what is Genesis Block and why Genesis Block is needed ...

05-12 20:25 - 'Coinbase message for halving block harks back to the genesis block. This is why we have plan B.' (i.redd.it) by /u/BeTeeC removed from /r/Bitcoin within 1421-1431min

Coinbase message for halving block harks back to the genesis block. This is why we have plan B.
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: BeTeeC
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Dan Hedl on Twitter: "If Satoshi had wanted Bitcoin to first revolutionize transactions, he would have put this message in the genesis block 'VISA on brink of raising processing fees'"

Dan Hedl on Twitter: submitted by Bastiat to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

02-27 21:13 - 'Actually, considering the message Satoshi left on the Genesis block: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks". He was referencing a British newspaper (The Times) and the British Chancellor of th...' by /u/coin4coin removed from /r/Bitcoin within 32-42min

'''
Actually, considering the message Satoshi left on the Genesis block: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks". He was referencing a British newspaper (The Times) and the British Chancellor of the Exchequer. He is most likely British or, at least he may have lived in the U.K. [link]1
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: coin4coin
1: en.bi*co*n.i**w/im*ges/en*1/*d**onny10*0theti**s.pn*
Unknown links are censored to prevent spreading illicit content.
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

Dan Hedl on Twitter: "If Satoshi had wanted Bitcoin to first revolutionize transactions, he would have put this message in the genesis block 'VISA on brink of raising processing fees'"

Dan Hedl on Twitter: submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

I just signed a message with the genesis block address /r/Bitcoin

I just signed a message with the genesis block address /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Sign a Message with the Private Key Associated with Genesis Block or GTFO /r/Bitcoin

Sign a Message with the Private Key Associated with Genesis Block or GTFO /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Question about the Genesis Block hidden message /r/Bitcoin

Question about the Genesis Block hidden message /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Why doesn't Craig Wright just post new message on the original forum where the white paper was released where each new message is signed using a key from the genesis block? Plain and simple... /r/Bitcoin

Why doesn't Craig Wright just post new message on the original forum where the white paper was released where each new message is signed using a key from the genesis block? Plain and simple... /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Is it possible to sign a message using the genesis block? since the coins used in said block never existed before and they wouldn't be valid /r/Bitcoin

Is it possible to sign a message using the genesis block? since the coins used in said block never existed before and they wouldn't be valid /Bitcoin submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

BTC MEM-Pool and Fees to the Mo0n again !

BTC MEM-Pool and Fees to the Mo0n again !

https://preview.redd.it/tcmwk25j5lu51.jpg?width=1642&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3069a76fec68031a4ace1200a9ad51fbc38cfbf3
source: https://jochen-hoenicke.de/queue/#0,30d
Satoshi never intended the mem-pool to be much bigger then a single block .
I really do wonder why this crippled unusable version of "Bitcoin" with the ticker BTC has so much "value" .
Only reason must be, people simply don´t use it as a currency, like intended .
submitted by PanneKopp to btc [link] [comments]

Is keepkey at risk to same exploit?

https://decrypt.co/37651/ledger-exploit-makes-you-spend-bitcoin-instead-of-altcoins
submitted by Wyldwiisel to keepkey [link] [comments]

coinbase message

Hello, i would like to retrieve this message:https://coinfomania.com/bitcoin-halving-done-block-629999-coinbase-message/ on my bticoin node installed on a linux server. I found this guide https://ma.ttias.be/retrieving-the-genesis-block-in-bitcoin-with-bitcoin-cli/ but it shows it only for the genesis block. So how can i view the halving message?
submitted by ff20001000 to BitcoinBeginners [link] [comments]

Did Satoshi ever mention the financial crisis?

(answered)
Hi there
Bitcoin whitepaper was published 2008 in the time Lehman Brothers collapsed and the financial crisis began. I think it's obvious that this is no accident. But did Satoshi ever say that? Did he ever mention, that Bitcoin is the answer to what happened or something like that? Or did he leave it up to us to answer that?
Thank you for helping me with this.
submitted by kayth1 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

It's that simple.

It's that simple. submitted by myquidproquo to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Litecoin’s Charlie Lee says signing a message with genesis key is the only way to authenticate Nakamoto’s true identity

Litecoin’s Charlie Lee says signing a message with genesis key is the only way to authenticate Nakamoto’s true identity submitted by carlosesverde to litecoin [link] [comments]

Want to ₿ part of the revolution? Let’s start today by Tipping Satoshi!

