Connect with us

Blockchain

Four genuine blockchain use cases

Where shared ledgers add real value in enterprise IT Almost a year after first releasing MultiChain, we’ve learnt a huge amount about how blockchains, in a private and non-cryptocurrency sense, can and cannot be applied to real-world problems. Allow me to share what we know so far. To begin with, the first idea that we… Read more »

Republished by Plato

Published

on

Where shared ledgers add real value in enterprise IT

Almost a year after first releasing MultiChain, we’ve learnt a huge amount about how blockchains, in a private and non-cryptocurrency sense, can and cannot be applied to real-world problems. Allow me to share what we know so far.

To begin with, the first idea that we (and many others) started with, appears to be wrong. This idea, inspired by bitcoin directly, was that private blockchains (or “shared ledgers”) could be used to directly settle the majority of payment and exchange transactions in the finance sector, using on-chain tokens to represent cash, stocks, bonds and more.

This is perfectly workable on a technical level, so what’s the problem? In a word, confidentiality. If multiple institutions are using a shared ledger, then every institution sees every transaction on that ledger, even if they don’t immediately know the real-world identities of the parties involved. This turns out to be a huge issue, both in terms of regulation and the commercial realities of inter-bank competition. While various strategies are available or in development for mitigating this problem, none can match the simplicity and efficiency of a centralized database managed by a trusted intermediary, which maintains full control over who can see what. For now at least, it seems that large financial institutions prefer to keep most transactions hidden in these intermediary databases, despite the costs involved.

I base this conclusion not only on our own experience, but also on the direction taken by several prominent startups whose initial goal was to develop shared ledgers for banks. For example, both R3CEV and Digital Asset are now working on “contract description languages”, in Corda and DAML respectively (earlier examples include MLFi and Ricardian Contracts). These languages allow the conditions of a complex financial contract to be represented formally and unambiguously in a computer readable format, while avoiding the shortcomings of Ethereum-style general purpose computation. Instead, the blockchain plays only a supporting role, storing or notarizing the contracts in encrypted form, and performing some basic duplicate detection. The actual contract execution does not take place on the blockchain – rather, it is performed only by the contract’s counterparties, with the likely addition of auditors and regulators.

In the near term, this is probably the best that can be done, but where does it leave the broader ambitions for permissioned blockchains? Are there other applications for which they can form a more significant part of the puzzle?

This question can be approached both theoretically and empirically. Theoretically, by focusing on the key differences between blockchains and traditional databases, and how these inform the set of possible use cases. And in our case, empirically, by categorizing the real-world solutions being built on MultiChain today. Not surprisingly, whether we focus on theory or practice, the same classes of use case arise:

  • Lightweight financial systems.
  • Provenance tracking.
  • Interorganizational record keeping.
  • Multiparty aggregation.

Before explaining these in detail, let’s recap the theory. As I’ve discussed before, the two most important differences between blockchains and centralized databases can be characterized as follows:

  1. Disintermediation. Blockchains enable multiple parties who do not fully trust each other to safely and directly share a single database without requiring a trusted intermediary.
  2. Confidentiality: All participants in a blockchain see all of the transactions taking place. (Even if we use pseudonymous addresses and advanced cryptography to hide some aspects of those transactions, a blockchain will always leak more information than a centralized database.)

In other words, blockchains are ideal for shared databases in which every user is able to read everything, but no single user controls who can write what. By contrast, in traditional databases, a single entity exerts control over all read and write operations, while other users are entirely subject to that entity’s whims. To sum it up in one sentence:

Blockchains represent a trade-off in which disintermediation is gained at the cost of confidentiality.

In examining the four types of use case below, we’ll repeatedly come back to this core trade-off, explaining why, in each case, the benefit of disintermediation outweighs the cost of reduced confidentiality.

Lightweight financial systems

Let’s start with the class of blockchain applications that will be most familiar, in which a group of entities wishes to set up a financial system. Within this system, one or more scarce assets are transacted and exchanged between those entities.

