The History of Bitcoin – WTOP

From humble beginnings in 2008 to its 2017 price peak, Bitcoin has taken investors and the world for quite the

From humble beginnings in 2008 to its 2017 price peak, Bitcoin has taken investors and the world for quite the ride. In just over a decade, its spiked and crashed and rallied and fallen again.

Bitcoin is following principles of economics and principles of market efficiency, says Hemang Subramanian, assistant professor in Florida International Universitys business information systems department. It is an asset that is not controlled by a central entity, that is secure, international and fungible, liquid and is available in a limited supply for trade. This demand at near-constant supply has caused prices to go up disproportionately in a short period of time, attracting more investors.

Some would say Bitcoins raucous journey has paved the way for the thousands of other cryptocurrencies used for financial and investing activities today, he says. Heres how Bitcoin did it.

When Did Bitcoin Start?

The idea behind Bitcoin was introduced to the world on Oct. 31, 2008, at the depth of the financial crisis by a pseudonymous person called Satoshi Nakamoto, says Chetan Chawla, assistant professor of entrepreneurship at North Central College in Naperville, Illinois, who studies cryptocurrencies and blockchain.

Nakamoto posted a message on a cryptography mailing list titled, Bitcoin P2P e-cash paper. In it was a link to a white paper called Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. Both of these are still available online.

In these papers, Nakamoto laid out the concept for Bitcoin as a decentralized, digital currency. Being decentralized means there is no single administrator but rather a public ledger of transactions that anyone can store on their computer, says Kris Marszalek, CEO of Crypto.com. Coins can be sent from user to user on the peer-to-peer Bitcoin network without the need for intermediaries.

[Read: What Is Return on Equity: The Ultimate Guide to ROE.]

On Jan. 3, 2009, the blockchain was launched when the first block, called the genesis block, was mined. The first test transaction took place about one week later.

For the first few months of its existence, it was obtainable only by miners validating the Bitcoin blockchain, Chawla says.

At this point, Bitcoin had no real monetary value, says Mark Grabowski, an associate professor at Adelphi University who teaches a course on Bitcoin and author of Cryptocurrencies: A Primer on Digital Money. Miners computers that solve complex math problems to uncover new bitcoins and verify previous bitcoin transactions are legitimate and accurate would trade Bitcoin back and forth just for fun.

It would take more than a year for the first economic transaction to take place, when a Florida man negotiated to have two Papa Johns pizzas, valued at $25, delivered for 10,000 bitcoins on May 22, 2010. That transaction essentially established the initial real-world price or value of bitcoin at 4 bitcoins per penny, Grabowski says.

Fast forward to today, and that same transaction would have a value of $114 million, says Peter C. Earle, economist and research fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research. In honor of this pivotal moment, cryptocurrency fans and supporters call May 22 Pizza Day.

In the early days, the first transactions with Bitcoin were negotiated on internet forums with people bartering for goods and services in exchange for bitcoin, says Garrette Furo, partner at Wilshire Phoenix, a New York-based investment management firm. The value of bitcoin was originally arbitrary.

Then, in 2011, miners and coders started to build other networks like Ethereum and Litecoin and began to improve the code behind Bitcoins blockchain, adapting it for different uses, Furo says.

This wider base of applications brought in more individuals, which contributed partly to the increase in Bitcoins perceived value, he says. There was also an increase in the use of Bitcoin as currency once select businesses began to accept the asset alongside traditional currency.

Once Bitcoin became available on exchanges in 2010, it became easier to buy, sell, trade and store. Thanks to these exchanges, bitcoin could also be priced against the U.S. dollar, Chawla says. From a low of a few cents in 2010 to the all-time high of late 2017 when each bitcoin touched U.S. $20,000, Bitcoin has come a long way and continues to dominate the cryptocurrency markets.

Bitcoin Price History

Bitcoins history is largely one of astronomical growth punctuated by a few severe price retrenchments, Earle says.

In February 2011, bitcoins price crossed the $1 threshold. For its first few years as it grew, its price was under $2, Marszalek says. In June 2011, it hit its first bubble, rocketing to around $31 before sinking back down to the single-digit range.

[Sign up for stock news with our Invested newsletter.]

Almost two years later, in April 2013, Bitcoin reached $200. By the end of November that same year, it was worth more than $1,000. It then rose tenfold to $10,000 in November 2017.

Bitcoins highest price was about $19,650 in mid-December 2017, Earle says, noting there were different peak prices on different exchanges. It then fell tremendously over the next few years.

The 2017-2018 bubble was primarily led by a boom in initial coin offerings, or ICOs, Furo says. Some market veterans compare the Bitcoin bubble to the internet boom at the end of the 20th century.

Everyone from your next-door neighbor to the wealthiest hedge fund managers was talking about Bitcoin or some altcoin, new network or protocol, Furo says. The ICO craze brought in billions of dollars into the crypto space. Investors saw the value of coins fall dramatically in the early months of 2018 as prices crashed amid uncertainty, fraud and a lack of belief among other psychological and technical factors.

After the fall of bitcoins value, what you could call a more mature market arose around the cryptocurrency. Fidelity entered the custodian space (and) national banks were given permission to custody digital assets, Furo says. Today, Square offers Bitcoin trading in all 50 states.