Hello fellow Bitcoiners! It would seem that since the implementation of cash settled futures (right at the ATH) coupled with the banks being large investors in most, if not all, of the major bitcoin exchanges that they have been in control of the USD price of bitcoin for the past few years. Their ability to rehypothecate and commingle bitcoin seems to have no end (see Catlin Long’s Forbes articles about financialization) since no matter how often or how well it’s repeated, even so eloquently put by the great Andreas, “Not your keys, not your coins” there will always be a percentage of so called bitcoin “owners” that leave their Satoshi’s on these exchanges. Sadly this seems to allow them to continue their fiat OTC market / public spot price exchange games.
And while I certainly believe that their control of the price is temporary and that the math will eventually determine its true value, I believe that there are a few things that we can do in order to push this forward in breaking the price free from the fiat currency master manipulators:
1) Don’t trust your wallets and “Roll Your Own” P2PKH addresses using dice. I say P2PKH as you can simply sign a bitcoin message with one of these addresses with a standardized signing message in your wallet and then verify that you are in fact of the private keys to these address by signing a bitcoin message and validating the signature via your own bitcoin node.
2) Tip Satoshi! That’s right, tip Satoshi! Wait, how can we do that? Well, one would assume that the very first receiving address (the address receiving the first coinbase transaction ( 1A1zP1eP5QGefi2DMPTfTL5SLmv7DivfNa ) would have had to of been Satoshi’s then we can simply send Satoshi some satoshi’s! By doing so you would be doing one of the following
a. burning that bitcoin thus reducing the supply, or
b. You would actually be tipping the creator(s) of bitcoin!
After looking into this address, it would appear that the idea of sending Satoshi satoshis is not a new idea as there are tons of transactions that have been sent to him since the genesis block. In fact as I type this there is not only my transaction but another one pending in the mempool.
submitted by BitcoinCanSaveUsAll to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Error starting up new Bitcoin Unlimited BCH node.

EDIT: Fixed, I just needed to run "./bch-unlimited-1.8.0.0/bin/bitcoind --daemon -reindex" It's fully synced now.
It was syncing for awhile at first but now it keeps crashing whenever I run the following command."./bch-unlimited-1.8.0.0/bin/bitcoind --daemon"
It throws the error "Error: Failed to connect best block"Below is the log. Any help is appreciated.
2020-07-29 18:53:36 CDBEnv::Open: LogDir=/root/.bitcoin/database ErrorFile=/root/.bitcoin/db.log 2020-07-29 18:53:36 Cache configuration: 2020-07-29 18:53:36 * Using 0.0MiB for block database 2020-07-29 18:53:36 * Using 0.0MiB for block undo database 2020-07-29 18:53:36 * Using 2.0MiB for block index database 2020-07-29 18:53:36 * Using 0.0MiB for txindex database 2020-07-29 18:53:36 * Using 317.1MiB for chain state database 2020-07-29 18:53:36 * Using 2155.9MiB for in-memory UTXO set 2020-07-29 18:53:36 init message: Opening Block database... 2020-07-29 18:53:36 LevelDB using max_open_files=1000 (default=1000) 2020-07-29 18:53:36 Opening LevelDB in /root/.bitcoin/blocks/index 2020-07-29 18:53:37 Opened LevelDB successfully 2020-07-29 18:53:37 Using obfuscation key for /root/.bitcoin/blocks/index: 0000000000000000 2020-07-29 18:53:37 init message: Opening UTXO database... 2020-07-29 18:53:37 LevelDB using max_open_files=1000 (default=1000) 2020-07-29 18:53:37 Opening LevelDB in /root/.bitcoin/chainstate 2020-07-29 18:53:38 Opened LevelDB successfully 2020-07-29 18:53:38 Using obfuscation key for /root/.bitcoin/chainstate: 8e46379444ba7f52 2020-07-29 18:53:38 init message: Opening Coins Cache database... 2020-07-29 18:53:38 init message: Loading block index... 2020-07-29 18:53:44 Checking all blk files are present... 2020-07-29 18:53:44 LoadBlockIndexDB: last block file = 695 2020-07-29 18:53:44 LoadBlockIndexDB: last block file info: CBlockFileInfo(blocks=119, size=103373591, heights=441306...441426, time=2016-11-30...2016-12-01) 2020-07-29 18:53:44 LoadBlockIndexDB: hashBestChain=000000000000000000c687014d1c6b88d26a2af658fea4598bbf9d36ae5a987c height=439622 date=2016-11-19 07:15:45 progress=0.268064 2020-07-29 18:53:44 init message: Verifying blocks... 2020-07-29 18:53:44 Verifying last 6 blocks at level 3 2020-07-29 18:53:45 No coin database inconsistencies in last 7 blocks (16216 transactions) 2020-07-29 18:53:45 block index 8915ms 2020-07-29 18:53:45 init message: Loading wallet... 2020-07-29 18:53:45 nFileVersion = 1080000 2020-07-29 18:53:45 Keys: 103 plaintext, 0 encrypted, 103 w/ metadata, 103 total 2020-07-29 18:53:45 wallet 5ms 2020-07-29 18:53:45 init message: Activating best chain... 2020-07-29 18:53:45 ERROR: ConnectBlockDependencyOrdering: block 0000000000000000012ecb0a0b8f28ee434841410d0c04ae14faa20cb5102635 inputs missing/spent in tx 335 0a01201f6cff4d38207d118c9f6100182d40033ffbcfe6daefbf9669e0f98ace 2020-07-29 18:53:45 InvalidChainFound: invalid block=0000000000000000012ecb0a0b8f28ee434841410d0c04ae14faa20cb5102635 height=439623 log2_work=85.562686 date=2016-11-19 07:25:44 2020-07-29 18:53:45 InvalidChainFound: current best=000000000000000000c687014d1c6b88d26a2af658fea4598bbf9d36ae5a987c height=439622 log2_work=85.562655 date=2016-11-19 07:15:45 2020-07-29 18:53:46 ERROR: ConnectTip(): ConnectBlock 0000000000000000012ecb0a0b8f28ee434841410d0c04ae14faa20cb5102635 failed 2020-07-29 18:53:46 Invalid block due to bad-txns-inputs-missingorspent 2020-07-29 18:53:46 InvalidChainFound: invalid block=0000000000000000012ecb0a0b8f28ee434841410d0c04ae14faa20cb5102635 height=439623 log2_work=85.562686 date=2016-11-19 07:25:44 2020-07-29 18:53:46 InvalidChainFound: current best=000000000000000000c687014d1c6b88d26a2af658fea4598bbf9d36ae5a987c height=439622 log2_work=85.562655 date=2016-11-19 07:15:45 2020-07-29 18:53:46 Chain activation failed, returning to next best choice 2020-07-29 18:53:48 Waiting for genesis block to be imported... 2020-07-29 18:53:48 Imported mempool transactions from disk: 0 successes, 0 expired 2020-07-29 18:53:48 Bound to [::]:8333 2020-07-29 18:53:48 Bound to 0.0.0.0:8333 2020-07-29 18:53:48 Error: Failed to connect best block 2020-07-29 18:53:48 Shutdown: In progress... 2020-07-29 18:53:48 StopNode() 2020-07-29 18:53:49 Dumped mempool: 2e-06s to copy, 0.001151s to dump 
submitted by BowlofFrostedFlakes to btc [link] [comments]

