Coinbase Mitbegründer Fred Ehrsam ... - Bitcoin News
Complete Guide to CoinBase
Coinbase - The reference platform for investing in cryptocurrencies: here is the complete guide. Coinbase is currently the most famous website or web platform for trading cryptocurrencies. This is not a classic Exchange but a real Broker that allows you to buy, sell and convert many of the main cryptocurrencies - Bitcoin and Ethereum among others - using traditional currency such as the Euro. In this complete guide to Coinbase we will try to explain all its features in detail. Founded in 2012 by Brian Armstrong and Fred Ehrsam, it was born as a simple online Bitcoin wallet. Over time it has transformed into a cryptocurrency trading site that now reaches over 33 countries. Being a broker, registering on the site requires all the necessary steps (KYC) to verify the user who holds the account. By signing up via the following secure link you can immediately earn 10 Dollars which will be credited to you by Coinbase. Complete Guide to CoinBase Coinbase as well as an intermediary for the purchase and sale of over 15 cryptocurrencies directly in Euro, also provides a real exchange (crypto exchange site) called Coinbase Pro (ex-GDax): The exchange behaves as a normal stock trading site with purchases and sales in real time with obviously much lower commissions when compared with those of classic trading platforms. What Coinbase Pro offers. Coinbase can receive crypto from other exchanges and specifically generates more permanent online wallets that will always remain at your disposal. To all intents and purposes, Coinbase's main task is to act as an archive for its cryptocurrencies for all those who do not want to try their hand at decentralized wallets. The transfer between Coinbase and Coinbase Pro, for example, will be quick and free (but this does not apply to other exchanges) thus allowing all those who wish to trade between the main cryptocurrencies to be able to avoid expensive passages on other exchanges. Coinbase Pro allows you to exchange a range of cryptocurrencies with each other higher than that of its brother site but at a much lower cost. While on Coinbase the exchange between cryptocurrencies involves the payment of a maximum commission of 2%, on Coinbase Pro the rates fluctuate between 0.15 and 0.25%. Values that will tend to decrease as the volumes traded increase. The Coinbase account will also allow you to operate on Coinbase Pro. However, an additional request for user verification via Webcam may occur. All these levels of security are obviously necessary to protect customers and comply with the stringent regulations of the various countries in which the company operates. Thanks to the guide, let's see what the interface shows us. In this complete guide to Coinbase we also want to clarify the visual aspect. Once inside the site you will find yourself in the Dashboard or Home Page which will show from top to bottom the value of your Portfolio with its historical graph, the list of cryptocurrencies that you decide to keep under observation, a box that shows the 5 heaviest cryptocurrencies in your Portfolio (a pie chart is also available) and a second box with the latest transactions. In the center of the page there is also the link to register with Coinbase Earn. By subscribing to the waiting list, you will have the opportunity to receive an invitation that will make you earn additional cryptocurrencies simply by following some very short video courses lasting a few minutes. In addition to the Home Page, there is the Prices page with the listing of all the cryptocurrencies available on Coinbase and a very long list of those not available. By selecting the star on the right you can decide which ones to always keep in the foreground on the home page. Clicking on one of them will open a new screen that will offer a large amount of technical and historical information on the crypto in question as well as a fair number of constantly updated news. Your funds are well organized. The Portfolio page will report the amount of the balance in Euro of all the cryptocurrencies deposited on Coinbase. Here you can send and receive crypto to external wallets. By clicking on Overview you will be sent back to the Prices page just described. The Safe item, on the other hand, allows you to set aside cryptocurrency at a higher level of security. Finally, a brief description of the "Make Transactions" item visible at the top right and present in almost all Coinbase pages. By clicking on it in any position you find it on the site, a small screen will open with the items "Buy, Sell, Convert". To purchase, you will first need to associate a payment method to your account. The Credit Card would be the most immediate choice due to its rapidity in crediting if it were not for the high commissions required by Coinbase. We therefore recommend that you be patient and use a normal Sepa standard bank transfer to credit the funds. Selling your cryptocurrencies on Coinbase, depositing them in your Euro account, is simple and immediate as well as foolproof thanks to the Preview that will always be shown before confirming the transaction. This will involve the payment of a commission between 0.99 and 2.99 Dollars. Rather high fees due to its wallet nature. For those who love trading, we obviously recommend moving to the Pro version. The site offers a complete and comprehensive technical support page: https://support.coinbase.com/ We conclude this complete guide to Coinbase with a note on the mobile versions. There are two versions of for smartphones: a standard one called Coinbase Bitcoin Wallet and a personal one called Coinbase Wallet. This second app allows you to transfer your cryptocurrencies from Coinbase Standard to an encrypted wallet on your smartphone (Coinbase Wallet). The substantial difference is the following: Coinbase Standard is an online wallet and therefore subject to the remote risk of an external cyber attack while Coinbase Wallet stores the encryption key locally on the phone. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.coinbase.android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.toshi We remind trading enthusiasts of the availability on our blog of the article dedicated to Exodus Wallet. If you liked this article and would like to contribute with a donation: Bitcoin: 1Ld9b165ZYHZcY9eUQmL9UjwzcphRE5S8Z Ethereum: 0x8D7E456A11f4D9bB9e6683A5ac52e7DB79DBbEE7 Litecoin: LamSRc1jmwgx5xwDgzZNoXYd6ENczUZViK Stellar: GBLDIRIQWRZCN5IXPIKYFQOE46OG2SI7AFVWFSLAHK52MVYDGVJ6IXGI Ripple: rUb8v4wbGWYrtXzUpj7TxCFfUWgfvym9xf By: cryptoall.it Telegram Channel: t.me/giulo75 Netbox Browser: https://netbox.global/PZn5A https://www.coinbase.com/join/rosa_fj https://coinbase.com/earn/eos/invite/6r5m2fwn https://coinbase.com/earn/oxt/invite/tkdjy946
Battle Over Bitcoin: China Backs US Startup Coinbase And US Falls Behind In Virtual Currencies.
