Bitcoin’s bubble under pressure as other cryptocurrencies ...
Bitcoin is All Grown Up and the Future is Bright ...
On Marxism and the Value of Bitcoin - The eCoin
Famous quotes by billionaires about Bitcoin - TheTechTor
Bob The Magic Custodian
Summary: Everyone knows that when you give your assets to someone else, they always keep them safe. If this is true for individuals, it is certainly true for businesses. Custodians always tell the truth and manage funds properly. They won't have any interest in taking the assets as an exchange operator would. Auditors tell the truth and can't be misled. That's because organizations that are regulated are incapable of lying and don't make mistakes. First, some background. Here is a summary of how custodians make us more secure: Previously, we might give Alice our crypto assets to hold. There were risks:
Alice might take the assets and disappear.
Alice might spend the assets and pretend that she still has them (fractional model).
Alice might store the assets insecurely and they'll get stolen.
Alice might give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force.
Alice might lose access to the assets.
But "no worries", Alice has a custodian named Bob. Bob is dressed in a nice suit. He knows some politicians. And he drives a Porsche. "So you have nothing to worry about!". And look at all the benefits we get:
Alice can't take the assets and disappear (unless she asks Bob or never gives them to Bob).
Alice can't spend the assets and pretend that she still has them. (Unless she didn't give them to Bob or asks him for them.)
Alice can't store the assets insecurely so they get stolen. (After all - she doesn't have any control over the withdrawal process from any of Bob's systems, right?)
Alice can't give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force. (Bob will stop her, right Bob?)
Alice can't lose access to the funds. (She'll always be present, sane, and remember all secrets, right?)
See - all problems are solved! All we have to worry about now is:
Bob might take the assets and disappear.
Bob might spend the assets and pretend that he still has them (fractional model).
Bob might store the assets insecurely and they'll get stolen.
Bob might give the assets to someone else by mistake or by force.
Bob might lose access to the assets.
It's pretty simple. Before we had to trust Alice. Now we only have to trust Alice, Bob, and all the ways in which they communicate. Just think of how much more secure we are! "On top of that", Bob assures us, "we're using a special wallet structure". Bob shows Alice a diagram. "We've broken the balance up and store it in lots of smaller wallets. That way", he assures her, "a thief can't take it all at once". And he points to a historic case where a large sum was taken "because it was stored in a single wallet... how stupid". "Very early on, we used to have all the crypto in one wallet", he said, "and then one Christmas a hacker came and took it all. We call him the Grinch. Now we individually wrap each crypto and stick it under a binary search tree. The Grinch has never been back since." "As well", Bob continues, "even if someone were to get in, we've got insurance. It covers all thefts and even coercion, collusion, and misplaced keys - only subject to the policy terms and conditions." And with that, he pulls out a phone-book sized contract and slams it on the desk with a thud. "Yep", he continues, "we're paying top dollar for one of the best policies in the country!" "Can I read it?' Alice asks. "Sure," Bob says, "just as soon as our legal team is done with it. They're almost through the first chapter." He pauses, then continues. "And can you believe that sales guy Mike? He has the same year Porsche as me. I mean, what are the odds?" "Do you use multi-sig?", Alice asks. "Absolutely!" Bob replies. "All our engineers are fully trained in multi-sig. Whenever we want to set up a new wallet, we generate 2 separate keys in an air-gapped process and store them in this proprietary system here. Look, it even requires the biometric signature from one of our team members to initiate any withdrawal." He demonstrates by pressing his thumb into the display. "We use a third-party cloud validation API to match the thumbprint and authorize each withdrawal. The keys are also backed up daily to an off-site third-party." "Wow that's really impressive," Alice says, "but what if we need access for a withdrawal outside of office hours?" "Well that's no issue", Bob says, "just send us an email, call, or text message and we always have someone on staff to help out. Just another part of our strong commitment to all our customers!" "What about Proof of Reserve?", Alice asks. "Of course", Bob replies, "though rather than publish any blockchain addresses or signed transaction, for privacy we just do a SHA256 refactoring of the inverse hash modulus for each UTXO nonce and combine the smart contract coefficient consensus in our hyperledger lightning node. But it's really simple to use." He pushes a button and a large green checkmark appears on a screen. "See - the algorithm ran through and reserves are proven." "Wow", Alice says, "you really know your stuff! And that is easy to use! What about fiat balances?" "Yeah, we have an auditor too", Bob replies, "Been using him for a long time so we have quite a strong relationship going! We have special books we give him every year and he's very efficient! Checks the fiat, crypto, and everything all at once!" "We used to have a nice offline multi-sig setup we've been using without issue for the past 5 years, but I think we'll move all our funds over to your facility," Alice says. "Awesome", Bob replies, "Thanks so much! This is perfect timing too - my Porsche got a dent on it this morning. We have the paperwork right over here." "Great!", Alice replies. And with that, Alice gets out her pen and Bob gets the contract. "Don't worry", he says, "you can take your crypto-assets back anytime you like - just subject to our cancellation policy. Our annual management fees are also super low and we don't adjust them often". How many holes have to exist for your funds to get stolen? Just one. Why are we taking a powerful offline multi-sig setup, widely used globally in hundreds of different/lacking regulatory environments with 0 breaches to date, and circumventing it by a demonstrably weak third party layer? And paying a great expense to do so? If you go through the list of breaches in the past 2 years to highly credible organizations, you go through the list of major corporate frauds (only the ones we know about), you go through the list of all the times platforms have lost funds, you go through the list of times and ways that people have lost their crypto from identity theft, hot wallet exploits, extortion, etc... and then you go through this custodian with a fine-tooth comb and truly believe they have value to add far beyond what you could, sticking your funds in a wallet (or set of wallets) they control exclusively is the absolute worst possible way to take advantage of that security. The best way to add security for crypto-assets is to make a stronger multi-sig. With one custodian, what you are doing is giving them your cryptocurrency and hoping they're honest, competent, and flawlessly secure. It's no different than storing it on a really secure exchange. Maybe the insurance will cover you. Didn't work for Bitpay in 2015. Didn't work for Yapizon in 2017. Insurance has never paid a claim in the entire history of cryptocurrency. But maybe you'll get lucky. Maybe your exact scenario will buck the trend and be what they're willing to cover. After the large deductible and hopefully without a long and expensive court battle. And you want to advertise this increase in risk, the lapse of judgement, an accident waiting to happen, as though it's some kind of benefit to customers ("Free institutional-grade storage for your digital assets.")? And then some people are writing to the OSC that custodians should be mandatory for all funds on every exchange platform? That this somehow will make Canadians as a whole more secure or better protected compared with standard air-gapped multi-sig? On what planet? Most of the problems in Canada stemmed from one thing - a lack of transparency. If Canadians had known what a joke Quadriga was - it wouldn't have grown to lose $400m from hard-working Canadians from coast to coast to coast. And Gerald Cotten would be in jail, not wherever he is now (at best, rotting peacefully). EZ-BTC and mister Dave Smilie would have been a tiny little scam to his friends, not a multi-million dollar fraud. Einstein would have got their act together or been shut down BEFORE losing millions and millions more in people's funds generously donated to criminals. MapleChange wouldn't have even been a thing. And maybe we'd know a little more about CoinTradeNewNote - like how much was lost in there. Almost all of the major losses with cryptocurrency exchanges involve deception with unbacked funds. So it's great to see transparency reports from BitBuy and ShakePay where someone independently verified the backing. The only thing we don't have is:
ANY CERTAINTY BALANCES WEREN'T EXCLUDED. Quadriga's largest account was $70m. 80% of funds are in 20% of accounts (Pareto principle). All it takes is excluding a few really large accounts - and nobody's the wiser. A fractional platform can easily pass any audit this way.
ANY VISIBILITY WHATSOEVER INTO THE CUSTODIANS. BitBuy put out their report before moving all the funds to their custodian and ShakePay apparently can't even tell us who the custodian is. That's pretty important considering that basically all of the funds are now stored there.
ANY IDEA ABOUT THE OTHER EXCHANGES. In order for this to be effective, it has to be the norm. It needs to be "unusual" not to know. If obscurity is the norm, then it's super easy for people like Gerald Cotten and Dave Smilie to blend right in.
It's not complicated to validate cryptocurrency assets. They need to exist, they need to be spendable, and they need to cover the total balances. There are plenty of credible people and firms across the country that have the capacity to reasonably perform this validation. Having more frequent checks by different, independent, parties who publish transparent reports is far more valuable than an annual check by a single "more credible/official" party who does the exact same basic checks and may or may not publish anything. Here's an example set of requirements that could be mandated:
First report within 1 month of launching, another within 3 months, and further reports at minimum every 6 months thereafter.
No auditor can be repeated within a 12 month period.
All reports must be public, identifying the auditor and the full methodology used.
All auditors must be independent of the firm being audited with no conflict of interest.
Reports must include the percentage of each asset backed, and how it's backed.
The auditor publishes a hash list, which lists a hash of each customer's information and balances that were included. Hash is one-way encryption so privacy is fully preserved. Every customer can use this to have 100% confidence they were included.
If we want more extensive requirements on audits, these should scale upward based on the total assets at risk on the platform, and whether the platform has loaned their assets out.