Crypto Banking Wars: Can BlockFi & Celsius Disrupt Banking?

Crypto Banking Wars: Can BlockFi & Celsius Disrupt Banking?
These crypto lending & borrowing services found early traction. Are they capable of bundling more financial services and winning the broader consumer finance market?
https://reddit.com/link/icps9l/video/98kl1y596zh51/player
This is the third part of Crypto Banking Wars — a new series that examines what crypto-native company is most likely to become the bank of the future. Who is best positioned to reach mainstream adoption in consumer finance?
While crypto allows the world to get rid of banks, a bank will still very much be necessary for this very powerful technology to reach the masses. As we laid out in our previous series, Crypto-Powered, we believe a crypto-native company will ultimately become the bank of the future. We’re confident Genesis Block will have a seat at that table, but we aren’t the only game in town.
In the first post of this series, we did an analysis of big crypto exchanges like Coinbase & Binance. In our second episode, we looked at the world of non-custodial wallets.
Today we’re analyzing crypto lending & borrowing services. The Earn and Borrow use-case covers a lot of what traditional banks deliver today. This category of companies is a threat worth analyzing. As we look at this market, we’ll mostly be focused on custodial, centralized products like BlockFi, Nexo, and Celsius.
Many of these companies found early traction among crypto users. Are they capable of bundling more financial services and winning the broader consumer finance market? Let’s find out.

Institutional Borrowers

Because speculation and trading remains one of the most popular use-cases of crypto, a new crypto sub-industry around credit has emerged. Much of the borrowing demand has been driven by institutional needs.
For example, a Bitcoin mining company might need to borrow fiat to pay for operational costs (salaries, electricity). Or a crypto company might need to borrow USD to pay for engineering salaries. Or a crypto hedge fund needs to borrow for leverage or to take a specific market position. While all of these companies have sufficient crypto to cover the costs, they might not want to sell it — either for tax or speculative reasons (they may believe these crypto assets will appreciate, as with most in the industry).
Instead of selling their crypto, these companies can use their crypto as collateral for loans. For example, they can provide $1.5M in Bitcoin as collateral, and borrow $1M. Given the collateralization happening, the underwriting process becomes straightforward. Companies all around the world can participate — language and cultural barriers are removed.

https://preview.redd.it/z9pby83d6zh51.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=54bf425215c3ed6d5ff0ca7dbe571e735b994613
The leader (and one of our partners) in this space is Genesis Capital. While they are always the counterparty for both lenders and borrowers, they are effectively a broker. They are at the center of the institutional crypto lending & borrowing markets. Their total active loans as of March 2020 was $649M. That number shot up to $1.42B in active loans as of June 2020. The growth of this entire market segment is impressive and it’s what is driving this opportunity for consumers downstream.

Consumer Products

While most of the borrowing demand comes from institutional players, there is a growing desire from consumers to participate on the lend/supply side of the market. Crypto consumers would love to be able to deposit their assets with a service and watch it grow. Why let crypto assets sit on an exchange or in cold storage when it can be earning interest?
A number of consumer-facing products have emerged in the last few years to make this happen. While they also allow users to borrow (always with collateral), most of the consumer attraction is around growing their crypto, even while they sleep. Earning interest. These products usually partner with institutional players like Genesis Capital to match the deposits with borrowing demand. And it’s exactly part of our strategy as well, beyond leveraging DeFi (decentralized finance protocols).
A few of the most popular consumer services in this category include BlockFi, Nexo, and Celsius.

