Category Archives: Bitcoin

Authorities need to expand the regulatory framework for cryptocurrency miners, a member of the parliament in Kazakhstan has suggested. The additional rules should streamline their activities and help correct the forming public opinion that they are responsible for the countrys electricity deficit.

New regulatory requirements and criteria for the crypto mining industry must be adopted to streamline its operations while developing a comprehensive ecosystem for digital assets. Thats according to a recent statement by Dyusenbay Turganov, member of the Mazhilis, the lower house of Kazakhstans parliament.

Quoted by the local business news portal Inbusiness.kz, the deputy noted that mining has been a legal industrial activity since the adoption of legislative amendments in 2020. He also reiterated that starting from January 2022, miners operating in accordance with the law will pay a new type of tax to the budget.

Nevertheless, against the backdrop of a brewing power shortage, society has an incorrect, misled opinion about digital mining as the culprit of the energy crisis and it seems that government agencies are not addressing this problem to the required extent, Turganov elaborated. He also commented that effective measures and their results are not visible, there is no due coordination of government bodies in this important process.

Kazakhstan has registered a growing deficit of electrical power, exceeding 7% in the first nine months of the year, which has been largely blamed on the increasing consumption in its growing mining sector. In November, many consumers, including households, experienced blackouts, and restrictions were imposed in the south of the country. To deal with the shortages, Kazakhstan had to import electricity from neighboring Russia at a higher tariff.

Dyusenbay Turganov insists, however, that its uncontrolled electricity consumption by illegal mining farms thats the main reason for the current situation. To solve the issue, the government has to step up efforts to identify so-called gray miners and suppress their illegal activities, he added. That would allow authorities to limit their consumption of power which is badly needed by legitimate consumers, the lawmaker stressed. Turganov has been quoted as stating:

It is needed to develop and adopt the necessary requirements and criteria for streamlining the activities of miners and the development of an integrated ecosystem for the circulation of digital assets based on the AIFC [Astana International Financial Centre] to reduce the share of the shadow economy.

The parliamentarian proposes that miners get involved in the development of renewable energy sources in Kazakhstan and help deal with imbalances in the nations power supply system. Authorities should also take steps to expand the countrys generating capacities, he urged.

Turganovs suggestions come after a group of his colleagues in the Mazhilis proposed, in early October, the establishment of a state register for cryptocurrency farms operating in the country. Worried by the growing consumption of energy in the sector, the lawmakers also want to charge miners a higher price for the electricity they use to mint digital coins.

Do you think Kazakhstan will introduce additional regulatory requirements for cryptocurrency miners? Share your expectations in the comments sections below.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

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.

Read this article:
More Regulations Proposed to 'Streamline' Mining Sector in Kazakhstan Mining Bitcoin News - Bitcoin News

Just over 13 years ago a tsunami was silently and slowly building from the force of Satoshi Nakamotos newly released paper Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. At the time only a handful of cryptography enthusiasts were aware of Bitcoin, and even they were grappling with its viability. And since the source code was still being refined and the genesis block had yet to be mined, Satoshi was grinding away in obscurity oblivious to the havoc Bitcoin was about to unleash on the world.

Any Bitcoin enthusiast knows that a fundamental element of Satoshis Bitcoin architecture is the selection of Proof-of-ork (PoW) as a consensus mechanism. Today when most people think of PoW, they immediately think of Bitcoin mining, and when they think of Bitcoin mining they garner images of ASIC-based mining servers lining a warehouse. But while Satoshi made analogies to gold mining, he never publicly used the word miner. The closest he (or she) probably came was the phrase proof of worker. He also talked about things like your computer's heat is offsetting your baseboard electric heating regarding the cost of running a node and implying that he viewed the PoW function as something that would be performed largely by individuals in homes. The Satoshi of 2008 would likely have found the direction of the Bitcoin mining infrastructure baffling, and, maybe, like me, a bit concerning. The basis of my concerns are the emerging trends for the Bitcoin mining network to lack diversity in the scale of operations and toward a dependence on third-party controlled energy sources.

To illustrate this situation lets look to the animal world. Consider three animals and their key characteristics: elephants, horses, and rabbits. Elephants are very large and mighty, slow to move over distance, hard to hide, reproduce slowly and are somewhat rare. Horses are powerful, can move quickly even over long distances; they can be difficult to find, theyre plentiful but building their population takes time. Rabbits are small and extremely quick over short distances, and fairly easy to spot individually; however, they are innumerable and can multiply at an astounding rate. Like all animals, some live in captivity and some in the wild. With this in mind, consider that the elephants are like the very large Bitcoin mining sites, that the rabbits are like the home miners, and that the horses are like the small to medium-sized mining operations. Regardless of the site size, those reliant on the grid for power are captive animals and those which produce and control their own power are wild.

In the beginning, Bitcoins mining infrastructure was all captive rabbits, just PCs running in offices, spare bedrooms, dorm rooms and garages. Over the first few years it was only the captive rabbits forming the network, but slowly a few captive horses started to appear as larger commercial efforts started to take over in back rooms, small warehouses, and old data centers. While there are plenty of captive rabbits and horses now, we are moving squarely into the era of the captive elephant. Bitcoin news feeds are littered regularly with announcements of new facilities which will house thousands of mining servers (ASICs), consume dozens or even hundreds of megawatts of electricity and cost hundreds of millions of dollars to bring online.

wild and captive animals as bitcoin minersCaptive elephant sites are very important as they bring massive computing power and security to the Bitcoin network, and in many cases, they are designed in partnership with utility companies to provide the stability and economic incentive to expand grid capacity. But there is danger in the growing trend for the Bitcoin network to become more dependent on them.