In order for any asset to remain scarce, two related problems must be solved. First, we must ensure that the same unit of the asset cannot be sent to more than one place (a “double spend”). Second, it must be impossible for anyone to create new units of the asset on a whim (“forgery”). Any entity which could do either of these things could steal unlimited value from the system.

A common solution to these problems is physical tokens, such as metal coins or securely printed paper. These tokens trivially solve the problem of double spending, because the rules of physics (literally) prevent one token from being in two places at the same time. The problem of forgery is solved by making the token extremely difficult to manufacture. Still, physical tokens suffer from several shortcomings which can render them impractical:

  • As pure bearer assets, physical tokens can be stolen with no trace or recourse.
  • They are slow and costly to move in large numbers or over long distances.
  • It is tricky and expensive to create physical tokens that cannot be forged.

These shortcomings can be avoided by leaving physical tokens behind, and redefining asset ownership in terms of a ledger managed by a trusted intermediary. In the past, these ledgers were based on paper records, and today they tend to run on regular databases. Either way, the intermediary enacts a transfer of ownership by modifying the ledger’s content, in response to an authenticated request. Unlike settlement with physical tokens, questionable transactions can quickly and easily be reversed.

So what’s the problem with ledgers? In a nutshell, concentration of control. By putting so much power in one place, we create a significant security challenge, in both technical and human terms. If someone external can hack into the database, they can change the ledger at will, stealing others’ funds or destroying its contents completely. Even worse, someone on the inside could corrupt the ledger, and this kind of attack is hard to detect or prove. As a result, wherever we have a centralized ledger, we must invest significant time and money in mechanisms to maintain that ledger’s integrity. And in many cases, we require ongoing verification using batch-based reconciliation between the central ledger and those of each of the transacting parties.

Enter the blockchain (or “shared ledger”). This provides the benefits of ledgers without suffering from the problem of concentration. Instead, each entity runs a “node” holding a copy of the ledger and maintains full control over its own assets, which are protected by private keys. Transactions propagate between nodes in a peer-to-peer fashion, with the blockchain ensuring that consensus is maintained. This architecture leaves no central attack point through which a hacker or insider could corrupt the ledger’s contents. As a result, a digital financial system can be deployed more quickly and cheaply, with the added benefit of automatic reconciliation in real time.

So what’s the downside? As discussed earlier, all participants in a shared ledger see all of the transactions taking place, rendering it unusable in situations where confidentiality is required. Instead, blockchains are suitable for what I call lightweight financial systems, namely those in which the economic stakes or number of participants is relatively low. In these cases, confidentiality tends to be less of an issue – even if the participants pay close attention to what each other are doing, they won’t learn much of value. And it is precisely because the stakes are low that we prefer to avoid the hassle and cost of setting up an intermediary.

Some obvious examples of lightweight financial systems include: crowdfunding, gift cards, loyalty points and local currencies – especially in cases where assets are redeemable in more than one place. But we are also seeing use cases in the mainstream finance sector, such as peer-to-peer trading between asset managers who are not in direct competition. Blockchains are even being tested as internal accounting systems, in large organizations where each department or location must maintain control of its funds. In all these cases, the lower cost and friction of blockchains provides an immediate benefit, while the loss of confidentiality is not a concern.

Provenance tracking

Here’s a second class of use case that we repeatedly hear from MultiChain’s users: tracking the origin and movement of high-value items across a supply chain, such as luxury goods, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and electronics. And equally, critical items of documentation such as bills of lading or letters of credit. In supply chains stretching across time and distance, all of these items suffer from counterfeiting and theft.

The problem can be addressed using blockchains in the following way: when the high-value item is created, a corresponding digital token is issued by a trusted entity, which acts to authenticate its point of origin. Then, every time the physical item changes hands, the digital token is moved in parallel, so that the real-world chain of custody is precisely mirrored by a chain of transactions on the blockchain.