Indeed, virtual currencies are nothing new to the Chinese. For example, more than 100 million people on the social platform QQ have used the Q coin for more than 10 years. And after China’s state-run China Central Television, or CCTV, ran a half-hour-long documentary on bitcoins, downloads of apps for processing and “mining” bitcoins soared in the world’s second largest economy. Bitcoin, long the plaything of the Western ubernerd, now appears poised to grow substantially in China and other markets, like the euro zone, where government meddling in native currency valuations has left many distrustful of the money in their bank accounts. Americans don’t have this problem -- yet. And that may be a problem in itself. According to bitcoin proponents, if the U.S. tries to ignore the nascent currency, writing it off as a financial fad with less value than the seemingly stable dollar, Americans risk ceding to the Chinese and others control of the future of what could be the most disruptive force in monetary exchanges since the credit card. In turn, the dollar and the ability of the U.S. to navigate global currency conflicts could be seriously weakened. “Here’s the bottom line: Bitcoin has much higher popularity outside the U.S. and much higher potential outside the U.S.,” observed Andreas M. Antonopoulos of the Bitcoin Foundation. “If you go to an American and say, ‘Hey, there’s this new thing, bitcoin,’ they say, ‘Well, what’s wrong with the dollar?’ That question is different in other countries.” Bitcoins are a finite, Web-based currency created in 2009 by a group of hackers working under the nom-de-Internet Satoshi Nakamoto. Exactly 10,952,975 bitcoins are in circulation, all of which have been purchased on exchange networks or mined. The currency is mined using software that processes transactions on the bitcoin network, adding groups of transactions, called blocks, to the chain. Miners are paid about 25 bitcoins per block. That digital money can then be used to purchase a variety of goods online, from legitimate software to heroin on the infamous virtual black-market Silk Road. Bitcoin surged in value to $266 last month, thrusting the currency into the mainstream spotlight as investment poured in from sources as diverse as the hapless Brothers Winklevoss (of Facebook infamy) and Union Capital Ventures principal Fred Wilson (an early investor in Zynga, Twitter, and Kickstarter). Suddenly, everyone was talking about buying bitcoins. But the bubble burst in late April, and in the U.S. at least, bitcoin faded from the news. That was not the case in China, where Antonopoulos said downloads of bitcoin clients have eclipsed those in the U.S. Bitcoins are mined in several steps. After downloading a bitcoin client, such as Coinbase (which serves as a wallet in which to store the bits of code that constitute the digital money), miners often join pools where they share computing power to decode algorithms in which bitcoins are hidden. The concept of bitcoins and bitcoin mining is cryptic for many people, even some otherwise forward-thinking American investors. The irony is that, for now, American startups are leading the bitcoin charge, and the U.S. government was the first to issue guidance on using the currency as payment -- a seemingly tacit recognition of bitcoin’s validity as legal tender. Why China Poses A Threat Feng Li, the IDG partner who chose to fund Coinbase, said the Chinese have yearned for access to a virtual currency since the central government cracked down on the use of Q coins. Q coins were introduced in March 2002 by Tencent Holdings Ltd. (HKG:0700), the parent company of the country’s most popular instant-messaging service, QQ , and they currently average an annual transaction value of more than 1 billion yuan ($163 million). That value is growing at about 15 to 25 percent each year. Q coins, purchased with yuan, are predominantly used to buy virtual products and services in QQ and its related online games and social media. Originally, Tencent regulations prevented Q coins from being traded between users or converted back to yuan, but allowed users to trade points and purchase Q coins with their game accounts, then use the black market to convert them into cash. That caused concerns at the People’s Bank of China, China’s central bank. In January 2007, converting game points to Q coins was banned, and Tencent reiterated that Q coins constitute a product, not a currency, which seemed to satisfy the concerns. “There has already been proof with the Q coin,” Feng said of the Chinese likeliness to start using bitcoin. “It’s been very well circulated and very well adopted.” Already, shops on Taobao -- the Chinese equivalent to eBay Inc. (NASDAQ:EBAY), owned by Alibaba.com Ltd. (HKG:1688) -- accept bitcoins as payment for goods, as does the similar service, Tencent’s PaiPai.com. The Chinese are embracing bitcoins in other ways. The first bitcoin fund began to raise money in June, with the goal of raising 20 million yuan. The fund’s investment threshold is 10,000 yuan, and it will mature in four years. Q coin’s popularity isn’t the only reason bitcoin has appeal in China. As it turns out, China is the perfect place for bitcoin mining. While much of the developed world is well into the transition from personal computers to mobile devices, China’s PC market is still thriving, which provides the necessary computing power to run a successful business converting electricity into mined coins. Price caps on electricity already create wasteful use of energy in China, so running a code-crunching computer for hours on end isn’t as costly an investment as it would be in the U.S. And so-called “gold-mining” or “gold-farming” businesses already exist in China’s cybersphere. None of that will come as a surprise to any “World of Warcraft” player: Gamers in Chinese urban sweatshops are known to sit in front of glowing blue screens for hours, slaughtering players in the game for their spoils or mining gold deposits found in the sprawling milieu of Blizzard Entertainment’s international blockbuster. Those treasures are then sold to players in the game for real money. China has a heavily controlled currency, which also makes bitcoin attractive. “The more controlled the currency is, the harder the transactions are, the more friction there is in the national currency, the more appealing the coin is,” Antonopoulos said, noted that the most appealing place to use bitcoin would be a country whose economy is a veritable train wreck -- like Zimbabwe, except that the southern African nation lacks the necessary technology. “I would say China is perfect,” he said. “It’s got the penetration, it’s got the smartphones, it’s got the Internet and the people are familiar with virtual currencies. And, it’s got the not-as-appealing national currency.” Regulation In The U.S. Guidance issued in March by the U.S. Treasury Department said that companies issuing or exchanging online cash, including bitcoin, would be subject to the same scrutiny as traditional firms such as the Western Union Co. (NYSE:WU) to prevent money laundering. Less than two months later, the Department of Homeland Security proved that edict had teeth. Federal officials obtained a warrant Tuesday to seize an account tied to Mt.Gox, the Tokyo-based exchange company that handles about 80 percent of all bitcoin trades. Authorities accused Mt.Gox’s U.S. subsidiary, Mutum Sigillum LLC, of failing to register as a money-services company with the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. An account held by the online-payments firm Dwolla was subsequently seized. Many feared the warrant execution could cast a chill over the bitcoin industry as a sector centered on a borderless, decentralized money came under the scrutiny of the federal government. That proved not to be the case, Coinbase’s Ehrsam said. “For bitcoin to go mainstream, or as it goes mainstream, it will be used in a higher and higher amount of transactions,” he said, adding that Coinbase is registered as a money-services firm. “There’s no way there will be all this money flowing through an unregulated system.” Chris Larsen -- the CEO of OpenCoin, a fellow San Francisco-based payment platform that processes most national currencies as well as bitcoin and its own virtual cash, Ripple -- agreed. “They definitely are regulating them, [and] we actually think that’s a really good thing for the industry,” he told IBTimes. “I thought the guidance was a good idea. One of the things the guidelines seem to make clear for the first time is that a virtual currency could be used for goods and services.” The Price Of Regulation But such regulation is a slippery slope, said Jerry Brito, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. Perhaps it begins with measures to prevent money-laundering, he said. But what measures would the government take to prevent the untraceable currency from being used for child pornography or human trafficking? “Bitcoin has the potential to be a disruptive technology that would be beneficial to the economy, and we don’t want to kill off that potential to get at the other potential for bad stuff,” he observed. Brito, who plans to speak next month at a conference on virtual currencies organized by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, added: “We’re already the first country to enforce money-laundering laws against bitcoin. But the U.S. would be shooting itself in the foot if it went too far [with regulations] and either outlawed bitcoin or made the legal guidelines impossible to comply with.” Will China Step In? So far, Chinese bitcoin merchants have little to fear. For many, the CCTV segment on bitcoin seemed to be a signal from Beijing, which heavily controls the channel’s content, that the currency is worth exploring. Some of those interviewed speculated that the Communist Party wants to see bitcoin stockpiled in China, allowing the government to invest in it if, or when, the dollar is shaken from its perch as the world’s reserve currency. It remains to be seen whether -- or, more likely, when -- China will intervene in the trade of bitcoin in its own economy. But for the U.S. to experience widespread adoption of the currency, which is considered a necessary step for gaining a grasp on the bitcoin market, limited government control will have to allow the money, like the Internet that birthed it, to develop organically.