If you think of the mining servers as the food for the mining community then the elephants have a preferred seat at the dining table. Right now, server supply is extremely tight and unfortunately the elephants voracious appetites are leaving the horses and the rabbits to fend for scraps. It is certainly understandable that manufacturers like Bitmain, MicroBT and Bitfury give preference to the elephants given their limited production capacity and that the elephants simplify business for them. This is because they can make commitments to inventory months (or even years) in advance, they have the capital to make large deposits on their orders, and it is easier for the sales and support teams to deal with just a few elephant-class clients instead of a plethora of rabbits and horses. As a result, for the past few years rabbits and horses have largely been forced to buy products at a premium on the gray market, or use older technology, and in many cases, theyve been left out entirely.

The elephants have been getting fatter and fatter by consuming such a massive portion of the food supply and this has created a famine for the rabbits and horses. Since technology refreshes are ultimately mandatory for all miners, if the food supply for the rabbits and horses does not improve soon it will result in death by starvation for many. Should that occur, the entire Bitcoin ecosystem takes on a large vulnerability. If a large super majority of the global hash were owned by the elephants, and given that elephants are easy to find(hunt) and slow to reproduce, then a targeted effort to impair them and compromise the networks integrity takes on a realistic possibility. This could be from a coordinated effort involving legislation and regulation, directed attacks to physically destroy the sites, and/or even attacks at the elephants power sources. Such an attack against the Bitcoin network was initiated by China in the spring of 2021, so we must consider the possibility of another attack in the future. The next one might be larger, better funded, might involve arms and could even involve the confiscation and directed usage of the mining sites against the network. The more likely that such an attack would be successful, the more likely it is to occur especially as Bitcoin has become a growing threat to the global financial infrastructure and to government power.

Bitcoin defended itself marvelously in the China attack of 21, but it would be foolish to assume that future attacks could be so easily turned back. For instance, imagine the impact of a subtle change in Chinas strategy; instead of simply demanding all mining stop, what if China had confiscated all the hash rate and directed it against the network. If so, wed be having very different discussions today about the state of mining and might even find ourselves in the middle of the first world war in the digital space. To be certain that Bitcoins defense systems remain at full readiness, it is crucial that a robust population of rabbits and horses, both in and out of captivity, exists to provide a reliable base layer of hashing power.

When the China attack of 21 occurred, the Bitcoin network withstood the resulting 50-60% decrease in hashing power quite well. Because we now have the benefit of understanding that the network can maintain itself with this level of impairment, and that we want to remove the possibility of a hostile party confiscating enough hash power to wage a 51% attack, this gives us a good approximation of the maximum amount of ecosystems hash power that should be in elephant sites, especially captive elephant sites. The Bitcoin community should monitor these levels and never allow them to drift too far from 51%. Of course, the hashing power of the elephants will be split between wild and captive sites but because captive sites present a higher risk, setting an upper threshold to the amount of hashing power there is very important.

Before determining the appropriate split of captive and wild power sources for the elephants, lets first delve deeper into the definitions of wild and captive sites. A captive site is one in which the sites power is provided by an external, trusted third-party, or power master. This would typically be a utility company via a connection to a public power grid. Captive sites are usually in the vicinity of population centers as the economics of a grid power generally require a significant population and commercial activity to justify their existence.

A wild site is one in which a miner generates electricity on-site and that electricity moves to the mining equipment without passing through an intermediary. This would typically be implemented by using energy sources like flared gas, stranded gas, steam from geo-thermal sources, or small-scale hydroelectric solutions. Wind and solar power sources are possible as a portion of a mining sites power solution, but their intermittent nature means that they are typically accompanied by a parallel and supporting grid solution. Wild sites require more technical ability to build and maintain, have higher capital costs, need more space, and often have special safety requirements. Wild sites are possible even in the most remote areas, under the harshest environmental conditions and do not require the economic impact of also supporting others. An extreme example of a wild site would be a satellite containing mining equipment launched into earth orbit and powered by an on-board nuclear reactor. There are an infinite number of possible locations for wild sites, while the number of possible captive sites is finite. Finally, because generating extremely large amounts of consistent, reliable energy is hard in remote locations, wild elephant sites are, and will be, somewhat rare.

There are no metrics currently available showing the split of captured hash power from wild hash power; however, wild sites of any size are currently very unusual, and it can be said with certainty that wild hash rate makes up well less than 10% of the global total, and it could easily be as low as 1%. This means that at least 90% or more is captive and reliant on a power master a dangerous spot to be in. Obviously, allowing anyone to gain control of 51% of the network is dangerous, and since wild hash power is very difficult to secure through legislation or force, ideally 50% or more of the global hash power should be wild. However, for the next few years we will continue to have a huge and widening gap because massive increases in captive elephant hash power are already in motion. Our best hope in the near term (current halving cycle) would be to simply maintain something close to the present level and then strive for a 20% wild hash rate in the following halving cycle, and 50% in the subsequent one. Hitting these targets on the nose isnt crucial, it is important only that we be in the rough vicinity.

If we were able to achieve a split like the one in the target chart shown above, then 50% of the hash would be overseen by elephants and 50% by rabbits and horses, and 55% of the hash would be captive and 45% would be wild. Assuming that that this hash is also spread out in a geographically balanced manner, it would make it impossible for any bad actor, or even a group of bad actors, to compromise the mining ecosystem.

To set a course to achieve these targets each animal type will need help. First lets examine the rabbits. Foremost for the rabbits is access to mining servers. People buying individual machines have no clout or priority with the existing base of suppliers, and there are presently no retailers or even large distributors acting as a consolidation point. This results in rabbits being forced to buy on the spot market, and usually at a considerable premium to the prices paid by the elephants. Companies like Compass Mining do provide some means for individuals to get into mining, but those folks arent really rabbits as their units are hosted at horse and elephant sites. For a larger mix of mining to migrate toward rabbits the supply base must allocate a higher percentage of their inventory to individual sales, or they must establish a relationship with large retailers or distributors to support this market. It is encouraging that Blockstream and Square have both announced initiatives to develop ASICs, and that Jack Dorsey, Squares CEO, has specifically commented on wanting to support further decentralization of the network, thus inferring support for the rabbits. As mentioned earlier, rabbits are likely to be predominantly captive because the difficulty of producing and maintaining power at a small scale is challenging; however, over time it is likely that in areas where residential solar power is popular there will be some proliferation of wild rabbits.