There are ways to structure audits such that neither crypto assets nor customer information are ever put at risk, and both can still be properly validated and publicly verifiable. There are also ways to structure audits such that they are completely reasonable for small platforms and don't inhibit innovation in any way. By making the process as reasonable as possible, we can completely eliminate any reason/excuse that an honest platform would have for not being audited. That is arguable far more important than any incremental improvement we might get from mandating "the best of the best" accountants. Right now we have nothing mandated and tons of Canadians using offshore exchanges with no oversight whatsoever. Transparency does not prove crypto assets are safe. CoinTradeNewNote, Flexcoin ($600k), and Canadian Bitcoins ($100k) are examples where crypto-assets were breached from platforms in Canada. All of them were online wallets and used no multi-sig as far as any records show. This is consistent with what we see globally - air-gapped multi-sig wallets have an impeccable record, while other schemes tend to suffer breach after breach. We don't actually know how much CoinTrader lost because there was no visibility. Rather than publishing details of what happened, the co-founder of CoinTrader silently moved on to found another platform - the "most trusted way to buy and sell crypto" - a site that has no information whatsoever (that I could find) on the storage practices and a FAQ advising that “[t]rading cryptocurrency is completely safe” and that having your own wallet is “entirely up to you! You can certainly keep cryptocurrency, or fiat, or both, on the app.” Doesn't sound like much was learned here, which is really sad to see. It's not that complicated or unreasonable to set up a proper hardware wallet. Multi-sig can be learned in a single course. Something the equivalent complexity of a driver's license test could prevent all the cold storage exploits we've seen to date - even globally. Platform operators have a key advantage in detecting and preventing fraud - they know their customers far better than any custodian ever would. The best job that custodians can do is to find high integrity individuals and train them to form even better wallet signatories. Rather than mandating that all platforms expose themselves to arbitrary third party risks, regulations should center around ensuring that all signatories are background-checked, properly trained, and using proper procedures. We also need to make sure that signatories are empowered with rights and responsibilities to reject and report fraud. They need to know that they can safely challenge and delay a transaction - even if it turns out they made a mistake. We need to have an environment where mistakes are brought to the surface and dealt with. Not one where firms and people feel the need to hide what happened. In addition to a knowledge-based test, an auditor can privately interview each signatory to make sure they're not in coercive situations, and we should make sure they can freely and anonymously report any issues without threat of retaliation. A proper multi-sig has each signature held by a separate person and is governed by policies and mutual decisions instead of a hierarchy. It includes at least one redundant signature. For best results, 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7. History has demonstrated over and over again the risk of hot wallets even to highly credible organizations. Nonetheless, many platforms have hot wallets for convenience. While such losses are generally compensated by platforms without issue (for example Poloniex, Bitstamp, Bitfinex, Gatecoin, Coincheck, Bithumb, Zaif, CoinBene, Binance, Bitrue, Bitpoint, Upbit, VinDAX, and now KuCoin), the public tends to focus more on cases that didn't end well. Regardless of what systems are employed, there is always some level of risk. For that reason, most members of the public would prefer to see third party insurance. Rather than trying to convince third party profit-seekers to provide comprehensive insurance and then relying on an expensive and slow legal system to enforce against whatever legal loopholes they manage to find each and every time something goes wrong, insurance could be run through multiple exchange operators and regulators, with the shared interest of having a reputable industry, keeping costs down, and taking care of Canadians. For example, a 4 of 7 multi-sig insurance fund held between 5 independent exchange operators and 2 regulatory bodies. All Canadian exchanges could pay premiums at a set rate based on their needed coverage, with a higher price paid for hot wallet coverage (anything not an air-gapped multi-sig cold wallet). Such a model would be much cheaper to manage, offer better coverage, and be much more reliable to payout when needed. The kind of coverage you could have under this model is unheard of. You could even create something like the CDIC to protect Canadians who get their trading accounts hacked if they can sufficiently prove the loss is legitimate. In cases of fraud, gross negligence, or insolvency, the fund can be used to pay affected users directly (utilizing the last transparent balance report in the worst case), something which private insurance would never touch. While it's recommended to have official policies for coverage, a model where members vote would fully cover edge cases. (Could be similar to the Supreme Court where justices vote based on case law.) Such a model could fully protect all Canadians across all platforms. You can have a fiat coverage governed by legal agreements, and crypto-asset coverage governed by both multi-sig and legal agreements. It could be practical, affordable, and inclusive. Now, we are at a crossroads. We can happily give up our freedom, our innovation, and our money. We can pay hefty expenses to auditors, lawyers, and regulators year after year (and make no mistake - this cost will grow to many millions or even billions as the industry grows - and it will be borne by all Canadians on every platform because platforms are not going to eat up these costs at a loss). We can make it nearly impossible for any new platform to enter the marketplace, forcing Canadians to use the same stagnant platforms year after year. We can centralize and consolidate the entire industry into 2 or 3 big players and have everyone else fail (possibly to heavy losses of users of those platforms). And when a flawed security model doesn't work and gets breached, we can make it even more complicated with even more people in suits making big money doing the job that blockchain was supposed to do in the first place. We can build a system which is so intertwined and dependent on big government, traditional finance, and central bankers that it's future depends entirely on that of the fiat system, of fractional banking, and of government bail-outs. If we choose this path, as history has shown us over and over again, we can not go back, save for revolution. Our children and grandchildren will still be paying the consequences of what we decided today. Or, we can find solutions that work. We can maintain an open and innovative environment while making the adjustments we need to make to fully protect Canadian investors and cryptocurrency users, giving easy and affordable access to cryptocurrency for all Canadians on the platform of their choice, and creating an environment in which entrepreneurs and problem solvers can bring those solutions forward easily. None of the above precludes innovation in any way, or adds any unreasonable cost - and these three policies would demonstrably eliminate or resolve all 109 historic cases as studied here - that's every single case researched so far going back to 2011. It includes every loss that was studied so far not just in Canada but globally as well. Unfortunately, finding answers is the least challenging part. Far more challenging is to get platform operators and regulators to agree on anything. My last post got no response whatsoever, and while the OSC has told me they're happy for industry feedback, I believe my opinion alone is fairly meaningless. This takes the whole community working together to solve. So please let me know your thoughts. Please take the time to upvote and share this with people. Please - let's get this solved and not leave it up to other people to do. Facts/background/sources (skip if you like):
The inspiration for the paragraph about splitting wallets was an actual quote from a Canadian company providing custodial services in response to the OSC consultation paper: "We believe that it will be in the in best interests of investors to prohibit pooled crypto assets or ‘floats’. Most Platforms pool assets, citing reasons of practicality and expense. The recent hack of the world’s largest Platform – Binance – demonstrates the vulnerability of participants’ assets when such concessions are made. In this instance, the Platform’s entire hot wallet of Bitcoins, worth over $40 million, was stolen, facilitated in part by the pooling of client crypto assets." "the maintenance of participants (and Platform) crypto assets across multiple wallets distributes the related risk and responsibility of security - reducing the amount of insurance coverage required and making insurance coverage more readily obtainable". For the record, their reply also said nothing whatsoever about multi-sig or offline storage.
In addition to the fact that the $40m hack represented only one "hot wallet" of Binance, and they actually had the vast majority of assets in other wallets (including mostly cold wallets), multiple real cases have clearly demonstrated that risk is still present with multiple wallets. Bitfinex, VinDAX, Bithumb, Altsbit, BitPoint, Cryptopia, and just recently KuCoin all had multiple wallets breached all at the same time, and may represent a significantly larger impact on customers than the Binance breach which was fully covered by Binance. To represent that simply having multiple separate wallets under the same security scheme is a comprehensive way to reduce risk is just not true.
Private insurance has historically never covered a single loss in the cryptocurrency space (at least, not one that I was able to find), and there are notable cases where massive losses were not covered by insurance. Bitpay in 2015 and Yapizon in 2017 both had insurance policies that didn't pay out during the breach, even after a lengthly court process. The same insurance that ShakePay is presently using (and announced to much fanfare) was describe by their CEO himself as covering “physical theft of the media where the private keys are held,” which is something that has never historically happened. As was said with regard to the same policy in 2018 - “I don’t find it surprising that Lloyd’s is in this space,” said Johnson, adding that to his mind the challenge for everybody is figuring out how to structure these policies so that they are actually protective. “You can create an insurance policy that protects no one – you know there are so many caveats to the policy that it’s not super protective.”
The most profitable policy for a private insurance company is one with the most expensive premiums that they never have to pay a claim on. They have no inherent incentive to take care of people who lost funds. It's "cheaper" to take the reputational hit and fight the claim in court. The more money at stake, the more the insurance provider is incentivized to avoid payout. They're not going to insure the assets unless they have reasonable certainty to make a profit by doing so, and they're not going to pay out a massive sum unless it's legally forced. Private insurance is always structured to be maximally profitable to the insurance provider.
The circumvention of multi-sig was a key factor in the massive Bitfinex hack of over $60m of bitcoin, which today still sits being slowly used and is worth over $3b. While Bitfinex used a qualified custodian Bitgo, which was and still is active and one of the industry leaders of custodians, and they set up 2 of 3 multi-sig wallets, the entire system was routed through Bitfinex, such that Bitfinex customers could initiate the withdrawals in a "hot" fashion. This feature was also a hit with the hacker. The multi-sig was fully circumvented.
Bitpay in 2015 was another example of a breach that stole 5,000 bitcoins. This happened not through the exploit of any system in Bitpay, but because the CEO of a company they worked with got their computer hacked and the hackers were able to request multiple bitcoin purchases, which Bitpay honoured because they came from the customer's computer legitimately. Impersonation is a very common tactic used by fraudsters, and methods get more extreme all the time.