These 25 top-voted posts from r/btc this week show that users and miners are working on real solutions to help Bitcoin move forward, while Core/Blockstream are obstructing progress and losing support. Please help spread this information (including translating for the Chinese-speaking community)!
Antpool Will Not Run SegWit Without Block Size Increase Hard Fork
Leaders of Core had a childish little selfish tantrum about wanting to work on what cool stuff they wanted to build and wouldn't listen. It would have been relatively safe and easy to introduce the 2mb HF if it was progressed collectively and collaboratively with good will by all parties. All of this could have been avoided long ago. There is one person who is very influential who we know to be adamant about blocks being confined to 1mb.
Hardfork in July 2017 will be too late. If you read the statement by Peter "I don't have a clue about economics" Todd you might start to puke. “Unfortunately Bitcoin simply doesn't scale well" How about you start to tell what exactly doesn't scale you fuckhead? P.S.: The blockchain is growing indefinitely, if you don't like that fact you should choose something else than cryptocurrencies or come up with a better way.
This is classic narrowmindedness on PT's part. He'd also be the first one to say that the internet is not sustainable as it produces exponentially more and more data. These guys are fucking idiots and really have no idea what they are talking about, all they see is "BLOAT!" and "TOO BIG FOR CURRENT NODES!" then react accordingly without even thinking about the fact that Bitcoin's usefulness mitigates these limiting factors almost entirely.
People are starting to realize how toxic Gregory Maxwell is to Bitcoin, saying there are plenty of other coders who could do crypto and networking, and "he drives away more talent than he can attract." Plus, he has a 10-year record of damaging open-source projects, going back to Wikipedia in 2006.
There are limits on routing table sizes, but they are not top-down-specified-in-a-standards-document protocol limits. They are organic limits that arise from whatever hardware is available and from the (sometimes very contentious!) interaction of the engineers keeping the Internet backbone up and running.
We've long established that the 1mb limit (or their refusal to remove it) has absolutely nothing to do with technical concerns. It's a political matter, whose raison d'être we can only infer. Time to stop the bullshit and the [s]quabbling. Chinese miners wake up! Time to try something new. It quite literally can't be worse than what's going on right now.
Bitcoin has become embroiled in debate over the block size - an important topic for the health of the network, but not something that should halt progress in a young and rapidly developing field. The developer community in Bitcoin feels fairly dormant. Bitcoin never really made it past the stage of simple wallets and exchanges. Bitcoin’s “leadership” is ... toxic. Greg Maxwell, technical leader of Blockstream which employs a solid chunk of Core developers, recently referred to other Core developers who were working with miners on a block size compromise as “well-meaning dips***s.”
This was a good sobering read. It is also worth noting that Coinbase was left with little choice but to broaden its offerings given the current state of Bitcoin usability ... When BS hijacked BTC away from being money, it screwed a lot of business and usage plans. ... Praise be to the free market and the market place of ideas.
REPOST from 12/2015: "If there are only 20 seats on the bus and 25 people that want to ride, there is no ticket price where everyone gets a seat. Capacity problems can't be fixed with a 'fee market'; they are fixed by adding seats, which in this case means raising the blocksize cap." – Vibr8gKiwi
By the way, this shows that a certain other trending OP from today: Why all the disinformation? Full blocks DO NOT matter, what matters is transaction fees. Currently $0.05 ...is total bullshit. But that other OP was posted in an echo-chamber of censorship (r\bitcoin). That is dangerous (for them), because it allows them to enjoy the illusion that they are right - when in reality, they are wrong, because they are ignoring the fact that full blocks DO matter: because the overflow goes elsewhere (into fiat, into alts, etc.).
Bitcoin exchange and wallet service Coinbase is adding support for ether, the native cryptocurrency of the Ethereum network. ...
This is quite significant. I would interpret this as a loss of confidence in Blockstream to provide what customers need in a timely manner. While Blockstream wastes time figuring out how to stuff all the world's transaction data into their beloved tiny blocks, the market will move on to solutions that can actually scale and can scale NOW.
Opinions on Gavin over there are variously: 1 - Why aren't you coding for Core? 2 - Which agency do you work for? 3 - Haha classic suxxor A very telling series of questions that the false agenda has fermented and sunk in.
It's actually kind of brilliant ! Think about it: no need for super dangerous hard forks, and not even soft forks. No new code needed, no testing, nothing. All it took was 2-3 years of endless stalling, organizing some fake conventions, a bit of character assassination and demonization here and there, nothing major. Done. It was actually very well-thought-out. Congratulations and hat off to nullcadam3us and all their drones.
Bitcoin is a giant, global "Consensus-tron" based on a fundamental meta-rule: "51% Consensus based on Greed / Self-Interest" ("Nakamoto Consensus"). Blockstream/Core is trying change this meta-rule, to make it "95% Consensus" ("Extreme Consensus") - the MOST CONTENTIOUS change conceivable in Bitcoin The main characteristic of Bitcoin is that it is basically a kind of global "consensus-producing machine" or "Consensus-tron" - which runs based on a fundamental meta-rule of "51% Consensus + Greed / Self-Interest" - also called "Nakamoto Consensus". Recently, Blockstream has started trying to quietly change this fundamental meta-rule of Bitcoin based on "51% Consensus + Greed / Self-Interest" ("Nakamoto Consensus"). Instead, they have proposed a totally different meta-rule based on "95% Consensus" - which they like to call "Strong Consensus", but a better name would probably be "Extreme Consensus", to show what an extreme change it would be.
