Connect with us


Blockchain for Government



Governments around the globe can gain immensely from implementing emerging innovative technologies like IoT, AI, Big Data and Blockchain. These technologies will ensure better interactions and transactions with citizens and other countries. At this point of time, the most invaluable emerging technology for governments is Blockchain. This technology can reduce bureaucracy, increase administrative process efficiencies and build up trust in public record keeping. The most important innovation that blockchain introduces is a distributed append-only ledger on which messages can be immutably recorded. It erases a need to maintain centralized intermediaries, which has possibly large political and economic significance.

Use cases for Blockchain by governments

Blockchain technology is expected to facilitate numerous government services and functions. For example, storing citizen records, running state registries, support to electronic voting, preventing tax fraud and reallocating public money.

Using Blockchain for securing and sharing important data and records

verification of records and sharing of data of various kinds is among the most
promising use cases for Blockchain in governments.

Identity: Governments need to clearly identify their citizens and stakeholders to provide services to them, the same applies for organizations, assets, machines and autonomous agents. With blockchain’s decentralized technology, people and organizations can have verifiable identities that are secure and private, yet capable of providing sufficient information online when required without a third party’s involvement.

E-Voting: Using smartphones or personal computers, citizens could easily and securely vote from any location thereby creating a more participatory democracy. With citizens’ verified data on a Blockchain, it is possible to design e-voting systems that are much more transparent and trustworthy at the same time maintaining confidentiality. Ballots could be automatically counted while ensuring no votes were cast more than once and the validity of the count could be proven without revealing the identity of those who voted.

Title/ asset registrations: In countries like Africa and India Blockchain projects have been implemented for land registries because corrupt local officials would steal land by falsifying paper-based documents. Selling a house can generally be a slow and laborious process involving coordination and verification between many different entities like government agencies, lawyers and banks. Blockchain technology ensures title transfers and land registration are a streamlined process. The same process can also be used to secure information about almost any kind of registration – automobiles, businesses, firearms, etc.

Healthcare: In most cases today, medical records are kept separately in doctor’s offices and hospital databases – they are shared manually, not always in a secure way. Also, it often becomes complicated when multiple inputs are required for a patient from various institutes and people. Blockchains are ideal for such scenarios by providing an audit for inputs from various parties and ensuring data is unalterable once it is recorded.

can also make anonymised patient data available for open research and make it
easier for citizens to have control over their medical reports. In this case,
the Blockchain is used to store proof that data is genuine or store a record of
who has permission to access what data.

Educational certification: Important personal data like educational certificates tend to be kept in siloed databases by the universities or schools that issue them. Accessing this information to prove credentials can be a painstaking task. Degrees can also be relatively easily falsified. Blockchain based systems can help by facilitating individuals to take control of their verified records and allow access to employers or others when required.

Using Blockchain for monitoring and regulating markets

consumers is one of the key tasks of a government, to do so they need to ensure
markets remain viable and laws are adhered to. Regulators need data to track
what is going on in markets. Most governments rely on companies to share the
legally required information. In some cases, inspections are carried out or
other means are used to gather the information they require. For self-reported
data, governments are dependent on the reporting entity for the information to
be accurate and there is a considerable time lag in receiving the information.
In fast moving industries and markets this lag means information is often
obsolete by the time it is received by the regulator. Inspections and audits
can be expensive and in many cases do not provide a realistic picture. Also,
reporting can be time-consuming and expensive for companies- sometimes costly
investments need to be made for compliance teams and infrastructure.

Taking into consideration the above factors, a shared ledger
can simplify data collection by making information available for regulators,
companies and other stakeholders. Blockchain would ensure the information is
verifiable. Secure and trustworthy audit trails would also be useful for
investigations and litigation.

In manufacturing supply chains, automated sensors can send
data directly to the Blockchain thereby facilitating real-time monitoring of
products during their lifecycle. In addition, smart contracts can be used for
automated pay-outs thereby insuring suppliers and manufacturers are paid on

From a regulatory perspective, important use cases include know-your-customer (KYC) and anti-money laundering. Blockchain based shared customer and business registries could greatly reduce KYC/ AML compliance costs by permitting all entities involved to share relevant information in a secure way. Individuals and businesses will gain from this too by facilitating a single onboarding experience.

From keeping record of births and deaths to creating smart cities, Blockchain has manifold potential benefits for countries around the world. Ensuring transparency and verifiable data for citizens and governments will lead to a superior democratic set up where corruption will be eradicated.

