where Thomas Scaria interviews founders of top DeFi projects twice a month. Giving insight to their business as well as the technical challenges that they have overcome.
Bankless - the ultimate guide to crypto finance written by Ryan Sean Adams
DeFi Tutorial - a newsletter focused on teaching and educating readers about DeFi with hands on video tutorials
DeFi Value - a place to better understand and evaluate Decentralized Finance
DeFi Weekly - a weekly in-depth review of technical achievements within decentralized finance
Dose of DeFi - a weekly newsletter that specializes in deep dives on topics in the space
EthHub Weekly Newsletter - a collection of the week's Ethereum and cryptocurrency news curated by the founders of EthHub
The Defiant - a curated list of daily news in the DeFi space explained and conensed down to a digestable level by Camila Russo
Concourse Open Community - an open community of builders, enthusiasts and researchers working towards a free, bountiful and decentralized future for everyone
Dai para principiantes - a spanish-first Dai and Defi educational website, tutorials & active community
DeFi Nation - a DeFi-oriented community featuring discussions, walk-throughs, Q&A calls and more
Ethereum Italia - an Ethereum focused community in Italy with a strong presence on all social media
Hola DeFi - a DeFi product directory for the Spanish-speaking community
The ‘Trilemma’ of Blockchain space - Scalability, Security, and Decentralization - are the three things every blockchain is trying to solve simultaneously. But it’s easier said than done, as proven by the scalability issue faced by Ethereum. Higher scalability transcends to higher market adoption. This is where Cardano and Algorand have come into the picture. They have their similarities and differences that seem to work for them for now. Rather than telling you which one has more potential, it’s better to present the entire case and let you decide how they fare against each other.
Star Player of the Team
Anyone would agree that having a renowned and accomplished team player always gives a boost to the project.
Cardano’s Charles Hoskinson
If the name seems familiar, that’s because he is also the co-founder of Ethereum. A tech entrepreneur and mathematician with an interest in analytic number theory, Charles Hoskinson moved into blockchain space in 2013. He co-developed the Ethereum blockchain with Vitalik Buterin before leaving the project in June 2014. Hoskinson joined crypto and blockchain research firm IOHK to develop Cardano and since then has sponsored various blockchain research labs at the Tokyo Institute of Technology and the University of Edinburgh. He also founded Invictus Innovations. Hoskinson was the founding chairman of the education committee of the Bitcoin Foundation and established the Cryptocurrency Research Group in 2013. His current focus lies in educating people on the use of crypto and decentralization.
Algorand’s Silvio Micali
Unlike the innovators of other blockchain projects, Silvio Micali is already a famous name in cryptography long before he started developing Algorand. Deemed as one of the top cryptographers, he is a recipient of the prestigious Turing Award in 2012 and RSA prize for cryptography, Gödel Prize (theoretical computer science) in 1993, and ACM fellowship in 2017. Micali’s work spans around public-key cryptosystems, pseudorandom functions, digital signatures, oblivious transfer, and secure multi-party computation among others. In 1989, he co-invented Zero-Knowledge Proofs with Shafi Goldwasser and Charles Rackoff. He also developed Peppercoin, a cryptographic system for processing micropayments. A professor at MIT’s electrical engineering and computer science department since 1983, Silvio Micali is also working as a computer scientist at MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. His doctoral students include Shai Halevi, Mihir Bellare, Rafail Ostrovsky, Bonnie Berger, Rafael Pass, Chris Peikert, and Phillip Rogaway - each renowned in their respective fields.
Project Partners and Collaborators
For any business, partnerships and collaborations are the most important aspect since they drive growth and innovation.
Cardano has formed 17 partnerships so far that either enhance its capabilities or grow its business.
Metaps Plus: To integrate the ADA coins into the MeTaps Plus, South Korea’s one of the largest mobile payment platforms.
IBM Research: For a software distribution project commissioned by the European Union.
PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC): To develop a new commercial strategy, probably to bring enterprise users to Cardano.
New Balance: All customers can authenticate the footwear purchases on the Cardano blockchain.
SIRIN LABS: To integrate the Cardano blockchain in their blockchain smartphone FINNEY and its SIRIN OS.
Konfidio: To drive the adoption of the blockchain business model platform among corporations and governments.
Algoz: To offer liquidity solutions and trading solutions for its native ADA token.
Priviledge: To study and publish decentralized software updates Priviledge is a consortium of renowned companies and scientific universities with the European Union.
South Korea Government-Approved Trade Associations:Signed two MoUs with Korea Mobile Game Association (KMGA) and Korea Blockchain Contents Association (KBCCA) to implement Cardano for Korean mobile gaming and digital content.
Ethiopian Government: To develop a new digital payment system and combine it with identity cards using its Atala blockchain framework.
Georgian Government: Signed MoU to implement Cardano blockchain-enabled projects across education, business, and government services.
Cardano’s other major partnership includes Z/Yen Group’s Distributed Futures practice, COTI Network, and Ellipal Hardware.
Algorand’s innovativeness and potential to be the blockchain leader has helped it bag a plethora of valuable partnerships across the world. Here are a few partnerships out of the 17 -
International Blockchain Monetary Reserve (IBMR): To launch the Southeast Asia Microfinance Platform and create a stablecoin called Asia Reserve Currency Coin (ARCC) to encourage financial inclusion in Southeast Asia.
SFB Technologies: To build the infrastructure to create a CBDC (central bank digital currency) dubbed ‘SOV’ for the Marshall Islands.
Meld: To tokenize gold and track it over the supply chain using stablecoin for the Australian gold industry.
Caratan: To build financial tools and products to promote Fintech adoption at an institutional level.
Italian Society of Authors and Publishers (SIAE): To develop copyright management tools and services.
DUST Identity: To authenticate physical objects and validate transactions over the blockchain.
AssetBlock: A real estate startup launched its tokenized property investment platform on Algorand
PlanetWatch: Focused on environmental monitoring, the first "CERN Spin-off " labeled organization is building the world's first immutable air quality ledger on the Algorand blockchain using IoT technologies.
Other major partnerships include World Chess - the commercial arm of the World Chess Federation, Big Data company Syncsort, and Tether.
Both Cardano and Algorand use PoS or Proof of Stake consensus mechanism at their heart, but that’s where the similarity ends. Each of them has its own spin to it. In the PoS mechanism, a person can validate a block depending on how many stakes or coins he holds. The stake quantity determines the amount of mining power one has. So how does each of them differ?
Cardano’s version is called Ouroboros PoS.
Cardano allows stakeholders to pool their resources together in a single ‘stake pool’, thus delegating their stakes to the pool. This is because every elected stakeholder may not have the expertise to create blocks.
The physical timeline is divided into small blocks called ‘epochs’ that are made up of fixed slots. These epochs are cyclic.
Each such epoch consists of a set of pooled stakeholders.
While the endorsers are elected depending on the weight of the number of stakes held by them, a slot leader (for every epoch) is randomly chosen by a digital coin toss among stakeholders. When the endorsers approve the blocks produced by slot leaders, it gets added to the blockchain.
The slot leader also selects the slot leader for the next epoch through the ‘coin toss’.
Note that having a higher stake increases the probability of getting elected.
Currently, the list of validators is fixed and the succession is known beforehand.
With the launch of the Shelley mainnet, Cardano plans to remove the above issue. But this will be a hard fork. Here, the community will decide on block validators through staking.
The version Algorand uses is called PPoS (Pure Proof of Stake) consensus mechanism.
PPoS randomly selects a token holder as a block producer.
The proposed block gets approved by a committee of 1000 randomly selected token owners and then added to the blockchain.
The algorithm runs a cryptographically verifiable lucky draw over all the accounts to randomly select committee members as well as the block proposer.
This means the identities of the participants are unknown until the blocks are added to the chain.
This selection does not depend on the stake size of the nodes at all.
PPoS runs this lottery process in complete isolation with other nodes in the network.