Every binary vote has an opposite side. 95% consensus is actually 5% consensus of the opposing team. Would you like a 5% consensus system? No? Then you wouldn't like a 95% consensus system. That's why 50% is the only valid threshold -- because it's the only one that makes both sides equal.
Continuing on this road , soon Coinbase and Circle will probably allow to send and receive Ether, and Coinbase and Bitpay will offer the option to pay in Ether. At that point Gregonomic fee pressure will go out of the window. The first mover led the ground work, but it's not an exclusive advantage. Bitcoin needs to wake up from the Blockstream-induced coma !!!
This is so painfully obvious. The users do not want a "fee market". Blockstream is absolutely hell-bent on giving us one, despite there being no need for a "fee market" at this point in time. Therefore the free market will do its job and provide an alternative to Bitcoin, and the users will move to the alternative where they will get what they actually want.
Bitcoin users are speaking out, and they want bigger blocks. Compare these 2 OPs: r\bitcoin: "Full blocks DO NOT matter, what matters is transaction fees" (100 upvotes) vs btc: "Capacity problems can't be fixed with a 'fee market'; they can only be fixed by raising the blocksize cap" (200 upvotes)
The block size issue has turned me off to bitcoin entirely, I no longer evangelize, no longer buy or use them. Blockstream has destroyed all the good-will I had for Bitcoin. Once the block sizes are larger, and continue rising with use, I'll be interested again. until then, Bitcoin can wallow in the fail
Damn fucking straight, the larger block side has been compromising for over a year and they have refused to compromise from day one. Now is not the time to compromise, now is the time to sweep them aside as they have brought nothing to the table. These devs shouldn't even be given the time of day considering their open contempt for larger blocks and the miners should be finding devs that will give them what they need, rather than trying to negotiate with asshats that refuse to negotiate.
"It's truly funny how blockstream are dead against 2mb of block data using traditional transactions along with linear signature validation... but blindly think that 2.85mb of segwit + confidential payment codes + other features is acceptable." And also funny that their roadmap allows for 5.7mb blocks when blockstream decide its ok for the hard fork.. yet they cant explain what network bandwidth restrictions are currently preventing 2mb now but weirdly and suddenly not an issue for 5.7mb next year...
It's a matter of ego and politics. From a computer science standpoint, Adam Back wanted the 2-4-8 mb scaling originally, which would have been completely safe (and smart). Segwit is required for the Lightning Network and some other things Blockstream wants to centralize and profit from. No better way to get something you need in there than making it necessary for scaling and saying it's the best solution. Segwit is a backwards approach compared to the easier and cleaner solution of increasing the blocksize
maaku7: "I don't know anyone who is actually working on a hard fork right now (although I'm sure someone is). Keep in mind very few core developers were at the HK meeting and that 'agreement' is mostly not acceptable to those who were not there." The Hongkong Farce. Great job Core and Chinese/Georgian 'miners'!
HF will never happen unless miners switch client. The problem is miners still trust Adam & Co. The day Mike Hearn left, he told me: "Both Adam Back and Gregory Maxwell are extremely skilled manipulators, timewasters and both of them have been caught lying red handed. I strongly suggest you just ignore both of them. I do not plan to take part in Bitcoin related discussions further". From my experience, Adam will tell you whatever you want to hear, but do something different behind your back. Just look at his presentations he gave to the miners and others, they are full of lies and inaccuracies. This isn't rocket science. I just can't understand why people keep buying bullshit from a guy who's not even a core dev, but president of a company that only benefits from making sure Bitcoin itself is crippled so people are forced offchain.
That was known opinion by Mark [Friedenbach, maaku7]. He said right after HK that it is not Core's agreement, that individual developers there were not representatives for Core. And that the HF block limit increase is not an option. I don't know what are miners still expecting and waiting for.
There's more than enough developer talent in the Bitcoin space to ensure a hard fork comes off successfully, but the Core developers have divided the community with lies to make it more difficult to pull off. Instead of helping achieve it, they have created community-wide FUD.
My opinion is that we can't have Blockstream at all involved in Bitcoin any longer. If you keep them involved, even after a blocksize increase, we will suffer in the future. Similar to malware, you have to remove it.
Hearn describes in the interview how people in the developer scene do not truly want the cryptocurrency to be decentralized.
“They say they want so, but that’s not what they want. Bitcoin is a young, unripened Democracy, in which a group of developers hold the power. And this group is desperately trying to prevent a real vote on the future of Bitcoin.” ... “[They] won’t vote against Core, because [they’ve] been told voting is dangerous,” Hearn elucidates. “The miners are not per se against proposals to increase the capacity, such as something like Bitcoin Classic wants. The miners refuse to vote. At this point, some developers, including myself, lost interest, because we realized it no longer was a debate about the block size. Suddenly it was trying to convince Chinese people democracy is a good thing.”
~ Mike Hearn
Sadly, he sounds like the voice of reason in a world gone mad.
I think the Berlin Wall Principle will end up applying to Blockstream as well: (1) The Berlin Wall took longer than everyone expected to come tumbling down. (2) When it did finally come tumbling down, it happened faster than anyone expected (ie, in a matter of days) - and everyone was shocked.
When push comes to shove, people are going to remember pretty damn quick that open-source code is easy to patch. People are going to remember that you don't have to fly to meetings in Hong Kong or on some secret Caribbean island ... or post on Reddit for hours ... or spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on devs ... in order to simply change a constant in your code from 1000000 to 2000000.
This is so true. I mean, look at the logic. If $0.01 is not enough, and everyone sets it at $1.00, then it is still not enough because the number of transactions at the 'higher' price is still too many and blocks are still full with transactions being ignored.
The core devs (Wladimir and Maxwell) do not care about the price of bitcoin. They do not care to give investors a clear indication of what capacity will be in the near or mid future. This is contrary to the fact that everything else is known. Roger Ver is right. Investors (Hodlers) are a large part of what makes bitcoin valuable. Without a clear indication of what capacity is going to be in the future there is no clear indication of what the worth of Bitcoin actually is.
Unfortunately, I know of multiple companies with more than 100,000,000 users that have put their bitcoin integration on hold because there isn't enough current capacity in the Bitcoin network for their users to start using Bitcoin. Instead they are looking at options other than Bitcoin.