Would you like to know more about our blockchain services?

Read More About Our Blockchain Services

37,875 total views, 434 views today

The post Blockchain for Government appeared first on PrimaFelicitas.



Chainlink, Polkadot, Decred Price Analysis: 20 September



Chainlink slipped beneath yet another important level, with the crypto likely to post further losses over the next week or two. Further down the cryptocurrency charts, Polkadot and Decred‘s movements suggested that the bears were continuing to dominate the crypto-market.

Chainlink [LINK]

Chainlink, Polkadot, Decred Price Analysis: 20 September

Source: LINK/USD on TradingView

The Awesome Oscillator registered bearish momentum for LINK. Using the VPVR, it was observed that LINK had significant levels of support at $10 and $9.5, with $10.5 also being a level that LINK had slipped beneath recently.

A longer-term analysis of Chainlink concurred with the short-term indications of bearishness on the crypto’s charts.

If LINK continues its trajectory, it is possible that LINK might dip down to as low as $9 in the next few days.

Chainlink recently made the news after TrustSwap announced that Chainlink’s Price Reference Data would be integrated with TrustSwap’s SmartLock.

Polkadot [DOT]

Chainlink, Polkadot, Decred Price Analysis: 20 September

source: DOT/USDT on TradingView

DOT was defending its support level of $4.8 valiantly over the course of the few trading sessions right before press time. As highlighted by the cyan arrow, the candles formed noticeably long tail wicks, indicating that $4.8 was a good demand zone. The trading volume was also above-average. Then, as DOT attempted to climb, it faced a lot of sell pressure and formed a Doji candle, denoting indecision in the market.

DOT also faced significant selling pressure in the region of $5.50. If $4.80 is defended, DOT could attempt to rise again.

The RSI flipped from presenting a bullish to bearish outlook over the past few days, with the same sliding into bearish territory. It appeared more likely that DOT would slide beneath its support level, than defending it.

In other news, Polkadot announced the launch of its Treasury, a new decentralized platform to fund projects. With this move, it will be able to directly compete with Ethereum, which also allocates funds for project development.

Decred [DCR]

Chainlink, Polkadot, Decred Price Analysis: 20 September

Source: DCR/USD on TradingView

Decred has been on a downtrend since its surge to $24 in August. It was valued at $12.95 at press time, with a level of resistance at $13.7.

The Stochastic RSI highlighted oversold conditions for the cryptocurrency, with its price noting a minor bounce on the 19th of September. However, this was just further evidence of the fact that the bears had not relinquished their grip on DCR. DCR’s price reacted to oversold conditions by rising from $12.64 to $13.09, a 3.5% bounce.

It is likely that DCR will drop further towards its support at $12.2.


Continue Reading


Did Ethereum Learn Anything From the $55M DAO Attack?



Up until it collapsed, The DAO represented the highest technological achievement – and the coming wave of innovation – that the Ethereum blockchain has enabled. 

The smart contract and blockchain were interlinked ideas. In Vitalik Buterin’s early writings detailing the network of computers that would become Ethereum, the world’s second largest by blockchain by market cap but largest by developer activity, he put forward the idea of fully decentralized, autonomous corporations or organizations (or, DACs and DAOs). 

The DAO, which got that name for being the first encoded version of the concept, was the proving ground that the disruptive world of venture capitalism could itself be disrupted. Approximately $150 million in ether was contributed to the project, and more than 50 projects were teed up to possibly be funded by a smart contract that no one person owned.

See also: The $55M Hack That Almost Brought Ethereum Down

Then it was attacked. On a Friday morning in June 2016, a still-anonymous hacker (or hackers) exploited a vulnerability in the code and confiscated tens of millions of dollars in cryptocurrency. Copycats soon followed. Investors withdrew their funds, a “dark DAO” was spun up to protect the remaining and a serious debate raged over when it might be appropriate to hard fork or roll back events on a blockchain. 

Four years after The DAO hack, Matthew Leising, a veteran Bloomberg News reporter, is unsure of what it all meant. The obvious lessons around market exuberance and security went mostly unheeded, as evidenced by the ICO bubble that popped years ago and rise of DeFi today. 

“It goes back to the vision Vitalik laid out for a decentralized platform where people could do whatever they want,” Leising said. “When you give people that flexibility and creative license, you’re going to get crazy projects.”

