By CCN: The bitcoin price has surged by seven percent in the past several hours from $7,300 to around $8,000 in major markets including the U.S., demonstrating a strong recovery from its abrupt drop to $6,400. On May 17, as CCN reported, the bitcoin price briefly plunged to $6,400 by more than 18 percent against the U.S. dollar. Market eating up an 18% bitcoin drop quickly is a sign of positive sentiment Analysts including Dovey Wan, a founding partner at Primitive, stated that the brief price drop of bitcoin on Friday was likely due to manipulation engaged by a single
There was a strong buying interest for bitcoin near the $6,800 support area against the US Dollar.
The price started a fresh increase and broke the $7,000 and $7,500 resistance levels.
There was a break above a major contracting triangle with resistance near $7,300 on the 4-hours chart of the BTC/USD pair (data feed from Kraken).
The pair is eyeing a strong rise and it could trade above $8,500 and $8,800 in the near term.
Bitcoin price is up more than 10% after a strong downside correction against the US Dollar. BTC is now eying further upsides and it could even test the $9,000 resistance area.
Bitcoin Price Weekly Analysis (BTC)
This past week, bitcoin price rallied significantly above the $7,000 resistance against the US Dollar. The BTC/USD pair broke many barriers near $7,000, $7,200 and $7,800. The pair even surged above the $8,000 level and traded to a new 219 high near the $8,360 level. Later, there was a sharp downside correction below the $8,000 support, but the price stayed well above the 100 simple moving average (4-hours). It broke the $7,200 support area, but found a strong buying interest near the $6,650 and $6,800 levels.
A swing low was formed at $6,645 and the price recently recovered nicely. It climbed sharply above the $7,000 and $7,200 resistance levels. Moreover, there was a break above the 50% Fib retracement level of the downside correction from the $8,362 high to $6,645 low. More importantly, there was a break above a major contracting triangle with resistance near $7,300 on the 4-hours chart of the BTC/USD pair. The pair is now trading above the $7,700 resistance and the 61.8% Fib retracement level of the downside correction from the $8,362 high to $6,645 low.
These all are positive signs and it seems like the price may continue to surge above the $8,000 barrier. The next key resistance above $8,000 is near the $8,350 level. If the bulls gains pace above $8,362 swing high, it will most likely open the doors for a sharp rally towards the $8,600 and $8,800 resistance levels.
Looking at the chart, bitcoin price rebounded nicely after a strong decline towards $6,650. It is now up more than 10% and it seems like it could continue higher towards $8,200 and $8,500. The main target for the bulls in the coming sessions could be $8,800 or even $9,000. The key supports on the downside are near $7,500, $7,200 and $7,000.
4 hours MACD – The MACD for BTC/USD is gaining pace in the bullish zone.
4 hours RSI (Relative Strength Index) – The RSI for BTC/USD is back above 50 and it could continue towards 70.
ETH price started a fresh increase after a sharp downside correction towards $225 against the US Dollar.
The price is currently gaining traction and it broke the $240 and $245 resistance levels.
There is a crucial bullish trend line in place with support near $236 on the 4-hours chart of ETH/USD (data feed via Kraken).
The pair is surging higher and it seems like there could be more gains towards the $275 and $285 levels.
Ethereum price is once again gaining bullish momentum versus the US Dollar, similar to bitcoin. ETH is eyeing more gains and it seems like the price could revisit the $280 swing high.
Ethereum Price Weekly Analysis
This past week, Ethereum price gained a strong bullish momentum above the $250 resistance against the US Dollar. The ETH/USD pair rallied above the $260 and $270 resistance levels. The upward move was such that the price traded to a new 2019 high near $281. Later, there was a strong downside correction in both bitcoin and Ethereum. ETH price declined sharply below the $260 and $250 support levels. It traded close to the $225 level and stayed well above the 100 simple moving average (4-hours).
A swing low was formed recently near $223 and a new support base was formed. Moreover, there is a crucial bullish trend line in place with support near $236 on the 4-hours chart of ETH/USD. As a result, the pair climbed higher and broke the $240 resistance. There was a break above the 23.6%% Fib retracement level of the last decline from the $281 swing high to $223 low. It opened the doors for more gains above the $250 level. The price is now testing the 50% Fib retracement level of the last decline from the $281 swing high to $223 low.