The course for elephants is somewhat the opposite of rabbits. There is such massive momentum in the development of captive elephant sites that they may be placing the integrity of the network at risk. For instance, Riot Blockchain, Inc. is in the process of expanding its site in Rockdale, Texas to 700MW. This is very impressive and the accompanying leap in hashing power will initially help further secure the network; however, if most network expansion comes through similar captive elephant sites, then collectively these sites have the potential to become an Achilles heel. This is exacerbated by the fact that these captive elephant sites are being developed by the small number of organizations which have access to the enormous capital and resource requirements. Certainly, there is no implication that organizations like Riot should scale back their expansion efforts but, hopefully they will see that continuing a strategy of only developing captive elephant sites exposes both them and the network.

As crucial as development of wild elephants is to the health of the Bitcoin mining ecosystem, over the next handful of years nothing is more important than the expansion of wild horse sites. There are already several companies like Great American Mining, Upstream Data, Digital Shovel and my company, Barefoot Mining, which are building infrastructure equipment or doing development for wild horse sites. Interestingly, rapidly increasing wild horse sites is not dependent on finding energy; known stranded and flared gas sources alone have the potential to meet all wild horse needs. Adding in small-scale hydro and geo-thermal sources makes energy supply essentially infinite. Development of these sites is mostly dependent on raising capital. For instance, a wild horse site of about 2MW requires capital of $5 million to $10 million depending on the energy source and the mining equipment selected. To date, traditional commercial money-lending sources have been largely uninterested in supporting projects like this, especially for the small to medium-sized companies typically behind them. As a result, this usually forces these companies into fund-raising mode, but this is a time-consuming and frustrating process. This is because by the time a business plan is created and money has been raised, mining equipment costs and availability, and market conditions usually have changed too. In turn this means that the capital needs and pro-forma of the deal have changed so that a return to the investors is required. This can become a vicious cycle.

The good news is that over the past few years Barefoot Mining and others have brought wild horse sites into the network proving their technical and economic viability. This is leading to more confidence from investors in wild horse sites and more flexibility in how deals are created. This gives me great optimism that we are on the cusp (or in the midst) of a boon in the development of wild horse sites. Interest in this segment should continue to skyrocket and attract the capital it needs to become a major segment of the mining community. The energy is just waiting to be put to use.

The Bitcoin mining ecosystem has proven itself to be incredibly strong. It has weathered an attack from one of the largest, most powerful nations on earth without missing a beat and sometime early next year it will achieve a new all-time high in hash rate. There is a massive amount of money flowing into mining and on the surface all is well. However, it would be foolish for the Bitcoin mining community to assume that it is infallible and growing ever stronger. There is clearly a possibility of the mining network growing too asymmetrically, too top-heavy, and too captive, resulting in an unbalanced and exposed ecosystem. Nature has already taught us a lot about balance and survival. When an apex predator becomes too dominant and the population below it dwindles too far, the entire ecosystem collapses upon itself. Lets encourage and support the rabbits, and especially the wild horses, so that the diversity of the Bitcoin mining ecosystem becomes its great strength instead of its greatest weakness.

This is a guest post by Bob Burnett. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.

See the original post here:
The Crucial Role Of Wild Horses In Bitcoin Mining - Bitcoin Magazine

Image source: Getty Images

Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) plunged almost 8% on Saturday morning as news of the new Omicron variant of COVID-19 shocked the world.

That sent the cryptocurrency down more than 17% since its all-time high earlier this month.

As it recovers 4% on Monday morning, one expert reckons now is a ripe time to buy.

Bitcoin is unstoppable, and I fully expect to see prices double over the next 12 months, said deVere Group chief executive Nigel Green.

This dip in cryptocurrencies which are, of course, the inevitable future of money will be used by savvy investors as a major buying opportunity, topping up their portfolios with the current lower entry points.

The fact that Bitcoin sank so much in line with share markets on the first news of Omicron tells Green that the cryptocurrency has truly arrived.

The discovery of a new COVID variant has rattled global stock markets as it brings in a new wave of uncertainty, which they hate, he said.

The crypto markets have mirrored the reaction of other financial markets. This underscores how mainstream digital assets have now become, as an increasing number of institutional investors have piled into Bitcoin this year.

But Bitcoins value plummeting because of a new health crisis doesnt make sense, as traditionally, it has been seen as a store of value like gold.

So a revival in fortunes is inevitable.

I think this [is] a knee-jerk reaction from the crypto market. It will move on from this relatively quickly as it did with the Delta variant in the summer, said Green.

Why? Partly, because now we have more of a roadmap of how to deal with variants. But importantly because amongst retail investors it is increasingly regarded as a safe haven asset, similar to gold.

As he said with share markets, Green reckons the cryptocurrency investors will soon move on from the Omicron threat and return to worrying about other issues.

Investors will once again focus on heightening global inflation fears caused by lingering supply-side issues, he said.

As such, amid some peaks and troughs along the way as markets never move in a straight line with traders taking profit, we can expect to see the price of Bitcoin and other major cryptocurrencies continue their upwards trajectory.

Bitcoin has historically done well in times of inflation anxiety because of its finite supply. The currency has been programmed to have no more than 21 million coins in circulation.

And this would continue to drive demand from large investors, who for so long ignored Bitcoin as a legitimate asset.

This inflation shield will continue to bring to the crypto market growing investment from major institutional investors, bringing with them capital, expertise and reputational pull and further driving up prices.

Follow this link:
Unstoppable: Bitcoin will double in next 12 months, says expert - Motley Fool Australia

The CEO of cryptocurrency exchange Binance says that he and Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett share a similar investment strategy. However, he said he would not convince the Oracle of Omaha to invest in cryptocurrency. I get worried if he uses crypto. He may not have the necessary skills or the knowledge on how to keep his own crypto safe, the Binance CEO stressed.

Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao (CZ) talked about Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett and cryptocurrency investing on Yahoo Finance Wednesday.

Zhao recently praised Buffetts investing skills after reading a book about him titled Warren Buffett: Inside the Ultimate Money Mind. The book provides a deep analysis of Buffetts essential wisdom, an intricate mosaic of wide-ranging ideas and insights that Buffett calls a Money Mind, according to its description.

The Binance boss was asked if he were sitting in a room with Buffett, what he would tell the Oracle of Omaha about why he should invest in crypto. Zhao replied:

I wouldnt convince him to invest in crypto. I think its not necessary that everybody has to invest in crypto.

My mom doesnt use the internet that much and thats fine. The internet is fine. My mom is fine, the Binance executive continued. I think basically its a free world. We dont have to convince everybody to use crypto. Its only for the people who want to use crypto.

He explained that he read the book on Buffett because he reads many investment books. I recently just stumbled upon it, and its a great book, actually, Zhao emphasized, adding that the Oracle of Omaha has many investment theses that are timeless. And that still applies to crypto. Its just that hes not personally interested in crypto.

In addition, the Binance executive thinks he and Buffett have similar investing strategies. He explained, as noted in the book, that Buffett is not an investor who likes to diversify his portfolio. Zhao described:

He likes to hold a small number of stocks that he knows well. And he doesnt want to diversify across hundreds of stocks. Thats very similar to my personal mentality. I only hold BNB and BTC. I dont diversify myself across different crypto assets.

Because of his non-diversification, he is not into bitcoin or crypto. Thats fine. We dont need to convince him, Zhao emphasized.

He is not short of money. He is at a different stage of life where I think the learnings, the philosophies, the teachings are valuable to the world, the Binance executive added. The Berkshire Hathaway CEO is super successful which I respect a lot, he added, noting that there is no need to get him into crypto.

In fact, Zhao said he would be worried if Buffett starts using crypto, stating:

I get worried if he uses crypto. He may not have the necessary skills or the knowledge on how to keep his own crypto safe.

Buffett has been a vocal critic of bitcoin and cryptocurrency. He called BTC rat poison squared in 2018. He also called the cryptocurrency gambling, a game, and not an investment. His righthand man, Charlie Munger, said bitcoin is disgusting and contrary to the interests of civilization at Berkshires annual meeting in May.

Zhao was also asked about his recent discussion on Twitter with Tesla CEO Elon Musk about Binances dogecoin problem. Musk, a proponent of the meme cryptocurrency dogecoin, tweeted Tuesday morning that the Binances problem sounds shady.

Well, I dont intend to be sassy on Twitter, the Binance boss explained, emphasizing that Musk was incorrect and lacks research. He continued: I am not aggressive by nature, but Im also not submissive or cowardly when it comes to defending our business. I view defending Binance as my job and defending BNB and the crypto industry as my lifes mission.

Do you agree with Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao about Warren Buffett and crypto? Let us know in the comments section below.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

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.

View original post here:
Binance CEO Says He and Warren Buffett Use Similar Investment Strategy but Doubts Buffett Has Skills to Keep Crypto Safe News Bitcoin News - Bitcoin...

Roughly around two days ago, bitcoins price dipped to an intraday low of $55,640 (on Bitstamp), causing moderate turmoil within the community and raising the question of how far the correction will go.

As we reported back then, one of the key levels to consider is the zone between $58.3K and $53K as it contains very strong support in terms of both technical and on-chain indicators.

Now, prominent Bitcoin analyst Daniel Joe noted on Twitter that the cryptocurrency dipped into this major accumulation zone while also printing a moderate hammer candle and followed through higher.

According to the analyst, this is a near-term positive development for technicals, but we need to see higher highs and higher lows for validation.

We noted on more than one occasion that the current drawdown is caused predominantly by leveraged long positions being liquidated and weak hands panic selling mostly newer coins. Long-term holders (LTHs) and miners, on the other hand, have been holding through and show no serious interest in selling at these levels.

This is firmly attested by the fact that the Mean Coin Age (MCA) has been trending higher for a considerable period, despite some short-term pullbacks, as seen in the chart below:

The analyst also notes that he believes this to be an excellent buying opportunity as there are no serious signs of aggressive distribution from older coins and miners as the price was declining.

I think this pullback is a solid buying opportunity because we saw no major signs of aggressive distribution from older coins and miners as price fell.

So this is likely a shakeout in the middle of the bull market.

Always feels amazing to accumulate in times like this. Thank the leverage longs and the weak hands for causing short-term dislocations in price. Joe concluded.

PrimeXBT Special Offer: Use this link to register & enter POTATO50 code to get 50% free bonus on any deposit up to $1750.

Disclaimer: Information found on CryptoPotato is those of writers quoted. It does not represent the opinions of CryptoPotato on whether to buy, sell, or hold any investments. You are advised to conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Use provided information at your own risk. See Disclaimer for more information.

See the article here:
Bitcoin Price Analysis: Ahead of Weekly Close, First Positive Signs Correction Might Be Over - CryptoPotato

Depending on who you believe, computer scientist Craig Wright is either the mysterious Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto one of the most influential men of the modern age and the 15th wealthiest person in the world or a crafty Aussie who is trying to trick the world and cheat the estate of a dead man.

Or both.

In a court case now unfolding in West Palm Beach, Fla., Ira Kleiman, the brother of the late computer-security specialist David Kleiman, maintains that his brother and Wright developed the original digital currency credited to the Nakamoto pseudonym.

Ira claims that, as a result, he is entitled to half of Wrights crypto trove: some $64 billion in Bitcoin (by Fridays valuation).

If Wright is Satoshi, as he claims on his private Instagram page (which contains just one post), then he holds 1.1 million Bitcoin and is worth tens of billions of dollars.