In his latest book, “Out of the Ether: The Amazing Story of Ethereum and the $55 Million Heist That Almost Destroyed It All,” Leising traces the events leading up to and following the pivotal moment (excerpt here). CoinDesk caught up with him to discuss The DAO’s legacy and what Leising thinks will come next in blockchain. 

Out of the Ether is available wherever audiobooks are sold.
Source: (Wiley)

What do you think the most lasting legacy of the DAO hack has been? 

I think it had a short living effect. At the time, I think people realized that the smart contract should have been capped, that it shouldn’t have been allowed to grow to $150 million in ether, especially for being so new. Ethereum was only a year old at that time. There should have been some emergency stop button or safety hatch, to some way take control if anything went wrong.

I love the idea of decentralized governance, but when you’re writing in a language like Solidity, which was also less than a year old, you have to have a failsafe. Especially considering the amount of bugs that were already found in The DAO before the hack.

When you’re dealing with other people’s money – you have to be careful. I wish I could say these lessons were learned, I don’t think they have. I think we’re seeing the same mistakes made in DeFi now. The money sloshing around is just insane. It’s even worse in some respects, with people announcing they haven’t audited the code. 

See also: DeFi Lender bZx Loses $8M in Third Attack This Year

At least with The DAO they did security audits, but there were still problems. When you compile in a language like Solidity, you’re going to have problems. There needs to be much more vetting when these projects come out so real people don’t lose money. 

This seems like it gets to the fundamental enthusiasm in crypto. People are attracted to risk and volatility. 

You definitely can’t cap enthusiasm, and I don’t think you’d want to. It goes back to the vision Vitalik laid out for a decentralized platform where people could do whatever they want. When you give people that flexibility and creative license, you’re going to get crazy projects. The only thing you can do about it is to not participate. 

I think interesting things are being done to address this issue. Fabian Vogelsteller is exploring “reversible ICOs.” He’s the guy that wrote the ERC-20 code that allowed for ICOs, and is now trying to address that. He’s created a fundraising mechanism that allows people to pull their money out whenever they want. So it’s not like you dump ETH in a pool and the dev team can go out and buy lambos. 

I’d trust someone like Fabian over some anonymous guy like Sushi Chef. These are questions you have to ask. Who are the people behind the project? Are they known quantities? Have they been in Ethereum for a while or are they coming out of the woodwork? 

You decide not to determinitively call out the DAO hacker in the book and write throughout that multiple sources you’ve met with have their suspicions but are also reticent. Do you think crypto respects pseudonymity to a fault?

I want to make clear that there were several different DAO attacks, which is a point that not many people realize. The $55 million Friday attack is probably what people think of when they’re talking about the DAO attack. 

Then there was an attack on the following Tuesday. That’s where I was able to get some leads, do some reporting and track down somebody I think was involved. I believe it was a copycat. The code for the attack contract was already circulated.

They were sloppy enough for me to trace them. That to me says they weren’t very careful, whereas the Friday attacker covered their tracks really well. You should see the ways he scrambled the ether and bitcoin. They knew what they were doing and were very careful. 

I’m moving the ball forward here a little bit, but I wasn’t able to get very far with identifying anyone involved in the $55 million theft. 

If anything, the frequency and scope of attacks has only picked up – but they’ve seemingly become less and less important. Do you think the industry has accepted that attacks are just one of the risks we have to live with?

If you’re talking about people losing significant amounts of their money, I think people are just as concerned today as in 2016. I can’t speak for the industry, but given the frequency at which these things happen, it does seem like there’s a part of the industry that downplays security. 

Everyone who is trading crypto at this point should know not to leave your coins on an exchange – that’s the dumbest thing you can do. 

Despite all the politics and backstabbing, the idea was so good and valid that Ethereum survived.

I’m not sure if people just coming into the space know that. Coinbase and Gemini are like a hackers dream. You need to have your funds in a wallet on a blockchain. There are just basic things that people should be doing. But is there enough education about that? Is there anyone telling them to take these steps? Coinbase certainly isn’t telling people, “Now that you’ve bought your BTC, move it off our exchange and put it in your wallet.” That’s not in their interest. 

People make fun of the SEC and CFTC on the regulatory front in the U.S., but they are great about educating potential investors about how to keep their money safe when they’re buying and selling in markets. 

What were you most surprised to learn about Vitalik while researching the book? 