Because of these developments, the market for Bitcoin has become relatively mature, he says. Smart and efficient exchanges exist, and core institutional-grade players are adopting the necessary measures to create a sustainable and viable market for the trading and investing of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

The 2020 global pandemic has also been a boon for the digital currency, reflected by its current price of more than $10,000, Marszalek says.

Bitcoin Today

Today, one bitcoin is worth a little less than $12,000. Its a far cry better than its post-peak lowest price of just more than $3,000.

To this day, no one knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is or was, Earle says. Its a subject not only for debate, but speculation and perhaps inevitably conspiracy theories.

These theories abound, from Bitcoin actually being a skunk work, or advanced and often secret project of Google or an intelligence agency like the National Security Agency, Earle says. Others believe that its a trapdoor project which, when it gets big enough, a malevolent party which has been lying patiently in wait for over a decade will suddenly seize control of.

[SEE: What Is a SPAC? 6 Best SPACs to Buy.]

To Earle, more important than Bitcoins price history is its testimony to two long-disputed views: First, that money is a good like any other, (and) second, that money can come about as a result of a market process.

While BItcoin is still growing into its role as a store of value and unit of account, cryptocurrencies, and especially Bitcoin, have largely buried the idea that money somehow isnt money unless it is accepted as payment for taxes, Earle says. (The IRS does not accept bitcoins.)

Bitcoin Tomorrow

So what is in store for Bitcoins future? No one can tell for certain, but Furo sees it being a bright and exciting place. Investment vehicles that are innovative, cost-effective and transparent are nearing reality and will help make investing in cryptocurrency even more accessible, he says. This access would rival that of traditional markets.

Just bear in mind that no investments particularly frontier investments are without risk. If there is one lesson to be taken from Bitcoins history, it is that what goes up can also come down, and it can come down fast.

More from U.S. News

What Is a Financial Consultant?

What Is Earnings Per Share (EPS)?

Is Now a Good Time to Buy Stocks?

The History of Bitcoin originally appeared on usnews.com

View original post here:
The History of Bitcoin - WTOP

Warren Buffett Shifts Funds From US Amid Inflation Fears, Bitcoin’s New All-Time High Expected | News – Bitcoin News

Warren Buffett has made another major investment shift, one that reduces Berkshire Hathaways dependence on the U.S. economy. This news followed the Federal Reserves policy announcement to push up inflation, which is seen as bullish for bitcoin, with some predicting that the price of the cryptocurrency will soon reach an all-time high.

Warren Buffetts Berkshire Hathaway has invested over $6 billion in Japans five biggest trading houses. The company has taken a 5% stake in Itochu Corp., Marubeni Corp., Mitsubishi Corp., Mitsui & Co. Ltd., and Sumitomo Corp. The stakes could rise to 9.9%, the company said on Sunday, Buffetts 90th birthday. Reuters described:

The investment will help reduce Berkshires dependence on the U.S. economy, which in the last quarter contracted the most in at least 73 years as the Covid-19 pandemic took hold.

Buffetts choice in Japan, however, surprised market players as trading houses have long been far from investor favorites, the publication added. Tokyo-based Norihiro Fujito, chief investment strategist at Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley Securities, pointed out that it is un-Buffett-like to buy into all five companies rather than selecting a few.

Most of Berkshires operating businesses are American. The company owns more than 90 businesses outright and invests in dozens of companies, such as American Express Co., Bank of America Corp., and Coca-Cola Co. Moreover, Berkshire has a roughly $125 billion stake in Apple Inc. (APPL), accounting for about 43% of its total portfolio.

Berkshire already made a surprise investment move about two weeks ago when it invested in Barrick Gold. Crypto exchange Gemini founder Cameron Winklevoss tweeted on Sunday:

When Buffett buys stake in gold mining company you know he knows somethings up inflation is coming. Hell find Bitcoin in a decade. It took him until 2016 to find APPL, but now its his biggest investment ever.

Many people joined into the discussion, pointing out that Buffett is already 90 so it will be difficult for him to find Bitcoin during his lifetime. Overall, the opinions are split, with some believing that the Berkshire CEO will eventually buy bitcoin while others say he will never do so in his lifetime.

Not sure Buffett is ready to wade into Bitcoin just yet, global macro investor and Gold Bullion International co-founder Dan Tapiero tweeted last week. Perhaps his younger deputies might be. BRK [Berkshire Hathaway] is a public company so difficult for them to take too many non-equity outlier positions. In 2-3 years, I think its possible they could allocate.

The Oracle of Omaha has repeatedly said that he will never own bitcoin, calling the cryptocurrency rat poison squared, as he does not see any value in it. He was gifted a bitcoin in February by Tron founder Justin Sun during a dinner which Sun won for $4.57 million at a charity auction. However, Buffett later said that all cryptocurrencies gifted to him were immediately regifted to his charity.

Some people are more optimistic about the prospect of Buffett investing in bitcoin. Popular television personality and bitcoin proponent Max Keiser, for example, believes that Buffett will panic-buy bitcoin at $50K just like gold bug Peter Schiff and veteran investor Jim Rogers will do. Commenting on Buffetts new investments in non-U.S. companies, he tweeted Monday:

Buffetts move into Japan, along with his gold investment, confirms hes getting out of USD bigly Bitcoin gold silver will all make new ATH [all-time high] in the near term.