The completely randomized election and secret identities of the committee members drastically reduce the chances of any foul playing within the network. As the number of users grows, the network gets stronger and more secure. Algorand’s PPoS has embraced a more egalitarian ecosystem to negate the wealth gap present in traditional PoS.
Currently, Cardano offers 50-250 TPS. But with incorporating sharding technology in its Ouroboros Hydra version, the scalability can increase to one million TPS theoretically. The processing speed will increase as more users or nodes join the network.
In Algorand, every lottery takes just a microsecond to run. Since such lotteries run independently of each other, multiple lotteries can run simultaneously. This inherently makes PPoS highly scalable. The mainnet itself has the capability to handle 1000 TPS.
Both Cardano and Algorand have sound tech and teams that believe in extensive research and meticulously designed products. Having an early start, there’s no denying that Cardano has established itself in a superior position thanks to the technological achievement, consistency, and transparency it has showcased. But with Algorand’s ecosystem growing fast, the competition has intensified. Algorand’s aim to bring full transparency, technological innovation, and successful partnerships just within a year have made it a prime challenger to Cardano. While referring to Algorand, Cardano chief Hoskinson voiced similar opinion - “... they are another one of the science coins and we all kind of support each other. Even though we get academically competitive, we're able to reference each other's work and learn from each other and grow from each other.”
A new way to monetize blogs - looking for feedback please! :)
Hey bloggers, I’m reaching out to ask for your opinions on my startup! - I've listed some questions at the bottom that are my main concerns but any feedback would be appreciated. What it is: A way of monetizing your blogs/sites. We offer a paywall which gives users the choice to view an ad(s) or to pay in micropayments. The problem: Adblocker is leading to revenue loss Difficult for small blogs: only payout when you meet a minimum or only can show ads once you have a certain number of visitors Our solution: Users can pay for access in micropayments (e.g. half a penny) Or, users can view ads for free access. Our ads include Captchas so that adblocker will not work for these. We do not need to aggregate amounts, so you can withdraw earnings straight away. The bit you might not like: Our service runs on the Bitcoin Lightning Network. Aargh, we know this is off-putting for a lot of people. But hear me out… Why we do it this way: Bitcoin Lightning Network has created a way of offering micropayments without the need of aggregating amounts. It also gives users another level of privacy (something many are concerned with in this age of privacy and data rights). Why it shouldn’t put you off: If you’re interested in cryptocurrency then, great, you can keep it and spend it as you like. If you want nothing to do with cryptocurrency then that is totally fine. You can convert your money back into your own currency. Our driving ambitions are: To help content creators get properly rewarded for their work To give users more control over their online privacy and data My questions to you: Would you be more willing to add a paywall to your site that still offered a means of free access by viewing ads? Or would you be totally against a hard paywall? Does the idea of having to deal with cryptocurrency completely turn you off? If we can make it as simple as possible to set-up, could you get your head around the idea of Bitcoin? Any other thoughts that you have would be greatly appreciated! The good and the bad. You can also drop me an email. I’d love to give you some more information and hear your thoughts: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Ruby 😊
Increase Nano Projects and Developer Resources | Among other ideas
To increase adoption I think marketing should be focused on two things and only enacted once they've somewhat been fulfilled. Otherwise Nano is just some weird version of Bitcoin and doesn't have much use. Alternative platforms improved by Nano and how developers can build on Nano. While these both are very intertwined I do think they should be separated. For the first one we simply need more projects for people to use. The build off was a great start but I think we need to go futher. There needs to be alternatives to products that exists but are clearly not only enhanced by better because of Nano. Take for instance Venmo. The whole idea is making it easy, cheap, and fast to send money to people you know. Of course at the moment PayPal charges a fee for the ability to send money fast, it is also locked to the United States, and finally has privacy issues. Now if a wallet was created that makes it easy to buy Nano, has human readable addresses, makes tax compliance simple, allow businesses to use it, and with some marketing we could have a real Venmo competitor. Now of course Venmo was just one example but this could be applied to many things such as Ecommerce, micropayments, etc. Take Ecommerce for example. Besides just creating an easy way to integrate with the major self hosted platforms there could be an alternative to Ebay/Amazon but prices would be slighty discounted (2% or something) if you used Nano instead of a Debt/Credit Card. As the sellers wouldn't be losing profit fees and wouldn't have to worry about charge backs. Along with this Nano cash back programs could exist on these platforms. My point is we need alternative online platforms to the major ones today (Reddit, YouTube, Facebook, PayPal, etc.) that are improved by Nano. (Side Note: Making a list of platforms that could be improved by Nano with a bounty for creating said platforms would be a good start for something like this.) Once we have those platforms then use marketing to focus on why they're better and people should use them. Otherwise Nano is just a feeless currency which exists in the form of debit cards. (For the users not the business accepting said debit cards.) For my second point Nano development needs some sort of really well written tutorial (written or in video format) that teaches viewers how to create various projects and everything else we can about Nano. This would greatly speed up adoption as developers would be able to master Nano much faster then they are now. With this there should be a library/suite of well documented tools to help create projects quicker. Also how cool would it be if there was some sort of Nano magazine that teaches developers and enthusiasts how to build random projects. That would help a lot with creating an active community. Finally developers they need an incentive. That's why I think creating some sort of foundation and or a permanent build off would be a boon to Nano. As mass innovation would be encouraged. These could be funded through user nano donations. Something similar to a Pateron where we'd all donate x-amount and get name recognition if we wanted too. This would be a crazy boost to community involvement and adoption. Also If the price could be stabilized that would also help. All of these would drive adoption because they drive interest and use. TLDR: Create better developer resources and a couple alternatives to major online services. Then spend the budget on marketing those in the their respective circles.
An idea for a better way to monetize blogs and I want your feedback
Hey bloggers, I’m reaching out to ask for your opinions on my startup! What it is: A way of monetizing your blogs/sites. We offer a paywall which gives users the choice to view an ad(s) or to pay in micropayments. The problem: Increased use of adblocker is leading to a loss in revenue for content creators. Many services such as Goodle Adsense only payout when you meet a certain threshold which can be difficult for small blogs to attain. Other blogs are becoming subscription-based only but users are suffering from subscription fatigue. Our solution: Let users pay for each article individually in micropayments (e.g. half a penny) so they can access a plethora of sites and not be restricted by subscriptions. Or, users can view ads for free access. Our ads include Captchas so that adblocker will not work for these. Whilst we are creating a hard paywall, the option to view ads for free access should prevent users from bouncing like they would when meeting a traditional paywall. We do not need to aggregate amounts, so you can withdraw earnings straight away. The bit you might not like: Our service runs on the Bitcoin Lightning Network. Aargh, we know this is off-putting for a lot of people. But hear me out… Why we do it this way: Bitcoin Lightning Network has created a way of offering micropayments without the need of aggregating amounts. It also gives users another level of privacy (something many are concerned with in this age of privacy and data rights). Why it shouldn’t put you off: If you’re interested in cryptocurrency then, great, you can keep it and spend it as you like. If you want nothing to do with cryptocurrency then that is totally fine. You can convert your money back into your own currency. Our driving ambitions are: To help content creators get properly rewarded for their work To give users more control over their online privacy and data My questions to you: Would you be more willing to add a paywall to your site that still offered a means of free access by viewing ads? Or would you be totally against a hard paywall? Does the idea of having to deal with cryptocurrency completely turn you off? If we can make it as simple as possible to set-up, could you get your head around the idea of Bitcoin? Any other thoughts that you have would be greatly appreciated! The good and the bad. You can also drop me an email. I’d love to give you some more information and hear your thoughts: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) Ruby 😊
Bitcoin faucets are websites or applications that offer you a small amount of bitcoin as a reward for making easy tasks. Depending on the selected faucet, users can earn coins for completing various tasks, such as viewing certain websites, watching ads, entering a captcha, or playing a game. by StealthEX At the beginning of the cryptocurrency’s existence, when the stakes were not so high, the creators of faucets gave 5 bitcoins for each claim — back then it was their way to promote digital money among newcomers. Now faucets operate with much smaller amounts and give out some part of the Bitcoin, which is measured in Satoshi(named after the creator of Bitcoin). Satoshi is the smallest possible fractional number of Bitcoin — one BTC is equal to 100 million Satoshi. If you have ever left a water tap not completely closed, you probably noticed that water was dripping into it, and if you put a bowl under it, sooner or later it will be filled. Even though one-time payments on faucets are scanty, many advise not to neglect the opportunity to earn on them, because, with the right approach, faucets can bring a tangible profit with a minimum of effort. There are plenty of sites offering free bitcoins. Unfortunately, most of them are not trustworthy, do not live long, or are simply overflowed with annoying flashing ads. However, there are some that work for many years, used by thousands of users and considered reliable. Here is the list of them:
This faucet is probably the most well-known one. It was created in 2013 on the territory of the British Virgin Islands. Payouts are not fixed and vary for each claim. You can get cryptocurrency every hour, and for each claim you get from 0.00000030 to 0.03 BTC. In addition to the faucet, Freebitcoin allows you to earn in other ways — save interest on your deposit, play the lottery, invite new users via referral links. It supports several withdrawal methods: you can set up automatic withdrawal every Sunday, slow withdrawal every 6–24 hours, or use the fastest instant withdrawal that takes 15 minutes. The last one, of course, has the highest fee.