A clear break above the $255 resistance is likely to set the pace for more gains. The next immediate resistance is near $258, above which the price will most likely retest the $281 swing high. The next important resistance is near the $288 and $292 levels. On the downside, the main support for the bulls are near $240 and $225.
The above chart indicates that Ethereum is placed nicely above the key supports near $240 and $225. Therefore, there are high chances of a strong upward move was above the $255 and $260 resistance levels. The next target for the bulls could be $300.
4 hours MACD – The MACD for ETH/USD is currently gaining pace in the bullish zone.
4 hours RSI – The RSI for ETH/USD is now well above the 50 level and it could climb towards 80.
By CCN: The bitcoin price stumbled toward the end of the week but it looks like the bulls have gotten it together. BTC is now moving higher by nearly 7% to approximately $7,800 at last check on CoinMarketCap. The price had fallen as low as approximately $7,000 on Friday, and some traders have been calling for the bottom to fall out. It seems as though that won’t happen, at least not today. Even though the sudden reversal came suddenly and seemingly disrupted some weekend plans, nobody on Crypto Twitter was complaining. BTC on the move again. — Mati Greenspan (@MatiGreenspan)
By CCN: At a commencement speech at Tulane University in New Orleans, Apple CEO Tim Cook had some harsh words for the parents of Tulane’s class of ’19. During his speech at the Mercedes-Benz Superdome, Cook said: “In some important ways, my generation has failed you.” He added: “We have spent too much time debating, we have been too focused on the fight, and not focused enough on progress.” Cook made a reference to Hurricane Katrina, which devastated New Orleans in 2005: “You don’t need to look far to find an example of that failure…Here today, in this very place,
Peer to peer lending also known as P2P is not a new phenomenon. People have always turned to their friends and family for financial assistance when caught between a rock and a hard place. It was either that or the cutthroat pawnshop owner or the shadowy lenders down a dark alley.
Before the recession, many a person in need of a loan could comfortably approach a bank and get their credit problems solved. However, with the collapse witnessed in the banking sector, things took an about turn, and stringent borrowing measures took the loan out of reach for most people in need.
The rise of peer to peer lending
The rise in the popularity of peer to peer lending has been partly attributed to a growing need for alternative lending sources outside the brick and mortar lending institutions. The other could be the financial need of the younger generations in the job market that does not have the stable financial future cushion the older generations had to rely on.
With little in terms of job security, the gig economy is on the rise, meaning that there will not be much to rely on as far as employer matched pension benefits are concerned. So millennials and their peers are out there looking for a way to make that extra buck that will make their future more comfortable.
These age groups are also leaving tertiary institutions tangled in high student debt more than witnessed in any other generation in history. They, therefore, need these alternative lending sites, for credit for their business ideas and start-ups, since most of them are deemed not worthy of credit by most banks.
Why P2P lending has had such an unbeaten run
With this crowdfunding method, you will be matched to an investor willing to lend you cash for interest. Banks have for eons thrived on low-interest charges lent to savings accounts and high-interest charges lent to creditors. Younger investors have found out that P2P lending can give them higher returns on their investments, much better than bank savings.
With these ultra-low rates on savings, banks have put their clientele in a bind and opened the door for alternative lending sources. These alternatives have thrived and taken away their customers right under their noses.
P2P lending also has fewer overheads than brick and mortar lenders. Investors, therefore, can have better ROIs and also give affordable interest rates to the borrowers…It’s a win-win for all parties.
The dark clouds on the horizon
As for 2018, the peer to peer lending industry in the U.S had hit the $3 billion mark. A clarion call is continually being sent out to more youngsters with deep pockets to join in, in the largely unregulated trade.
Riding on the wave of financial technology they are appealing to millennials who have a deep distrust for banks and their out of date and inefficient systems. This age group are digital mavens and flourish where the service and industry are, and so, they are responding in droves to the P2P attraction.
P2P lending is of course very different from traditional lending or short-term lending from companies. Why? If you are planning to lend some money to your friend, you will have a harder time making that transaction legal. Banks thrive in the legalism they in conjunction with the law have built for mutual interest.
P2P is however very different from cash saving for investors or lenders. An investor could lose everything they have plowed into lending for interest if the borrower defaults. The transaction in this sector are primarily unprotected and not covered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
In the UK, financial regulators are preparing methods to crack down on the marketing efforts of P2P lending sites in fear that more people are throwing their money into these pools through false advertising. In 2018, these platforms transacted £6.1bn as loans. And while there is great risk apportioned to these investment platforms, the reward is that their interest rates far exceed most of what is found on other investment instruments.