If you like, the token is acting as a virtual “certificate of authenticity”, which is far harder to steal or forge than a piece of paper. Upon receiving the digital token, the final recipient of the physical item, whether a bank, distributor, retailer or customer, can verify the chain of custody all the way back to the point of origin. Indeed, in the case of documentation such as bills of lading, we can do away with the physical item altogether.

While all of this makes sense, the astute reader will notice that a regular database, managed (say) by an item’s manufacturer, can accomplish the same task. This database would store a record of the current owner of each item, accepting signed transactions representing each change of ownership, and respond to incoming requests regarding the current state of play.

So why use a blockchain instead? The answer is that, for this type of application, there’s a benefit to distributed trust. No matter where a centralized database is held, there will be people in that place who have the ability (and can be bribed) to corrupt its contents, marking forged or stolen items as legit. By contrast, if provenance is tracked on a blockchain belonging collectively to a supply chain’s participants, no individual entity or small group of entities can corrupt the chain of custody, and end users can have more confidence in the answers they receive. As a bonus, different tokens (say for some goods and the corresponding bill of lading) can be safely and directly exchanged, with a two-way swap guaranteed at the lowest blockchain level.

What about the problem of confidentiality? The suitability of blockchains for supply chain provenance is a happy result of this application’s simple pattern of transactions. In contrast to financial marketplaces, most tokens move in a single direction, from origin to endpoint, without being repeatedly traded back-and-forth between the blockchain’s participants. If competitors rarely transact with each other (e.g. toy manufacturer to toy manufacturer, or retailer to retailer), they cannot learn each others’ blockchain “addresses” and connect those to real-world identities. Furthermore, the activity can be easily partitioned into multiple ledgers, each representing a different order or type of good.

Finance-vs-Supply-Chain-Transactions

Interorganizational record keeping

Both of the previous use cases are based on tokenized assets, i.e. on-chain representations of an item of value transferred between participants. However there is a second group of blockchain use cases which is not related to assets. Instead, the chain acts as a mechanism for collectively recording and notarizing any type of data, whose meaning can be financial or otherwise.

One such example is an audit trail of critical communications between two or more organizations, say in the healthcare or legal sectors. No individual organization in the group can be trusted with maintaining this archive of records, because falsified or deleted information would significantly damage the others. Nonetheless it is vital that all agree on the archive’s contents, in order to prevent disputes.

To solve this problem, we need a shared database into which all of the records are written, with each record accompanied by a timestamp and proof of origin. The standard solution would be to create a trusted intermediary, whose role is to collect and store the records centrally. But blockchains offer a different approach, giving the organizations a way to jointly manage this archive, while preventing individual participants (or small groups thereof) from corrupting it.

One of the most enlightening conversations I’ve had in the past two years was with Michael Mainelli of Z/Yen. For 20 years his company has been building systems in which multiple entities collectively manage a shared digital audit trail, using timestamping, digital signatures and a round robin consensus scheme. As he explained the technical details of these systems, it became clear that they are permissioned blockchains in every respect. In other words, there is nothing new about using a blockchain for interorganizational recordkeeping – it’s just that the world has finally become aware of the possibility.

In terms of the actual data stored on the blockchain, there are three popular options:

  • Unencrypted data. This can be read by every participant in the blockchain, providing full collective transparency and immediate resolution in the case of a dispute.
  • Encrypted data. This can only be read by participants with the appropriate decryption key. In the event of a dispute, anyone can reveal this key to a trusted authority such as a court, and use the blockchain to prove that the original data was added by a certain party at a certain point in time.
  • Hashed data. A “hash” acts as a compact digital fingerprint, representing a commitment to a particular piece of data while keeping that data hidden. Given some data, any party can easily confirm if it matches a given hash, but inferring data from its hash is computationally impossible. Only the hash is placed on the blockchain, with the original data stored off-chain by interested parties, who can reveal it in case of a dispute.