A notable case in Canada was the Canadian Bitcoins exploit. Funds were stored on a server in a Rogers Data Center, and the attendee was successfully convinced to reboot the server "in safe mode" with a simple phone call, thus bypassing the extensive security and enabling the theft.
The very nature of custodians circumvents multi-sig. This is because custodians are not just having to secure the assets against some sort of physical breach but against any form of social engineering, modification of orders, fraudulent withdrawal attempts, etc... If the security practices of signatories in a multi-sig arrangement are such that the breach risk of one signatory is 1 in 100, the requirement of 3 independent signatures makes the risk of theft 1 in 1,000,000. Since hackers tend to exploit the weakest link, a comparable custodian has to make the entry and exit points of their platform 10,000 times more secure than one of those signatories to provide equivalent protection. And if the signatories beef up their security by only 10x, the risk is now 1 in 1,000,000,000. The custodian has to be 1,000,000 times more secure. The larger and more complex a system is, the more potential vulnerabilities exist in it, and the fewer people can understand how the system works when performing upgrades. Even if a system is completely secure today, one has to also consider how that system might evolve over time or work with different members.
By contrast, offline multi-signature solutions have an extremely solid record, and in the entire history of cryptocurrency exchange incidents which I've studied (listed here), there has only been one incident (796 exchange in 2015) involving an offline multi-signature wallet. It happened because the customer's bitcoin address was modified by hackers, and the amount that was stolen ($230k) was immediately covered by the exchange operators. Basically, the platform operators were tricked into sending a legitimate withdrawal request to the wrong address because hackers exploited their platform to change that address. Such an issue would not be prevented in any way by the use of a custodian, as that custodian has no oversight whatsoever to the exchange platform. It's practical for all exchange operators to test large withdrawal transactions as a general policy, regardless of what model is used, and general best practice is to diagnose and fix such an exploit as soon as it occurs.
False promises on the backing of funds played a huge role in the downfall of Quadriga, and it's been exposed over and over again (MyCoin, PlusToken, Bitsane, Bitmarket, EZBTC, IDAX). Even today, customers have extremely limited certainty on whether their funds in exchanges are actually being backed or how they're being backed. While this issue is not unique to cryptocurrency exchanges, the complexity of the technology and the lack of any regulation or standards makes problems more widespread, and there is no "central bank" to come to the rescue as in the 2008 financial crisis or during the great depression when "9,000 banks failed".
In addition to fraudulent operations, the industry is full of cases where operators have suffered breaches and not reported them. Most recently, Einstein was the largest case in Canada, where ongoing breaches and fraud were perpetrated against the platform for multiple years and nobody found out until the platform collapsed completely. While fraud and breaches suck to deal with, they suck even more when not dealt with. Lack of visibility played a role in the largest downfalls of Mt. Gox, Cryptsy, and Bitgrail. In some cases, platforms are alleged to have suffered a hack and keep operating without admitting it at all, such as CoinBene.
It surprises some to learn that a cryptographic solution has already existed since 2013, and gained widespread support in 2014 after Mt. Gox. Proof of Reserves is a full cryptographic proof that allows any customer using an exchange to have complete certainty that their crypto-assets are fully backed by the platform in real-time. This is accomplished by proving that assets exist on the blockchain, are spendable, and fully cover customer deposits. It does not prove safety of assets or backing of fiat assets.
If we didn't care about privacy at all, a platform could publish their wallet addresses, sign a partial transaction, and put the full list of customer information and balances out publicly. Customers can each check that they are on the list, that the balances are accurate, that the total adds up, and that it's backed and spendable on the blockchain. Platforms who exclude any customer take a risk because that customer can easily check and see they were excluded. So together with all customers checking, this forms a full proof of backing of all crypto assets.
However, obviously customers care about their private information being published. Therefore, a hash of the information can be provided instead. Hash is one-way encryption. The hash allows the customer to validate inclusion (by hashing their own known information), while anyone looking at the list of hashes cannot determine the private information of any other user. All other parts of the scheme remain fully intact. A model like this is in use on the exchange CoinFloor in the UK.
A Merkle tree can provide even greater privacy. Instead of a list of balances, the balances are arranged into a binary tree. A customer starts from their node, and works their way to the top of the tree. For example, they know they have 5 BTC, they plus 1 other customer hold 7 BTC, they plus 2-3 other customers hold 17 BTC, etc... until they reach the root where all the BTC are represented. Thus, there is no way to find the balances of other individual customers aside from one unidentified customer in this case.
Proposals such as this had the backing of leaders in the community including Nic Carter, Greg Maxwell, and Zak Wilcox. Substantial and significant effort started back in 2013, with massive popularity in 2014. But what became of that effort? Very little. Exchange operators continue to refuse to give visibility. Despite the fact this information can often be obtained through trivial blockchain analysis, no Canadian platform has ever provided any wallet addresses publicly. As described by the CEO of Newton "For us to implement some kind of realtime Proof of Reserves solution, which I'm not opposed to, it would have to ... Preserve our users' privacy, as well as our own. Some kind of zero-knowledge proof". Kraken describes here in more detail why they haven't implemented such a scheme. According to professor Eli Ben-Sasson, when he spoke with exchanges, none were interested in implementing Proof of Reserves.
And yet, Kraken's places their reasoning on a page called "Proof of Reserves". More recently, both BitBuy and ShakePay have released reports titled "Proof of Reserves and Security Audit". Both reports contain disclaimers against being audits. Both reports trust the customer list provided by the platform, leaving the open possibility that multiple large accounts could have been excluded from the process. Proof of Reserves is a blockchain validation where customers see the wallets on the blockchain. The report from Kraken is 5 years old, but they leave it described as though it was just done a few weeks ago. And look at what they expect customers to do for validation. When firms represent something being "Proof of Reserve" when it's not, this is like a farmer growing fruit with pesticides and selling it in a farmers market as organic produce - except that these are people's hard-earned life savings at risk here. Platforms are misrepresenting the level of visibility in place and deceiving the public by their misuse of this term. They haven't proven anything.
Fraud isn't a problem that is unique to cryptocurrency. Fraud happens all the time. Enron, WorldCom, Nortel, Bear Stearns, Wells Fargo, Moser Baer, Wirecard, Bre-X, and Nicola are just some of the cases where frauds became large enough to become a big deal (and there are so many countless others). These all happened on 100% reversible assets despite regulations being in place. In many of these cases, the problems happened due to the over-complexity of the financial instruments. For example, Enron had "complex financial statements [which] were confusing to shareholders and analysts", creating "off-balance-sheet vehicles, complex financing structures, and deals so bewildering that few people could understand them". In cryptocurrency, we are often combining complex financial products with complex technologies and verification processes. We are naïve if we think problems like this won't happen. It is awkward and uncomfortable for many people to admit that they don't know how something works. If we want "money of the people" to work, the solutions have to be simple enough that "the people" can understand them, not so confusing that financial professionals and technology experts struggle to use or understand them.
For those who question the extent to which an organization can fool their way into a security consultancy role, HB Gary should be a great example to look at. Prior to trying to out anonymous, HB Gary was being actively hired by multiple US government agencies and others in the private sector (with glowing testimonials). The published articles and hosted professional security conferences. One should also look at this list of data breaches from the past 2 years. Many of them are large corporations, government entities, and technology companies. These are the ones we know about. Undoubtedly, there are many more that we do not know about. If HB Gary hadn't been "outted" by anonymous, would we have known they were insecure? If the same breach had happened outside of the public spotlight, would it even have been reported? Or would HB Gary have just deleted the Twitter posts, brought their site back up, done a couple patches, and kept on operating as though nothing had happened?
In the case of Quadriga, the facts are clear. Despite past experience with platforms such as MapleChange in Canada and others around the world, no guidance or even the most basic of a framework was put in place by regulators. By not clarifying any sort of legal framework, regulators enabled a situation where a platform could be run by former criminal Mike Dhanini/Omar Patryn, and where funds could be held fully unchecked by one person. At the same time, the lack of regulation deterred legitimate entities from running competing platforms and Quadriga was granted a money services business license for multiple years of operation, which gave the firm the appearance of legitimacy. Regulators did little to protect Canadians despite Quadriga failing to file taxes from 2016 onward. The entire administrative team had resigned and this was public knowledge. Many people had suspicions of what was going on, including Ryan Mueller, who forwarded complaints to the authorities. These were ignored, giving Gerald Cotten the opportunity to escape without justice.
There are multiple issues with the SOC II model including the prohibitive cost (you have to find a third party accounting firm and the prices are not even listed publicly on any sites), the requirement of operating for a year (impossible for new platforms), and lack of any public visibility (SOC II are private reports that aren't shared outside the people in suits).
Securities frameworks are expensive. Sarbanes-Oxley is estimated to cost $5.1 million USD/yr for the average Fortune 500 company in the United States. Since "Fortune 500" represents the top 500 companies, that means well over $2.55 billion USD (~$3.4 billion CAD) is going to people in suits. Isn't the problem of trust and verification the exact problem that the blockchain is supposed to solve?
To use Quadriga as justification for why custodians or SOC II or other advanced schemes are needed for platforms is rather silly, when any framework or visibility at all, or even the most basic of storage policies, would have prevented the whole thing. It's just an embarrassment.