Founded in 2015, the Moon Bitcoin has a certain user base and is considered by many to be one of the best faucets in existence. There are many appealing bonus offers. For example, the site gives you a reward for consistency — if you enter a captcha at least once every day, you will accumulate a bonus +1% to earnings daily. Like most other faucets, Moon Bitcoin offers a bonus for bringing new users. Earned funds are instantly transferred to the linked Coinpot wallet. The minimum withdrawal amount is 10,000 Satoshi if you agree to pay the fee. Or wait until it’s going to be over 50,000 Satoshi on your account and withdrawal money for free. It is worth saying that Coinpot has its own bonus program. For example, for one captcha entry, you get 3 Coinpot tokens that can also be converted to cryptocurrency. There are also Moon faucets for Litecoin, Dash, Bitcoin Cash and DogeCoin. All payments are concentrated in one Coinpot account.
Bonus Bitcoin is one of the oldest services and is considered one of the best bitcoin faucets. You can request a new portion of free coins every 15 minutes, getting an average of 10 Satoshi per claim. You can also gain more coins completing tasks in the offers and surveys section. Users who regularly stay active for a number of days receive an additional 5% of their daily rewards. The site also gives 50% of all fees of users you invited using referral links. Bonus Bitcoin accounts are also connected to Coinpot, a micro-earnings wallet that accumulates your payouts. The site also provides the opportunity to earn Litecoin and Dogecoin.
This is one more faucet associated with Coinpot wallet. Bitfun started its work in January 2017. In addition to the faucet itself, which allows you to request free Satoshi every 3 minutes, the site has a large number of browser games of various genres. Progress in these games gives you additional earnings. You can also earn coins by completing offers. As with Bonus Bitcoin, the user receives 50% of the fees of their referrals.
The service was launched in 2018 and has become known as one of the best free bitcoin generators. There are several ways to claim Satoshi. In addition to the faucet, you can also earn bitcoins by watching videos, clicking on ads, and playing browser games. Here you can make claims once every 12 hours and get a certain number of Coins to your account. Coins are the inner currency of this service, 10000 Coins worth 1$. It converted to Satoshi at the time of withdrawal. Rewards can be collected at FaucetHub, another web wallet for micropayments, in this case, the withdrawal limit is 35,000 Coins. For amounts over 100,000 Coins, withdrawals can be made directly to your bitcoin wallet. Or you can keep Coins at the site and earn 5% interest. Users can earn a loyalty bonus, by claiming rewards every day. Bringing another user via referral link gives you 25% of their claims and 10% of their offer earnings.
PentaFaucet is one of the oldest and most stable bitcoin faucets today. The main difference from similar websites is that the site uses double protection: captcha and anti-bot. You can collect from 5 to 25 Satoshi every 5 minutes. A reasonable amount of advertising and a simple interface make working with the faucet comfortable. The faucet does not allow you to earn money from games, surveys, and other sponsorship services. In addition to the main method, it offers only a referral program, giving 10% from earnings of each new user. Earned Satoshi are instantly transferred to the FaucetHub wallet. You can withdraw your funds from FaucetHub to your bitcoin wallet once a week on Sundays.
FireFaucet is a multi-currency automatic faucet, perhaps the best of its kind. This resource allows you to earn 9 cryptocurrencies at the same time, as well as instantly withdraw the accumulated funds to the Faucet Hub. The Auto Claim function allows for collecting currency automatically. You can change the number of currencies to get and the time between collections. FireFaucet affords many different ways to earn money: in addition to the faucet itself, there are also offers, a referral system that gives 20% from newcomer’s income, and browser mining. FireFaucet also has its own unique level system: getting XP for various actions on the site and raising their level, users receive a reward in Satoshi. As a pleasant addition, FireFaucet has a nice-looking design and does not use pop-up ads.
This bitcoin faucet does not require registration. All you need is the public address of your BTC wallet. Users can claim Satoshi every hour, getting from 5 to 1200 each time. At the moment DailyFreeBits is using the FaucetHub wallet we are already familiar with. The resource offers a referral reward. By inviting new users to the website, you can regularly receive 10% of their earnings. These are probably the best bitcoin faucets at this point. Do not expect that you will earn loads of money just using faucets, but it is with no doubt an interesting and easy way to get a certain portion of free Satoshi and learn how the cryptocurrency and various wallets work. Always be careful and study every site that is claimed to be a Bitcoin faucet with some scepticism. Always be critical of your choice and read reviews. Original article was posted onhttps://stealthex.io/blog/2020/05/28/best-bitcoin-faucets/
Bitcoin To Reach $397,000 By 2030 According To A Crypto Research Report
Researchers Also Predicted Ethereum To Reach Prices Of Over $3,600 By 2030 The latest report by CryptoReseach made a shocking price prediction that Bitcoin, the world’s largest cryptocurrency by market cap, would be over $397,000 by 2030. The researchers also noted that the price movement of the altcoin sector would closely follow Bitcoin. Interestingly, researchers noted that the biggest price surge would be in the following five years, with another five years of steady price increases. Researchers believe that Bitcoin “is still in its early phase of mass adoption”, as the crypto leader is only working with 0,44% of its potential addressable market. “If Bitcoin manages to penetrate and reach 10% of its potential market, we are seeing non-discounted prices of $400,000 per Bitcoin”, the report stated. The CryptoResearch team also took one of the best-performing cryptocurrencies into account. It turns out that Ethereum (ETH) is anticipated to grow ten-fold over the course of the next five years, Litecoin (LTC) would surge from its present $83 price point to $2,252 by 2030. The report also includes Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and Stellar (XLM). The price increases mean that Bitcoin would up its price by 4,000% by 2030, while Ethereum, Litecoin, and Bitcoin Cash would see a price increase of 1,600%, 5,000%, and 5,400%, respectively. Stellar, however, is set to gain the most, with an 11,000% total price increase by 2030. Source: Crypto Research The research company used the Target Addressable Market (TAM) metric, which is used to “determine the implied future price of crypto assets.” The researchers explained that they use numerous metrics to derive their predictions, such as tax evasion, remittance, store of value, micropayments, online transactions, online loans and gambling, crypto trading, and others. CryptoResearch also noted that the off-chain velocity of the researched crypto assets is increasing, as opposed to their on-chain velocity numbers. Off-chain velocity is referred to as trading on crypto exchanges, while the on-chain velocity is a measure of the amount of transaction on a given blockchain. For instance, Bitcoin’s off-chain velocity and the price moved almost simultaneously. https://preview.redd.it/i0vo86uulu751.jpg?width=1300&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cba4cd3dde364869d747a88b3229e6c4e39e5833 “If cryptos see mass adoption in the long run, as well as short-run speculative or retail usage, their prices will definitely go up. However, the increase in off-chain velocity means cryptocurrencies are primarily used as speculation assets, rather than a store of value.” The researchers concluded.