As mentioned earlier, R3CEV’s Corda product has adopted this third approach, storing hashes on a blockchain to notarize contracts between counterparties, without revealing their contents. This method can be used both for computer-readable contract descriptions, as well as PDF files containing paper documentation.

Naturally, confidentiality is not an issue for interorganizational record keeping, because the entire purpose is to create a shared archive that all the participants can see (even if some data is encrypted or hashed). Indeed in some cases a blockchain can help manage access to confidential off-chain data, by providing an immutable record of digitally signed access requests. Either way, the straightforward benefit of disintermediation is that no additional entity must be created and trusted to maintain this record.

Multiparty aggregation

Technically speaking, this final class of use case is similar to the previous one, in that multiple parties are writing data to a collectively managed record. However in this case the motivation is different – to overcome the infrastructural difficulty of combining information from a large number of separate sources.

Imagine two banks with internal databases of customer identity verifications. At some point they notice that they share a lot of customers, so they enter a reciprocal sharing arrangement in which they exchange verification data to avoid duplicated work. Technically, the agreement is implemented using standard master–slave data replication, in which each bank maintains a live read-only copy of the other’s database, and runs queries in parallel against its own database and the replica. So far, so good.

Now imagine these two banks invite three others to participate in this circle of sharing. Each of the 5 banks runs its own master database, along with 4 read-only replicas of the others. With 5 masters and 20 replicas, we have 25 database instances in total. While doable, this consumes noticeable time and resources in each bank’s IT department.

Fast forward to the point where 20 banks are sharing information in this way, and we’re looking at 400 database instances in total. For 100 banks, we reach 10,000 instances. In general, if every party is sharing information with every other, the total number of database instances grows with the square of the number of participants. At some point in this process, the system is bound to break down.

So what’s the solution? One obvious option is for all of the banks to submit their data to a trusted intermediary, whose job is to aggregate that data in a single master database. Each bank could then query this database remotely, or run a local read-only replica within its own four walls. While there’s nothing wrong with this approach, blockchains offer a cheaper alternative, in which the shared database is run directly by the banks which use it. Blockchains also bring the added benefit of redundancy and failover for the system as a whole.

It’s important to clarify that a blockchain is not acting just as a distributed database like Cassandra or RethinkDB. Unlike these systems, each blockchain node enforces a set of rules which prevent one participant from modifying or deleting the data added by another. Indeed, there still appears to be some confusion about this – one recently released blockchain platform can be broken by a single misbehaving node. In any event, a good platform will also make it easy to manage networks with thousands of nodes, joining and leaving at will, if granted the appropriate permissions.

Although I’m a little skeptical of the oft-cited connection between blockchains and the Internet of Things, I think this might be where a strong such synergy lies. Of course, each “thing” would be too small to store a full copy of the blockchain locally. Rather, it would transmit data-bearing transactions to a distributed network of blockchain nodes, who would collate it all together for further retrieval and analysis.

Conclusion: Blockchains in Finance

I started this piece by questioning the initial use case envisioned for blockchains in the finance sector, namely the bulk settlement of payment and exchange transactions. While I believe this conclusion is becoming common wisdom (with one notable exception), it does not mean that blockchains have no other applications in this industry. In fact, for each of the four classes of use case outlined above, we see clear applications for banks and other financial institutions. Respectively, these are: small trading circles, provenance for trade finance, bilateral contract notarization and the aggregation of AML/KYC data.

The key to understand is that, architecturally, our four classes of use case are not specific to finance, and are equally relevant to other sectors such as insurance, healthcare, distribution, manufacturing and IT. Indeed, private blockchains should be considered for any situation in which two or more organizations need a shared view of reality, and that view does not originate from a single source. In these cases, blockchains offer an alternative to the need for a trusted intermediary, leading to significant savings in hassle and cost.

 

Please post any comments on LinkedIn.