Many people on social media believe Buffett anticipated that inflation was coming to make the investment decisions he did. The Federal Reserve announced a major policy change last week to push up inflation. Several experts expect bitcoin to benefit from this policy shift as well as from the weakness of the U.S. dollar and the political uncertainty surrounding the U.S. presidential election.

Devere Group CEO Nigel Green believes that bitcoin will break out this year, as news.Bitcoin.com reported. Responding to the Feds inflation policy shift, the founders of Gemini Exchange explained how bitcoin will ultimately [become] the only long-term protection against inflation, potentially driving the price of the cryptocurrency above $500K.

Meanwhile, to hedge against inflation, several companies have already begun reducing their cash holdings and moving their reserves into bitcoin. Among them is the Nasdaq-listed Microstrategy, which recently moved $250 million into bitcoin, and Canadian restaurant chain Tahinis, which moved all of its cash reserves into the cryptocurrency.

What do you think of Buffetts strategy? Let us know in the comments section below.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, CNN

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

Continued here:
Warren Buffett Shifts Funds From US Amid Inflation Fears, Bitcoin's New All-Time High Expected | News - Bitcoin News

Elon Musk Confirms Serious Russian Bitcoin Ransomware Attack On Tesla, Foiled By The FBI – Forbes

Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla TSLA , has confirmed the electric car-maker was targeted by a ransomware hacker demanding $1 million in bitcoin.

The attack, foiled by the FBI, was planned by a Russian national, court documents unsealed last week have shown.

Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla, said the bitcoin ransomware attack was "serious."

Elon Musk confirmed in a tweet that an employee at a Tesla factory in Nevada was offered $1 million and an upfront payment of 1 bitcoin to to install ransomware software on Tesla's computer network.

However, the employee didnt carry out the plan and instead alerted other Tesla staff who contacted the FBI. The FBI arrested Egor Igorevich Kriuchkov, a 27-year-old Russian man, on August 22 in Los Angeles. Kriuchkov was charged last week and faces up to five years in prison for his role in the scheme if found guilty.

"This was a serious attack," Musk, who was among many high-profile Twitter users to be targeted in a bitcoin-based scam in July, said via the micro-blogging network, replying to a news report posted by by a Tesla-focused website.

Bitcoin, despite its growing mainstream popularity, is a favorite tool of cyber criminals, with victims thought to have paid out over $140 million to ransomware operators over the past six years, according to the FBI.

Ransomware hackers, who encrypt their victims' files before demanding bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies to unlock them, have increased their attacks during the coronavirus pandemic, Interpol reported in April, with criminals taking advantage of an influx of remote workers.

Tesla, now boasting an eye-watering market capitalization of around $465 billion, became the world's biggest car company by value in July after a near six-fold increase in the value of its shares this year--propelling Musk's personal fortune past $100 billion.

The Palo Alto-based company, whose output is dwarfed by most of its established rivals with General Motors GM shipping 7.7 million cars last year compared to Tesla's 360,000, plans to use cash from a share sale conducted this week to expand production and build new factories near Berlin, Germany and Austin, Texas.

Go here to see the original:
Elon Musk Confirms Serious Russian Bitcoin Ransomware Attack On Tesla, Foiled By The FBI - Forbes

How the Bitcoin Blockchain Is Being Used to Safeguard Nuclear Power Stations – CoinDesk – CoinDesk

Nuclearis, a manufacturer of precision mechanical components for the nuclear industry, is using the Bitcoin blockchain to verify the manufacturing blueprints of parts that make up nuclear power reactors.

Announced Tuesday, Nuclearis, which is headquartered in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and has offices in the U.S. and China, is using the Bitcoin-powered RSK blockchain as an immutable anchor, keeping tabs on critical documents. The firm has open-sourced the framework so other players in the nuclear industry can use it.

Its not the first time blockchain tech has been leveraged within the nuclear industry. Estonias Guardtime has been using its own version of DLT for some time to distribute data as a way to prevent cyberattacks on nuclear infrastructure. There have also been projects using blockchain to track the uranium fuel supply chain and also track what happens to nuclear waste.

Safety is everything when it comes to nuclear. The track and trace use case for manufacturing documents is important because there have been forgeries in the past, where antiquated nuclear reactors have opted for shortcuts to revamp equipment (a high-profile case of this sort went through the courts in France in 2016.)

Some 150 new reactors are set to be built over the next 30 years and the NuclearTech space is all about instilling trust within the operators of nuclear power plants, said Nuclearis CTO Sebastian Martinez.

Part of the problem is that there are many intermediaries in this supply chain and parts of it are still paper-based, said Martinez. We hash the manufacturing documents and upload to the blockchain at the point of creation of the steel part. Months or even years later, when we deliver the part, the power plant can check if everything digitally matches.

Nuclearis, which is working with Argentinas three power plants Atucha I, Atucha II and Embalse said the Argentine government and the countrys main operator of nuclear power plants, Nucleoelctrica Argentina, are looking to adopt its blockchain system.

The RSK blockchain developed with consultancy IOV Labs uses a process called merged mining to run a sidechain on the Bitcoin blockchain and harvest the hash power of the largest cryptocurrency.

The immutability and security that blockchain provides are of the most importance for the nuclear industry, IOV Labs CEO Diego Gutierrez Zaldivar said in a statement. We are very excited about Nuclearis solution in that industry and thrilled they have chosen RSK blockchain and RSK Infrastructure Framework (RIF) technologies for its development.