However as young investors enjoy the rates and grow their savings, the UK Financial Conduct Authority has its eyes fixed on the glossy ads that are inviting more and more hapless investors to the market.
Most are going overboard and putting in more they can afford in the hopes of striking it rich. With reported increased investor losses on loans, profits to investors are on a decline, and many a long time investor is preparing to leave the scene.
Regulation and closure
There has been increasing criticism over this crowdfunding method, especially after the massive collapse of their Chinese P2P lending platforms in 2016. One of the greatest dangers these platforms raise to investor assets is that they often grow to large pools of money giving the platform owners the onus loan out more risky investments in a bid to expand.
The expansion helps the platform sell off the business faster with less worry about the risks they have put their investors in. They can just get their millions, wash off their hands and walk away to the sunset, leaving their investor’s finances in disarray.
In China P2P lending took off like fire to fuel, hitting 6000 platforms in a few years. By 2017, the transactions this industry commanded totaled more than $445 billion. In a move to regulate the sector, the Chinese government moved in to shut down some platforms like Ezubao that was more Ponzi in its operations than a crowdfunding business.
Soon some of the Chinese largest P2P lenders started to exit the scene claiming that the new regulations were making it hard to turn in a profit. As of February 2018, there were less than 2000 platforms of this nature operating in China.
With the Chinese government still on the move with regulations more and more platforms shut down, often freezing the assets of their investors on their downward spiral. Lenders began to panic and withdrew their funds en masse causing a further loss of funds and investor confidence in the sector.
Guo Shuqing, the chair of the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission later issued a statement to the effect that investors had swallowed hook line and sinker the ‘too good to be true’ deal that Chinese P2P platforms represented.
He warned that while the high returns of 6% were questionable, those beyond 8% were dangerous, while those higher than 10% would cause investment losses. The upheaval witnessed in China has not hit the United States yet, but with growth, it is expected that the law and the taxman will make a move too.
Pros of P2P lending
Peer to peer platforms fills a natural void in the lending market and in the community need to share the resources available to them. There is a mutually beneficial relationship between borrower and lender that has less red tape than experienced in other lending sectors
You will get to enjoy higher returns than those of many different investment channels.
You have the choice of who to lend depending on your risk tolerance.
There is a lot of personal satisfaction derived from helping out a worthy person in genuine need of finances. If for example a borrower has a sketchy financial history, but has a sob story that arouses your sympathy, you can assume the risk of the loan or forego the high returns of the investment.
The sense of community and camaraderie in P2P sites is very inviting, and their forums are very heated and active. There is also the spirit of helping each learn about healthy borrowing and lending.
It is a good investment source for anyone that dislikes saving their cash in a bank
The denial rate for P2p loans is much lower than what is witnessed in banks.
The borrowing and lending relationships built over time can be forged to more profitable long-term relationships due to the nature of the platforms
The opportunity to invest and make profits is open to small scale investors as well who would have a harder time reaping off such benefits in other sectors
As per statistics, over 80% of all investors on these lending platforms have either met or exceeded their ROI. It works!
Cons of P2P lending
The available loans are often small and in many P2P platforms limited to $35,000, though there are variances.
Poor credit histories will still keep some borrowers away
The loans are not insured so a lender capital could be entirely or partly lost, especially when dealing with dishonest borrowers who have perfected their sob storytelling techniques
P2P platforms tend to publish what many borrowers consider private financial stories. Some borrowers may, therefore, prefer an impersonal brick and mortar lender to the publicity of a P2P platform
As the industry grows and shapes itself, regulations, consolidations may become a risk and a burden, chasing away disciplined investors.
To stay on the safe side, do your due diligence before committing your hard-earned cash to a P2P platform. Gauge the health of a platform not only by its sheer size, but by its performance for years. Do as much as you to minimize your exposure by ensuring that you do not put all your eggs in one single basket.
In my last article, I explained how to prove ownership of a specific address by signing a message with a public and private key pair. That’s just one way of proving ownership and verifying a valid signature, as BCH users can also anchor a document to the chain using the Bitcoin Cash protocol’s Script language. This particular walkthrough aims to teach you how to create notarized proofs using Notary.Bitcoin.com.