https://preview.redd.it/vptig5mg6zh51.png?width=1051&format=png&auto=webp&s=b5fdc241cb9b6f5b495173667619f8d2c93371ca

BlockFi

BlockFi (Crunchbase) is the leader in this category (at least in the West). They are well-capitalized. In August 2019, they raised $18.3M in their Series A. In Feb 2020, they raised $30M in their Series B. In that same time period, they went from $250M in assets under management to $650M. In a recent blog post, they announced that they saw a 100% revenue increase in Q2 and that they were on track to do $50M in revenue this year. Their growth is impressive.
BlockFi did not do an ICO, unlike Celsius, Nexo, Salt, and Cred. BlockFi has a lot of institutional backing so it is perceived as the most reputable in the space. BlockFi started with borrowing — allowing users to leverage their crypto as collateral and taking out a loan against it. They later got into Earning — allowing users to deposit assets and earn interest on it. They recently expanded their service to “exchange” functionality and say they are coming out with a credit card later this year.

https://preview.redd.it/byv2tbui6zh51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=bac080dcfc85e89574c30dfb396db0b537d46706
Security Woes
It’s incredible that BlockFi has been able to see such strong growth despite their numerous product and security woes. A few months ago, their systems were compromised. A hacker was able to access confidential data, such as names, dates of birth, postal addresses, and activity histories. While no funds were lost, this was a massive embarrassment and caused reputational damage.

https://preview.redd.it/lwmxbz5l6zh51.png?width=606&format=png&auto=webp&s=ebd8e6e5c31c56da055824254b35b218b49f80e0
Unrelated to that massive security breach and earlier in the year, a user discovered a major bug that allowed him to send the same funds to himself over and over again, ultimately accumulating more than a million dollars in his BlockFi account. BlockFi fortunately caught him just before withdrawal.
Poor Product Execution
Beyond their poor security — which they are now trying to get serious about — their products are notoriously buggy and hard-to-use. I borrowed from them a year ago and used their interest account product until very recently. I have first-hand experience of how painful it is. But don’t take my word for it… here are just a few tweets from customers just recently.

https://preview.redd.it/wcqu3icn6zh51.png?width=1055&format=png&auto=webp&s=870e2f06a6ec377a87e5d6d1f24579a901de66b5
For a while, their interest-earning product had a completely different authentication system than their loan product (users had two sets of usernames/passwords). Many people have had issues with withdrawals. The app is constantly logging people out, blank screens, ugly error messages. Emails with verification codes are sometimes delayed by hours (or days). I do wonder if their entire app has been outsourced. The sloppiness shines through.
Not only is their product buggy and UX confusing, but their branding & design is quite weak. To the left is a t-shirt they once sent me. It looks like they just found a bunch of quirky fonts, added their name, and slapped it on a t-shirt.

https://preview.redd.it/mi6yeppp6zh51.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=fd4cd8201ad0d5bc667498096388377895b72953
Culture
To the innocent bystander, many of these issues seem totally fixable. They could hire an amazing design agency to completely revamp their product or brand. They could hire a mercenary group of engineers to fix their bugs, etc. While it could stop the bleeding for a time, it may not solve the underlying issues. Years of sloppy product execution represents something much more destructive. It represents a top-down mentality that shipping anything other than excellence is okay: product experience doesn’t matter; design doesn’t matter; craftsmanship doesn’t matter; strong execution doesn’t matter; precision doesn’t matter. That’s very different from our culture at Genesis Block.
This cancerous mentality rarely stays contained within product & engineering — this leaks to all parts of the organization. No design agency or consulting firm will fix some of the pernicious values of a company’s soul. These are deeper issues that only leadership can course-correct.
If BlockFi’s sloppiness were due to constant experimentation, iteration, shipping, or some “move fast and break things” hacker culture… like Binance… I would probably cut them more slack. But there is zero evidence of that. “Move fast and break things” is always scary when dealing with financial products. But in BlockFi’s case, when it’s more like “move slow and break things,” they are really playing with fire. Next time a massive security breach occurs, like what happened earlier this year, they may not be so lucky.
Institutional Focus
Based on who is on their team, their poor product execution shouldn’t be a surprise. Their team comes mostly from Wall Street, not the blockchain community (where our roots are). Most of BlockFi’s blockchain/crypto integration is very superficial. They take crypto assets as deposits, but they aren’t leveraging any of the exciting, low-level DeFi protocols like we are.
While their Wall Street heritage isn’t doing them any favors on the product/tech side, it’s served them very well on winning institutional clients. This is perhaps their greatest strength. BlockFi has a strong institutional business. They recently brought on Three Arrows Capital as a strategic investor — a crypto hedge fund who does a lot of borrowing. In that announcement, BlockFi’s founder said that bringing them on “aligns well with our focus on international expansion of our institutional services offering.” They also recently brought someone on who will lead business development in Asia among institutional clients.
BlockFi Wrap Up
There are certainly BlockFi features that overlap with Genesis Block’s offering. It’s possible that they are angling to become the bank of the future. However, they simply have not proven they are capable of designing, building, and launching world-class consumer products. They’ve constantly had issues around security and poor product execution. Their company account and their founder’s account seem to only tweet about Bitcoin. I don’t think they understand, appreciate, or value the power of DeFi. It’s unlikely they’ll be leveraging it any time soon. All of these reasons are why I don’t see them as a serious threat to Genesis Block.
However, because of their strong institutional offering, I hope that Genesis Block will ultimately have a very collaborative and productive partnership with them. Assuming they figure out their security woes, we could park some of our funds with BlockFi (just as we will with Genesis Capital and others). I think what’s likely to happen is that we’ll corner the consumer market and we’ll work closely with BlockFi on the institutional side.
I’ve been hard on BlockFi because I care. I think they have a great opportunity at helping elevate the entire industry in a positive way. But they have a lot of issues they need to work through. I really don’t want to see users lose millions of dollars in a security breach. It could set back the entire industry. But if they do things well… a rising tide lifts all boats.