We are now seeing regulators take strong action. CoinSquare in Canada with multi-million dollar fines. BitMex from the US, criminal charges and arrests. OkEx, with full disregard of withdrawals and no communication. Who's next?
We have a unique window today where we can solve these problems, and not permanently destroy innovation with unreasonable expectations, but we need to act quickly. This is a unique historic time that will never come again.
Following up on my other post which shared only a few high level points I thought people would be interested in, here's a more in-depth summary of the meetup. THIS IS VERY LONG! I don't really have a TL;DR beyond my other short highlight thread, but I think there are some other high level summaries. This is for those who want a very thorough recap of what was discussed. I'm happy to update this with anything shared in the comments which I remember and think is additive to the summary, definitely didn't catch every single thing. I'm leaving out a few talking points/questions that either 1) I didn't totally catch, 2) provided no incremental information or 3) were just bad questions (there were some). Sunny's Speech Sunny began with a history of blockchain, from the bitcoin whitepaper to the first few alt coins to the advent of Ethereum. He then went on to discuss the extent to which these various stages involved meaningful/useful innovation: original alt coins did not, ethereum of course did, but is heavily flawed for enterprise use. He then went on to discuss what those primary flaws are and how VeChain is trying to solve them (scalability, governance, cost, etc.) He noted that technology is not blockchain's biggest obstacle, it's adoption. He talked about how, although some people will tell him to "get lost or something" he doesn't really believe in full decentralization. I think his point was that although it's nice in theory, it just isn't really practical, and it's a bad approach in particular for trying to get this new blockchain technology adopted in the mainstream. This goes back to something he said in another interview at some point - you can't just come in with totally new, radical technology outside the existing framework and replace everything that exists from the outside. You have to start within the existing framework, show people what's possible, and then change the system from the inside out. He went on to discuss what he sees as problems with some of the existing projects. Talked about how projects in the top 20 have ecosystems worth 2 billion dollars, hold hundreds of millions of dollars worth of their own tokens to be used for the project's development etc., but they don't have a CFO. He thinks that should concern people. I don't remember exactly where it fit in the narrative, but he discussed valuation/speculation. He pointed out that they have a number of their university research partners trying to work out token valuation models. He made a general point that more utility should equal more value, the implication being VeChain will have more real utility (and should therefore have more value) than any other blockchain. They had a slide showing some calculations and pointed out that if you look at the known metrics, the dividends, etc., the price of Google's stock is 85.7% speculation. Only $161 of it's $1,128 value (at the time they ran these numbers) can be tied to the current value. For Tencent, it's 93.5% speculation. He jokingly pointed out that in crypto it's about 99.99%, but I think one of the unspoken points here is that it's silly to think that on mainnet launch speculation about the future value is going to go away and you'll just have token value based on current Thor production. That isn't how markets or valuation work. He then basically mocked people complaining about the code not yet being open source, and there being no whitepaper - the people who think these are red flags and that the project might be a 'scam'. As if PwC and DNV GL didn't do extensive diligence. On this point, I'll quote GarzyWarzy from another thread: "Sunny mentioned that the crypto community as a whole doesn’t seem to appreciate the level of reputational risk that these multi billion dollar enterprise partners take by publicly backing a blockchain startup (“what do people think would happen if PwC backed us and we failed in 6 months?”). As an investment banker who deals extensively with corporate governance issues and every type of business risk imaginable, I will add my two cents that this risk is massive and that is it a clear sign of extensive diligence and extreme trust in the VeChain team to execute their business plan for developing their ecosystem. Always remember, “it takes many years to build a reputation, and seconds to ruin it”." I'm a corporate lawyer and couldn't agree with this more. The people who think a whitepaper (which they likely wouldn't even understand) is more reassuring than the endorsement by DNV GL, PwC, Draper and Breyer (who would never, ever make such an investment without extensive due diligence) have no idea how things work in the corporate world. DNV GL and PwC are recommending VeChain to clients, and Draper and Breyer have made investments through their funds, where they have a fiduciary duty to the investors in those funds. The amount of diligence that occurs before taking those reputational and legal (negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, etc.) risks is truly exhaustive. Back to adoption, Sunny went on to compare blockchain to TCP/IP, as he's done in the past. Most people use email every day, but do they care about TCP/IP? Of course not. Blockchain will be the protocol infrastructure for things people use every day, whether they know it or not. At this point, continuing to talk about adoption and use cases, he mentioned that they signed a top 3 insurance company in China as a client, and he also mentioned a CRM use case that's in the works. He said the whitepaper will be out in a few days, and will explain a lot of what they're doing/what they're trying to do, and what some of the use cases are. They are focused on developing as many practical use cases as possible - this is how you get adoption. Once the use cases are defined, you can start "developing killer dApps" in relation to them. I think this is, to some degree, a subtle shot at Ethereum - his point here being that developing lots of dApps on a platform doesn't really mean much unless those dApps actually relate to a practical, defined real world use cases which ensures they will be used and adopted. The whitepaper took so long because, in Sunny's words, his "english sucks" and after he wrote it, his teams needed to double, triple, and quadruple review/edit/refine what he wrote so that it is in professional english. Back to adoption, he stated there are around 13/14 crypto projects they are working with who intend to use VeChain (either porting over from Ethereum or launching an ICO on the platform. More on this in the Q&A section). One of them is a company that already generates $50 million/month in revenue and want to 'blockchain-ize' their business. He pointed out here this is a company that isn't just interested in padding their coffers - they have money, that isn't an issue. These are the types of projects they like to work with. They aren't interested in being a 'shitcoin generator' (this was said by Sunny in the Q&A and got a laugh and round of applause). Last point on this, he noted that BitOcean is taking so long because the "Japanese government are being assholes". That's a direct quote. Sunny is hilarious. I can't overstate how likable he is - he comes off as a down to earth, cool, funny and easy going guy. Kevin's Speech Next, Kevin spoke. This was a short update on authority nodes and the mainnet. He mentioned that most projects have masternodes as basically a marketing tool, they aren't that meaningful or necessary. VeChain's authority masternodes are essential to the ecosystem. You can not become an authority node if you can not meaningfully contribute to growing the ecosystem. There is no room for negotiation on this. They aren't interested in having random people running validating authority nodes for profit and nothing else. As far as the application process, they received over 100 applications and are expecting more (authority node application and monitoring process will be ongoing to make sure VeChain has the best authority nodes possible and that each node is continuing to fulfill all of its obligations). As far as the applicant pool, they were about 71% enterprise, 29% individual. About 52% China, 23% America, then a mix of HK, Singapore, Japan, and others. He then addressed the mainnet. Internal testing is done, they are now moving on to the public alpha testing, which is by invite only and is not the open source phase. This phase starts today and includes a number of professional firms auditing the code: PwC's cybersecurity team, secureware.io, Slow Mist, and Hosho. They will also be putting a bug bounty on Hacken eventually, finding a critical vulnerability could get you up to 2000 VEN tokens. This private testing will go on for a few weeks, before the public testing begins in early June which involves the code becoming open source - as of now, they expect it to start in the first week or two of June. Then, he announced the 1 VEN to 100 VET token split. The example he gave was talking to friends about buying Bitcoin - some responded "it's already $8000, I can't buy a bitcoin I can't afford it". Kevin would respond, well actually you can buy .001 bitcoin if you want... and then they'd lose interest. I think what he's getting at is they want to be prepared for years down the road when demand is enormous - they don't want people dealing in fractions. Yes, I'm also sure they are aware of the implications for this in terms of price and the attractiveness of a 5 cent token verses a 5 dollar token. I don't deny that. Look at fucking Tron. The Q&A Session Someone asked about how the authority nodes will be monitored. Kevin explained there will be a dedicated team for this. They are serious about having the highest quality authority nodes and holding them to the standards they expect. There will be a quarterly review process, and any issues will be brought to the Steering Committee, which may decide to remove/replace an authority nodeholder if they aren't contributing and fulfilling their obligations. He noted that the whitepaper will include a thorough section on their governance model. Question about it being difficult, currently, for companies (especially in the west) to find out how to contact them and work with them. What are VeChain's plans in terms of a business development team, marketing, etc. Sunny explained that while obviously they'll have an internal BD team, and this is being built out, they also want to heavily leverage the resources of the community. In a way, the community will be a giant business development team, and they will create standard toolkits for the community to use to market/introduce VeChain to people in the first instance. The guy then asked what if I got you Pfizer - that's enormous, what's my incentive? Sunny responded there will be rewards in VET tokens for bringing them clients. I don't remember what the exact question was, but it was noted at this point that although the private, consortium chain is an Ethereum fork, the mainnet was built from scratch and is not an Ethereum fork. They did intentionally use the Ethereum Virtual Machine, though, so that Ethereum dApps can be easily ported over to VeChain. It sounds like they expect this to happen quite a bit. They also talked about how they went through the web3 libraries and 80% will be able to work directly with VeChain. They want interoperability, compatibility, and ultimately, an easy transition for Ethereum developers and dApps. Someone asked about them building out their own IoT business or letting others do the IoT work. Sunny talked about how he believes IoT is the way to connect blockchain to the physical world. There was a story not worth sharing about why they initially acquired an IoT team, but he gave this example: when Apple first released the app store and the ability to develop, nobody knew how or used it. So, Apple built the apps themselves and basically showed everybody what was possible and how to do it by example. So too will VeChain take this approach. They are partnering with IoT manufacturers and developing some of their own IoT solutions, and they'll continue to do this, but the point isn't to dominate IoT. They are showing the world by example what can be done in terms of IoT on