This is a followup of my older post about the history of payment channel mechanisms. The "modern" payment channel system is Lightning Network, which uses bidirectional indefinite-lifetime channels, using HTLCs to trustlessly route through the network. However, at least one other payment channel mechanism was developed at roughly the same time as Lightning, and there are also further proposals that are intended to replace the core payment channel mechanism in use by Lightning. Now, in principle, the "magic" of Lightning lies in combining two ingredients:
Offchain updateable systems.
HTLCs to implement atomic cross-system swaps.
We can replace the exact mechanism implementing an offchain updateable system. Secondly we can replace the use of HTLCs with another atomic cross-system swap, which is what we would do when we eventually switch to payment points and scalars from payment hashes and preimages. So let's clarify what I'll be discussing here:
I will be discussing mechanisms for the offchain updateable system, which are generally called "payment channel mechanisms". The exact contracts that can be transported across such systems, such as HTLCs, the Scriptless-Script point-based variant, and Discrete Log Contracts, will have to wait another post.
Payment channel mechanisms are designed to be trust-minimized. They might not achieve this design goal (consider the broken Satoshi sequence numbers, or the pre-SegWit Spilman, which I still class as "payment channel mechanism"), but mechanisms which invoke trust in one participant or other as inherent parts of their design are not true payment channels. Such constructions might be of interest, but I will not discuss them here.
Now I might use "we" here to refer to what "we" did to the design of Bitcoin, but it is only because "we" are all Satoshi, except for Craig Steven Wright. So, let's present the other payment channel mechanisms. But first, a digression.
Digression: the new nSequence and OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY
The new relative-timelock semantics of nSequence. Last time we used nSequence, we had the unfortunate problem that it would be easy to rip off people by offering a higher miner fee for older state where we own more funds, then convince the other side of the channel to give us goods in exchange for a new state with tiny miner fees, then publish both the old state and the new state, then taunt the miners with "so which state is gonna earn you more fees huh huh huh?". This problem, originally failed by Satoshi, was such a massive facepalm that, in honor of miners doing the economically-rational thing in the face of developer and user demands when given a non-final nSequence, we decided to use nSequence as a flag for the opt-in replace-by-fee. Basically, under opt-in replace-by-fee, if a transaction had an nSequence that was not 0xFFFFFFFF or 0xFFFFFFFE, then it was opt-in RBF (BIP125). Because you'd totally abuse nSequence to bribe miners in order to steal money from your bartender, especially if your bartender is not a werebear. Of course, using a 4-byte field for a one-bit flag (to opt-in to RBF or not) was a massive waste of space, so when people started proposing relative locktimes, the nSequence field was repurposed. Basically, in Bitcoin as of the time of this writing (early 2020) if nSequence is less than 0x80000000 it can be interpreted as a relative timelock. I'll spare you the details here, BIP68 has them, but basically nSequence can indicate (much like nLockTime) either a "real world" relative lock time (i.e. the output must have been confirmed for X seconds before it can be spent using a transaction with a non-zero nSequence) or the actual real world, which is measured in blocks (i.e. the output must have been confirmed for N blocks before it can be spent using a transaction with a non-zero nSequence). Of course, this is the Bitcoin universe and "seconds" is a merely human delusion, so we will use blocks exclusively. And similarly to OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY, we also added OP_CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY in BIP112. This ensures that the nSequence field is a relative-locktime (i.e. less than 0x80000000) and that it is the specified type (block-based or seconds-based) and that it is equal or higher to the specified minimum relative locktime. It is important to mention the new, modern meaning of nSequence, because it is central to many of the modern payment channel mechanisms, including Lightning Poon-Dryja. Lessons learned?
Poetic justice is a thing. Go go new nSequence!
Decker-Wattenhofer "Duplex Micropayment Channels"
Mechanisms-within-mechanisms for a punishment-free bidirectional indefinite-lifetime payment channel. The Decker-Wattenhofer paper was published in 2015, but the Poon-Dryja "Lightning Network" paper was published in 2016. However, the Decker-Wattenhofer paper mentions the Lightning mechanism, specifically mentioning the need to store every old revocation key (i.e. the problem I mentioned last time that was solved using RustyReddit shachains). Maybe Poon-Dryja presented the Lightning Network before making a final published paper in 2016, or something. Either that or cdecker is the Bitcoin time traveler. It's a little hard to get an online copy now, but as of late 2019 this seems to work: copy Now the interesting bit is that Decker-Wattenhofer achieves its goals by combining multiple mechanisms that are, by themselves, workable payment channel mechanisms already, except each has some massive drawbacks. By combining them, we can minimize the drawbacks. So let's go through the individual pieces.
Indefinite-lifetime Spilman channels
As mentioned before, Spilman channels have the drawback that they have a limited lifetime: the lock time indicated in the backoff transaction or backoff branch of the script. However, instead of an absolute lock time, we can use a relative locktime. In order to do so, we use a "kickoff" transaction, between the backoff transaction and the funding transaction. Our opening ritual goes this way, between you and our gender-neutral bartender-bancho werebear:
First, you compute the txid for the funding transaction and the kickoff transaction. The funding transaction takes some of your funds and puts it into a 2-of-2 between you and the bartender, and the kickoff is a 1-input 1-output transaction that spends the funding transaction and outputs to another 2-of-2 between you and the bartender.
Then, you generate the backoff transaction, which spends the kickoff transaction and returns all the funds to you. The backoff has a non-zero nSequence, indicating a delay of a number of blocks agreed between you, which is a security/convenience tradeoff parameter
You sign the backoff transaction, then send it to the bartender.
The bartender signs the backoff, and gives back the fully-signed transaction to you.
You sign the kickoff transaction, then send it to the bartender.
The bartender signs the kickoff, and gives it back to you fully signed.
You sign and broadcast the funding transaction, and both of you wait for the funding transaction to be deeply confirmed.
The above setup assumes you're using SegWit, because transaction malleability fix. At any time, either you or the bartender can broadcast the kickoff transaction, and once that is done, this indicates closure of the channel. You do this if you have drunk enough alcoholic beverages, or the bartender could do this when he or she is closing the bar. Now, to get your drinks, you do:
Sign a transaction spending the kickoff, and adding more funds to the bartender, to buy a drink. This transaction is not encumbered with an nSequence.
Hand the signed transaction to the bartender, who provides you with your next drink.
The channel is closed by publishing the kickoff transaction. Both of you have a fully-signed copy of the kickoff, so either of you can initiate the close. On closure (publication and confirmation of the kickoff transaction), there are two cases:
You fail to pick up any chicks at the bar (I prefer female humans of optimum reproductive age myself rather than nestling birds, but hey, you do you) so you didn't actually spend for drinks at all. In this case, the bartender is not holding any transactions that can spend the kickoff transaction. You wait for the agreed-upon delay after the kickoff is confirmed, and then publish the backoff transaction and get back all the funds that you didn't spend.
You spend all your money on chicks and end up having to be kicked into a cab to get back to your domicile, because even juvenile birds can out-drink you, you pushover. The bartender then uses the latest transaction you gave (the one that gives the most money to him or her --- it would be foolish of him or her to use an earlier version with less money!), signs it, and broadcasts it to get his or her share of the money from the kickoff transaction.
Pro: Number of updates is limited only by the amount of money you have in the "payer" side of the channel.
Pro: no lifetime limit. You can keep the channel open indefinitely if you don't transact over it.
Pro: The delay can be very small.