The RSK-based platform now in use is only for tracking the provenance of new parts, but there are lots of interesting use cases going forward around areas like decommissioning of parts, Nuclearis said.

If you replace something like a pump from a primary circuit that has been radioactive for the last 50 years, you have to decommission it, get it out of the reactor and dismantle it, said Martinez. Traceability of that stuff is very important so it doesnt turn up on some black market, or worse, finds its way into a dirty bomb.

Read more:
How the Bitcoin Blockchain Is Being Used to Safeguard Nuclear Power Stations - CoinDesk - CoinDesk

Trumps Former Pro-Bitcoin Chief of Staff Now Runs a Hedge Fund – Cointelegraph

Former White House chief of staff under U.S. President Donald Trump Mick Mulvaney is running a hedge fund. Since 2014 Mulvaney has been recognized as a pro-Bitcoin (BTC) official, encouraging practical regulation of cryptocurrencies.

The new fund called Exegis Capital was announced during a podcast with S&P Global Market Intelligence. Mulvaney would collaborate with former Sterling Capital Management portfolio manager Andrew Wessel.

At the 2014 Bitcoin Demo Day conference, Mulvaney said he would like to see the government take its time in regulating Bitcoin.

He said the top cryptocurrency has the potential to become a medium of trade and a means of payment. Mulvaney said at the time:

My interest in it is to just try and make sure that government doesnt act too soon in such a fashion that curbs the potential for Bitcoin. Because I see potential for Bitcoin as a medium of trade and as a transactional tool, and I'd hate to see the government make decisions early that sort of retard its growth.

Since then, he has continuously encouraged the government to efficiently regulate the cryptocurrency market. When Mulvaney was initially appointed as the White House chief of staff, the sentiment among cryptocurrency industry executives was generally positive.

It remains to be seen whether Mulvaneys enthusiastic stance towards Bitcoin would lead the fund to get involved in the cryptocurrency market.

In recent weeks, the Bitcoin market has seen a spike in the inflow of institutions. Most recently, Fidelity Investments filed an application with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to operate a Bitcoin fund.

As Cointelegraph reported on Aug. 26, Fidelity Investments President Peter Jubber filed the Form D for a Bitcoin index product with a $100,000 minimum investment.

Previously, Fidelity said in a paper entitled Bitcoin Investment Thesis: An Aspirational Store of Value that Bitcoin has the properties of a store of value. The paper reads:

Many investors consider Bitcoin to be an aspirational store of value in that it has the properties of a store of value but has yet to be widely accepted as such.

The growing institutional activity in the Bitcoin market naturally raises the speculation on whether more hedge funds would enter the cryptocurrency space.

In the near term, Mulvaney is unlikely to actively consider Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies due to his ties with the administration.

While Mulvaney is no longer the White House chief of staff, he still remains a special envoy. Given the Trump administrations negative stance towards Bitcoin, the probability that Exegis Capital would seek exposure to cryptocurrencies remains low, at least for the foreseeable future.

Link:
Trumps Former Pro-Bitcoin Chief of Staff Now Runs a Hedge Fund - Cointelegraph

No interim injunction over bitcoin account where damages would be adequate – Lexology

In Toma v Murray,(1) the court declined to continue interim injunctions granted in respect of a 'coin depot account' holding bitcoin over which the claimants asserted a proprietary right. On this occasion, the balance of convenience in respect of continuing the injunctions did not lie with the claimants, including because damages would be an adequate remedy.

Background

In 2015 the two claimants, Mr Toma and Mr True, sold bitcoin to an account in the name of BTC OTC on LocalBitcoins, an online trading platform based in Finland. Although the claimants had initially been paid for the bitcoin, the relevant payments were reversed leaving them without the bitcoin or the relevant payments.

The BTC OTC account was controlled by the defendant, Mr Murray. Similar amounts of bitcoin had been transferred from the BTC OTC account to a coin depot account that he also controlled, giving rise to the inference that the claimants' bitcoin had been transferred from one account to the other. Murray's position was that his accounts had been hacked.

The claimants had obtained interim injunctions restraining the defendant from dealing with the bitcoin in the coin depot account and applied to continue those interim injunctions.

Relevant legal test for granting interim injunctions

The relevant legal test for interim injunctions was recently set out in cyber-fraud case AA v Persons Unknown(2) (more commonly known as Re Bitcoin) (for further details please see "Bitcoin is 'property' and can therefore be subject of proprietary injunction"):

On these facts, the court found that there was a serious issue to be tried. A full hearing would be needed to determine whether the defendant had committed a fraud; this was not a matter for an interim application where the court should not conduct a mini trial or even express a view on the merits of either party's case.

So, did the balance of convenience justify continuing the interim injunctions?

Balance of convenience

The court needed to consider:

As to the damages question, the claimants submitted that the significance of that question is reduced where there was a proprietary claim, citing AA v Persons Unknown and Madoff Securities International Ltd v Raven.(3)

The court held that those cases merely established that claimants would more readily be afforded interim remedies in such circumstances, not that they inevitably would. The cases could be distinguished on the basis that on their facts, if a proprietary injunction had not been granted, the claimants were likely to have had no realistic possibility of recovering any loss that they had suffered. In this case, the defendant was a known individual with a substantial unencumbered asset worth many times more than the value of the claim. Further, although the claimants' claim was put on the basis of a proprietary tracing claim, they were essentially seeking the value of the bitcoin contained in the coin depot account which was capable of being satisfied in monetary terms rather than necessitating a proprietary remedy.