Gregory Maxwell (nullc) & /bitcoin have deleted my posts They have also banned me from any discussion on their subreddit. I was simply posting that Gregory Maxwell (nullc) is lying when he says "the Chinese Bitcoin community stands behind us". This is false, they do not. In fact, a respected member from the Chinese Bitcoin community said this: "Do you know that what you are doing is harming bitcoin by spreading misinformation? I'm from China. I can just tell you the common sense in the Chinese Community of Bitcoin. No one likes BlockStream now! People in China all know that it is Greg Maxwell who is blocking bitcoin by limiting block size. I dare say, your company can never develop any business in China in the future."
Jihan of Antpool, great response in regards to Chinese Bitcoin discussion on /bitcoin I was banned from:
Maxwell, When you talking about "in fact", it smells like no fact. You are spreading very serious rumors about the mining network situation. Antpool has been connected to Relay Network and also testing a new network called Falcon after being invited. The total network orphan rate has been keeping lower and lower in the past months, which is an evidence that the network is working in a much better situation. Antpool in the past April have only 1 orphaned block, which is an evidence that there is no selfish mining situation - a selfish mining attack will generate higher orphan rate on both competitors and attackers. On the https://poolbench.antminer.link/, you can find ... the performance of a mining pool. (This is a third party site, this is fact.) Antpool and other mining pools had made the position clear as water since in the Hong Kong meeting, that SegWit+HF [is] coming as package. If you just realized right now, ... the communication problem inside Core, you cannot blame anyone else. We will not activ[ate] the SegWit until seeing the promised (by "individuals" yes I know Maxwell could not be represented) HF code being released in Bitcoin Core. If everything is progressed according the HK Consensus, the SegWit will not be stalled. The SegWit as a very th[o]rough improvement/change [and] will need to be carefully tested and reviewed after its release, at least for several months. During which time the HF can be proposed, defined, implemented and released. While the max blocksize limit lifting can be activated later, but as the code is already contained in the release, most of the economic nodes in the network will be compatible with the coming blocksize bumping up. Bitcoin is a worldwide economy infrastructure and it requires working together and moving forward. Greg, you need to have some self control from talking like a human flesh fascist propaganda machine, trying to attack anyone who disagree with you. Please don't tag those concerns as "pro-altcoin". (Another evidence of your problematic speaking style.) The concerns are genuine concerns. Some of the concerns coming from people who hold very large stake of Bitcoin since early time. Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency in the town. I also see some small blockers are very active in the competing coin development. You cannot use this methods to distinguish people at all. Then stop judging people's intention and unrelated behavior but focus on the problem itself. The only thing I have to add is that you can't wait for Mr. Maxwell and his company to deliver their promise. It is a toxic arrangement and we need to focus on looking past them, repairing the damage and working towards the future. When there are too many lies and scandal involved, you have to cut your losses and walk away. Investors around the world will be confident once we start making firm moves. Positive press from Forbes will help repair confidence with investors. Either way, thank you! We are all committed to working together.
In successful open-source software projects, the community should drive the code - not the other way around. Projects fail when "dead scripture" gets prioritized over "common sense". (Another excruciating analysis of Core/Blockstream's pathological fetishizing of a temporary 1MB anti-spam kludge)
The essence of Gavin's point reminded me of the things the Agile Manifesto was meant to address. ... The behaviour of Blockstream is like the most pathological cases of capital-E Enterprise software development I've seen.
Why is it not recognized that ANY block size limit is a hack on a hack Bitcoin will NOT work right until the size limit hack is removed entirely. The limit is being leveraged to justify many actions. All of which would be moot if the limit did not exist.
You're absolutely right. Miners have always regulated the size of their own blocks and still do. We see it in the form of excluding zero-fee transactions, SPV mining, spam filtering, etc. They will do the same without a limit. All in the name of maintaining profitability.
Disclaimer:This post is not an endorsement to either buy or sell Bitcoins. I am simply attempting to outline the reasons why there is inherent value in Bitcoins, as well as the risks that come with investing in a crypto-currency. In full disclosure, I personally own and use them, but only a very small portion of my overall portfolio which I would be ok if BTC went to 0 tomorrow. Purpose: I’ve been seeing a lot of doom and gloom (as well as irrational exuberance) in a lot of posts lately, and a lot of people saying this or that with no evidence or fundamentals to back up their claims. So I wanted to put my thoughts and experiences [more about me below] out there in the hopes that people actually serious about utilizing Bitcoins (BTC from here on) might find this information helpful, as well as to connect with and solicit thoughts from anybody else that’s done research on the future of BTC. Also mods: I searched through old posts and the FAQ but couldn’t really find anything like this, so let me know if there is a more appropriate place to post this. I can also add hyperlinked sources to this to make it a reference document if there is interest. Summary/tl;dr: The fundamentals underlying the intrinsic value of Bitcoins haven’t changed. In fact, they continue to improve day-by-day, as merchant and user adoption increases. As long as this trend continues, and certain risk factors - see below - are minimized, BTC will eventually become widely accepted as a currency. That being said, you should never “invest” more money than you are willing to completely lose, or money that you would otherwise need for living expenses. Otherwise, you are gambling. (I put “invest” in quotes because I believe BTC are currently far too speculative to be considered an “investment.” This may change in the future, but the technology is still so new, and there are so many unknowns, that it should not be considered anything more than a speculative investment at this point.) This has happened before and it will happen again: This week hasn’t been good for those holding Bitcoins. In fact, if you invested in BTC anytime in the past year, I’d say it’s been a pretty shitty year, period. But the thing is, we’ve seen this type of thing in financial markets before, almost exactly to a t, and how they tend to play out. There have been various bubbles of all shapes and sizes throughout history, and the run-up in prices earlier this year, was no exception. However, unlike the critics, I believe BTCs are different, as there is significant intrinsic value in the BTC network and BTC as a value store - which I outline below. I also think it’s useless to speculate about the direction of BTC in the short to medium-term (I would argue the price adjustment has been a good thing for the long-term), so to me the only meaningful way to analyze what’s going on is to examine the fundamentals (apologies if a lot of this is basic, but I wanted to cover all the key points as I saw them):
Currency As a Store of Value: A currency has value because the holders of it believe it has value. This might seem like a paradox, but it is how fiat currencies (namely, the USD and every other major currency in the world) function, and BTC is no different. As the number of people owning and using BTC increases, the relative value of BTC will have to grow as the supply is limited to 21million BTC (to use an economics analogy: In this case, we can’t find more seashells, we can only break the ones we have into smaller pieces). What if user adoption were to plateau or decrease? Even if growth were to stop today, and not a single more person in the world were to use BTC than already are, there would still be value assigned to them by those who currently hold, which is reflected in the BTC/USD rate. There is already value there by virtue of the number of people that own it and merchants that accept it. As of me writing this, there are an estimated 1.2million BTC holders on ledgers worldwide. This number is greater than the population of many countries that have their own currency. I believe BTC are past the point where people should question the viability of BTC as a store of value, and instead look at BTC for the value it provides for the following reasons.