Upload a File or Document to the BCH Chain and Prove Ownership Using Notary.Bitcoin.com
Proof of ownership or proof of existence is a technique that can be used by anyone via the Bitcoin Cash protocol in order to certify the integrity of a variety of proofs. Our last guide covered the basics on how a person can prove ownership of a specific BCH address and tether a unique message and digital signature to the address as well. However, there are other methods available that allow people to record various things like a document or file. The BCH chain allows you to add raw data to a transaction using an opcode called OP_Return. Our website hosts a service called Notary.Bitcoin.com that allows people to tether the hash of a signature and file within the blockchain’s recorded data. Similarly to how the private key allows someone to prove ownership of an address, a private key can also correspond with the owner’s signature and the hash of the file held in the BCH blockchain.
This attribute allows for some unique possibilities so anyone can certify a document, contract, and date of publication at any time in a permissionless fashion. To demonstrate how to use Notary.Bitcoin.com, I decided to upload a Rich Text File (RTF) to the BCH chain which contains the abstract introduction to the Bitcoin white paper.
After creating the RTF, I simply selected ‘Choose file’ located in the Get Started section, which allows you to either upload or drag a file into the window. The file is never uploaded to the Bitcoin.com server as privacy is our top priority. After the file is uploaded, a new screen will appear which shows the document timestamp, and the document hash but the data will not be broadcasted to the BCH chain until 0.00005 BCH is paid to the address shown.
From here I fired up the Badger Wallet located in my Chrome browser and sent the 0.00005 BCH to the address supplied by Notary.Bitcoin.com. After that, the service told me that my transaction was pending and that it needs one blockchain confirmation in order to be etched into the BCH chain. After the transaction is confirmed, Notary.Bitcoin.com will provide a document hash, server timestamp, the blockchain broadcast time, and the blockchain confirmation time. The upload will also appear in the recent documents registered and the recent anchors section on the notary page.
Notarized Proofs on the Bitcoin Cash Blockchain for Less Than 5 Cents
After you test Notary.Bitcoin.com service and get an understanding of how it works by tethering a notarized document to the BCH chain you can verify the document as well to certify the file’s integrity. Instead of selecting the Notarize tab, simply select the Verify tab and again you just upload or drag the file that was tied to the BCH chain into the window. The service will tell you whether or not the document has been notarized on the BCH chain and Notary.Bitcoin.com will redirect you to the document proof page. When the process is complete, the service also provides a transaction ID (txid) which can be queried on any BCHblockchain explorer.
The simplicity of tying a document to the BCH chain makes it so anyone can certify ownership and this includes businesses, journalists, whistleblowers, and artists who decide to share and create unique content. Just like our previous article which shows anyone how to prove ownership of a specific BCH address, Notary.Bitcoin.com is very easy to understand and allows anyone to prove ownership of a document or file for only 0.00005 BCH (which is less than 5 cents).
Global opinions on electric flying cars and taxis are still divided. That is only normal, as this business concept raises a lot of questions which can’t be answered all that easily. Lillium, a German startup has demonstrated its electric flying taxi prototype this week. A remarkable development, as the product will enter public service by 2025.
The Flying Taxi is Coming
Most consumers on this planet struggle with the idea of having a car that flies. Even if it were just a one-seater vehicle, there are may risks and drawbacks involved. German startup Lillium is already looking well beyond that option. More specifically, they recently unveiled an electric five-seater aircraft. If everything goes according to plan, these units will go “live” in just over five years from the time of writing.
The term flying taxi might not necessarily make much sense to people at first. It is expected Lillium’s prototype will act as the foundation of an on-demand air service. As such, it will be used to deliver products and goods to designated destinations. It will not be an autonomous vehicle by any means, albeit one never knows how this technology will evolve.
Under the hood, this flying taxi packs an electric jet-powered engine. It can reach a theoretical speed of up to 300 km/hour, or roughly 200 miles per hour. As such, its maximum travel distance would be 300 km. A more than respectable distance, especially when considering how this is still a prototype which needs to be put through rigorous testing.
It is not the first time Lillium puts a flying taxi prototype together. A much smaller version of the same craft completed several successful test flights throughout 2017. This new unit only had a very brief remote-controlled test flight. While deemed a big success by the team, there is still plenty of work to be done over the coming months and years. All of this is part of Lillium’s plan to launch an app-based air taxi service in multiple German cities by 2025.