The theory of the case is that a partnership was formed to create and mine a significant amount of Bitcoin under the name Satoshi Nakamoto, Vel Freedman, the attorney representing Ira Kleiman, told The Post. Evidence [in the form of emails] shows that Craig and Dave agreed to keep their partnership a secret. Nobody knew about it until Craig began telling [the Kleiman] family some details after Dave passed away [in 2013] and Craig decided to keep the fortune for himself.

We believe the court will find theres nothing to indicate or record that they were in a partnership, said Andrs Rivero, a lawyer for Wright.

Kleiman, a paraplegic, died under terrible conditions. When he was discovered, his body had begun to decompose, open bottles of alcohol were scattered around and, according to the complaint, there was a loaded handgun next to him. A bullet hole in his mattress was found. The exact details surrounding his death remain unknown.

If he himself had a stash of Bitcoin, it was never recovered and there was no known password.

Bitcoin started in 2008, after Nakamoto published online an open-source paper introducing a new form of digital currency: designed to be used without the need for a central bank. Its initialworth was less than a penny. Today, the value is nearly $58,000 per coin.

Nakamoto came up with the idea for coins created by solving increasingly complex calculations that would eventually require extremely powerful computers. The number of Bitcoins in circulation will top out after a finite 21 million are mined unlike traditional currency, which can be endlessly minted.

The identity of Nakamoto has become one of the great mysteries of our time, with everyone from Elon Musk to Swedish video-game developer Vili Lehdonvirta to American computer scientist Nick Szabo being tossed around as the man behind the myth. Wright, however, is the one person to step up and actually claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto.

While testifying on the witness stand earlier this month, Wright, according to coindesk.com, claimed to have written the white paper that laid out the inner workings of Bitcoin and was credited to Satoshi Nakamoto.

But there are vehement doubters who do not believe that Wright is the real Nakamoto.

Hes lying, full stop, maintained the well-regarded security researcher Dan Kaminsky via Twitter. Satoshi signed a transaction in 2009. Wright copied that specific signature and tried to pass it off as new.

Others believe that neither Wright nor Kleiman had anything to do with the creation of cryptocurrency. Im convinced that neither one of these guys are Satoshi, Bitcoin expert Arthur van Pelt told The Post. [The real Nakamoto] didnt want to be the leader. He wanted to hand it over to the community.

Wright grew up in Brisbane, Australia, and says he has a PhD in computer science from Charles Stuart University in his home country.

Craig has Aspergers and he is a little different from most people, Calvin Ayre, a venture capitalist who first made his bones with the controversial online gambling site Bodog.com and is an investor in nChain, where, according to CrunchBase, Wright is a founder and chief scientist. Hes a polymath who sleeps four hours a night and [in his sleep] listens to text books at four times the speed.

In the early 2000s, Wright was working for BDO, an accounting firm in Sydney, Australia, when he was assigned to do a security audit for a different online gambling operation. Thats when he met the gambling sites chief technology officer, Stefan Matthews.

If hes had a stressful day and needs to unwind, he reads a fking text book. He is wired differently from anyone I know.

If hes had a stressful day and needs to unwind, he reads a fking textbook. He is wired differently from anyone I know, Matthews told The Post. Hes got dozens of technical certifications for things like networks, firewalls, penetration testing.

Not long after they met, He talked to me about digital gold and digital cash and he had eight or nine different concepts for them, Matthews, formerly the CEO of nChain and now chairman of TAAL Distributed Information Technologies, recalled.

In 2008, Wright presented Matthews with a flash drive and asked him to download the document from it, with the hope that he would read it and offer his opinion on the work.

It was a white paper [for Bitcoin, summing up the digital currency] that covered a lot of what we had discussed, said Matthews. The final, published version, in October 2008, has Satoshis name on it. In January 2009 [someone posing as Nakamoto] launched the Bitcoin code.

Craig and Dave [Kleiman] first communicated in 2007 or 2008, he recalled. Craig told me that David helped him to edit the white paper. Craig has a problem with staying within word lengths.

Kleiman was a soldier turned cop turned computer forensics expert. While working as an officer for the Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office, he was paralyzed in a 1995 motorcycle accident that left him confined to a wheelchair.

According to court documents, Dave and Craig met in an online cryptography forum in 2003. Both men had a longtime interest in cyber security, digital forensics and the future of money. They maintained correspondence over the years and in 2007 they coauthored a paper on the mechanics of overwriting hard drive data.

One year later, the court document confirms, Wright asked Kleiman to help edit the white paper. Then, it maintains, for the next few months, Craig and Dave worked to get Bitcoin operational.

The court document states that on Thanksgiving Day in 2009, Dave told his brother Ira he was creating digital money with a wealthy foreign man, i.e., Craig.

Kleimans ex-wife Maria Frechette is not surprised if this was the case. I dont know if he invented [Bitcoin], she told The Post. But he was no dummy.

During the first several years of Bitcoin, Nakamoto communicated regularly with a small group of crypto obsessives, via email and various message boards, but never on the telephone or in person.

Then, on April 26, 2011, Nakamoto disappeared posting a farewell message to the community that concluded, Ive moved on to other things and has not been definitively heard from since.

Things were quiet for the next four years.

Wright had been keeping his alleged Satoshi identity on the down-low until December 2015. Thats when Wired and Gizmodo outed him.

They had been sending Craig emails for weeks and wanted to do an interview with him, Matthews said. The advice was for Craig to do nothing because no one will break the story without Craig corroborating what they say. Of course that was wrong advice and they both did. Craig was torn up about that.

But by May 2016, he had reversed course. Wright vowed to cash out some of Satoshis coins in order to prove that he was Satoshi. Then he backed out with a claim, according to Bitcoin magazine , that the transaction could reveal an early security flaw that would make it risky for him to move Bitcoin, exposing him to exploitation or theft.

I believed that I could put the years of anonymity and hiding behind me. But as the events of this week unfolded and I prepared to publish the proof of access to the earliest keys, I broke, he wrote in an online post. I do not have the courage. I cannot.