Worldwide Transaction Network: In my analysis, this represents the true potential value of BTC. Think of the major credit card companies (Visa, MasterCard, AMEX) - they’re accepted pretty much anywhere right? You can walk into almost any shop throughout the world, and as long as you hold one of these cards, the merchant will trade you his/her goods and services for a portion of what you’ve got in your account. And this is hugely valuable. To the tune of $Billions per year these companies make in profit, all because of the network of merchants that accept them worldwide. But one thing that people might forget is these companies had to grow their merchant network, just like BTC, one at a time. Thus, this to me represents the primary growth potential of BTC. I’ve seen estimates that 10,000 retailers are currently accepting them, and there are some pretty big names in the list (Overstock, Target, eBay via PayPal, CVS). As the number of places that accept BTC increase, so does the intrinsic value. This also has a compounding, even self-fulfilling, effect: as the number of places that accept BTC increases, the value increases, thus more merchants are willing to accept BTC as a currency because it has value…chew on that for a second.
Growing BTC Eco-system: This is represented by the growing number of Bitcoin-related venture startups and websites/wallets/apps that support BTC transactions. There is a network effect here, and as long as people are invested into it, will continue to grow.
Security/Anonymity/Ease of Transaction: I think most of us are familiar with BTC security measures (how important the password to your wallet/account is), how the hashes are generated by an algorithm that cannot be faked (essentially counterfeit-proof), and low transaction costs. These are all pluses that make the currency attractive as a value store, with some caveats listed in the “Risks” section below.
Hedge Against Fiat Currencies: This is a two-edged sword. I think there’s a lot of investment in BTC because of the fear of overactive Central Banks inflating other currencies (again, namely the USD), but as we saw this week, this can work against BTC. I explain more later below.
So I’ve briefly outlined above some pretty clear reasons why there is inherent value in BTC, and the reasons why I personally am optimistic about the long-term future and will continue to use them. That being said, I’ve also identified several primary risk factors that worry me as a long-term investor, ones that all holders of BTC should be aware of. Please, if you know or can think of any others, reply or PM me so I can add them to this list:
Continued market volatility: Price volatility might be good for day-traders, but for a currency, it’s killer. As described above, one of the core elements a currency must have is as a store of value, and if the price fluctuates wildly from day-to-day, merchants (and currency owners) will be less willing to accept it. Who would want to hold currency that’s worth 1/2 of what it was last week? This is also a reason why it’s essential for the currency to have a limited supply (or perception thereof), or else rampant inflation would occur - look at Zimbabwe. The bottom-line is, if the USD (US Dollar) were to drop 25% in one week, like we saw with BTC this week, it would indicate a complete economic collapse was occurring. Faith in the currency would be destroyed, and it would take extreme measures to preserve it. It’s actually kind of a small miracle BTC hasn’t completely collapsed, but I think it’s because (1) there is real value in it, and (2) BTC are not widely used yet. The remedy for this is there has to be either (1) a large holder of the currency that is able to inject or take out some currency to keep the price stable -- if you look at the US Federal Reserve this is one of its two primary mandates, or (2) the number of BTC owners has to reach a saturation “tipping point” where enough people are utilizing the currency for day-to-day transactions, and not for speculative reasons. I don’t believe we’re quite at this point yet, but getting there.
Governmental regulation: This is a big unknown for me, and with recent news that Russia and China have prohibited use of BTCs, presumably in the effort to curb illegal transactions, could become a trend. However, to address people who are concerned about this, I would make the following points:
What is the reason for government regulation? Is it to curb illegal activity transacted in BTC? If this is the case, there is plenty of illegal activity being transacted in US Dollars, Russian Rubles, gold coins, jewelry, etc… What makes BTC special? If the reason is to prohibit a competing national currency, then that is a separate legal issue which will have to be resolved, but probably not until far in the future. In the US, a case like this would almost definitely go to the Supreme Court for clarification.
Which government agency should have regulatory authority? In more democratic societies (than Russia and China) that have a strong rule of law (most of the rest of the western world), government agencies can’t simply do something because they want to (unfortunately the trend is changing even in the US). There has to be a legal jurisdiction or precedence that would allow this, and because crypto-currencies are so new, none has been set. For example, just look at how long it took most state governments to start taxing Amazon purchases. I used to live in Virginia, and they just started in Dec 2013, almost 20 years after Amazon was founded…
How would governments enforce restrictions? Would it be by imposing fines on merchants that accept the crypto-currencies? Legally, how is this different than restricting payment in gold or silver then, or Craigslist transactions?
Ease of use: BTC are not quite easy enough to use where the average person will find it appealing. I think a lot of companies are working to address this (e.g. the hardest part of signing up on Coinbase was remembering my password), so to me this risk is what we can do the most about, but still a concern.
Loss potential: If you forget or lose your password, you’re SOL at this point. But this isn’t really different from losing cash on the street.
Market Cornering(added): There is the possibility a large percentage of the total available BTC are owned by a handful of individuals. For example, it is estimated that Satoshi alone owns ~1 million BTC. In the event that one or more of these owners were to attempt to corner the BTC market there could be extreme price volatility.
Current overall valuation may be a bit high: Back of the napkin calculation follows- Total valuation of BTC = (# of BTC available) x (current price/BTC) Total valuation of BTC = ~13million x $330 = ~$4billion $4 billion of perceived value is probably high for as small as the BTC network currently is. But, this number is reflective of the high growth rate in the number of users/owners and merchants that have accepted BTC. In other words, this may be a fair price. And, by definition, it is technically the actual fair price since it is, after all, an actual currency.
I could go on, but those are the major value and risk factors I see. If you have anything to add, please feel free. So, in the context of everything I said above, I’d like to talk about what happened this week in particular: I believe this week’s price movement (as of me writing this, has been a 25% drop) is a result of several factors:
Capitulation: I don’t have the ability to do Technical Analysis on BTC right now, but just eyeing the 1-year chart, it looks like $400 was a key support point for the price of BTC. Once it broke through that, psychological barriers were broken and selling cascaded.