 

Source: https://www.multichain.com/blog/2016/05/four-genuine-blockchain-use-cases/

Blockchain

Six-Figure Bitcoin Price Predictions Back on The Table

Republished by Plato

Published

on

This has resulted in the renewal of six-figure price predictions for this market cycle, with some suggesting a top of $300,000 this time around.

At the time of writing, Bitcoin was trading at $37,900 after reaching an intraday high of $40,000 according to Tradingview.com. The asset had started to fall back during the Asian trading session on Friday and had failed to break its previous high of $42,000 but the sentiment is still very bullish.

Total crypto market capitalization has topped a trillion dollars again as some of the altcoins, such as Polkadot, make monumental 24-hour gains.

When Will Bitcoin Top $100K?

Popular traders and analysts are back in the game of predicting prices and they’re largely in agreement that this market cycle will result in six figure Bitcoin prices.

Josh Rager said that he thinks Bitcoin will see a six-figure price by early 2022;

He added that at this peak, the name of ‘Bitcoin’ will be mentioned on every TV, phone, and tablet around the world.

“This could certainly be the cycle that leads to Bitcoin becoming a household name along with serious adoption from those who once mocked peer-to-peer digital money,”

Fellow trader ‘TraderKoz’, who has 28k followers on twitter added that at a guess he would say that this cycle takes us to $250k to $350k.

“From there, we have 3 years of accumulation in the $60-90k range before Bitcoin takes over the entire financial system. That bull run will take us to over $1,000,000,”

Michael Saylor, who’s institutional investment firm MicroStrategy has been buying up large swathes of Bitcoin, continues to post bullish tweets about the asset to his 330k followers;

The Institutional Effect

Aggregated derivative exchange data provider Bybit reported that Bitcoin institutional inflows are showing no signs of slowing down, adding that there may be a new round of buying by Grayscale.

Grayscale itself reported an assets under management (AUM) figure of $27.7 billion in its most recent update. The company has also just released its fourth-quarter report revealing that there was record investor demand in the period, with approximately $3.3 billion in inflows.

The story made such an impact that even Reuters picked it up.

SPECIAL OFFER (Sponsored)
Binance Futures 50 USDT FREE Voucher: Use this link to register & get 10% off fees and 50 USDT when trading 500 USDT (limited offer).

PrimeXBT Special Offer: Use this link to register & enter CRYPTOPOTATO35 code to get 35% free bonus on any deposit up to 1 BTC.

You Might Also Like:


Source: https://cryptopotato.com/six-figure-bitcoin-price-predictions-back-on-the-table/

Continue Reading

Blockchain

$500K Bitcoin Donation Funneled to Groups Involved in US Capitol Riot: Analysis

Republished by Plato

Published

on

Blockchain intelligence firm Chainalysis has tracked simultaneous Bitcoin (BTC) donations to wallets associated with right-wing extremist groups in the U.S., which might have helped fund the recent riot at the U.S. Capitol. The news marks yet another pivot towards pseudonymous money transfer means by alt-right groups in the U.S.

Alt-Right Agitators Received $500K in Bitcoin Prior to US Capitol Riot

Publishing its findings on Thursday (Jan. 14, 2021), Chainalysis revealed that several notable alt-right personalities who were present at the Jan. 6 riot in the U.S. Capitol received substantial Bitcoin donations.

According to Chainalysis, a single donor funneled 18.15 BTC to addresses belonging to entities with right-leaning affiliations on Dec. 8, 2020. At the time, this figure was worth over $500,000.

In its report, Chainalysis also revealed that popular far-right political commentator Nick Fuentes received 13.5 BTC. There are a few photographic pieces of evidence placing Fuentes at the riot with a megaphone in hand though Fuentes has denied entering the building itself.

Apart from him, alt-right podcaster Ethan Ralph and VDARE — an anti-immigration organization — also received BTC sums from the donor. While Chainalysis did not reveal the identity of the person responsible for funneling the Bitcoin, the crypto forensics outfit did mention that there strong evidence that the donor is a French computer programmer.