Decrementing nSequence channels
Enforcing order by reducing relative locktimes. I believe this to be novel to the Decker-Wattenhofer mechanism, though I might be missing some predecessor. This again uses the new relative-locktime meaning of nSequence. As such, it also uses a kickoff transaction like the above indefinite-lifetime Spilman channel. Set up is very similar to the setup of the above indefinite-lifetime Spilman channel, except that because this is bidirectional, we can actually have both sides put money into the initial starting backoff transaction. We also rename the "backoff" transaction to "state" transaction. Basically, the state transaction indicates how the money in the channel is divided up between the two participants. The "backoff" we sign during the funding ritual is now the first state transaction. Both sides keep track of the current state transaction (which is initialized to the first state transaction on channel establishment). Finally, the starting nSequence of the first state transaction is very large (usually in the dozens or low hundreds of blocks). Suppose one participant wants to pay the other. The ritual done is then:
A new version of the current state transaction is created with more money in the payee side.
This new version has nSequence that is one block lower than the current state transaction (in practice it should be a few blocks lower, not just one, because sometimes miners find blocks in quick succession).
Both sides exchange signatures for the new state transaction.
Both sides set the new state transaction as the current state transaction that will be the basis for the next payment.
When the channel is closed by publication of the kickoff transaction, then the transaction with the lowest nSequence becomes valid earlier than the other state transactions. This is enough to enforce that the most recent state transaction (the one with the lowest nSequence, and thus the first to become valid) is published.
Pro: indefinite lifetime, at least if no updates are done.
Pro: it shows that life is not without a sense of irony. The original design for nSequence replacement required an incrementing nSequence using the original Satoshi's Vision interpretation of nSequence (which doesn't work). But this channel mechanism instead uses a decrementing nSequence using the new Bitcoin Core interpretation of nSequence as a relative timelock (which does, in fact, work).
Con: Number of updates is limited by the starting maximum nSequence delay. Increasing this delay increases the encumbrance if the channel is closed without any activity, but reducing this delay reduces the number of payments in either direction you can use before you have to close the channel and recreate it. For example, let's have a maximum of 144 blocks of delay. Each update, we decrement the nSequence by 4, because that handles up to the very rare case where up to 3 blocks arrive in very close succession to each other. That only gives us 36 updates for a worst-case of one day of delay, a very bad tradeoff.
Con: You can only be safely offline for a number of blocks equal to the "step", but the maximum delay you may incur is the product of the step times the number of updates you want to make. So you want a small step (because you don't want your worst-case lock time to be large) but you want a big step (because you want to still be safe even if you go offline for a long time).
Combining the ingredients of the Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels concoction. Of note is that we can "chain" these mechanisms together in such a way that we strengthen their strengths while covering their weaknesses. A note is that both the indefinite-lifetime nSequence Spilman variant, and the above decrementing nSequence mechanism, both have "kickoff" transactions. However, when we chain the two mechanisms together, it turns out that the final transaction of one mechanism also serves as the kickoff of the next mechanism in the chain. So for example, let's chain two of those decrementing nSequence channels together. Let's make them 144 blocks maximum delay each, and decrement in units of 4 blocks, so each of the chained mechanisms can do 37 updates each. We start up a new channel with the following transactions:
A funding transaction paying to a 2-of-2, confirmed deeply onchain. All other transactions are offchain until closure.
A kickoff transaction spending the funding transaction output, paying to a 2-of-2.
A "stage 1" decrementing nSequence state transaction, spending the kickoff, with current nSequence 144, paying to a 2-of-2.
A "stage 2" decrementing nSequence state transaction, spending the stage 1, with current nSequence 144, paying to the initial state of the channel.
When we update this channel, we first update the "stage 2" state transaction, replacing it with an nSequence lower by 4 blocks. So after one update our transactions are:
A funding transaction paying to a 2-of-2, confirmed deeply onchain. All other transactions are offchain until closure.
A kickoff transaction spending the funding transaction output, paying to a 2-of-2.
A "stage 1" decrementing nSequence state transaction, spending the kickoff, with current nSequence 144, paying to a 2-of-2.
A "stage 2" decrementing nSequence state transaction, spending the stage 1, with current nSequence 140, paying to the second state of the channel.
The first 3 transactions are the same, only the last one is replaced with a state transaction with lower `nSequence. Things become interesting when we reach the "stage 2" having nSequence 0. On the next update, we create a new "stage 1", with an nSequence that is 4 lower, and "reset" the "stage 2" back to an nSequence of 144. This is safe because even though we have a "stage 2" with shorter nSequence, that stage 2 spends a stage 1 with an nSequence of 144, and the stage 1 with nSequence of 140 would beat it to the blockchain first. This results in us having, not 36 + 36 updates, but instead 36 * 36 updates (1296 updates). 1296 updates is still kinda piddling, but that's much better than just a single-stage decrementing nSequence channel. The number of stages can be extended indefinitely, and your only drawback would be the amount of blockchain space you'd spend for a unilateral close. Mutual cooperative closes can always shortcut the entire stack of staged transactions and cut it to a single mutual cooperative close transaction. But that's not all! You might be wondering about the term "duplex" in the name "Duplex Micropayment Channels". That's because the last decrementing nSequence stage does not hold the money of the participants directly. Instead, the last stage holds two indefinite-lifetime Spilman channels. As you might remember, Spilman channels are unidirectional, so the two Spilman channels represent both directions of the channel. Thus, duplex. Let's go back to you and your favorite werebear bartender. If you were using a Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channel, you'd have several stages of decrementing nSequence, terminated in two Spilman channels, a you-to-bartender channel and a bartender-to-you channel. Suppose that, while drinking, the bartender offers you a rebate on each drink if you do some particular service for him or her. Let us not discuss what service this is and leave it to your imagination. So you pay for a drink, decide you want to get the rebate, and perform a service that the bartender finds enjoyable. So you transfer some funds on the you-to-bartender direction, and then later the bartender transfers some funds in the bartender-to-you channel after greatly enjoying your service. Suppose you now exhaust the you-to-bartender direction. However, you note that the rebates you've earned are enough to buy a few more drinks. What you do instead is to update the staged decrementing nSequence mechanisms, and recreate the two Spilman directions such that the you-to-bartender direction contains all your current funds and the bartender-to-you direction contains all the bartender's funds. With this, you are now able to spend even the money you earned from rebates. At the same time, even if the staged decrementing nSequence mechanisms only have a few hundred thousand updates, you can still extend the practical number of updates as long as you don't have to reset the Spilman channels too often.
Pro: chaining allows more possible updates!
Pro: no "toxic waste"! That is, old backups of your channel state database won't cause you to lose funds automatically.
Con: unilateral closes have long lock times, due to the chaining of decrementing-nSequence mechanisms.
Con: unilateral closes put a lot of transactions onchain, due to the chaining of multiple nested mechanisms.
Con: HTLCs are affected by the total nSequence delay needed by the mechanism. This is because HTLCs have an absolute timelock in their contract, and this can only be enforced onchain. However, the existence of nSequence delays means that absolute timelocks need to trigger unilateral closes several blocks before the absolute timelock, by the nSequence total delta of all the stacked mechanisms. In Poon-Dryja you can safely keep a channel open until just before the absolute timelock expires.
Con: It's not clear to me if the cancellable HTLCs used by Lightning can be hosted by Spilman channels. The HTLCs used in Lightning are "cancellable" because of a nifty ability of every offchain update mechanism: every contract has an additional clause "... or if every signer of the offchain update mechanism agrees, we can ignore this contract and place its funds wherever we agree on". This is not a degradation of security since the HTLCs in a channel are between the two users of the channel, so both of them need to agree anyway in order to accept such a cancellation. This ability is used to propagate forwarding failures back to the payer: instead of waiting for the HTLCs to time out, the node just says to the sender "between you and me, this HTLC won't propagate anyway, because 'insert some reason here', so let's just put the money in it back to you". However, this seems unsafe with Spilman channels, as a cancelled HTLC will still be available on older states of the Spilman channel, and potentially claimable by the payee end up until the timelock. Removing the Spilman channels at the end would remove this issue, but now you are limited to a few hundred thousand updates even with lots of decrementing-nSequence layers.
Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer Channel Factories
Because you like channels so much, you put channels inside channels so you could pay while you pay. I N C E P T I O N The Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels introduced the possibility of nesting a channel mechanism inside another channel mechanism. For example, it suggests nesting a decrementing-nSequence mechanism inside another decrementing-nSequence mechanism, and having as well an unlimited-lifetime Spilman channel at the end. In the Decker-Wattenhofer case, it is used to support the weakness of one mechanism with the strength of another mechanism. One thing to note is that while the unlimited-lifetime Spilman channel variant used is inherently two-participant (there is one payer and one payee), the decrementing-nSequence channel mechanism can be multiparticipant. Another thing of note is that nothing prevents one mechanism from hosting just one inner mechanism, just as it is perfectly fine for a Lightning Network channel to have multiple HTLCs in-flight, plus the money in your side, plus the money in the counterparty's side. As these are "just" Bitcoin-enforceable contracts, there is no fundamental difference between an HTLC, and a payment channel mechanism. Thus the most basic idea of the Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer Channel Factories paper is simply that we can have a multiparticipant update mechanism host multiple two-party update mechanisms. The outer multiparticipant update mechanism is called a "channel factory" while the inner two-party update mechanisms are called "channels". The exact mechanism used in the Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer paper uses several decrementing-nSequence mechanisms to implement the factory, and Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels to implement the channel layer. However, as noted before, there is no fundamental difference between a Poon-Dryja channel and an HTLC. So it is in fact possible to have chained Decker-Wattenhofer decrementing-nSequence mechanisms to implement the factory level, while the channels are simply Poon-Dryja channels.
So this concludes for now an alternative mechanism to the classic Poon-Dryja that Lightning uses. The tradeoffs are significantly different between Decker-Wattenhofer vs Poon-Dryja:
Decker-Wattenhofer: No toxic waste: old data stolen from you, or which you inadvertently use, is not going to lose all your funds.
Decker-Wattenhofer: Multiple participants in a single offchain mechanism, enabling things like Channel Factories.
Poon-Dryja: Doesn't have ridiculously long lock times in the unilateral close case.
Poon-Dryja: Supports HTLCs for trustless forwarding (not clear if Decker-Wattenhofer fully supports this without sacrificing the duplexed indefinite-lifetime Spilman channels at the end).
Copyright 2020 Alan Manuel K. Gloria. Released under CC-BY.
I found a 2019 prediction that Satoshi made in January 2009 (via bitcoin-list archives)
I thought this was very interesting - text follows: " I would be surprised if 10 years from now we're not using electronic currency in some way, now that we know a way to do it that won't inevitably get dumbed down when the trusted third party gets cold feet. It could get started in a narrow niche like reward points, donation tokens, currency for a game or micropayments for adult sites. Initially it can be used in proof-of-work applications for services that could almost be free but not quite. It can already be used for pay-to-send e-mail. The send dialog is resizeable and you can enter as long of a message as you like. It's sent directly when it connects. The recipient doubleclicks on the transaction to see the full message. If someone famous is getting more e-mail than they can read, but would still like to have a way for fans to contact them, they could set up Bitcoin and give out the IP address on their website. "Send X bitcoins to my priority hotline at this IP and I'll read the message personally." Subscription sites that need some extra proof-of-work for their free trial so it doesn't cannibalize subscriptions could charge bitcoins for the trial. It might make sense just to get some in case it catches on. If enough people think the same way, that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Once it gets bootstrapped, there are so many applications if you could effortlessly pay a few cents to a website as easily as dropping coins in a vending machine. Satoshi Nakamoto "
Technical: A Brief History of Payment Channels: from Satoshi to Lightning Network
Who cares about political tweets from some random country's president when payment channels are a much more interesting and are actually capable of carrying value? So let's have a short history of various payment channel techs!
Generation 0: Satoshi's Broken nSequence Channels
Because Satoshi's Vision included payment channels, except his implementation sucked so hard we had to go fix it and added RBF as a by-product. Originally, the plan for nSequence was that mempools would replace any transaction spending certain inputs with another transaction spending the same inputs, but only if the nSequence field of the replacement was larger. Since 0xFFFFFFFF was the highest value that nSequence could get, this would mark a transaction as "final" and not replaceable on the mempool anymore. In fact, this "nSequence channel" I will describe is the reason why we have this weird rule about nLockTime and nSequence. nLockTime actually only works if nSequence is not 0xFFFFFFFF i.e. final. If nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF then nLockTime is ignored, because this if the "final" version of the transaction. So what you'd do would be something like this:
You go to a bar and promise the bartender to pay by the time the bar closes. Because this is the Bitcoin universe, time is measured in blockheight, so the closing time of the bar is indicated as some future blockheight.
For your first drink, you'd make a transaction paying to the bartender for that drink, paying from some coins you have. The transaction has an nLockTime equal to the closing time of the bar, and a starting nSequence of 0. You hand over the transaction and the bartender hands you your drink.
For your succeeding drink, you'd remake the same transaction, adding the payment for that drink to the transaction output that goes to the bartender (so that output keeps getting larger, by the amount of payment), and having an nSequence that is one higher than the previous one.
Eventually you have to stop drinking. It comes down to one of two possibilities:
You drink until the bar closes. Since it is now the nLockTime indicated in the transaction, the bartender is able to broadcast the latest transaction and tells the bouncers to kick you out of the bar.
You wisely consider the state of your liver. So you re-sign the last transaction with a "final" nSequence of 0xFFFFFFFF i.e. the maximum possible value it can have. This allows the bartender to get his or her funds immediately (nLockTime is ignored if nSequence is 0xFFFFFFFF), so he or she tells the bouncers to let you out of the bar.
Now that of course is a payment channel. Individual payments (purchases of alcohol, so I guess buying coffee is not in scope for payment channels). Closing is done by creating a "final" transaction that is the sum of the individual payments. Sure there's no routing and channels are unidirectional and channels have a maximum lifetime but give Satoshi a break, he was also busy inventing Bitcoin at the time. Now if you noticed I called this kind of payment channel "broken". This is because the mempool rules are not consensus rules, and cannot be validated (nothing about the mempool can be validated onchain: I sigh every time somebody proposes "let's make block size dependent on mempool size", mempool state cannot be validated by onchain data). Fullnodes can't see all of the transactions you signed, and then validate that the final one with the maximum nSequence is the one that actually is used onchain. So you can do the below:
Become friends with Jihan Wu, because he owns >51% of the mining hashrate (he totally reorged Bitcoin to reverse the Binance hack right?).
Slip Jihan Wu some of the more interesting drinks you're ordering as an incentive to cooperate with you. So say you end up ordering 100 drinks, you split it with Jihan Wu and give him 50 of the drinks.
When the bar closes, Jihan Wu quickly calls his mining rig and tells them to mine the version of your transaction with nSequence 0. You know, that first one where you pay for only one drink.
Because fullnodes cannot validate nSequence, they'll accept even the nSequence=0 version and confirm it, immutably adding you paying for a single alcoholic drink to the blockchain.
The bartender, pissed at being cheated, takes out a shotgun from under the bar and shoots at you and Jihan Wu.
Jihan Wu uses his mystical chi powers (actually the combined exhaust from all of his mining rigs) to slow down the shotgun pellets, making them hit you as softly as petals drifting in the wind.
The bartender mutters some words, clothes ripping apart as he or she (hard to believe it could be a she but hey) turns into a bear, ready to maul you for cheating him or her of the payment for all the 100 drinks you ordered from him or her.
Steely-eyed, you stand in front of the bartender-turned-bear, daring him to touch you. You've watched Revenant, you know Leonardo di Caprio could survive a bear mauling, and if some posh actor can survive that, you know you can too. You make a pose. "Drunken troll logic attack!"
I think I got sidetracked here.
Bears are bad news.