And that’s it. That’s all I can find about Bitcoins in the news. The value fundamentals I listed have not changed one bit, and if anything, the rate of user adoption has increased as more people are learningwhatit is. Which is why I’m excited about the future of BTC. It’s a product that I use and like, and see tremendous value for. This week’s sell-off just means I can buy more. About me: In a past life, I was an equity research analyst responsible for due diligence, fundamental/technical analysis, and making recommendations to the PM on which stocks a certain mutual fund should buy or sell. This meant reading through a lot of annual reports, financial statements, 10-K, 10-Q, shareholder calls, etc… My primary influences were Warren Buffett, Philip Fisher, and Ben Graham. If you recognize these names, you’ll probably guess that I was a value investor1 , and you’d be right. The fundamental premise behind value investing, for those that don’t know, is that you can find companies that are trading at a discount to their “true” intrinsic value, and thus can make money by buying the stock at a low price and selling when the market has realized the fair value of the company and the price has subsequently gone up. This is essentially how Warren Buffett built Berkshire Hathaway and became the world’s richest man (for a short period); his strategy has since greatly evolved, but this was the core philosophy he used for a long time. 1 Utilizing this strategy, our fund bought a significant stake in AAPL when the price per share was less than the amount of cash per share the company currently held (split adjusted something like ~$2 per share when we bought). It hasn’t all been a bed of roses, we’ve made some not-so-great investments, but that’s a story for a different time :) Edit: Paragraphs within bullets? How do you do them?
A list of people worth following on Twitter (x/post from daily thread)
I have had a couple of users from the weekly thread ask me to make some recommendations of people to follow on Twitter so cross posting here. These are people I have chosen to follow so it's obviously a very subjective selection though many on the list are nonetheless some of Ethereum's OGs - as evidenced by their amount of followers. The list is loosely ordered although those higher up tend to be people who are more active on Twitter whose tweets I have liked/retweeted the most. The list isn't exhaustive either (ie, it's missing a few newer Twitter users or personalities that are more niche). Feel free to make your own recommendations too as I'm always looking to add people in what has lately become my preferred medium of discussion regarding all things crypto. I'm also adding a link to my own profile below simply because it is easier to view these people's bios and follow them on Twitter yourself by clicking on my own 'following' page (ie, I'm not looking to recruit any followers of my own though you are obviously welcome to follow me if you so desire): https://twitter.com/anajolsson/following Joseph Young @iamjosephyoung Evan Van Ness @evan_van_ness Richard Burton @ricburton Laura Shin @laurashin Spencer Noon @spencernoon Crypto Bobby @crypto_bobby Jackson Palmer @ummjackson MrYukonC @MrYukonC Hudson Jameson @hudsonjameson Fred Ehrsam @FEhrsam Ryan Sean Adams @RyanSAdams Crypto Insider @CryptoInsiderX StoreOfValue Blog @SovCryptoBlog Nathaniel Popper @nathanielpopper MyEtherWallet.com @myetherwallet MyCrypto.com @MyCrypto Omar Bham (Crypt0) @crypt0snews Jeremiah Nichol @prodjkc Taylor Monahan @tayvano_ Joey Krug @joeykrug Ari Paul @AriDavidPaul Chris Burniske @cburniske Eva Beylin @EvaBeylin ConcourseQ.io @concourseqio Joseph Lubin @ethereumJoseph Andreas M. Antonopoulos @aantonop Vitalik "Not giving away ETH" Buterin @VitalikButerin Bitcoin_Schmitcoin @BTC_Schmitcoin Crypto Tax Girl @CryptoTaxGirl
Fred Ehrsam Resigning from Coinbase. Coinbase "has never been in a stronger position".
http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-coinbase-co-founder-fred-ehrsam-leaving-company/ Former Goldman Sachs trader and Coinbase co-founder Fred Ehrsam is leaving the San Francisco bitcoin startup for new opportunities. Revealed to the company today via an internal meeting, Ehrsam told CoinDesk he intends to now "step back" from his daily duties at the end of January, take some time off, and potentially, plot a new venture in the blockchain industry. "There's a high probability it will be in the crypto space," he said. Ehrsam will continue to hold a position on the Coinbase board. When asked about the reasons behind the move, Ehrsam said that he believes both the company and the wider blockchain industry to be at an "inflection point". "This is the first time I've thought it could support a diverse set of businesses and ideas," he said. Ehrsam first joined Coinbase at the end of 2012 after exchanging emails with co-founder and CEO Brian Armstrong, who was then building the bitcoin wallet startup at Y Combinator. (Forbes has a longer profile of the story here). Ehrsam said the move had been discussed for some time, and that, over time, he expects more employees will likely leave Coinbase for new ventures. Coinbase's first employee, Olaf Carlson-Wee, for example, left the company in July to start a hedge fund focused on the trading of blockchain-based tokens, a funding model of which Ehrsam has emerged as a noteworthy proponent. "If you look at the really successful companies, the big ones that emerge in a whole new industry, the most successful ones throw off entrepreneurs," he said, adding: "It's like the PayPal mafia. We're creating the Coinbase mafia." During his time at the startup, Ehrsam made 30 Under 30 lists from publications including Time and Forbes, while also attending high-profile events as a representative of the company. As part of the news, Coinbase also announced Mike Lempres will be joining as chief legal and risk officer. The company added in a statement: "Coinbase has never been in a stronger position and we are optimistic for 2017 and beyond."
For immediate distribution: February 24th, 2014 -- 7:00 PM PST
The purpose of this document is to summarize a joint statement to the Bitcoin community regarding Mt.Gox.
This tragic violation of the trust of users of Mt.Gox was the result of one company’s abhorrent actions and does not reflect the resilience or value of bitcoin and the digital currency industry. There are hundreds of trustworthy and responsible companies involved in bitcoin. These companies will continue to build the future of money by making bitcoin more secure and easy to use for consumers and merchants. As with any new industry, there are certain bad actors that need to be weeded out, and that is what we are seeing today.
We are confident, however, that strong Bitcoin companies, led by highly competent teams and backed by credible investors, will continue to thrive, and to fulfill the promise that bitcoin offers as the future of payment in the Internet age.
In order to re-establish the trust squandered by the failings of Mt. Gox, responsible bitcoin exchanges are working together and are committed to the future of bitcoin and the security of all customer funds. As part of the effort to re-assure customers, the following exchanges will be coordinating efforts over the coming days to publicly reassure customers and the general public that all funds continue to be held in a safe and secure manner: Coinbase, Kraken, BitStamp, Circle, and BTC China.
We strongly believe in transparent, thoughtful, and comprehensive consumer protection measures. We pledge to lead the way.