It is expected this five-seater will house one pilot and a maximum of four passengers. A standard cross-city flight would cost roughly $70, which is a fair bit lower than initially expected. It will still be a somewhat exclusive form of air travel, but one that can create a very interesting precedent on a global scale. Urban air mobility is the focus of many startups, albeit achieving this goal will be a different matter altogether.
Over the coming months, Lillium will put its unit through flight testing and obtaining certification for the new plane. Assuming that latter part won’t pose too much of a problem, the future of air travel may look very different from society had in mind originally. These units also produce just 20% of the noise of a helicopter, which would make it suitable for travel in most cities.
Tools Used by Hackers to Steal Cryptocurrency: How to Protect Wallets
In this article, you will find out most popular tricks used to steal cryptos and get to know tools you can use to protect your wallet effectively.
Tools Used by Hackers to Steal Cryptocurrency: How to Protect Wallets
Bitcoin Core wants to distance itself politically from the former project leader Gavin Andresen, the payment protocol BIP070 he was involved with, and from the BCH-friendly Bitpay payment processor company. The attempts to remove software associated with Gavin Andresen are now having real-world effects on the security of bitcoin payments.
Bitpay keeps getting criticized for implementing a payment protocol requirement for wallet apps looking to send money to a Bitpay BTC or BCH address. Bitpay quite suddenly implemented the requirement without much debate and no public negotiations with other community members.
The initial instinctual reaction among many BTC and BCH users was that “no (single) private company should be allowed to make demands about mandatory changes to all BTC and BCH wallet apps because that would mean that software change decisions would be decided in a centralized manner which would be unacceptable for a currency that’s supposed to be decentralized.” But that reasoning only works superficially and stops working if you spend some time to think more deeply about it, and here’s why:
The Payment Protocol was not created by Bitpay. It was created by the individuals (independent from Bitpay) Gavin Andresen and Mike Hearn back in July 29, 2013, long before Bitpay announced on Nov. 28, 2017 that they would start requiring wallet apps to use the Payment Protocol when sending money to Bitpay. Many major BTC wallet apps had already implemented Payment Protocol support independently from Bitpay – “If you are using the BitPay, Copay, Mycelium, Bitcoin Core, Airbitz, or Electrum wallets for your bitcoin payments, nothing will change. These true bitcoin wallets all already ‘speak’ Payment Protocol” – and before Bitpay made their announcement that they would start requiring Payment Protocol compatibility in the coming months.
The major reason why Bitpay announced they would start demanding Payment Protocol compatibility from all wallet apps that would like to send money to Bitpay was that they started getting a lot of customer support requests from their users who had accidentally sent money to them with a transaction fee so low that their transaction either got delayed for days, sometimes weeks or even rejected by the BTC network, typically after a several weeks long delay.
The Payment Protocol would remove the ability for the Bitpay customer to choose the transaction fee and give that decision to Bitpay instead. Bitpay would specify a transaction fee high enough that they would be reasonably confident that they would eventually receive the money in a reasonably timely manner, thus heavily reducing the number of customer support tickets generated.
Bitpay did not try to start centrally controlling “the rules of Bitcoin.” They just saw a harmless way to reduce their customer support department costs and announced their necessary requirement to accomplish that goal more efficiently.
No clarification has been given on why the BIP070 Payment Protocol is now considered “deprecated and will be removed in a later version of Bitcoin Core” because “The protocol has multiple security design flaws and implementation flaws in some wallets,” at least not on the Bitcoin Core documentation site since Nov. 22, 2018 until May 7, 2019. Maybe it’s just a matter of their documentation being poorly updated or maybe it’s because BIP070 actually works well enough to not have to be deprecated.
The latter reason seems more likely because Bitcoin Core (BTC) advocates have been politically hostile against Bitpay and especially so after Bitpay announced that they have started supporting BCH in addition to BTC.
This seems to be a political move to signal that Bitcoin Core should make the important decisions about how payments should be made and not a BCH friendly company such as Bitpay.
BIP070 was authored by two BCH friendly individuals (“Satoshi’s second in command” and former Bitcoin Core project leader Gavin Andresen and Bitcoin XT founder Mike Hearn) whereas the now suggested Payment Protocol BIP021 was co-authored by the well-known Bitcoin Core and small base blocksize limit advocate and developer Matt Corallo.