Further, by the claimants' own admission, they would have had difficulty satisfying any cross-undertaking as to damages and therefore the defendant would potentially have been exposed to any loss suffered as a result of the injunctions being continued.

Finally, the court considered whether the injunctions might be continued with a protective mechanism added whereby the defendant would be able to sell the bitcoin in the cash depot account subject to the claimants' consent. However, the court did not consider this practical as a long-term solution given that obtaining consent expeditiously might be difficult, recognising that the volatile nature of bitcoin meant that its value could fall very quickly. The court also considered that the claimants could potentially use any requirement for consent as settlement leverage.

Therefore, the court concluded that the balance of convenience did not lie with the claimants and declined to continue the interim injunctions.

Comment

This case adds to the growing body of case law relating to the injunctive relief that may be granted in respect of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. It is interesting that bitcoin's characteristic volatility was one factor that the court considered militated against an injunction. It should be noted that while the court did not consider that an injunction containing a mechanism permitting the sale of the bitcoin by the defendant subject to the claimants' consent was a viable long-term option, it acknowledged that it might be an appropriate short-term solution where claimants were seeking an interim injunction on a without notice basis (as was initially the case here). Accordingly, claimants seeking short-term injunctive relief should consider making such a proposal to maximise the probability of obtaining such relief.

More generally, it is interesting to note the divergence between the court's approach in this case, where the identity of the defendant is known, and in AA v Persons Unknown where it was not. There is clearly a strong logical basis for providing claimants who do not know the identity of a potential fraudster with greater ammunition to protect their interests than those who do.

Endnotes

(1) [2020] EWHC 2295 (Ch).

(2) [2019] EWHC 3556 (Comm).

(3) [2011] EWHC 3102 (Comm).

Here is the original post:
No interim injunction over bitcoin account where damages would be adequate - Lexology

Justice Department Seeks To Recover Hacked Cryptocurrency Funds Tied To North Korea – Forbes

A computer popup box screen warning of a system being hacked, compromised software enviroment. 3D ... [+] illustration.

The Justice Department has announced action against two hacks of virtual currency exchanges by North Korean actors.

According to court documents, the actors stole millions of dollars worth of cryptocurrency and laundered the funds through Chinese over-the-counter (OTC) cryptocurrency traders. Now, the Justice Department is seeking to recover those funds through the filing of a civil forfeiture complaint.

(You can test your knowledge of civil forfeiture here.)

The complaint follows criminal and civil actions announced earlier this year related to the theft of cryptocurrency through other exchange hacks by North Korean actors. Those thefts initially occurred in 2018; afterward, the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) Cyber Crimes Unit learned that a South Korea-based virtual currency exchange had been hacked. The North Korean cyber actors responsible for the hack stole nearly $250 million worth of virtual currencies, which eventually landed in about 146 virtual currency accounts. In March of 2020, the United States filed a forfeiture complaint against those accounts.

The theft was not particularly surprising. Last year, a panel of experts established by the United Nations Security Council to investigate compliance with sanctions against North Korea found that the North Korean government has "used cyberspace to launch increasingly sophisticated attacks to steal funds from financial institutions and cryptocurrency exchanges to generate income." Why? According to the panel, these activities allow North Korea "to generate income in ways that are harder to trace and subject to less government oversight and regulation than the traditional banking sector." So far, these activities have raised money for the country's weapons programs, with total proceeds to date estimated at up to $2 billion.

How does it happen? Money laundering through multiple accounts. Stolen funds can be transferred through accounts in a series of separate transactions and then routed to various countries before being converted to fiat currency. That makes it highly challenging to track the money. And if you change the kind of currency, it makes it even more difficult to trace. This practice of moving between different types of virtual currency is called "chain hopping."

The most recent complaint detailed a theft that happened on or about July 1, 2019. In that hack, thieves stole approximately 401,981,748 Proton Tokens (PTT) from a virtual currency exchange. About 280,269,180 PTT was contained before it could be liquidated, but the remaining approximately 121,712,568 PTT entered the market. Around the same time, the affected exchange reported thefts of other currencies. Those currencies were transferred to other exchanges through a complicated series of transactions summarized in court documents like this:

DOJ

According to the complaint, a few months later, in September 2019, a U.S.-based company focused on the Algorand blockchain (which administers ALGO tokens) was hacked in a related incident.The North Korea-associated hacker gained access to the company's virtual currency wallets, funds held by the company on other platforms, and funds held by its partners.In the hack, the thieves used 15 recovery seeds to recreate wallets owned by the exchange and its partners. A recovery seed - also known as a recovery phrase - is a list of upwards of 12 words that, when entered in a specific order into virtual currency wallet software, allows whoever has the words to recreate access to virtual assets within the wallet. What the hackers were able to do then is direct the transfer of funds out of the wallets into other addresses and wallets. That allowed the hackers to steal nearly $2.5 million and launder it through 106 accounts at other virtual currency exchanges.

Following the transactions allowed law enforcement to identify the property involved in the schemes. The complaint now seeks a judgment declaring that the property be forfeited to the United States government.