the VeChain platform, and they ultimately want people/enterprises to be able to create their own value and their own IoT solutions on the VeChain blockchain. Anyone who wants to do so will be able to. Question about enterprises buying once the enterprise pool runs out - what happens if enterprises aren't comfortable doing what all of us have done (wiring money to a fiat gateway exchange, buying bitcoin/ethereum, moving it to binance, buying in the market, transferring out of binance, etc.). Kevin isn't really worried about this. They are talking to exchanges and service providers about it, they're talking to Circle about fiat pairing, etc., but realistically Kevin can see that exchanges are becoming more advanced and that ultimately they will be institutionalized in a way that basically just mitigates this concern. Question about storage of VET tokens after mainnet. There will be a mobile wallet launch at the exact same time. This mobile wallet will 1) facilitate the token swap from VEN to VET (most people will probably do this on exchanges, but eventually you'll be able to do it in the mobile wallet if you missed doing it on an exchange), 2) have a module that shows you what kind of node you are, 3) automatically receive your generated Thor, and 4) eventually allow you to hold other ERC-20 tokens. They also mentioned that although they're talking to ledger, etc. they are developing their own hardware wallet. Kevin explained this is essential for enterprises serving as authority nodes or holding large amounts of VET. They aren't going online and ordering a ledger and setting it up. VeChain needs to be able to provide this service and assurance for them, and they will. This is why these guys are lightyears ahead in terms of enterprise adoption. They've thought about these things. Question about 'competitors' like Waltonchain. First, Sunny goes "who?" and Kevin goes "what's Waltonchain?" But then Sunny went on by saying the "right" thing - there are no competitors in such a fledgling industry. He would love to hold hands with the other blockchain projects trying to do good things, and walk into the future together. He thinks projects can learn from each other and help each other. They aren't trying to crush competitors or beat anyone or anything like that. However, Sunny also jokingly asked "Seriously, why do people think Waltonchain is our competitor? We are what, 15th biggest project, and they are...?" He also went on to say that he is judging some competition or tech demo later this month on the 26th-28th, and that Waltonchain is the demo product. He thinks this is sort of funny, but also said if their product is great and the demo is good, there is no reason he wouldn't support them, vote for them, etc. Question about Breyer and Draper relationships. Draper is invested in many cryptocurrency projects and many companies, has tons of connections, and he gives VeChain a way of talking to all of those projects/companies. Breyer was the one who set them up with the research team at a Chinese university, he was the link to Circle to discuss fiat onramps, etc. The connections these guys bring are tremendous. I should note here that in a small group conversation with Kevin during the networking portion after the speeches, which was initiated by GarzyWarzy (perhaps he can elaborate further), he confirmed that Breyer and Draper are both meaningfully invested in tokens, not just equity of the technology portion of the company. Some clown actually used up time to ask "is CCK here?" Sunny said someone asked him this at Harvard also, and he was absolutely adamant that he doesn't know who this person is or how they are getting the information they have. He did not comment on it beyond that. He clearly thought it was a dumb question and said seriously that once and for all, he really doesn't know who it is. Question about how many projects will be running on the mainnet day 1. Sunny said it's hard to say for sure, but that there are currently between 20 and 25 use cases deployed on the consortium chain, all of which will be moved over in the first few months. He also mentioned the 15ish crypto projects that will be moving over to or launching on the platform, and the fact that their client pipeline is now over 250. He transitioned a bit from this point to discuss how they "don't want to be a shitcoin generator". If you come to them with a project that is just an ICO with a whitepaper and no product, no proof of concept, etc., they're not going to want you to launch that. They would rather invest in you if they think you're a good project, help you develop those things, prove out what you're trying to do, then help you launch a serious ICO or dApp with a real use case. Again, they are all about practical use cases, this is the path to adoption. That said, the project will be open source ("you guys asked for open source, so") there will be some shitcoins, it's unavoidable. I think that covers most of what I remember. Hope you all enjoy!
https://preview.redd.it/6in97egosnx31.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=d2e4d1b052b295cb3da49f604fab7a6113321210 I wrote this lecture on the methodology of successful trading, and more specifically on tactics, strategies, subtleties and recommendations, based on 2 years of work on Bitmex, Binance, Gate, Okex bitcoin cryptocurrency exchanges in real combat conditions. Guided by this technique, I managed to earn 500% in excess of the deposit for 7 days of trading (i.e. I increased the deposit amount by 5 times!). These are not fairy tales, but reality, that is, confirming statistics of exchange transactions on the account of the crypto-exchange.
I believethat the knowledge provided in this course will help a beginner tomaster successful tradingonly if the course is not only read, but also outlined. It will be important to follow punctually, commenting on your actions in your notes.
In separate consultations, I could give personal instructions on the nuances of technical analysis on various timeframes, signals on entry points, information on trade automation software (algorithmic trading robots), and other tools useful in the work of a trader. But, despite a lot of additional software, my experience has shown that the most effective speculation model on the cryptocurrency and stock exchange, which everyone chooses for themselves based on practical experience, is directly in the online trading mode on exchange terminals. Each exchange is good in its own way, but also has its drawbacks. I chose the best solution for myself and am sure that this is temporary. Perhaps in the future there will be more progressive decentralized exchanges with good liquidity and they will replace the existing platforms managed by market leaders. Various digital designations, such as: — in what percentage of the deposit do you enter into a particular transaction; — where to put stop limit or market (Market) (market) orders (and whether to place them at all), where to exit the transaction and how. Again, I note that all the selected values are usually individual and depend both on the time trading intervals (TimeFrame) (1m 3m 15m 1h 3h 4h 6h 1 d 1w 1m) and on the deductible amount of the bet in % percentage of the amount of your deposit. It is important to remember that trading in the cryptocurrency market is a high-risk investment activity that everyone chooses and carries out at their own risk. Remember that with a big bet on the whole, as they say, a patty, and even with 100x-500x leverage, you risk losing your entire deposit right away. An exchange machine or a well-tuned and trained professional broker robot does not cost anything to go against the trend with a tidbit — easy prey. Do not be hamsters i.e. naive simpletons — do not merge the deposit into zero due to elementary greed, incontinence, ardor and other factors that contradict the qualities that a professional trader needs to succeed in trading, namely: cold-bloodedness, endurance, accuracy, punctuality, tact, quick reaction , the ability to quickly enter numbers and timely press the desired buttons.
You ask me: “Hey … guy, you are so smart … I wonder how much you earned from trading or how much you earn or why you don’t do it yourself … why do you need competitors?” — I will answer you: it is no secret that AI (artificial intelligence) has been working on the exchange for a long time and it is constantly improving, but this still does not prevent a person from continuing to beat him. I hope that in the future this trend will not stop otherwise — we have disappeared. And as regards competition — do not worry so much for me, because there is still a trading idea, program or terminal that I have not yet implemented and not reported in this guide after its publication and, perhaps, it will not deprive me of future trading opportunities.
So, the instructions that I follow in the process of trading cryptocurrencies on the exchange terminal in online mode.
It is necessary to wait for the moment of the entry point. You need to enter the deal only then, you feel it and foreseen it in advance according to the levels of the daily period.
It is necessary to carefully weigh their capabilities, ie to consider funds, understanding that futures trading (with leverage) leads to greater risks of liquidation / margin call (MarginCall).
During growth, you need to fix profit and try to sell at a pullback. It is always possible to re-enter a deal, but it is unlikely to return lost profits, instead, you can get several hours of dead weight in the price movement opposite from the planned direction.
It is very important to have cost control, namely, the timely Stop Limit (stop trade order) + sliding Stop Loss (the same thing, only with insurance against a sharp price movement).
It is easy to understand the wave component and accept the movement by levels — press exit buttons in time at 2% and + 10% according to the 1 to 5 principle (we risk one part of the deposit against 5). The Pareto effect has not been canceled: 20% activity, gives 80% effectiveness.
To work with Japanese candles, the ability to draw support levels and resistance lines is enough, but this is not enough for a professional, because the presence of modern advanced indicators, such as MACD, SRSI, Ichimoku Cloud / Signal, horizontal and vertical volume indicator and so on, is very important. Everyone chooses for themselves the indicator that brings more profit to a certain trading range. But remember — the main criterion for success is an understanding of the laws of the market and trade by market. Perhaps this applies to the field of extrasensory perception, metaphysics, and other obscure and hard to prove phenomena and sciences, but one way or another — intuition is clear and has a place to be.
In no case should you enter into short-term breakthrough deals on minute trading with market uncertainty. The situation where minute fluctuations may seem like reversal movements is often quite misleading. If you are in a pose (bull — for growth / long or bear — for fall / short) do not retreat and the market will not slow you to please you with profit. Often, a stock price feed / the same chart manipulates the minds of players, displaying false breakdowns and minute movements, on the basis of which you can not rely on a trend change (this lie is especially evident in minute time intervals / timeframes). In such cases, make decisions only at fundamental levels. On the hourly chart you will see a more truthful picture, because globally, on markets other than minute timeframes, the market is less susceptible to momentary manipulations. This knowledge will give you firmness in the intention and decision-making to remain in the chosen position and not to respond to minor market manipulations. During the day, you may repeatedly wish to unreasonably enter into such transactions, but remember that in this case you will be guaranteed to drain the deposit. Remember — the market from the middle of the trend will go up up or down and hit the stop limit order placed by you (if you play with a large leverage not for your money), after which it will go in the right direction you have chosen. Although in general the situation is banal — you are led by the nose like thousands as well as you. The only true method is to use common sense and avoid uncertainty when trying to enter a pose. A historical analysis of prices, the frequency of ranges (delta) of ups and downs, the degree of volatility and fundamental approaches — to help you. I also want to add that success is in your hands and it consists in the realization of the need not to merge a deposit under any circumstances.