Honorable Mentions

Celsius (ICO Drops) raised $50M in an ICO, and is led by serial entrepreneur Alex Mashinsky. I’ve met him, he’s a nice guy. Similar to Binance, their biggest Achilles heel could be their own token. There are also a lot of unanswered questions about where their deposits go. They don’t have a record of great transparency. They recently did a public crowdraise which is a little odd given their large ICO as well as their supposed $1B in deposits. Are they running out of money, as some suggest? Unclear. One of their biggest blindspots right now is that Mashinsky does not understand the power of DeFi. He is frequently openly criticizing it.
Nexo (ICO Drops) is another similar service. They are European-based, trying to launch their own card (though they’ve been saying this forever and they still haven’t shipped it), and have a history in the payments/fintech space. Because they haven’t penetrated the US — which is a much harder regulatory nut to crack — they are unlikely to be as competitive as BlockFi. There were also allegations that Nexo was spreading FUD about Chainlink while simultaneously partnering with them. Did Nexo take out a short position and start spreading rumors? Never a dull moment in crypto.
Other players in the lending & borrowing space include Unchained Capital, Cred (ICO Drops), and Salt (ICO Drops).

https://preview.redd.it/9ts6m0qw6zh51.png?width=1056&format=png&auto=webp&s=dd8d368c1aa39994c6bc5e4baec10678d3bbba2d

Wrap Up

While many companies in this category seem to be slowly adding more financial services, I don’t believe any of them are focused on the broader consumer market like we are. To use services like BlockFi, Nexo, or Celsius, users need to be onboarded and educated on how crypto works. At Genesis Block, we don’t believe that’s the winning approach. We think blockchain complexity should be abstracted away from the end-user. We did an entire series about this, Spreading Crypto.
For many of these services, there is additional friction due to ICO tokens that are forcefully integrated into the product (see NEXO token or CEL Token). None of these services have true banking functionality or integration with traditional finance —for example, easy offramp or spending methods like debit cards. None of them are taking DeFi seriously — they are leveraging crypto for only the asset class, not the underlying technology around financial protocols.
So are these companies potential competitors to Genesis Block? For the crypto crowd, yes. For the mass market, no. None of these companies are capable of reaching the billions of people around the world that we hope to reach at Genesis Block.
------
Other Ways to Consume Today's Episode:
Follow our social channels: https://genesisblock.com/follow/
Download the app. We're a digital bank that's powered by crypto: https://genesisblock.com/download
submitted by mickhagen to genesisblockhq [link] [comments]

The Blockchain Paradox: Decentralization Through Centralized Institutions

Link to Cointelegraph article: https://cointelegraph.com/news/the-blockchain-paradox-decentralization-through-centralized-institutions
Institutional adoption of blockchain can offer great benefits, as truly decentralized control often comes from the roots of centralization.
The power of blockchain technology to decentralize control of our financial economy is well documented. It is one of the cornerstones of the origins of the technology, with the genesis block of Satoshi Nakamoto’s Bitcoin (BTC) containing a reference to the 2008–2009 financial crisis: "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks."
The message, although never explicitly outlined by Bitcoin’s creator, is from the headline of a London Times article dated Jan. 3, 2009 that details banks being bailed out by the British government. Bitcoin, according to Nakamoto, is a means of reforming this corrupt and inefficient financial system to create a fairer, more democratic system of financial governance.
What, then, would Nakamoto say to the current state of the blockchain and crypto industry? Increasingly, it is institutions rather than individuals that appear to be garnering control of the means of production in the blockchain sector.
Facebook’s announcement of plans for its digital payments platform, Libra, was the initial public icebreaker for many last summer. However, the reality is that many governments and incumbent institutions from a range of sectors — including the likes of Walmart, JPMorgan Chase and PayPal — have been quietly building blockchain operations and capabilities for several years now.
The recent decision by the United States Office of the Comptroller of the Currency to allow nationally chartered banks in the U.S. to provide custody services for cryptocurrencies is another significant affirmation of the legitimacy of crypto, which is likely to spark a race among financial institutions to build or acquire secure custody solutions.
Such centralization appears to be at odds with the vision of the fair, democratic system of finance envisioned by Nakamoto and the original cypherpunks. Critics decry the end of the decentralized blockchain utopia as governments and institutions adopt the technology — but the situation is far more complex than such a black and white reading allows.
Rather than institutions being fundamentally antithetical to the democratic ideals of crypto, I would argue that they are actually essential to fulfilling such a vision. The entry of centralized institutions to the crypto economy cannot possibly represent in itself a blow to the values of crypto. While public trust in centralized institutions may be at a historical low in countries such as the U.S., such institutions are not by their nature inherently malevolent or corrupt. The same counterpoint applies to decentralized organizations: They do not make inherently trustworthy or morally responsible actors. Numerous scandals in the crypto industry involving wallet hacks, initial coin offering scams and dubious projects illustrate that often, this is anything but the case.
Institutional adoption of blockchain can offer tremendous benefits to the blockchain ecosystem as a whole: It is a key step in the evolution of the sector, which can significantly scale up adoption from a limited cohort of tech-savvy users (limited in terms of gender, age range and location) to truly global demographic spanning markets that the fractured crypto industry is incapable of reaching in its current form.
submitted by BlockDotCo to u/BlockDotCo [link] [comments]