You can't reasonably invoke "Satoshi's Vision" and simultaneously reject the Lightning Network because it's not onchain. Satoshi's Vision included a half-assed implementation of payment channels with nSequence, where the onchain transaction represented multiple logical payments, exactly what modern offchain techniques do (except modern offchain techniques actually work). nSequence (the field, but not its modern meaning) has been in Bitcoin since BitCoin For Windows Alpha 0.1.0. And its original intent was payment channels. You can't get nearer to Satoshi's Vision than being a field that Satoshi personally added to transactions on the very first public release of the BitCoin software, like srsly.
Miners can totally bypass mempool rules. In fact, the reason why nSequence has been repurposed to indicate "optional" replace-by-fee is because miners are already incentivized by the nSequence system to always follow replace-by-fee anyway. I mean, what do you think those drinks you passed to Jihan Wu are, other than the fee you pay him to mine a specific version of your transaction?
Satoshi made mistakes. The original design for nSequence is one of them. Today, we no longer use nSequence in this way. So diverging from Satoshi's original design is part and parcel of Bitcoin development, because over time, we learn new lessons that Satoshi never knew about. Satoshi was an important landmark in this technology. He will not be the last, or most important, that we will remember in the future: he will only be the first.
Incentive-compatible time-limited unidirectional channel; or, Satoshi's Vision, Fixed (if transaction malleability hadn't been a problem, that is). Now, we know the bartender will turn into a bear and maul you if you try to cheat the payment channel, and now that we've revealed you're good friends with Jihan Wu, the bartender will no longer accept a payment channel scheme that lets one you cooperate with a miner to cheat the bartender. Fortunately, Jeremy Spilman proposed a better way that would not let you cheat the bartender. First, you and the bartender perform this ritual:
You get some funds and create a transaction that pays to a 2-of-2 multisig between you and the bartender. You don't broadcast this yet: you just sign it and get its txid.
You create another transaction that spends the above transaction. This transaction (the "backoff") has an nLockTime equal to the closing time of the bar, plus one block. You sign it and give this backoff transaction (but not the above transaction) to the bartender.
The bartender signs the backoff and gives it back to you. It is now valid since it's spending a 2-of-2 of you and the bartender, and both of you have signed the backoff transaction.
Now you broadcast the first transaction onchain. You and the bartender wait for it to be deeply confirmed, then you can start ordering.
The above is probably vaguely familiar to LN users. It's the funding process of payment channels! The first transaction, the one that pays to a 2-of-2 multisig, is the funding transaction that backs the payment channel funds. So now you start ordering in this way:
For your first drink, you create a transaction spending the funding transaction output and sending the price of the drink to the bartender, with the rest returning to you.
You sign the transaction and pass it to the bartender, who serves your first drink.
For your succeeding drinks, you recreate the same transaction, adding the price of the new drink to the sum that goes to the bartender and reducing the money returned to you. You sign the transaction and give it to the bartender, who serves you your next drink.
At the end:
If the bar closing time is reached, the bartender signs the latest transaction, completing the needed 2-of-2 signatures and broadcasting this to the Bitcoin network. Since the backoff transaction is the closing time + 1, it can't get used at closing time.
If you decide you want to leave early because your liver is crying, you just tell the bartender to go ahead and close the channel (which the bartender can do at any time by just signing and broadcasting the latest transaction: the bartender won't do that because he or she is hoping you'll stay and drink more).
If you ended up just hanging around the bar and never ordering, then at closing time + 1 you broadcast the backoff transaction and get your funds back in full.
Now, even if you pass 50 drinks to Jihan Wu, you can't give him the first transaction (the one which pays for only one drink) and ask him to mine it: it's spending a 2-of-2 and the copy you have only contains your own signature. You need the bartender's signature to make it valid, but he or she sure as hell isn't going to cooperate in something that would lose him or her money, so a signature from the bartender validating old state where he or she gets paid less isn't going to happen. So, problem solved, right? Right? Okay, let's try it. So you get your funds, put them in a funding tx, get the backoff tx, confirm the funding tx... Once the funding transaction confirms deeply, the bartender laughs uproariously. He or she summons the bouncers, who surround you menacingly. "I'm refusing service to you," the bartender says. "Fine," you say. "I was leaving anyway;" You smirk. "I'll get back my money with the backoff transaction, and posting about your poor service on reddit so you get negative karma, so there!" "Not so fast," the bartender says. His or her voice chills your bones. It looks like your exploitation of the Satoshi nSequence payment channel is still fresh in his or her mind. "Look at the txid of the funding transaction that got confirmed." "What about it?" you ask nonchalantly, as you flip open your desktop computer and open a reputable blockchain explorer. What you see shocks you. "What the --- the txid is different! You--- you changed my signature?? But how? I put the only copy of my private key in a sealed envelope in a cast-iron box inside a safe buried in the Gobi desert protected by a clan of nomads who have dedicated their lives and their childrens' lives to keeping my private key safe in perpetuity!" "Didn't you know?" the bartender asks. "The components of the signature are just very large numbers. The sign of one of the signature components can be changed, from positive to negative, or negative to positive, and the signature will remain valid. Anyone can do that, even if they don't know the private key. But because Bitcoin includes the signatures in the transaction when it's generating the txid, this little change also changes the txid." He or she chuckles. "They say they'll fix it by separating the signatures from the transaction body. They're saying that these kinds of signature malleability won't affect transaction ids anymore after they do this, but I bet I can get my good friend Jihan Wu to delay this 'SepSig' plan for a good while yet. Friendly guy, this Jihan Wu, it turns out all I had to do was slip him 51 drinks and he was willing to mine a tx with the signature signs flipped." His or her grin widens. "I'm afraid your backoff transaction won't work anymore, since it spends a txid that is not existent and will never be confirmed. So here's the deal. You pay me 99% of the funds in the funding transaction, in exchange for me signing the transaction that spends with the txid that you see onchain. Refuse, and you lose 100% of the funds and every other HODLer, including me, benefits from the reduction in coin supply. Accept, and you get to keep 1%. I lose nothing if you refuse, so I won't care if you do, but consider the difference of getting zilch vs. getting 1% of your funds." His or her eyes glow. "GENUFLECT RIGHT NOW." Lesson learned?
Payback's a bitch.
Transaction malleability is a bitchier bitch. It's why we needed to fix the bug in SegWit. Sure, MtGox claimed they were attacked this way because someone kept messing with their transaction signatures and thus they lost track of where their funds went, but really, the bigger impetus for fixing transaction malleability was to support payment channels.
Yes, including the signatures in the hash that ultimately defines the txid was a mistake. Satoshi made a lot of those. So we're just reiterating the lesson "Satoshi was not an infinite being of infinite wisdom" here. Satoshi just gets a pass because of how awesome Bitcoin is.
CLTV-protected Spilman Channels
Using CLTV for the backoff branch. This variation is simply Spilman channels, but with the backoff transaction replaced with a backoff branch in the SCRIPT you pay to. It only became possible after OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY (CLTV) was enabled in 2015. Now as we saw in the Spilman Channels discussion, transaction malleability means that any pre-signed offchain transaction can easily be invalidated by flipping the sign of the signature of the funding transaction while the funding transaction is not yet confirmed. This can be avoided by simply putting any special requirements into an explicit branch of the Bitcoin SCRIPT. Now, the backoff branch is supposed to create a maximum lifetime for the payment channel, and prior to the introduction of OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY this could only be done by having a pre-signed nLockTime transaction. With CLTV, however, we can now make the branches explicit in the SCRIPT that the funding transaction pays to. Instead of paying to a 2-of-2 in order to set up the funding transaction, you pay to a SCRIPT which is basically "2-of-2, OR this singlesig after a specified lock time". With this, there is no backoff transaction that is pre-signed and which refers to a specific txid. Instead, you can create the backoff transaction later, using whatever txid the funding transaction ends up being confirmed under. Since the funding transaction is immutable once confirmed, it is no longer possible to change the txid afterwards.