"As part of our commitment to safeguarding national security, this office has been at the forefront of targeting North Korea's criminal attacks on the financial system," said Acting U.S. Attorney Michael R. Sherwin of the District of Columbia."This complaint reveals the incredible skill of our Cryptocurrency Strike Force in tracing and seizing virtual currency, which criminals previously thought to be impossible."

Several different agencies were involved in the investigation, including IRS-CI's Washington, D.C. Cyber Crimes Unit, the FBI's Chicago and Atlanta Field Offices, and HSI's Colorado Springs Office with additional support from the FBI's San Francisco Field Office.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Zia M. Faruqui, Jessi Camille Brooks, and Christopher Brown, with assistance from Supervisory Paralegal Specialist Elizabeth Swienc and Legal Assistant Jessica McCormick, Trial Attorney C. Alden Pelker of the Criminal Division's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, and Trial Attorney David Recker of the National Security Division's Counterintelligence and Export Control Section are prosecuting the case.

"Despite the highly sophisticated laundering techniques used, IRS-CI's Cybercrimes Unit was able to successfully trace stolen funds directly back to North Korean actors," said Don Fort, Chief of IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI). "IRS-CI will continue to collaborate with its law enforcement partners to combat foreign and domestic operations that threaten the United States financial system and national security."

The funds from these hacks, and the earlier hacks, were all allegedly laundered by the same group of Chinese OTC actors.The infrastructure and communication accounts used to further the intrusions and fund transfers were also tied to North Korea.

"At U.S. Cyber Command, we leverage a persistent engagement approach to challenge our adversaries' actions in cyberspace," said Brigadier General Joe Hartman, Commander of the Cyber National Mission Force. "This includes disrupting North Korean efforts to illicitly generate revenue. Department of Defense cyber operations do not occur in isolation. Persistent engagement includes acting through cyber-enabled operations as much as it does sharing information with our interagency partners to do the same."

"Today's complaint demonstrates that North Korean actors cannot hide their crimes within the anonymity of the internet. International cryptocurrency laundering schemes undermine the integrity of our financial systems at a global level, and we will use every tool in our arsenal to investigate and disrupt these crimes," said Special Agent in Charge Emmerson Buie Jr. of the FBI's Chicago Field Office."The FBI will continue to impose risks and consequences on criminals who seek to undermine our national security interests."

Original post:
Justice Department Seeks To Recover Hacked Cryptocurrency Funds Tied To North Korea - Forbes

Akon Unveils Major Details of $6 Billion Cryptocurrency City: Real-Life Wakanda – Bitcoin News

Akon has released detailed plans of Akon City, his $6 billion futuristic cryptocurrency city, which he calls a real-life Wakanda, referring to the hit movie Black Panther. There will be seven major districts, and the city will be run on the akoin cryptocurrency.

Senegalese-American star and philanthropist Akon, whose full name is Aliaune Damala Badara Akon Thiam, unveiled Monday some major details of his planned Akon City. The $6 billion futuristic city in Senegal, Africa, will be run on the akoin cryptocurrency.

The city will be divided into seven major districts: the African culture village district, the offices and residential district, the entertainment district, the health and safety district, the education district, the technology district, and the Senewood district.

The African culture village district will feature a seaside resort and spa encompassing retail stores, a ballroom, a business center, a restaurant area, a night club, a fitness center, and a hotel. There will also be 20 chalets and an open market. The Associated Press reported Monday that a hotel within the city plans to feature rooms decorated for each of the 54 countries of Africa.

The residential and office district will comprise six residential buildings, two office buildings, and four parking structures. Akon Citys website explains that there will be a smart parking system, which it describes as a more efficient, safer, and energetically sustainable system that includes e-parking, automated parking system, e-transportation within the city and much more.

The entertainment district will have a casino, a stadium, a resort building with a hotel, and a sports field. There will also be a mall with a cinema, an entertainment area for kids and adults, and a fashion district. The health and safety district will consist of a general hospital, an outpatient center with a pharmaceutical retail area, laboratories, and a variety of clinics. There will also be a police station and a fire station, which include areas for training, sleeping, and fitness.

The eduction district will have three main buildings to accommodate MIT, Berkeley, Harvard, and Stanford. There will be housing for students and faculty members. The technology district will feature a tech park spanning several buildings while the Senewood district will have the Akon tower, a media tower, and four filming and recording studios that will help develop Senegals film industry.

Akon City is located in the heart of Cadastral de Mbodiene park within the beautiful landscape of water and surrounding nature, its website details, adding that the location is easily accessible to commuting as well as to the general public. The website further claims:

Akon City will set the standard for all future real estate development in Senegal as a country and region as a whole.

The project was, however, designed by a Dubai-based architect because a suitable one in Africa could not be found fast enough, the Associated Press reported, citing Akon. It is also unclear what percentage of the building materials and construction teams will be sourced locally, the publication noted.

While hopes are high in Mbodiene that the Akon City project will change lives, village chief Michel Diom was quoted as saying: We have a lot of hope. Many promised us projects, but we saw nothing. Without providing specific details, Akon also said hes considering franchising the concept to other countries on the continent, the publication conveyed.