You cannot leave the market unattended, the alarm of the price change alarm is not in your favor or without a stop limit at a reliable exchange platform (broker).
Once again I repeat, you must be prepared in advance for the fact that the market is deceiving and unexpected movements can often occur and your task is to secure your funds with a stop on the market or to fix profit by a floating stop or a fixed stop limit.
Risk management — the basis of success in trading when trading with leverage (margin trading). It is usually recommended to go into a deal at 2% of the deposit with x leverage and stop from profit in the ratio of 1 to 5. What does this mean and why is this risk / profit sharing technique so important?It is necessary to clearly calculate probabilistic lumbago in order to avoid elimination. I recommend you not to rush into bets, but to take a sheet of paper and bargain virtually in order to understand whether your calculations were correct. A virtual game is worth nothing, but it will save you money and keep the deposit safe and sound.
The wave theory assumes entry into the transaction after completion and a clear change in the previous trend based on signals and the news background, incl. experience of the current subject of trade — the operator pushing the buttons. For example, in the absence of price movement in the direction of the RSI indicator, analysis of all time frames with indicators, fibonacci levels, correction degree phase, time of day in time zones, stock and commodity market readings.
It is important, before starting trading, test the presence of a manipulator on the market using the method of high rates. If you are looking for an entry into a major deal in a few weeks, keep in mind that a stop with a loss can be a significant amount in the money equivalent that you are ready to lose, and if the deal does not take place in your favor, you must set yourself up in advance for what it should be. Because a successful trader is not one who regularly guesses successful transactions, but one who successfully completes one out of five transactions according to risk management and the calculation of the leverage calculator in accordance with the chosen strategy.
A lost position can be closed without waiting for the reverse restoration of the bidding process, thus manually participating in the balance adjustment or by setting a stop limit order in advance or after the bid in case of further decline or growth.
There is an assumption that at the end of the working day, with a likely depreciation, traders convert stocks into fiat (money), which contributes to a depreciation, but this is not accurate)
Incorrect entry into the transaction. How important is it to exit an unsuccessful transaction as early as possible or at the first rollback to change the direction of the trend or wait to determine a new entry point.
The presence of two accounts on the exchange terminal is possibleand desirable in order to be able to remain in a winning position regardless of the success of the initially selected trading direction (a technique requiring careful verification by personal experience with a clear definition of the margin leverage and % of the entry into the transaction from the deposit balance to minimize the risk of loss).Successful trading does not consist in the ability to conclude as many successful trades as possible, but in minimizing losses.
Technology is improving and strategies are changing. Before entering a transaction, it is necessary to carefully analyze the current market situation using a comparative analysis, studying the general news background (guided by the ***“buy for expectations — sell on the news”***postulate), detecting a flat (sideways), determining the level of instrument volatility (gold, oil, funds , bitcoins / cryptocurrencies — digital coins, etc.)
Immediately put a stop — is a guarantee of success or a drain of the deposit? After all, how to cope with their own feelings and not get into anxiety about a successful or unsuccessful transaction? The gradual entry scheme works well.
Coins. We look at the trading delta with the help of a robot scanner and make a decision based on all the above criteria in the course. It has been noticed that amateurs buy coins in the hope of growth. Remember, the market for altcoins is not growing now.
A favorable time for earning is at the time of a flat, which usually occurs after the rising flag or the implementation of a bull pennant figure, etc. It will be more clear to observe the schedule in real mode and make the required notes in your own mind.
On the cryptocurrency market, some laptop microprocessors are heated and the fan turns on at peak times. This indicates the beginning of a sharp movement and is a signal to enter the deal. Therefore, you can not only observe the behavior of the market, but now also listen (this is my personal note, it is unlikely that you will find such information somewhere else, as they say — an exclusive / VIP signal;)).
You can still write a lot about time, how much can or should be spent on the monitor, on which timeframes to trade and which strategies to follow, but everyone should choose this independently and preferably, under the guidance of a specialist, because what is applicable to one is to the other — contraindicated.
In fact, any market situation should be beneficial for you due to successful risk management*!*For successful online trading, it is very important to use candlestick and technical analysis*, which help to more accurately determine the entry point to the transaction (purchase or sale).*You cannot act at random when the market is hard to predict and often ready to follow your footsteps.If you lose, then I do not recommend immediately going to recoup*, because trade should ultimately be break even. In ardor, you are likely to enter into an unsuccessful deal and lose even more than before. This situation will make you very sad, so do not make this mistake. She is famous.*Use amodern powerful laptop or desktop computer with a convenient side numeric keypad, a large screen and a convenient manipulator (mouse)so that when you press the buttons you have as little physical braking and stops as possible.Practice in advance to work in the browser on the exchange terminal without making a deposit on futures trading from the exchange wallet. This training practice will reduce your losses.
Hello from Ukraine, Kramatorsk city ( “War is peace / freedom is slavery [and] ignorance is strength.”) Reslav Cryptotrader (if you need find me look around — me be i near ;). To be continued… http://twitter.com/reslav1 P.S.: Nowadays, money strives to be counted more and more. Using the information technology of databases with indexes, it has become possible to automatically and instantly capture and display the information that was previously collected by entire departments of the state within a month and after manual entry was displayed on the screens of industrial monitors and public television. The era of the Internet has come, the time of the accessibility and decentralization of information. Today we see stock chart quotes of stock prices of leading world companies online. Everyone has the opportunity to invest their money in these stocks and earn on the difference in exchange rates of their value. A speculative market was formed on this basis, where leaders appeared who were able to act most efficiently and, accordingly, earn money. Many specialists are studying the nature of success in speculative markets. Many works on methods of achieving success in trading are morally obsolete due to the emergence of new technologies for calculating and controlling the money supply, for example, such as Bitcoin. After all, back in 2009 for 1309.03 BTC they gave 1 dollar. Today 1 BTC costs $ 9,000. This is due to the fact that since the appearance of bitcoin has never been hacked and the technology has shown its reliability and consistency, as a measure of the money invested in it. I will not go into the details and subtleties of Bitcoin technology, but I will note one thing — this is cryptographic software that was used in the banking sector as Swift payments, but transformed into a P2P peer-to-peer network of private computers, as a result, like Bittorent, it became public, hard controlled, commons. Bitcoin provides for a complexity bomb, which complicates each year, and therefore makes it more expensive, its limited production, and this is one of the main reasons for its rise in price. As well as the fact that Bitcoin is convenient for storing funds, as it is liquid and it can be easily sent without quantity restrictions and with high transaction (transfer) speed. All details about Bitcoin are available in open sources and you can find out everything about it on the Internet, as well as the alternative coin market (altcoins / coins), such as Ethereum, USDT (dollar tokens confirmed by a US company with real dollars in bank accounts) etc. Around this market of bitcoin cryptocurrencies, the same speculative matrix (network / exchange) arose as around ordinary currencies and created such a strong competition for traditional assets that many governments adopted it and began to use and implement technologies that arose in their turn base. Cryptocurrencies or blockchain (cryptographic chain / blocks / chain) began to be introduced in public sectors of the economy for calculating and controlling public commons, such as electricity, land, etc. Further, on the basis of this market, the need for regulation arose and the US authorities were very worried about the uncontrolled development of technology, on the basis of which a news background (negative or positive) arose, which powerfully affects cryptocurrency rates. In the era of information, this network began to act as a money pump, skillfully pumping money from the hands of inept speculators into the pockets of experienced traders. As a result of reading a lot of books, watching various telecasts in the industry of bitcoin trading analytics, I came to the conclusion that successfully trading cryptocurrencies is akin to art and as statistics have shown, only 20% in 2–3 years are able to consistently earn money, and of which, in turn, only 2 -3% become billionaires. I bring to your attention a technique by which you can enter the ranks of these 20% successful traders and possibly, jointly, open the door to those notorious 2–3% successful traders who are fortunate enough to touch the notorious golden fleece and discover the world of unlimited financial opportunities. All knowledge is available in open sources and collected by me in the book “Basics of Bitcoin Trading from Reslav” (2019), most of them are available.
Buying Ether in Canada, my experience with different exchanges
Hello, I'm writing about my experiences buying ethereum in Canada, essentially converting CAD to ETH. The goal is to help beginners that are interested in getting started but don't know where to actually buy ether. There's a lot of info out there but most of it seems to be centered around USD, which doesn't always translate for CAD and our banking system. I'm by no means an expert but I figured someone might find this information helpful. I've verified and used the following sites, so I'll be writing about them:
If you just want the gist of it, a super-quick summary of what I found:
Coinbase: great if you just want to try things out. Fast to get ether, fast to verify, high fees.
QuadrigaCX: great if you're looking to get more seriously into cryptocurrency. Most deposit options, lower fees.
Kraken: great if you have a ton of money you want to transfer into cryptocurrency or if you want to play around with trading. Low fees, slow CAD deposit because wire transfer.