This 'Faketoshi' Signature Tool Lets Anyone Become Satoshi Nakamoto

This 'Faketoshi' Signature Tool Lets Anyone Become Satoshi Nakamoto submitted by JonyRotten to btc [link] [comments]

Crypto Banking Wars: Can Non-Custodial Crypto Wallets Ever Replace Banks?

Crypto Banking Wars: Can Non-Custodial Crypto Wallets Ever Replace Banks?
Can they overcome the product limitations of blockchain and deliver the world-class experience that consumers expect?
https://reddit.com/link/i8ewbx/video/ojkc6c9a1lg51/player
This is the second part of Crypto Banking Wars — a new series that examines what crypto-native company is most likely to become the bank of the future. Who is best positioned to reach mainstream adoption in consumer finance?
---
While crypto allows the world to get rid of banks, a bank will still very much be necessary for this very powerful technology to reach the masses. As we laid out in our previous series, Crypto-Powered, we believe companies that build with blockchain at their core will have the best shot at winning the broader consumer finance market. We hope it will be us at Genesis Block, but we aren’t the only game in town.
So this series explores the entire crypto landscape and tries to answer the question, which crypto company is most likely to become the bank of the future?
In our last episode, we offered an in-depth analysis of big crypto exchanges like Coinbase & Binance. Today we’re analyzing non-custodial crypto wallets. These are products where only the user can touch or move funds. Not even the company or developer who built the application can access, control, or stop funds from being moved. These apps allow users to truly become their own bank.
We’ve talked a little about this before. This group of companies is nowhere near the same level of threat as the biggest crypto exchanges. However, this group really understands DeFi and the magic it can bring. This class of products is heavily engineer-driven and at the bleeding-edge of DeFi innovation. These products are certainly worth discussing. Okay, let’s dive in.

Users & Audience

These non-custodial crypto wallets are especially popular among the most hardcore blockchain nerds and crypto cypherpunks.
“Not your keys, not your coins.”
This meme is endlessly repeated among longtime crypto hodlers. If you’re not in complete control of your crypto (i.e. using non-custodial wallets), then it’s not really your crypto. There has always been a close connection between libertarianism & cryptocurrency. This type of user wants to be in absolute control of their money and become their own bank.
In addition to the experienced crypto geeks, for some people, these products will mean the difference between life and death. Imagine a refugee family that wants to safely protect their years of hard work — their life savings — as they travel across borders. Carrying cash could put their safety or money at risk. A few years ago I spent time in Greece at refugee camps — I know first-hand this is a real use-case.

https://preview.redd.it/vigqlmgg1lg51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=0a5d48a63ce7a637749bbbc03d62c51cc3f75613
Or imagine a family living under an authoritarian regime — afraid that their corrupt or oppressive government will seize their assets (or devalue their savings via hyperinflation). Citizens in these countries cannot risk putting their money in centralized banks or under their mattresses. They must become their own bank.
These are the common use-cases and users for non-custodial wallets.