In addition, Akon noted on Monday that the project has secured about one-third of the $6 billion needed. However, KE International, a U.S. based consulting and engineering firm that has been awarded the contract for building and executing Akon City, said in June that it had secured $4 billion from investors for the first and second phases of execution of Akon City.

According to the Associated Press, Akon traveled with government officials on Monday to the grassy fields in Mbodiene some 100 kilometers (62 miles) outside the capital where construction has yet to begin. Akon said the construction is set to begin early next year, adding that the first phase of the project alone could take more than three years. He previously said that phase one of Akon City will be completed by 2023 and the entire city, running on the akoin cryptocurrency, will be completed in 2029.

Akoin, a Stellar-based cryptocurrency, will be used in Akon City. The akoin cryptocurrency was created with the aim to be used as a common medium of transfer between Africas 54 countries Allowing African citizens and entrepreneurs to engage with the digital economy with only a mobile phone, its website describes.

The akoin cryptocurrency has its own wallet that allows users to trade amongst partnered cryptocurrencies internally through a proprietary and private atomic swap technology that makes a direct transfer with all major cryptocurrencies, our partners alt currencies possible, without having to go through a major exchange.

Akon first announced the idea of Akon City in 2018. He described it as a real-life Wakanda, comparing it to the technologically advanced fictional African city in the blockbuster movie Black Panther. Sadly, actor Chadwick Boseman, who portrayed Black Panther in Marvels popular movie series, died on Saturday.

On Monday, Akon said he hoped his Akon City project would provide much-needed jobs for people in Senegal and serve as a home back home for Black Americans and others facing racial injustices, the Associated Press also reported. The system back home treats them unfairly in so many different ways that you can never imagine. And they only go through it because they feel that there is no other way, Akon shared, elaborating:

So if youre coming from America or Europe or elsewhere in the diaspora and you feel that you want to visit Africa, we want Senegal to be your first stop.

Covid-19 has sown doubt everywhere. This means that those who had doubts about the attractiveness of Senegal, and Africa in general must convince themselves that there are men and women who believe in Africa, the two-time Grammy Award-nominated artist opined.

Born in the U.S. to Senegalese parents, Akon spent much of his childhood in the West African country. He started the Akon Lighting Africa project in 2014 with the aim to provide electricity by solar energy in Africas rural areas. Recently, he joined bitcoin entrepreneur Brock Pierces presidential campaign as Chief Strategist.

Will you visit Akon City? Let us know in the comments section below.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, Akon City, Walt Disney Co., Everett Collection

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

Excerpt from:
Akon Unveils Major Details of $6 Billion Cryptocurrency City: Real-Life Wakanda - Bitcoin News

Does Regulation Chill Cryptocurrency Trading? – The Regulatory Review

Regulations have not decreased cryptocurrency trading within some U.S. and foreign markets.

Cryptocurrencies may have matured beyond their tulip craze stage and emerged as a durable class of investments. Yet their regulatory treatment remains unsettled.

Cryptocurrency proponents argue that new regulation is often inappropriate for these novel assets secured by technical mechanisms. They further claim that regulation of this developing technology would stymie beneficial innovations. These crypto fans also warn that capital will move away from countries adopting stringent requirements and toward those with more laissez-faire regulatory regimes.

Some regulators echo these concerns. For instance, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commissions Valerie Szczepanik, who leads the agencys cryptocurrencies working group, reportedly warned that overregulation could chill the market.

On the other hand, critics of cryptocurrencies point out the frequency of fraud, illegal activity, and regulatory arbitrage in wild west cryptocurrency markets. That cryptocurrencies are not tied to governments and do not require buyers and sellers to know each others real names to transact makes them attractive to criminals. At the very least, cryptocurrency trading should be subject to a similar array of regulatory obligationsincluding anti-money-laundering, tax, sanctions compliance, investor and consumer protection measuresthat are imposed on other financial activities, argue the critics.

To determine the optimal regulatory regime for cryptocurrencies, policymakers need to know how markets will react to regulatory action. Although that statement is true for the regulation of any economic activity, the stakes are particularly high concerning cryptocurrencies. If traders do not like the regulatory scheme in a particular jurisdiction, they can simply shift their trading activity to an offshore exchange.

Few of the usual switching costs that discourage regulatory arbitrage are present heremoving an individual traders activity offshore involves none of the costs and delays of currency conversion, nor does it involve any of the limitations of capital control that inhibit movement of fiat currencies.

In a new research paper, we examine how markets react to different types of regulatory actions over cryptocurrencies. We identify dozens of major government actionssuch as the announcement of new rules, novel enforcement actions, and important court decisionstaken in Japan, China, Russia, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States. These actions concern money-laundering, investor protection, restrictions on cryptocurrencies use for payments, and their tax treatment, among other subjects.

We then pair that information with a commercial dataset containing tick-by-tick volume and price information on 56 exchanges worldwide for the two coins with the highest market capitalizations, Bitcoin and Ethereum. We use these data to conduct a series of volume event studies to identify any in-jurisdiction abnormal trading activity in the countries in our studythat is, traders moving their activity either into or out of exchanges located within the affected jurisdictionsimmediately following the regulatory action. We also run models concerning global volume and price.