Coinsquare: Fees aren't bad, low volume though.
With every one of these sites, there's usually some form of verification. This involves taking a picture of some piece of government ID (usually passport or drivers license), as well as some sort of proof of address such as a utlity bill. Some sites require you to take a selfie with some of that documentation or holding a handwritten sign. It seemed sketchy to me at first, but every place does it. Coinbase This was the first place I tried. Their only payment methods I could find are Visa and MasterCard, of which they charge a 3.75% convenience. With reward cards you might get 1%-2% back, but this is a fairly high fee. The bright side is it's just about instantaneous. One thing I noticed is that their sell price is about ~$5 higher than a few exchanges. For example, as I write this, it's $119.23 on coinbase. On kraken it's 113.99 for a market order. There is a weekly $200 limit on the amount to buy. A 30 day countdown started after I spent $500 to increase the limit. I can't find what the new limit amount will be once that countdown reaches 0 though. So far, I've been with them for over a month and I've bought $600 worth of ether. The first time I bought it only took a minute to get sent to my private address. The second time it took ~40 minutes for it to actually get sent to my private ether address, but this was due to some issues they were having, probably just a fluke. I've bought two more times since then and both times it was instant. To summarize Pros:
Fast to verify, took a couple minutes, seemed to be completely automated
Almost instantly sent funds via Visa/Mastercard
Instantly got the ether I bought
Probably the easiest to use
Generally $5 over Kraken prices
High fees at 3.75%. Might be able to brought lower with a good rewards card
Low $200 weekly limit
QuadrigaCX Hoping to get lower fees, this was the second place I tried. They accept a lot more payments with a variety of fees, I'll list them out:
Electronic Funds Transfer
Min $250, Max $10,000
5 Business Days
Min $500, Max $5,000
Next Business Day
2% + $5
Min $50, Max $2,000
Instant (but may be held 24 hours by security)
1.5% (min. $5)
Min $100,000, Max $500,000
2-4 Business Days
Min $500, Max $500,000
Electronic Funds Transfer replaced their "direct bank transfer" option, and while I think it's great since I think every bank supports it, it unfortunately has a rather high fee at 5%. I don't really see why you would use this though, if you can use Interac Online, it's faster. If you need the higher daily limit, a bank wire would be cheaper too. Interac e-Transfer I'd go with this if your bank doesn't support Interac Online and if you don't mind the 2% fee. If you're doing a large amount, the Bank Wire would be a better choice, depending on how much your bank charges you. Interac Online seems like the best choice for less than $2000. Unfortunately even though my bank card says "Interac" on it, and the bank is listed as supported, I can't use it for Interac Online because the card is both a debit and visa card. I've read that RBC and BMO are the only banks that support this, so it may be worth signing up with them. Bank Wire ended up being what I used (EDIT: back then the minimum for a wire transfer was $500). I wanted to deposit a larger sum, so just paying my bank for the cost of the transfer ended up being worthwhile (about 0.5% fee). The downside is I had to go in person to a branch to send a wire transfer and it's only really worthwhile for larger transfers. Crypto Capital seems like a 3rd party that you can wire to and then transfer that to QuadrigaCX. I don't see the appeal in using this to fund an account since you can just wire to QuadrigaCX directly. I sent the wire transfer a few days ago, and it seems like it will take 3-5 business days for it to complete. I'll update this post if the money somehow just disappears. Wire transfer came through today, no problems :) Once you do get CAD on QuadrigaCX, the fees to buy Ether are 0.5%. Combined with my wire transfer cost, I expect to only have paid a total of 1% in fees. To summarize Pros:
Fast to verify, I was able to verify the same day I made my account
Lots of variety in funding choices
Lower fees compared to coinbase
High daily fund limits
Not as many deposit options if they don't support your bank
0.5% per completed trade is a little high compared to other exchanges
Some transfer options have higher fees than coinbase for low amounts
Some transfer options can take up to 5 days
Kraken The latest site I've tried, they have multiple tiers of verification. You can't deposit CAD until you reach tier 3 verification, which can take up to 48 hours. Tier 1 and tier 2 were verified within the hour but tier 3 was still not verified 3 days later. When I submitted a support ticket, they were very quick to respond the next day and told me I needed to submit a Confirmation ID. Their site listed the Confirmation ID for a few countries and some criteria but it didn't seem like Canada applied to any of the criteria. Regardless, I submitted the Confirmation ID and was verified with tier 3 that same day. The only way to deposit CAD with Kraken is through wire transfer and it seems like there's some unlisted fees based on what their banks charge them to receive a wire transfer (as well as any intermediary bank). I have not done this so I cannot tell what the costs would be. Once you do have CAD on their exchange, their fees are better than QuadrigaCX with a MakeTaker rate at 0.16%/0.26%. I have sent ether to Kraken just for playing around with trading and I've had no problems. To summarize Pros:
Low trading fees
Potentially lower CAD->ETH fee than QuadrigaCX, depending on if there are wire transfer hidden costs. Lower trading fee helps
High fund limits
Only one way to deposit CAD and it's slow
Unclear what the wire transfer costs are
Little confusing verification process for tier3
Min $100, Max $2,000
Instant (withheld for 3 days)
Min $100, Max $3,000
1-3 days (withheld 0-7 days)
Min $20, Max $500
Min $1000, Max $9,000
0-2 days (withheld 0-5 days)
Min $100, Max $1,000
0-2 days (withheld 0-5 days)
Min $10,000, Max $300,000
0-1 day (withheld 0-2 days)
They have this concept of withholding funds, where you basically have to keep the money on the account. You can trade with it as much as you want, but you won't be able to withdraw until after the withholding time. Pros:
Lowish trading fees
Some options are fast to fund
Reasonable fund limits
The direct way to go from CAD->ETH has higher trading fees. Have to go CAD->BTC and then BTC->ETH.
Horrible interface. Until they fix their site, some stuff is broken (unless it works in other browsers?), or if you know how to edit html. Wow! They really fixed their site and it looks great now! Only thing that bothers me is in the advanced section, it lists the CAD/BTC price in terms of bitcoin. So instead of saying $3400/bitcoin, it says 0.00029378BTC
Fairly high withdraw fees (unfortunately I can't find them listed on their site, and I can't find it listed anywhere, but some people have reported it being far too high)
Alternatives There are of course other sites to get ether, and there's always the option of getting bitcoin and exchanging it through an exchange like Kraken or Poloniex for ether. There are bitcoin ATMs scattered around as well, but I can't comment on any fees involved or how close they match exchange prices. Other sites I checked out:
Local Bitcoins - It looks like I'd have to find another user to trade with and prices seem far higher than the exchanges.
Poloniex - Doesn't look like you can deposit CAD.
Gemini - Don't see a way to deposit CAD. Also sent verification 2 days ago and have not been verified.
Bitfinex - Can't wire transfer USD out at this moment and I don't see a way to deposit CAD.
Coinswitch - Can't deposit CAD.
GDAX - Can't deposit CAD.
CEX.IO - Price quotes are signficantly higher than other exchanges, and it looks like it only does USD. Right now, their site says you can buy 1 ETH as $289.25 USD, compare that to GDAX which has them trading at $259.98 USD. You can sell on it too, but again, the price isn't favorable, sell on it for $250 USD vs selling on GDAX for $260 USD.
QuickBT - Only small amounts of ETH, and fees seem to range between 5-9% depending on how much you buy. Only supports interac online and flexepin.
Alt Coins The main sites for getting CAD into the cryptocurrency space like QuadrigaCX, Coinbase, Kraken, and Coinsquare don't have a lot of altcoins. Fortunately once you have ether you can send it to another exchange and trade that for altcoins. These are my favourite ones:
Bittrex - You can't buy ETH with CAD directly, but it has a lot of other cryptocurrencies. I used this until Binance came out. They closed accounts for people unverified or from some countries, so I'd be wary about using it.
Binance - You also can't buy ETH with CAD directly on this one, but it's my favourite for getting into other cryptocurrency coins. Fees are also lower than bittrex if you hold their BNB coin and they add new coins much faster. Referral | Non-Referral
Kucoin - Registration on Binance/Bittrex has been up and down lately and I've had success using this exchange. They seem to add coins even faster than Binance, but the site is a little bit slower and less polished. Still functional and good to pickup a few alts that you can't get elsewhere. Referral | Non-referral
Funnily enough, this whole experience has made me appreciate the flexibility cryptocurrency like ether has and served as a reminder to how slow and cumbersome transactions become once the banking system is involved. EDIT: received wire transfer through QuadrigaCX, made account with coinsquare. EDIT2: added coinsquare section EDIT3: updated QuadrigaCX and coinsquare section, updated alternatives list EDIT4: Added e-transfer for QuadrigaCX! EDIT5: Cleaned up alt coins section.