Products in Market

Let’s do a quick round-up of some of the more popular products already in the market.
Web/Desktop The most popular web wallet is MetaMask. Though it doesn’t have any specific integration with DeFi protocols yet, it has more than a million users (which is a lot in crypto land!). Web wallets that are more deeply integrated with DeFi include InstaDapp, Zerion, DeFi Saver, Zapper, and MyCrypto (disclosure: I’m an investor and a big fan of Taylor). For the mass market, mobile will be a much more important form-factor. I don’t view these web products as much of a threat to Genesis Block.
https://preview.redd.it/gbpi2ijj1lg51.png?width=1050&format=png&auto=webp&s=c039887484bf8a3d3438fb02a384d0b9ef894e1f
Mobile The more serious threats to Genesis Block are the mobile products that (A) are leveraging some of the powerful DeFi protocols and (B) abstracting away a lot of the blockchain/DeFi UX complexity. While none get close to us on (B), the products attempting this are Argent and Dharma. To the extent they can, both are trying to make interacting with blockchain technology as simple as possible.
A few of the bigger exchanges have also entered this mobile non-custodial market. Coinbase has Wallet (via Cipher Browser acquisition). Binance has Trust Wallet (also via acquisition). And speaking of acquisitions, MyCrypto acquired Ambo, which is a solid product and has brought MyCrypto into the mobile space. Others worth mentioning include Rainbow — well-designed and built by a small indy-team with strong DeFi experience (former Balance team). And ZenGo which has a cool feature around keyless security (their CEO is a friend).
There are dozens of other mobile crypto wallets that do very little beyond showing your balances. They are not serious threats.
https://preview.redd.it/6x4lxsdk1lg51.png?width=1009&format=png&auto=webp&s=fab3280491b75fe394aebc8dd69926b6962dcf5d
Hardware Wallets Holding crypto on your own hardware wallet is widely considered to be “best practice” from a security standpoint. The most popular hardware wallets are Ledger, Trezor, and KeepKey (by our friends at ShapeShift). Ledger Nano X is the only product that has Bluetooth — thus, the only one that can connect to a mobile app. While exciting and innovative, these hardware wallets are not yet integrated with any DeFi protocols.
https://preview.redd.it/yotmvtsl1lg51.png?width=1025&format=png&auto=webp&s=c8567b42839d9cec8dbc6c78d2f953b688886026

Strengths

Let’s take a look at some of the strengths with non-custodial products.
  1. Regulatory arbitrage Because these products are “non-custodial”, they are able to avoid the regulatory burdens that centralized, custodial products must deal with (KYC/AML/MTL/etc). This is a strong practical benefit for a bootstrapped startup/buildedeveloper. Though it’s unclear how long this advantage lasts as products reach wider audiences and increased scrutiny.
  2. User Privacy Because of the regulatory arbitrage mentioned above, users do not need to complete onerous KYC requirements. For example, there’s no friction around selfies, government-issued IDs, SSNs, etc. Users can preserve much of their privacy and they don’t need to worry about their sensitive information being hacked, compromised, or leaked.
  3. Absolute control & custody This is really one of the great promises of crypto — users can become their own bank. Users can be in full control of their money. And they don’t need to bury it underground or hide it under a mattress. No dependence, reliance or trust in any third parties. Only the user herself can access and unlock the money.

Weaknesses

Now let’s examine some of the weaknesses.
  1. Knowledge & Education Most non-custodial products do not abstract away any of the blockchain complexity. In fact, they often expose more of it because the most loyal users are crypto geeks. Imagine how an average, non-crypto user feels when she starts seeing words like seed phrases, public & private keys, gas limits, transaction fees, blockchain explorers, hex addresses, and confirmation times. There is a lot for a user to learn and become educated on. That’s friction. The learning curve is very high and will always be a major blocker for adoption. We’ve talked about this in our Spreading Crypto series — to reach the masses, the crypto stuff needs to be in the background.
  2. User Experience It is currently impossible to create a smooth and performant user experience in non-custodial wallets or decentralized applications. Any interaction that requires a blockchain transaction will feel sluggish and slow. We built a messaging app on Ethereum and presented it at DevCon3 in Cancun. The technical constraints of blockchain technology were crushing to the user experience. We simply couldn’t create the real-time, modern messaging experience that users have come to expect from similar apps like Slack or WhatsApp. Until blockchains are closer in speed to web servers (which will be difficult given their decentralized nature), dApps will never be able to create the smooth user experience that the masses expect.
  3. Product Limitations Most non-custodial wallets today are based on Ethereum smart contracts. That means they are severely limited with the assets that they can support (only erc-20 tokens). Unless through synthetic assets (similar to Abra), these wallets cannot support massively popular assets like Bitcoin, XRP, Cardano, Litecoin, EOS, Tezos, Stellar, Cosmos, or countless others. There are exciting projects like tBTC trying to bring Bitcoin to Ethereum — but these experiments are still very, very early. Ethereum-based smart contract wallets are missing a huge part of the crypto-asset universe.
  4. Technical Complexity While developers are able to avoid a lot of regulatory complexity (see Strengths above), they are replacing it with increased technical complexity. Most non-custodial wallets are entirely dependent on smart contract technology which is still very experimental and early in development (see Insurance section of this DeFi use-cases post). Major bugs and major hacks do happen. Even recently, it was discovered that Argent had a “high severity vulnerability.” Fortunately, Argent fixed it and their users didn’t lose funds. The tools, frameworks, and best practices around smart contract technology are all still being established. Things can still easily go wrong, and they do.
  5. Loss of Funds Risk Beyond the technical risks mentioned above, with non-custodial wallets, it’s very easy for users to make mistakes. There is no “Forgot Password.” There is no customer support agent you can ping. There is no company behind it that can make you whole if you make a mistake and lose your money. You are on your own, just as CZ suggests. One wrong move and your money is all gone. If you lose your private key, there is no way to recover your funds. There are some new developments around social recovery, but that’s all still very experimental. This just isn’t the type of customer support experience people are used to. And it’s not a risk that most are willing to take.
  6. Integration with Fiat & Traditional Finance In today’s world, it’s still very hard to use crypto for daily spending (see Payments in our DeFi use-cases post). Hopefully, that will all change someday. In the meantime, if any of these non-custodial products hope to win in the broader consumer finance market, they will undoubtedly need to integrate with the legacy financial world — they need onramps (fiat-to-crypto deposit methods) and offramps (crypto-to-fiat withdraw/spend methods). As much as crypto-fanatics hate hearing it, you can’t expect people to jump headfirst into the new world unless there is a smooth transition, unless there are bridge technologies that help them arrive. This is why these fiat integrations are so important. Examples might be allowing ACH/Wire deposits (eg. via Plaid) or launching a debit card program for spend/withdraw. These fiat integrations are essential if the aim is to become the bank of the future. Doing any of this compliantly will require strong KYC/AML. So to achieve this use-case — integrating with traditional finance —all of the Strengths we mentioned above are nullified. There are no longer regulatory benefits. There are no longer privacy benefits (users need to upload KYC documents, etc). And users are no longer in complete control of their money.