Soon after, Matthews reached out to Gavin Andresen. The Massachusetts-based software developer became the core maintainer of Bitcoins open-source code hand-selected by Nakamoto, though they never met when the founder reportedly left the project in 2011.

Andresen is well versed in the workings of Bitcoin: Records of mined coins are stored in blocks on the so-called blockchain, a digital ledger that keeps track of freshly mined coins. He knew that getting into each block required a unique key a string of numbers and letters that would allow Bitcoin to be transferred out (or messages to be left) plus a so-called public key that allows anyone to look at activity inside a given block.

Matthews invited Andresen to fly to London to meet Wright. At first, Andresen was skeptical, but, as he wrote on his website, An initial email conversation convinced me that there was a very good chance he was the same person [i.e., Satoshi] Id communicated with in 2010 and early 2011.

Convinced, Andresen took Matthews up on his offer. Upon landing in London, Andresen told The Post, I went to the basement of a hotel. Craig and I compiled code and did a whole bunch of geeky things. Then Craig signed a [unique] message I think it may have been Gavins favorite number is 11 in a block that Satoshi created. He had to have the private key to do it. That made me think Craig was Satoshi.

In fact, Andresen was so convinced that he posted as much on his website: I believe Craig Steven Wright is the person who invented Bitcoin During our meeting, I saw the brilliant, opinionated, focused, generous and privacy-seeking person that matches the Satoshi I worked with.

His opinion has since changed.

Now, Andresen told The Post, I have my doubts. Its possible that Satoshi got hacked and lost the key. Its possible I was fooled I was jet-lagged. The more that time goes on and we have not seen any movement in those early blocks, I have to ask myself why.

After Kleiman passed away from unknown causes in 2013, Matthews said, Wright reached out to Kleimans family.

From my recollection, when Craig found out that Dave passed away, it hit him really hard, Matthews told The Post. I understand he wrote an email to Daves [now deceased] father, saying that Dave was involved with Craig and that if Dave has encrypted drives, he may have mined Bitcoin and may have digital assets on them.

Said Ayre: He wanted Daves family to be proud of Dave, so he exaggerated Daves involvement.

Doubter van Pelt finds it ironic that Wrights claims are exactly what got him in hot water. [Wright] made himself out to be Satoshi and now is paying a price for it. He gave Ira Kleiman the appearance of being Satoshi Nakomoto. It works both ways.Craigis shameless.

Visit link:
Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? Two men claimed to be the inventor of Bitcoin - New York Post

A new dawn?

For bitcoin enthusiasts, one of the most compelling things about the cryptocurrency is its ability to side-step fiat monetary systems that dilute the value of cash holdings through inflation.

That isnt anywhere near as complicated as it sounds. Put very simply, central banks grease the wheels of their economies by continually printing new money. A higher money supply makes it easier for companies to spend and service their debt. But theres a catch: for every new dollar you add to the spending pool, the buying power of each individual dollar falls proportionally.

Again this is simpler than it sounds: changing the money supply doesnt magically create wealth or value. If your economy is a nursery and your money supply is crayons, then doubling the number of crayons in the room doesnt make the kids any richer. They all have twice as many crayons as they had before, so they all double the number they offer when bartering for toys, books and so on. In real terms, nothing has changed because the new supply of money is being evenly shared between everyone in the nursery.

Where things get more complicated and where bitcoiners have rightly identified a need for a different, fairer system is what happens when supply and distribution arent evenly matched?

Central bankers claim this isnt a concern, because they contend that all the cash ultimately trickles down to the man on the street be it through stimulus checks or higher wages or fatter pension funds or whatever other pathway they conjure up. In practice, of course, we know that simply doesnt reflect reality.

In the real world, billionaires have, by far, been the biggest winners from covid-era money printing. Theyve taken their higher money supply (including vast sums of borrowed money, which is cheaper and easier to obtain when interest rates are low) and theyve pumped it into inflation-beating asset classes such as the stock market, real estate, collectibles and so on. The middle classes have done the same, but on a smaller scale: building their savings during covid lockdowns and then allocating a healthy chunk of those funds to assets that have appreciated in value nicely.

Now consider the poor and the working classes. What little bonus cash theyve received during the pandemic has either been spent on survival or stagnated. Unable to get on the property ladder, they can neither benefit from rising house prices nor start building equity by replacing rent (money that goes into someone elses pot) with mortgage payments (money that goes into their own). Stock markets may, technically, be within their reach, but at a profound handicap due to high transaction fees and a limited understanding of investment strategies (the kind of knowhow that rich people simply pay someone else to worry about).

This imbalance results in one thing: inequality.

If youre rich, you can take a higher money supply and use it to your advantage. If youre poor, you really cant. Youre stuck with whatever cash holdings you have in the new economy. And, as we know, the value of those holdings is actively being diluted through inflation. The more money is printed, the poorer you get.

Interest rates, of course, could save the day if central banks wanted them to. When the interest rate rises above the inflation rate, any of us can grow the value of our cash simply by dumping it in a savings account. But policymakers dont want this, because just about the only thing holding up the global economy right now is easy access to debt. As soon as the interest rate paid by borrowers increases, the shaky foundations of our covid-era economic recovery will collapse. Businesses and homeowners who binged on cheap loans will suddenly be unable to make repayments. Waves of bankruptcies and foreclosures will cripple the global economy.

Small wonder that central bankers none of whom are working class, by the way prefer the easy option of hammering poor people. This might not be perfect, they rationalize, but everything seems to be stable and everyone I know is doing rather well! That, in a nutshell, tells you why central banks are the biggest driver of wealth inequality.

So, what to do? Well, as long as central bankers and politicians are in the driving seat, theres really no way of changing the direction of this economic journey. Those in power will always promote policies that advance their own personal interests, and they will do whatever is necessary to delay a global economic crash even one that would, in the long-run, probably be good for society as it would precipitate structural reforms to the current, broken system.