Surprisingly, these event studies yield almost entirely null results. Across all six major countries with substantial trading activity, dozens of major regulatory actions, and hundreds of model specifications, we cannot reject the null hypothesis that regulatory actionvirtually any regulatory actiondoes not affect in-jurisdiction trading activity. Regulatory determinations that crypto-assets are not currencies, bans on their trading or use, and anti-money-laundering and exchange regulation are associated with abnormal declines in global price in some models but not with abnormal changes in global or in-jurisdiction trading volume.

Consider the following timeline of U.S. regulatory events. The figure shows point estimates and 95 percent confidence intervals for cumulative average abnormal volume in U.S.-based Bitcoin and fiat markets around 23 major regulatory events. As the figure shows, the estimates fall far short of statistical significance at conventionally accepted levels. In some cases, the 95 percent confidence intervals extend beyond the figures limits, meaning that one cannot reject either the possibility that the regulation in question led to a complete cessation of trading or a greater than 100 percent increase in trading.

These results cast doubt on the concern that regulation will chill economic activity in this sector. We find that despite the professed antipathy of some cryptocurrency pioneers to regulation, the upsurge in regulatory activity in recent years does not appear to have dampened market activity. In addition, we cannot identify any significant shifts in trading activity away from jurisdictions such as the United States where market participants complain about regulatory enforcement and uncertainty, nor toward jurisdictions that have been more welcoming.

Despite our findings, it is possible that national regulation of cryptocurrencies can still have some effect. One can only draw limited inferences from null results. A few nations have imposed hard bans on cryptocurrency trading that impact activity in the country. And concerns about the United States classification of tokens as securities has led many initial coin offeringsa tool some cryptocurrency projects use to raise money similar to an initial public offeringto register elsewhere. Exchanges based in the United States, or serving U.S. customers, sometimes avoid listings altogether. But for the cryptocurrencies that dominate trading volumesBitcoin and Ethereumwe do not see effects of regulation on in-jurisdiction or global trading volume.

Our null findings should at least cast doubt on the critique that regulation of cryptocurrencies will lead to capital flight. As governments weigh the possibility of increasing regulation on cyber innovations in an effort to serve societal goals, concerns about the ill effects of regulation should not be a first-order consideration.

Brian D. Feinstein is an assistant professor of legal studies & business ethics at The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

Kevin Werbach is a professor of legal studies & business ethics at The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania..

Read the original:
Does Regulation Chill Cryptocurrency Trading? - The Regulatory Review

Two Biggest Threats To The Ongoing Bitcoin And Ethereum Rallies – Forbes

The price of Bitcoin looks to enter a new range after a key breakout.

The price of Bitcoin rose to as high as $12,086 on Coinbase, as Ethereum (ETH) buoyed overall market sentiment. While the cryptocurrency markets momentum is evidently strong, there are two potential threats to the rally.

The daily chart of Bitcoin.

The two possible obstacles to the ongoing Bitcoin and Ethereum rallies are the U.S. dollar recovery and historical performance of BTC in the month of September.

Is The Weakening U.S. Dollar Momentum Reversing?

Analysts have generally attributed the upsurge of both Bitcoin and gold to the fading dollar in recent months.

In late July, the U.S. dollar plunged to a two-year low due to the slowing economy and soaring virus cases.

Since then, the U.S. dollar has continuously declined. From March, within five months, the U.S. dollar index dropped from 98.32 points to 91.75 points, by more than 10%.

The weakening dollar seemingly fueled the sentiment around alternative assets, including Bitcoin and gold.

But, some analysts say that the decline of the dollar is overexaggerated. On August 23, Capital Economics senior economist Jonas Goltermann said the DXY does not depict the full picture.

He described the downfall of the dollar as a greatly exaggerated narrative. He noted that the U.S. dollar remains the dominant reserve currency, with more stability over the euro and renminbi.

Perhaps more importantly, there is no obvious alternative to the dollar. The next two largest economies, the euro-zone and China, are both smaller than the US, and the euro (due to its still-fragile political underpinnings) and the renminbi (due to Chinas capital controls and unique political system) have significant shortcomings as reserve currencies, he said.

The U.S. dollar has fallen sharply since May, and it remains to be seen whether the dollar could rebound at a key support area.

The U.S. dollar index (DXY) attempts to rebound at a key support area.

The recovery of the dollar could cause the uptrend of Bitcoin, gold, and other cryptocurrencies to slow.

Another potential factor to consider is the historical performance of Bitcoin during the month of September.

Every monthly candle in the last three years for the month of September closed as red. While the data is more coincidental than cyclical, it would be compelling to see if the pattern breaks for the first time in 4 years.

The Momentum of Bitcoin And Ethereum Remains Strong

For now, the momentum of both Bitcoin and Ethereum remains strong. Even at a high price point, the on-chain market analysis firm Santiment said traders undecided on whether to take profit.

BTC jumped above $12k today for the first time in 2 weeks, while $ETH hit a 25-month high of $485. Volume, especially for #Ethereum, has soared as traders polarize and decide whether to #FOMO in or profit take, Santiment researchers said.

Key on-chain data points also continuously signal the start to an extended uptrend. Rafael Schultz-Kraft, the chief technical officer at Glassnode, said the Bitcoin short-term holder net unrealized profit and loss activity (NUPL) has been above zero for four months.

A positive NUPL historically served as an indication for BTC bull markets, Kraft noted.

Continued here:
Two Biggest Threats To The Ongoing Bitcoin And Ethereum Rallies - Forbes