An examination into the donor’s wallet shows that the person is likely an early Bitcoin adopter. Further investigation into the donor shows a history of donations to extremist causes with an alleged suicide note referencing known alt-right talking points.

Based on these findings, U.S. law enforcement officials are reportedly investigating possible links between the donations and the assault on the Capitol. Prosecutors also say that they are approaching the investigations from a counterterrorism and counterintelligence standpoint.

Financial Censorship Triggering Crypto Adoption

Alt-right groups receiving donations in Bitcoin is only the latest example of political and social groups with dissident ideologies embracing cryptocurrencies. Indeed, Bitcoin’s early history is somewhat intertwined with WikiLeaks especially after the establishment was cut off from mainstream funding sources.

Even countries facing economic sanctions are also adopting cryptocurrencies. Venezuela is a popular example, with the Maduro administration even creating its own oil-backed Petro “coin.”

Nations like Iran are actively supporting Bitcoin mining with tax breaks for BTC miners. As previously reported by CryptoPotato, the output from three power plants has been offered to miners in the country.

SPECIAL OFFER (Sponsored)
Binance Futures 50 USDT FREE Voucher: Use this link to register & get 10% off fees and 50 USDT when trading 500 USDT (limited offer).

PrimeXBT Special Offer: Use this link to register & enter CRYPTOPOTATO35 code to get 35% free bonus on any deposit up to 1 BTC.

You Might Also Like:


Source: https://cryptopotato.com/500k-bitcoin-donation-funneled-to-groups-involved-in-us-capitol-riot-analysis/

Continue Reading

Blockchain

Bitcoin Faced First Major Correction In Current Bull Run: The Crypto Weekly Market Update

Republished by Plato

Published

on

This week was very intensive in the cryptocurrency market. It’s perhaps safe to say that it was among the most tumultuous ones we’ve had in the last few months.

Everything started calmly, and during the weekend, the price hit an all-time high value of $42,000. The excitement was short-lived, as immediately after that, bitcoin went in the opposite direction and started to decline. It wasn’t until Monday, however, when things took a turn for the worst.

Bitcoin’s price lost around $12,000 in what seems to be the first major correction in the ongoing bull run. The decline of around 27% came in a few brutal four-hour red candles and led to the liquidations of $2.87 billion worth of both long and short positions, indicating once again how over-leveraged the market is.

From there, the price took uphill and even reached $40,000 again on Thursday. Bears, however, weren’t done as what followed was another handful of red candles that brought the price to its current trading level of about $35,000.

With this said, the entire cryptocurrency market took a hit as the capitalization has dropped below $1 trillion. Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s dominance is also suffering, as it’s down to 67.7% during this week from its high of around 70.3%. This shows that despite the blood on the streets, altcoins have managed to take the upper hand and claim a larger portion of the market.

Meanwhile, two other projects made headlines over the past few days, mainly thanks to their incredible price performance. Despite this brutal correction, Polkadot’s DOT token is up 40% over the last seven days, while LINK is up 22%. The latter even charted a new all-time high today.

In any case, the week was particularly exciting, and even though this time it was the bears who had the upper hand, it’s very interesting to see how the next few days will shape up. Is this the beginning of a larger correction, or is it just a step back in preparation for an even bigger rally? We have yet to see.

Market Data

Market Cap: $964B | 24H Vol: 144B | BTC Dominance: 67.7%

BTC: $35,442 (-14.6%) | ETH: $1,141 (-7.5%) | XRP: $0.276 (-12.9%)

Tether (USDT) January 15th Deadline on iFinex Case: Everything You Need to Know. Today is an important date for the entire cryptocurrency industry as it marks a serious deadline on the iFinex v. NYAG case. Here is everything you need to know about it and what to expect.

FinCEN Extends Comment Window on Proposed Crypto Regulations. After receiving thousands of responses and serious criticism from industry participants, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has decided to extend the comment window on the proposed cryptocurrency regulations.