If there is a solution, it would have to be an alternative monetary system thats resilient to both inflation and central bank manipulation.

No prizes for stating the obvious there: civilization has aspired to have such a system for millennia. Trouble is, its never been that easy to build a monetary network thats backed by no-one and yet protects the interests of everyone so convincingly that ordinary people will trust it with their life savings. Never, that is, until 2009, when the launch of the bitcoin monetary network gave the world its first taste of decentralized blockchain technology.

Convincing readers about the technical benefits of blockchain is a bit like convincing overweight people about the health benefits of dieting. The proof is in the pudding, as it were. And the average person on the street has no more inclination to become an expert in food science the how or why a given diet is effective than they do computer programming.

That said, you cant understand the genius behind bitcoin without having at least a basic grasp of the revolutionary nature of blockchain technology so here goes.

Trust is everything. Ive already alluded to the fact that creating a monetary system from scratch is virtually impossible because money has no value unless enough people believe it has value. The easiest way to foster that belief is to get a government to pledge to uphold or back its value (think of that promise to pay the bearer on demand you see on banknotes). Another, more tenuous way is to come up with a universally appealing asset that has a fixed supply. Gold ticks this box nicely: its aesthetically attractive; it cant be forged because of its unique density; and it cant be manufactured by anyone, so therell only ever be as much gold on the planet as the planet already holds (shiny asteroids notwithstanding).

Then again, gold is a pain in the ass. Its heavy, so its a burden to carry and transfer. Its not easily divisible, so its hard to pay precise amounts with it. Not many people do their weekly shop with gold. But what if you could create a digital version of gold that weighs nothing, moves at the speed of light, and is divisible to the tiniest fraction of value. Sounds great. Also impossible. Until 2009.

If you only understand one thing about what blockchain technology does, let it be this: for the first time in history, blockchains give us genuinely immutable data.

That means the information contained within them cannot be changed. Ever. How they achieve this takes time to understand: its to do with the decentralized nature of the ledger, which lists all the transactions ever made on the blockchain and is secured by 1) the number of copies in existence (full nodes, all of which are cross-checked against each other); 2) the process through which new data is written (cryptographic encryption); and 3) the energy consumption of the network (the hashrate, which makes it impossible to overpower or change the course of the encryption process). I might have lost you there. But the end result isnt difficult to grasp. Once you have immutable data, you have the ability to create autonomous digital money.

By ensuring that bitcoins transaction history can never be altered, mankind has created a digital asset that satisfies five of the criteria for money: its durable, portable, scarce, divisible and fungible (interchangeable). The final criteria acceptability, or the willingness of people to conceive of bitcoin as real money will be determined not by its technical traits but by humanitys attitude towards it. In an increasingly digital age, the outlook is favorable.

Bitcoins detractors and there are many; typically old, middle class people whove become very rich from the status quo cite a different definition of money: that it must be embraced by society as a medium of exchange; a unit of account; and a store of value.

Bitcoin fails on all fronts, they say, as too few people use it on a daily basis, and the price is too volatile to measure or store value. Maybe so, today. But its also attained a market cap of $1 trillion in just 12 years. Is that not rather swift progress?

And what of the dollar and the other fiat currencies? Are they convenient mediums of exchange across international borders? Do they give us stable, predictable prices year after year? Most important of all, are they are a store of value in an era of high inflation? If youve ever complained about the rising cost of living, you already know the answer.

Read the rest here:
Why Bitcoin Is The Best Weapon Society Has Against Inflation And Wealth Inequality - Forbes

Weve argued many times in the past that the correlation between Bitcoins price and the market capitalization of hundreds of altcoins makes very little sense.

Whether you buy into the idea that Bitcoin is digital gold, or a payment mechanism, or both, it doesnt have a whole lot in common with Ethereum, Shiba Inu, or FTXs native exchange token.

Well, whether we like it or not, big moves in the price of Bitcoin define crypto markets.

Before Bitcoin slid from the latest all-time high above $68,000 back to the region of $55,000 last week, dragging most altcoins down with it, the crypto market had seen six straight weeks of virtually uninterrupted growth.

But as soon as the market turns red, as it did last week, many traders tend to succumb to three old enemies: Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD).

Which is why we say: FUD that. Experienced crypto traders know that periods of correction can also present profit opportunities. And Cointelegraph Markets Pros own VORTECS Score found six of the ten best-performing altcoins last week, even as the market took a dive.

The VORTECS Score is a machine learning-powered trading algorithm that compares historic and current market conditions in digital asset markets to aid crypto traders decision-making.

The model takes in a host of quantitative indicators including price movement, social sentiment, and trading activity to arrive at a score that assesses whether the present conditions are historically bullish, neutral, or bearish for over 200 cryptocurrencies.

A VORTECS Score of 80 or above is considered confidently bullish for the next 12-72 hours. Assets that achieve such scores exhibit arrangements of key trading and social variables that in the past came before significant price increases.

The table below shows ten altcoins that delivered significant return on investment between Nov. 11 and 18 the week that saw Bitcoin plunge from $68,000 to $58,000.

In bold are those tokens that hit a VORTECS Score of 80 or higher before reaching their peak price of the week.

Six out of ten of the weeks top performing assets exhibited patterns of trading and social behavior that closely resembled historically bullish combinations before they rallied.

Six out of ten is significant, given that the overall number of tokens that yielded any gains has been very modest.

What does it say about the nature of the crypto market? When things are bullish, altcoins can rally for an infinite number of reasons, oftentimes simply due to a favorable macro context and exuberance taking over the market.

But when much of the market is going south, analysis suggests that tokens supported by robust trading activity and high social sentiment are most likely to buck the trend.

These are also the times when traders need reliable data analytics to inform their strategies the most. When the floor is lava, it helps to have an extra pair of algorithmic eyes sifting through millions of data points to identify potential safe havens.

This is exactly what the VORTECS Score is trained to do.