Todd Micropayment Networks
The old hub-spoke model (that isn't how LN today actually works). One of the more direct predecessors of the Lightning Network was the hub-spoke model discussed by Peter Todd. In this model, instead of payers directly having channels to payees, payers and payees connect to a central hub server. This allows any payer to pay any payee, using the same channel for every payee on the hub. Similarly, this allows any payee to receive from any payer, using the same channel. Remember from the above Spilman example? When you open a channel to the bartender, you have to wait around for the funding tx to confirm. This will take an hour at best. Now consider that you have to make channels for everyone you want to pay to. That's not very scalable. So the Todd hub-spoke model has a central "clearing house" that transport money from payers to payees. The "Moonbeam" project takes this model. Of course, this reveals to the hub who the payer and payee are, and thus the hub can potentially censor transactions. Generally, though, it was considered that a hub would more efficiently censor by just not maintaining a channel with the payer or payee that it wants to censor (since the money it owned in the channel would just be locked uselessly if the hub won't process payments to/from the censored user). In any case, the ability of the central hub to monitor payments means that it can surveill the payer and payee, and then sell this private transactional data to third parties. This loss of privacy would be intolerable today. Peter Todd also proposed that there might be multiple hubs that could transport funds to each other on behalf of their users, providing somewhat better privacy. Another point of note is that at the time such networks were proposed, only unidirectional (Spilman) channels were available. Thus, while one could be a payer, or payee, you would have to use separate channels for your income versus for your spending. Worse, if you wanted to transfer money from your income channel to your spending channel, you had to close both and reshuffle the money between them, both onchain activities.
Poon-Dryja Lightning Network
Bidirectional two-participant channels. The Poon-Dryja channel mechanism has two important properties:
No time limit.
Both the original Satoshi and the two Spilman variants are unidirectional: there is a payer and a payee, and if the payee wants to do a refund, or wants to pay for a different service or product the payer is providing, then they can't use the same unidirectional channel. The Poon-Dryjam mechanism allows channels, however, to be bidirectional instead: you are not a payer or a payee on the channel, you can receive or send at any time as long as both you and the channel counterparty are online. Further, unlike either of the Spilman variants, there is no time limit for the lifetime of a channel. Instead, you can keep the channel open for as long as you want. Both properties, together, form a very powerful scaling property that I believe most people have not appreciated. With unidirectional channels, as mentioned before, if you both earn and spend over the same network of payment channels, you would have separate channels for earning and spending. You would then need to perform onchain operations to "reverse" the directions of your channels periodically. Secondly, since Spilman channels have a fixed lifetime, even if you never used either channel, you would have to periodically "refresh" it by closing it and reopening. With bidirectional, indefinite-lifetime channels, you may instead open some channels when you first begin managing your own money, then close them only after your lawyers have executed your last will and testament on how the money in your channels get divided up to your heirs: that's just two onchain transactions in your entire lifetime. That is the potentially very powerful scaling property that bidirectional, indefinite-lifetime channels allow. I won't discuss the transaction structure needed for Poon-Dryja bidirectional channels --- it's complicated and you can easily get explanations with cute graphics elsewhere. There is a weakness of Poon-Dryja that people tend to gloss over (because it was fixed very well by RustyReddit):
You have to store all the revocation keys of a channel. This implies you are storing 1 revocation key for every channel update, so if you perform millions of updates over your entire lifetime, you'd be storing several megabytes of keys, for only a single channel. RustyReddit fixed this by requiring that the revocation keys be generated from a "Seed" revocation key, and every key is just the application of SHA256 on that key, repeatedly. For example, suppose I tell you that my first revocation key is SHA256(SHA256(seed)). You can store that in O(1) space. Then for the next revocation, I tell you SHA256(seed). From SHA256(key), you yourself can compute SHA256(SHA256(seed)) (i.e. the previous revocation key). So you can remember just the most recent revocation key, and from there you'd be able to compute every previous revocation key. When you start a channel, you perform SHA256 on your seed for several million times, then use the result as the first revocation key, removing one layer of SHA256 for every revocation key you need to generate. RustyReddit not only came up with this, but also suggested an efficient O(log n) storage structure, the shachain, so that you can quickly look up any revocation key in the past in case of a breach. People no longer really talk about this O(n) revocation storage problem anymore because it was solved very very well by this mechanism.
Another thing I want to emphasize is that while the Lightning Network paper and many of the earlier presentations developed from the old Peter Todd hub-and-spoke model, the modern Lightning Network takes the logical conclusion of removing a strict separation between "hubs" and "spokes". Any node on the Lightning Network can very well work as a hub for any other node. Thus, while you might operate as "mostly a payer", "mostly a forwarding node", "mostly a payee", you still end up being at least partially a forwarding node ("hub") on the network, at least part of the time. This greatly reduces the problems of privacy inherent in having only a few hub nodes: forwarding nodes cannot get significantly useful data from the payments passing through them, because the distance between the payer and the payee can be so large that it would be likely that the ultimate payer and the ultimate payee could be anyone on the Lightning Network. Lessons learned?
We can decentralize if we try hard enough!
"Hubs bad" can be made "hubs good" if everybody is a hub.
Smart people can solve problems. It's kinda why they're smart.
After LN, there's also the Decker-Wattenhofer Duplex Micropayment Channels (DMC). This post is long enough as-is, LOL. But for now, it uses a novel "decrementing nSequence channel", using the new relative-timelock semantics of nSequence (not the broken one originally by Satoshi). It actually uses multiple such "decrementing nSequence" constructs, terminating in a pair of Spilman channels, one in both directions (thus "duplex"). Maybe I'll discuss it some other time. The realization that channel constructions could actually hold more channel constructions inside them (the way the Decker-Wattenhofer puts a pair of Spilman channels inside a series of "decrementing nSequence channels") lead to the further thought behind Burchert-Decker-Wattenhofer channel factories. Basically, you could host multiple two-participant channel constructs inside a larger multiparticipant "channel" construct (i.e. host multiple channels inside a factory). Further, we have the Decker-Russell-Osuntokun or "eltoo" construction. I'd argue that this is "nSequence done right". I'll write more about this later, because this post is long enough. Lessons learned?
Bitcoin offchain scaling is more powerful than you ever thought.
Creative economy, micropayments and Bitcoin Note; originally published January 2015, republished August 2019 (as this is becoming true about 4 years later). About 40% of the labor force in America will be self employed by 2020. Buy Bitcoin Locally . This is a piece that many people new to Bitcoin don’t know about. You can buy Bitcoin locally through a site called LocalBitcoins.com. This allows you to meet people in person at public places and exchange cash for Bitcoin. It seems strange, but it’s no harder than a Craiglist transaction. Bitcoin transaction fees have been much higher than this in the recent past, and in general, a solution like the Lightning Network is needed to ensure Bitcoin micropayments will be feasible over a long term. The concept of micropayments is not new. The term was coined in the 1960s by Dr. Ted Nelson, a visionary of the internet.But previous attempts have failed because of ineffective cost structures ... Digital money that’s instant, private, and free from bank fees. Download our official wallet app and start using Bitcoin today. Read news, start mining, and buy BTC or BCH.
Brave Browser Finally Unleashes Bitcoin Micropayments (The Cryptoverse #85)
⚡️Live ⚡️Tesla Podcast (Elon Musk) Company News, Bearish Bİtcoin, Liquidation, future Tesla Promotion 8,632 watching Live now tilepay Internet of Things Micropayments Platform ... Bitcoin and MicroPayments-The Perfect Solution? - Duration: 4:27. GamersGoneTech 299 views. 4:27. The TRUTH About Tesla Model 3 After 1 Year... - Duration: 21:26. Bitcoin ( BTC ) derivatives have returned to the spotlight this week as price moves appear to spark a surge in open interest. Data from on-chain analytics resource Skew showed open interest for ... “Micropayments” were also becoming more common with in-app purchases and downloadable content. Instacoin took advantage of this opportunity and launched their first Bitcoin ATM in the Greater ... After months of development and hype, Brave Software Inc. has finally released an update that integrates under-the-hood bitcoin micropayments right into its browser.