Wrap Up

One of the great powers of crypto is that we no longer depend on banks. Anyone can store their wealth and have absolute control of their money. That’s made possible with these non-custodial wallets. It’s a wonderful thing.
I believe that the most knowledgeable and experienced crypto people (including myself) will always be active users of these applications. And as mentioned in this post, there will certainly be circumstances where these apps will be essential & even life-saving.
However, I do not believe this category of product is a major threat to Genesis Block to becoming the bank of the future.
They won’t win in the broader consumer finance market — mostly because I don’t believe that’s their target audience. These applications simply cannot produce the type of product experience that the masses require, want, or expect. The Weaknesses I’ve outlined above are just too overwhelming. The friction for mass-market consumers is just too much.

https://preview.redd.it/lp8dzxeh1lg51.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=03acdce545cd032f7e82b6665b001d7a06839557
The winning bank will be focused on solving real user problems and meeting user needs. Not slowed down by rigid idealism like censorship-resistance and absolute decentralization, as it is with most non-custodial wallets. The winning bank will be a world-class product that’s smooth, performant, and accessible. Not sluggish and slow, as it is with most non-custodial wallets. The winning bank will be one where blockchain & crypto is mostly invisible to end-users. Not front-and-center as it is with non-custodial wallets. The winning bank will be one managed and run by professionals who know exactly what they’re doing. Not DIY (Do It Yourself), as it is with non-custodial wallets.
So are these non-custodial wallets a threat to Genesis Block in winning the broader consumer finance market, and becoming the bank of the future?
No. They are designed for a very different audience.
------
Other Ways to Consume Today's Episode:
Follow our social channels: https://genesisblock.com/follow/
Download the app. We're a digital bank that's powered by crypto: https://genesisblock.com/download
submitted by mickhagen to genesisblockhq [link] [comments]

"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of the second bailout for banks"

submitted by donareign to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Block Digest #220 - Make Bitcoin Magic Again - YouTube Early Bitcoin Contributor Projected $10 Million BTC Price ... The global economic environment before Bitcoin Creating your own Altcoin Part 3: Blockchain Parameters/Mining Genesis Block The Beginner’s Guide to Bitcoin Part 5: The History of Bitcoin with Marty Bent

As Bitcoin diehards know, this isn't the first time that a political statement has been put inside a Bitcoin block. The first ever Bitcoin block, known as the Genesis block, also contained a message. This was, "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks." Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous inventor of Bitcoin ... Most early bitcoin blocks and the hash of the genesis block have two more leading hex zeroes. In addition to this characteristic, block zero has a message in the coinbase parameter, which ... This message is a reference to a New York Times headline, which proves that the Bitcoin Genesis Block could not have been created before that date. This proves that there was no pre-mining before ... Eleven years ago today, Satoshi Nakamoto created the first ever Bitcoin block—known now as the Genesis Block. Let’s take a look at some of the reasons it’s important, and especially so this year. The Genesis Block is “Block 0”, and Block 1 was mined on January 9, after Satoshi Nakamoto released the first Bitcoin software client ... This message resonates with many true Bitcoin believers as it is indicative of the flaws in the financial system and the initial reason for Bitcoin’s creation. This message acts as a reminder for people to see how Bitcoin is different from existing financial institutions. Moreover, it serves as an indicator for Bitcoin’s initial creation. Conclusion. The Genesis Block acts as the ...

[index] [22675] [7822] [38828] [31259] [18865] [30039] [3496] [3328] [27856] [45138]

Block Digest #220 - Make Bitcoin Magic Again - YouTube

In January 2009, just a week after the Bitcoin genesis block, computer scientist Hal Finney published a price prediction model of ten million dollars per Bit... Being embedded in the genesis block and given the immutable and robust nature of the Bitcoin blockchain, that message stands there as an everlasting reminder for future generations. 💬 I am not a financial adviser and this is not financial advice. I'm just a humble man with a great passion for all things block-chain, even tangle and block-lattice. #hodl #cryptocurrency #bitcoin A few months later on January 3rd 2009 Satoshi Nakamoto mined the genesis block and included the message “Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks”. The message was important and ... And yes, for all of you pedants out there I know my timestamp message is technically incorrect. Also I would like to point out here that I was mistaken with respect to how the maximum supply works.

#