Bitpay could’ve chosen to mandate the significantly older Payment Protocol BIP021 (created Jan. 29, 2012) instead of mandating the newer Payment Protocol BIP070 (created July 29, 2013). For whatever reasons, Bitpay chose the newer standard BIP070. Bitcoin Core implemented support for BIP070 all the way back on March 19, 2014 as can be read in their release notes: “Add payment request (BIP 0070) support.”
It’s odd that the Bitcoin Core project implements the newer standard BIP070 and then many years later deprecates the newer standard in Bitcoin Core and starts suggesting that everyone should be using the much older standard BIP021 that even Bitcoin Core themselves did not choose initially. It’s odd unless you consider the politics between the competing Bitcoin variant currencies, BTC and BCH, in which case the events start making sense again.
Bitcoin Core wants to distance itself politically from BIP070, the former BCH-friendly Bitcoin Core project leader Gavin Andresen, and the BCH-friendly Bitpay payment processor company. Bitcoin Core advocates state the reasons as being: “The protocol has multiple security design flaws and implementation flaws in some wallets,” without clarifying those reasons, when in fact their reasons are clearly politically motivated as has been argued in this article.
The currently most widely accepted, supported and endorsed BTC and BCH Payment Protocol BIP070 works well enough for now (see graph below), even though mandating its use was decided by the BCH-friendly payment processor company Bitpay and not by the current project leader of the now BTC maximalist Bitcoin Core project. It makes sense to keep endorsing and supporting BIP070 at least until a better standard has been developed and its merits have been well argued and thoroughly debated within the BTC and BCH communities. The older BIP021 standard does not seem to be better than the newer BIP070 standard.
The best counterargument to enforce the use of BIP070 for wallet apps was arguably given by Andreas Antonopoulos, and Bitpay motivated their enforcement convincingly in this excellent summary: “Near the end of the video, Andreas pointed out that people are using third parties to unwrap the BIP-70 protocol to get to the BIP-21. This creates additional security concerns for BitPay users by introducing additional trusted parties. This point is not only valid, but, if our sole and primary motivation for enforcing BIP-70 was about security, would present a compelling case to roll-back enforcement until more of or all of the Bitcoin ecosystem adopted Payment Protocol. But as we said before, BIP-70 is not only about security for BitPay, but about usability. And the usability of cryptocurrency is not just about the short-term success of BitPay, but also the long-term success of cryptocurrency.”
Andreas talks about “The BIP-70 controversy.” He reads a question that was submitted by one of his viewers. The viewer says “Samurai wallet for example does not support BIP-70 and refuses to implement that feature. Could you explain why BIP-70 is controversial in itself and why Bitpay implements a non-universal BIP? Do users have a role to play in this controversy?”
It’s easy to understand why the Samurai wallet team refuses to implement and support BIP-70. They endorse the Bitcoin Core (BTC) currency above all and consider any other competing cryptocurrency, BCH especially, as “an attack on Bitcoin.”
The Samurai wallet team tweeted that they approve of Bitcoin Core advocates “viciously attacking” Bitcoin Cash advocates and that Bitcoin Cash advocates are “lunatics” and “frauds.” That’s a pretty strong choice of words to describe a group of people that have a difference of opinion regarding how Bitcoin should scale.
“Bitcoin will not bend the knee for you, your business, or anyone else. Bitcoin will not compromise. That’s a feature not a bug. You lunatics forked yourself off, now you can deal with the consequences and the ‘vicious attacks’.” And then this comment: “Forking is not the issue. That is exactly what they should have done. The ongoing narrative that ‘BCH is Bitcoin’ is the problem and should be ‘viciously attacked’ or at least highly ridiculed. If you don’t call out fraud, you yourself are a fraudster.”
It’s About Politics, Not Technology
It should not come as a surprise then that the Samurai wallet team refuses to support the BIP-70 technology that the Bitcoin Cash-friendly payment processor Bitpay started requiring from all wallet app providers. It’s about politics, not about technology. Andreas too has become a Bitcoin Core advocate so it’s not a surprise that he omits mentioning that the Samurai wallet team is not a typical example of a politically neutral wallet team. He just pretends that the person who asked the question in his video is right about the Samurai wallet team being politically neutral.