A cryptoforker's guide to free money - Part 1 (The holy ymgve script + what and where to exchange)
EDIT: a new version of this guide, multilingual and featuring a wallet checker (input your IP, see what you can fork and how much it is worth) is available at https://cryptodom.org
Hello my lovely forkers! A while ago I made a post A cryptoforker's guide to free money - Part 2 (Coinomi, Bither, Bitpie, Walleting Services) where I explained how I used a combination of COINOMI and BITPIE (together with DIG WALLETING SERVICES) to get hold of most forked coins - And then how I sold them (main sites used: GATE.IO / BTCTRADE.COM / BIT-Z.COM / EXRATES.ME / COINEX.COM). Please refer to that for the instructions regarding Bither and Coinomi. QUICK NOTE: If you are a seasoned forker, just look at point 4 and see if your pokem… I mean fork coins collection is complete :-p / If instead you are a total newbie, remember you can just do the “PREPARATION” part and then claim through DIG WALLETING (affiliate link: https://dig.walleting.services/#/aff/o5YP75ALDORdaAbmrJJx NON affiliate link: https://dig.walleting.services/# ) if the process is too hard/long/risky - these guys are reliable and provide a great service, especially for those who have a plethora of transactions and would need to hunt down every last key manually - they have a Reddit, too: you can reach them at Walleting_Services . BEFORE YOU START: What is a fork? Is it really free money? Imagine you had a bank account at BTCbank and a card for it. Tomorrow BTCbank splits and half of its branches become BTC2bank. Nothing changes for you as a client of BTCbank, however there is something you can now do. You can move your money from your BTCbank account to a new BTCbank account, in practice making the card for your former account useless in the BTNbank branches but… NOT IN THE BTN2bank branches! So you can go there and get the equivalent of what you had in “free” money. Nothing illegal, nothing shady, no bugs or exploits: it’s all there by design. Keeping with the example though, it should be specified that you must have the “card” of your BTCbank, which in this case is a private key. If you have your BTC stored on papehardware wallet or anywhere else where you are in direct control of your private keys, well done! Those keys are your BTCbank card(s). If, on the other hand, you held your money on an exchange (Binance, Bitfinex, Bittrex, you name it), then your only chance is to wait and hope that the exchange decides to support the coin and gives you your share. It’s not impossible but it introduces a middleman. It’s like you are asking your uncle to have an account in his name at BTCbank and there is no guarantee that uncle will go to a new branch of BTNbank2 and use the card trick to get the free money and give it to you, no matter how much you ask him to. He could do it, he could not: it’s uncle’s call. PREPARATION: First of all, a question: are you after the fork money to exchange it yourself or do you just want to claim it but want someone else to do all the exchange part for you? If you want to squeeze every last bit out of it, get ready to sign up to a few Chinese exchanges! You might as well do this now before you start, otherwise you’ll get stuck at the cashing part. Same goes for the script. No target address, no script. I warned you :) Anyway, here’s the list: • GATE.IO • BTCTRADE.IM • COINEX.COM • EXRATES.ME • TRADESATOSHI.COM • BIT-Z.COM My personal favourite is GATE.IO, despite the 60 confirmations (up to 14 hours), but they all helped me one way or another, and most importantly they all allow withdrawal (BTCTRADE.IM wanted verification papers, the others didn’t). Also, make sure to have Coinomi, Bither and Bitpie installed on an Android phone. STEP 1 - THE GOLDEN RULE Just like in the previous post, let me start off by warning everyone: what are you about to do is dangerous. You could lose your bitcoins. Are you scared? You should be, cause the threat is real. Nobody wants to lose 1 BTC to try and claim a few tens/hundreds of dollars, right? So, first and foremost, make sure that you MOVE your coins from wherever they are (ideally, an offline wallet like a ledger or a trezor), and then, once the wallet is empty, feel free to play around with its private keys, that will hopefully show some transferrable balance at the time of the fork. STEP 2 - GETTING YOUR KEYS - https://iancoleman.io/bip39/ For getting the keys, this is your number one option - with an offline version for paranoid available, no less. Use the seed (those 24 words in the case of ledger, for example) and after the calculation go get your keys in the chart at the end of the page. In case you have segwit addresses or special scenarios (like a wallet with a lot of operations over a long time), getting the keys, or the “right” keys, might take a while. Anyway: let’s look at the first line of the chart. In the first column you will find the address: copy and paste it onto https://blockchain.info/ and press enter to get the transaction history for that given address. Let’s suppose for the sake of this example that our address shows 2 transactions: one inbound for 2 BTC 1 year ago and anther one for the outgoing BTC 5 minutes ago (because before we started this we DID move them out, right?!?). What that means is that at the time of the forkS (in this case we’d get money from most of them) we had 2 BTC on that address. Great, so it’s loaded, and we need its key. Let’s go back to the chart on line one and let’s have a look at the third column: this is our private key. We will use it later to sweep or import in the various method outlined. STEP 3 - THE SCRIPT - https://github.com/ymgve/bitcoin_fork_claimer If you have ben around this subreddit long enough you surely read about the script… And spared a tender thought for ymgve who made this possible. Yet, no one really explains properly how to use it. Unfortunately I do not have the time to explain how to get python installed and running on a machine, you will have to figure it out on your own. Same goes for the fact that you might need to write “py” or “python” before the actual “claimer.py (…)” command. Let’s say you somehow get ready to run the script - now you do have a series of examples on the github page, but they are not so easy to understand for the uninitiated. Here is the relevant quote: In blockchain.info mode it uses the blockchain.info API to query and validate information about the transaction you're spending from. This only works for transferring/claiming coins that existed on the BTC main chain pre-fork. SYNTAX: * claimer.py
PSA: Stop spelling the Bitcoin fraudulent site correctly - It only helps them as search engines pick it up. Use: bitcoin,com | bitcoin .com | bitcoin (.) com | bitcoindotcom | ... (153 points, 52 comments)
What sets bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies apart from being just another form of money is that they are decentralized. They are the next step in the inevitable evolution of finance. What it means when it’s said that bitcoin is “decentralized” is that there is no central authority that grants us permission to have bitcoin. No one entity that decides it’s value, how to use it, or when ... Binance posted an all-time excessive of $9 billion of quantity in 24H final week, as per the alternate’s announcement. The alternate naturally expects this similar enthusiasm to spill over to its BTC choices buying and selling. Bitcoin futures are additionally rebounding after a lull in March. Open curiosity elevated in April after a drastic ... $25,000 in 2013 bitcoin is worth $2.2 million today. It’s easy to get lost in the technical jargon of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies: hashing algorithms, proof-of-work, Merkle Trees. 196 reviews of Binance - "I JUST TRIED THIS NO UPFRONT PAYMENT !!!!! NO UPFRONT PAYMENT I made a deposit of $10,000 into this broker on 1st December, then I got a call from the account manager telling me about my account and the bonuses I could get if I put in more money. He was really good at convincing (maybe he brainwashed me ) I later put $86,000 in total.Then I sent all of my verification ... What is bitcoin worth? That would seem like a fairly easy question, answerable by simply checking the top banner of this very page. But what gives it this value? That would seem to depend on who you ask. Proof of Work There are some for whom the answer to even this question appears simple. Bitcoin hasMore Look no further than “Beyond the Bitcoin Bubble,” which quotes Chris Dixon, a partner at Andreessen Horowitz as saying, “[W]e’re not trying to replace the U.S. government. It’s not meant to be a real currency; it’s meant to be a pseudo-currency inside this world.” Similarly, Dan Finlay, a creator of MetaMask said, “To me, what’s interesting about this is that we get to ... News and media reports are ceaselessly looking at Bitcoin’s changing worth advancements while there are a considerable number of people who are endeavoring their karma in Bitcoin trading. Regardless of the way that there are distinctive advanced types of cash spread over the current reality, Bitcoin has reliably remained on the most noteworthy purpose of the keep going for over 10 years ... #bitcoin #binance #china #btc #crypto #cryptocurrency #bnb #ethereum #eth #xrp #altcoin #altcoins #wechat #alipay #bestcrypto The data contained herein is for cognition functions alone. Nothing herein shall be construed to be medium of exchange authorized or tax recommendation. Regulators around the world have stepped up scrutiny of cryptocurrencies on concern that they’re a breeding ground for illicit activity including money laundering, market manipulation and fraud. Lesser-known tokens have been hit the hardest. Dead Coins lists around 800 that are effectively worth nothing, while Coinopsy puts the tally at more than 1,000. Fewer than 4 per cent of initial coin ... Here are some famous quotes about bitcoin: Jeff Bezos (net worth: $131 B) Founder and CEO of Amazon According to Cointelegraph it’s almost impossible to find any comments made by Bezos directly talking about Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or blockchain technology. Bill Gates ($96.5 B) co-founder of Microsoft “Bitcoin is mostly about anonymous transactions, and I don’t think over time that’s a ...
The Single Biggest Problem Bitcoin Faces - Solving It Means A $10,000,000 Bitcoin
They cost you nothing, and some even give you a discount! If you'd like to support us at no cost to yourself, we'd be apprecitive if you used these links. v AFFILIATE LINKS v Save 84% at https ... They cost you nothing, and some even give you a discount! If you'd like to support us at no cost to yourself, we'd be appreciative if you used these links. v AFFILIATE LINKS v Ledger has the best ... They cost you nothing, and some even give you a discount! If you'd like to support us at no cost to yourself, we'd be appreciative if you used these links. v AFFILIATE LINKS v Save 84% at https ... They cost you nothing, and some even give you a discount! If you'd like to support us at no cost to yourself, we'd be appreciative if you used these links. v AFFILIATE LINKS v Save 84% at https ... They cost you nothing, and some even give you a discount! If you'd like to support us at no cost to yourself, we'd be appreciative if you used these links. v AFFILIATE LINKS v Save 84% at https ... CZ Binance makes the biggest mistake of his life!? This stranger than fiction story, involves CZ, Binance, Bitcoin, P2P Trading, China, Alipay, WeChat & the censorship of crypto media news outlets ...