Bitcoin operators, whether they be exchanges, wallet services or payment providers, play a critical custodial role over the bitcoin they hold as assets for their customers. Acting as a custodian should require a high-bar, including appropriate security safeguards that are independently audited and tested on a regular basis, adequate balance sheets and reserves as commercial entities, transparent and accountable customer disclosures, and clear policies to not use customer assets for proprietary trading or for margin loans in leveraged trading. It does not appear to any of us that MtGox followed any these essential requirements as a financial services provider.
The following industry leaders stand by this statement:
Fred Ehrsam — Co-founder of Coinbase Jesse Powell — CEO of Kraken Nejc Kodrič — CEO of Bitstamp.net Bobby Lee — CEO of BTC China Nicolas Cary — CEO of Blockchain.info Jeremy Allaire — CEO of Circle
Thank you MEW ( MyEtherWallet ) (89 points, 32 comments)
The #2 reason to be invested in Ethereum (87 points, 26 comments)
Which burden do you want to carry: Going to PoS with an anti-Ethereum hacker holding (1)5 % of the Ethers? Or having an anti-principle fork in the history of the network which prevented exactly that? (81 points, 95 comments)
A new Bitcoin crisis: Bitcoin is suffering from a brain drain, accelerating Ethereum's brain gain (71 points, 22 comments)
Fred Ehrsam / Coinbase basically says that Ethereum is the future of cryptocurrency
This is an automatic summary, original reduced by 93%.
Ethereum is the Forefront of Digital CurrencyWe have sat here for the last 3 years seeing only infrastructure apps like wallets and exchanges emerge on top of Bitcoin. We now stand only 9 months out from the beginning of the Ethereum network and the level of app development is already faster than Bitcoin's. That said, I think Ethereum is ahead of Bitcoin in many ways and represents the bleeding edge of digital currency. When I started reading it, it was everything I found myself thinking about for the present and future of Bitcoin but didn't see being discussed much: scaling the network, the viability of proof of stake, how to create a stable digital currency, what a blockchain based company would look like, amongst other topics. This won't be because of a failure of the core Ethereum protocol though, much like the failure of Mt. Gox was not an error in the Bitcoin protocol. Some possibilities for Ethereum are sharding the network, computing power and networks naturally getting faster over time, and the economics of the Ethereum blockchain only running the most important things as a forcing function.
Feb 24th, 2014 The purpose of this document is to summarize a joint statement to the Bitcoin community regarding Mt.Gox. This tragic violation of the trust of users of Mt.Gox was the result of one company’s actions and does not reflect the resilience or value of bitcoin and the digital currency industry. There are hundreds of trustworthy and responsible companies involved in bitcoin. These companies will continue to build the future of money by making bitcoin more secure and easy to use for consumers and merchants. As with any new industry, there are certain bad actors that need to be weeded out, and that is what we are seeing today. We are confident, however, that strong Bitcoin companies, led by highly competent teams and backed by credible investors, will continue to thrive, and to fulfill the promise that bitcoin offers as the future of payment in the Internet age. In order to re-establish the trust squandered by the failings of Mt. Gox, responsible bitcoin exchanges are working together and are committed to the future of bitcoin and the security of all customer funds. As part of the effort to re-assure customers, the following services will be coordinating efforts over the coming days to publicly reassure customers and the general public that all funds continue to be held in a safe and secure manner: Coinbase, Kraken, BitStamp, Circle, and BTC China. We strongly believe in transparent, thoughtful, and comprehensive consumer protection measures. We pledge to lead the way. Bitcoin operators, whether they be exchanges, wallet services or payment providers, play a critical custodial role over the bitcoin they hold as assets for their customers. Acting as a custodian should require a high-bar, including appropriate security safeguards that are independently audited and tested on a regular basis, adequate balance sheets and reserves as commercial entities, transparent and accountable customer disclosures, and clear policies to not use customer assets for proprietary trading or for margin loans in leveraged trading. It does not appear to any of us that MtGox followed any these essential requirements as a financial services provider. The following industry leaders stand by this statement: Fred Ehrsam — Co-founder of Coinbase Jesse Powell — CEO of Kraken Nejc Kodrič — CEO of Bitstamp.net Bobby Lee — CEO of BTC China Nicolas Cary — CEO of Blockchain.info Jeremy Allaire — CEO of Circle
Coinbase’s Fred Ehrsam Expects Blockchain to Disrupt the Gaming Industry. An intriguing correlation between cryptocurrencies and video gaming has become apparent. This new form of money makes ... Coinbase Fred Ehrsam: Bitcoin macht Finanzen zu einem Software-Problem - Verordnung - 2020 September 2020. Gaze Coin - Shooting VR For Ethereum - (Behind the Scenes) (September 2020). In einer kürzlichen Folge des 1776 Podcasts diskutierten Coinbase-Mitbegründer Fred Ehrsam und der Mitbegründer von 1776, Evan Burfield, das Konzept des regulatorischen Hacking im Kontext von Bitcoin ... Der frühere Goldman Sachs Händler und Coinbase Mitbegründer Fred Ehrsam verlässt das Bitcoin Start-up-Unternehmen aus San Francisco, um neue Möglichkeiten wahrzunehmen. Ehrsam sagte in einem internen Meeting, dass er sich ab Ende Januar von seinen täglichen Aufgaben distanzieren werde und sich erstmal eine Auszeit nehmen möchte. Ehrsam first joined Coinbase at the end of 2012 after exchanging emails with co-founder and CEO Brian Armstrong, who was then building the bitcoin wallet startup at Y Combinator. ( Forbes has a ... [ septembre 17, 2020 ] Figure Launches First Digital Fund Services Offering on Blockchain Blockchain [ septembre 17, 2020 ] Bitcoin Daily: Two Spoofed Webites Steal Crypto Bitcoin [ septembre 17, 2020 ] Parents face the anxiety and ripple effects of pandemic schooling as COVID-19 cases inch up Ripple
Fred Ehrsam Open Mined Decentralized AI Summit 2018
How to set up bitcoin wallet-coinbase coinbase was founded in June 2012 by Brian Armstrong and Fred Ehrsam. It enrolled in the Summer 2012 Y Combinator startup incubator program. In October ... Local media has reported that Fred Ehrsam, co-founder of Coinbase, intends to meet with New Zealand financial regulators to discuss the possibility of launching operations in NZ. Ehrsam will visit ... Coinbase co-founder Fred Ehrsam - About Their Bitcoin Wallet, Exchange, And Merchant Solution - Duration: 23 minutes. Naation. 5 years ago; 641 views; Reposted from Newfination. 2013 interview ... Skip navigation Sign in. Search http://decentralized-ai.com Fred Ehrsam co-founded Coinbase. He is active in the decentralized blockchain infrastructure and application space. Prior to Coin...