Andreas Antonopoulos further says (regarding Bitpay’s choice to make the use of BIP070 mandatory for all of their customers) at 6:04 in his video that: “From a certain perspective I think that makes sense. However it’s created a lot of pushback … leading in fact to the emergence of alternatives and competitors to Bitpay with projects such as BTCpay Server.”
Notice how Andreas says it’s the reason and not a reason that people started competitors to the Bitpay company. That’s not a very honest description of the events now, is it? Bitpay requiring BIP070 is just one reason among many reasons that people started competing companies. The two most major reasons are that 1) people start competing companies in growing ecosystems all the time, and 2) Bitpay was one of the earliest and most influential community members that publicly advocated raising the base blocksize limit for the Bitcoin currency before Bitcoin split into Bitcoin Core (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) on Aug. 1, 2017. This is what Stephen Pair (co-founder and CEO of Bitpay) wrote all the way back on Jan. 7, 2016 about Bitpay’s political stance regarding the blocksize limit debate:
“Miners need a simple, but adaptive consensus rule for determining the block size limit. Of all the ideas we’ve examined, the one that seems most appealing is a simple adaptive limit based on a recent median block size. To determine the block size limit, you compute the median block size over some recent sample of blocks and apply a multiple. For example, you might set the limit to 2x the median block size of the last 2016 blocks … At BitPay, we will experiment with this approach. We will perform back testing to analyze what impact various settings might have on historic blocks. We will also analyze behavior under extreme circumstances and critique it from a game theoretic perspective. You can follow our work with our fork of the bitcoin client: https://github.com/bitpay/bitcoin. If our findings convince us that it is the best approach for Bitcoin, we will work to convince others (most importantly, miners) as well. In the meantime, if miners reach a consensus on a temporary bump in the fixed limit, you’ll be able to spend those coins at any BitPay merchant.”
As you can see, it’s no wonder Bitcoin Core advocates view Bitpay as being a very influential and important competitor to the scaling roadmap that the Bitcoin Core team fought and keeps fighting for.
Interestingly, it just so happens that Amaury Sechet (project leader of Bitcoin ABC) is advocating a very similar long-term solution to deciding the base blocksize limit for Bitcoin Cash. Bitcoin ABC stands for “Adjustable Blocksize Cap” and Bitcoin ABC’s base blocksize limit previous increases from 1 MB to 8 MB, and then to 32 MB have been merely short-term solutions while the long-term solution is still being researched and worked on. Amaury (“Deadalnix” on Github) wrote this on Jan. 6, 2019, almost exactly three years after the above mentioned Bitpay blog post:
“Given the goal of keeping the system secure without running while keeping the [base blocksize] limit above actual use, I would chose the parameter of the adjustment using the largest value of these two computations:
1/ the median block size of the last 11 block multiplied by 2.
2/ the average block size over a large duration (I’m not sure what’s a good value at this time).
Rationale: We want to avoid the usage to run into the block size. To do so, it is important to adapt quickly in case of rapid change in usage. We also desire to keep multiplier small as we want to reduce the attack surface. It follows that a small window (11) and a small multiplier (2) fits the bill best. 11 is considered safe from manipulation and used for other computation like MTP for that reason.”
Notice the striking similarity between Bitpay’s and Amaury’s preferred long-term solutions to the base blocksize limit for BTC and BCH. Great minds seem to think alike. It’s no wonder that Bitpay announced (March 28, 2018) that they would support BCH in addition to BTC for their payment services: “BitPay Merchants Can Now Accept Bitcoin Cash Payments.” Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is simply more Bitcoin than “Bitcoin.”
Where do you stand on this debate? Share your thoughts on the subject in the comments section below.
This post was written by Tomislav Dugandzic, independent bitcoin cash (BCH) user and currency speculator.
OP-ed disclaimer: This is an Op-ed article. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own. Bitcoin.com is not responsible for or liable for any content, accuracy or quality within the Op-ed article. Readers should do their own due diligence before taking any actions related to the content. Bitcoin.com is not responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any information in this Op-ed article.
Images courtesy of Shutterstock, Github, Bitpay, Stephen Pair (Twitter).
Do you want to dig deeper into Bitcoin? Explore past and present cryptocurrency prices through our Bitcoin Markets tool and head to our Blockchain Explorer to view specific transactions, addresses, and blocks.