Following Coinbase And Bakkt: Winklevoss’ Gemini Reportedly Considers Going Public. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss are reportedly exploring the option of taking their cryptocurrency exchange, Gemini, public. This means that they could follow in the footsteps of other cryptocurrency-related companies with similar intentions – namely, Coinbase and Bakkt.

Greenlight: Anchorage Secures Crypto Banking Charter from the OCC. The United States Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has granted a cryptocurrency custodial service company a national trust charter. This puts the firm in the position to claim the mantle of a US-based national crypto bank.

4 Possible Reasons for Bitcoin’s $12K Correction After Reaching $42,000 All-Time High. Bitcoin went through its first major correction this week, sliding by more than 27% in just a few four-hour red candles. Here are some of the potential reasons for which this happened.

Crypto Market Cap Reclaims $1 Trillion as Bitcoin Sets Sights on $40K. The cryptocurrency market sees no boring days. Just a couple of days back, it was on its way back up, recovering from a major correction, and even claimed $1 trillion in market cap again. Unfortunately, today things took a turn for the worst again.

Charts

This week we have a chart analysis of Bitcoin, Ethereum, Ripple, Polkadot, and Cardano – click here for the full price analysis.

SPECIAL OFFER (Sponsored)
Binance Futures 50 USDT FREE Voucher: Use this link to register & get 10% off fees and 50 USDT when trading 500 USDT (limited offer).

PrimeXBT Special Offer: Use this link to register & enter CRYPTOPOTATO35 code to get 35% free bonus on any deposit up to 1 BTC.

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

Cryptocurrency charts by TradingView.


Source: https://cryptopotato.com/bitcoin-faced-first-major-correction-in-current-bull-run-the-crypto-weekly-market-update/

Continue Reading
Blockchain4 days ago

Ethereum Whale Addresses With Over 10,000 ETH Continue to Grow In Numbers, Price Holds Above $1000

Blockchain3 days ago

Bitcoin Will Be Analogous to Amazon, Mark Cuban Compares Crypto to the Dot-Com Bubble

Blockchain3 days ago

‘Crypto is exactly like dot com bubble; Bitcoin, Ethereum can survive it’

Blockchain3 days ago

As Bitcoin Regains Lost Ground, Options Traders Bet on $52K Move By Late January

Blockchain3 days ago

Ethereum Price Analysis: 12 January

Blockchain4 days ago

Shanghai Government Invests $5M in Blockchain Startup Conflux

Blockchain3 days ago

Brian Brooks, Crypto-Friendly OCC Leader, Steps Down

Blockchain4 days ago

Coinbase Custody Lists DeFi Project BarnBridge

Blockchain3 days ago

Bitcoin ‘real’ daily trading volume tops $22B as BTC price recovers

Blockchain4 days ago

Crypto Community Expects Bitcoin to Surge Amid Biden’s $3 Trillion Stimulus Plan

Blockchain3 days ago

How the OCC Is Building Crypto America (and Saving Banks From Extinction)

Blockchain2 days ago

SolidX Sues VanEck Over Bitcoin ETF Plagiarism

Blockchain4 days ago

Bakkt to Become a Publicly Traded Company worth $2.1 Billion Via New Merger

Blockchain4 days ago

HSBC Blocks Transactions From Crypto Exchanges

Blockchain4 days ago

IMVU’s new blockchain-backed stablecoin goes live

Blockchain3 days ago

Trader comforts the market’s traumatized first timers amid falling prices

Blockchain3 days ago

Is China Poised to Nationalize Alibaba?

Blockchain3 days ago

Gensler Said to Be Named SEC Chairman: Reuters

Blockchain3 days ago

Uniswap’s growth lead bites back over Yearn Finance’s SushiSwap merger

Blockchain2 days ago

EU Crypto Payment Processor To Remove XRP Following The SEC Charges

Trending