Cointelegraph is a publisher of financial information, not an investment adviser. We do not provide personalized or individualized investment advice. Cryptocurrencies are volatile investments and carry significant risk including the risk of permanent and total loss. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Figures and charts are correct at the time of writing or as otherwise specified. Live-tested strategies are not recommendations. Consult your financial advisor before making financial decisions.

Go here to read the rest:
Seeing red? FUD that! Here's what you should have bought instead of Bitcoin last week - Cointelegraph

Most of us wish we had invested in -- or invested more in -- Bitcoin. The world's first cryptocurrency started out at around eight cents in 2010. And this year, it surpassed $60,000. Of course, it may not be too late to get in on this crypto titan. Some predict it will move even higher into the future. (And, as with many investments, others say just the opposite.)

But you may not want to hop on the Bitcoin train this late in the game. Instead, you may hope to find the next big mover in the cryptocurrency space and get in on the growth story earlier. If so, here's what you should consider buying now.

Image source: Getty Images.

I'm talking about the cryptocurrency Solana (CRYPTO:SOL). If you're a fan of non-fungible tokens (NFTs), you may have heard of the Solana blockchain. An NFT is a bit of data stored on a blockchain -- it is unique and operates like a certificate of authenticity and ownership. For instance, you can buy an original piece of artwork this way. Solana has become a significant platform for the creation and buying and selling of NFTs. The platform is the fourth biggest by sales volume, according to CryptoSlam.

But Solana isn't only about NFTs. A variety of projects can be built on the blockchain, including decentralized finance (DeFi) projects and games. And, of course, all of this is connected to Solana's own cryptocurrency known as "Sol." The currency started the year at only $1.50 -- it's since soared a whopping 14,000%.

Users like Solana for two reasons: Speed and cost. In fact, it beats bigger rival Ethereum when it comes to both. Solana can process about 50,000 transactions per second. That's compared to about 15 for Ethereum. And this is part of the reason why it's also cheaper to make a transaction on Solana: It's faster to process a larger block of information on the platform. Fees are less than a penny per transaction, while Ethereum fees these days are about $4.

Ethereum Average Transaction Fee data by YCharts

Why is Solana so speedy compared to peers? The company relies on its own method to validate transactions. It's called proof of history (PoH). PoH puts a timestamp on transactions to speed up validation. And what slows down Ethereum? Its proof of work method -- validators must solve complex mathematical puzzles in order to complete a transaction.

Solana is a relatively new kid on the block. Former Qualcommengineer Anatoly Yakovenko co-founded the project and launched it in 2020. Today, there are about 302 million Sol circulating. When Solana started, it increased supply 8% annually. Now, that will decrease by 15% each year -- until it reaches an issuance level of 1.5%. That's where it will stay. So, while supply will increase, it will do so in a controlled manner.

What does all of this mean for investors? Solana's speed, low cost, and the ground it's already gained in NFTs could power its value higher in the long term -- even after this year's big increase. That said, cryptocurrencies always come with a significant amount of risk. If you invest, you should only do so with money you can afford to lose.

Considering this, if you're still ready to take the plunge, Solana is a good option. You may have missed out on Bitcoin. But Solana could offer you a second chance at significant cryptocurrency gains.

This article represents the opinion of the writer, who may disagree with the official recommendation position of a Motley Fool premium advisory service. Were motley! Questioning an investing thesis -- even one of our own -- helps us all think critically about investing and make decisions that help us become smarter, happier, and richer.

Here is the original post:
Missed Out on Bitcoin? Here's What to Buy Now - Motley Fool

Dogecoin

NurPhoto

There's no doubt that 2021 has been the Year of the Cryptocurrency. Bitcoin is being heralded as an inflation hedge on a par with gold and ether is rapidly becoming the cryptocurrency of choice for decentralized finance, play-to-earn games, digital collectors' items, known as non-fungible tokens, and likely soon, the metaverse.

But it's not either of these two cryptocurrencies that have captured the public's imagination.

Dogecoin, which was founded by software engineers Billy Markus and Jackson Palmers in 2013 as a joke, has been the most searched-for cryptocurrency in the largest number of states so far this year, according to research by The Advisor Coach, a financial advisor. The coin, which is based on an internet meme of a Japanese Shiba Inu dog, was the most-googled in 23 states, including Florida, Illinois and Michigan.

This year, it shot to prominence, thanks in large part to the Twitter-based cheerleading of Tesla chief executive Elon Musk, who is a known crypto enthusiast that holds dogecoin, bitcoin and ether. Musk even went so far as saying in May this year that he might accept dogecoin as payment for his company's electric vehicles.

By that point, dogecoin was already beloved among the army of Reddit retail traders, who had pushed the coin up to around $0.07, from closer to $0.007 at the start of the year and Musk's payment remark sent the price to a record $0.70. It's since eased to around $0.24, but it's still one of the crypto stars of 2021, with a gain of nearly 5,000% so far.

"The rise in interest can be partially attributed to the endorsement of Elon Musk who stated earlier in the year that Tesla would accept dogecoin as a form of payment," The Advisor Coach note said.

Crypto traders' adoration of Musk extends well beyond what coins he holds and has given rise to dogecoin spinoffs. The Tesla boss even owns a Shiba Inu. There's now a shiba inu coin, and even a floki inu, named after Musk's real-life pup, Floki.

By contrast, bitcoin, the biggest and original cryptocurrency, was the most-searched for in just 10 states, including Connecticut, Alaska and Mississippi, ranking it second in the list. Bitcoin has led the surge in appetite for and adoption of cryptocurrencies. The total market value of crypto assets is hovering at close to $3 trillion, having risen from around $500 billion a year earlier, according to CoinGecko.

Ether came in third place, being the most searched in eight states, while shiba inu landed in fourth place. Interestingly, shiba inu was the most-searched for cryptocurrency in New York, home to Wall Street and the country's most powerful financial institutions.

The Advisor Coach

Continued here:
"Dogecoin" is the most-googled crypto in more US states than bitcoin - Markets Insider