Vitalik really clicked for me after his dad shared some of this document he wrote when he was seven called the encyclopedia of bunnies. It was this 20-page Word document that he wrote because he was absolutely obsessed with bunnies. It’s really impressive.

For some people, you find a certain detail about their life that sort of unlocks them, or encapsulates them. I felt like that was the bunny book for him. We all know he’s brilliant, but he’s also really funny and meticulous. He poured all this energy into this thing as a seven year old. Once I had that, it helped me see him as a person. 

I also didn’t know that behind the scenes of the Ethereum Foundation was such a shi*tshow. There were people fired after six months, a reorganization, and then more people fired. They tried to straighten out by bringing in a board of directors and executive director – but they were at each other’s throats from the beginning. 

I love the story of all the people that came together to create Ethereum, and the mismanagement of it since the beginning. It never really got better. Despite all the politics and backstabbing, the idea was so good and valid that it survived all of that. 

Do you think they’re going to be able to successfully manage shifting to Eth 2.0? 

I think so. It’s been a long time coming. I interviewed Vitalik at a Devcon3  in 2017, where he said proof-of-stake would be here by the end of the year. Another thing I learned about Ethereum is that it has never delivered on time. They thought they would be able to do their crowdsale the Tuesday after the Miami Bitcoin Conference. It was six months late. They’ve always had a problem with timelines. 

That being said, I’ve started to see signs that Eth 2.0 is coming closer to fruition. I don’t have any reason to suggest that they won’t be able to deliver. 

See also: The ‘Hot Swap’ Plan to Switch Ethereum to Proof-of-Stake Explained

It seems like you’ve really bought into the vision of Ethereum. What are you most excited about?

I’m interested in all the Web 3.0 applications being developed on Ethereum that are allowing people to take control over their data and privacy. We’re starting to see that mature. Metamask has gone mobile. There are truly decentralized web applications being put in place. 

It gets to the heart of the idealism that folks like Gavin Woods, Vitalik and Neha Nerula had from the beginning. These people really thought they could change the world and they’re doing the work to help make it come about. 

It’s slow and piecemeal. But that vision is clearer now than at any time in the past. Ethereum, DeFi, Web 3.0 will be alternatives, but they won’t replace anything. Bitcoin isn’t going to replace the U.S. dollar as the global currency, but it’s an alternative. 

All of these things, if they’re done well, can be a stable alternative for those who want to have greater privacy. Most people want convenience over privacy, and that’s up to them. But right now, there isn’t much choice. 

That promise will propel this forward. It almost seems like a return to something the internet had at the beginning. Andreas Antonopoulos says we need to redecentralize the web – that feels like what’s happening here. Google isn’t going away, but I want an alternative. 

What do you think the subject of the next great crypto book will be? 

I think the Tether saga – if someone could really tell that story and get all the details. I tried. It’s very hard. I still think there are bitcoins stories to tell. But the space moves so fast, it’s hard to say.


Continue Reading


Does Bitcoin’s ‘buy today, sell tomorrow’ strategy always work?



To the investment world, Bitcoin just doesn’t make sense. An asset with no financials, no quarterly earnings reports, no management to speak for it on investor calls, no valuations, no annual report, no head office, nothing. How does one value something like this in order to invest in it? There’s a simple answer – They don’t. 

Bitcoin is more or less seen as an asset of the future. And for an asset of the future, you don’t look at present fundamentals, not just because there are none, but because you can’t evaluate it correctly. For this reason and more, Bitcoin is popular among a lot of traders. The fickle, fast-moving, and shrewd operators of the markets who don’t care about the worth of an asset, as long as it gives them a return. Let’s look at Bitcoin’s market based on the perspective of these people.

In order to consider this, let’s take a neutral stance. Let’s look at the Bitcoin market as a buy-today-sell-tomorrow kind, rather than a hodl for weeks, or make a handful intra-day trades kind. In part, because this would still come under the category of trading, but mainly because it’s easier to pull out the daily close price of Bitcoin, rather than its hourly, or even by-minute estimates.

Right, with that sorted, let’s get into the numbers. If you simply and blindly conducted a buy-today sell tomorrow strategy for all the eight completed months and the first 5 days of September, how much would you have made? Before answering this, bear in mind that Bitcoin began the year at $7,500, broke past $10,000 twice, before breaking down to $4,000. It’s now up over $10,000 again. Oh, and two weeks ago, it was over $12,000. Back to the question, how much do you think you’d have made?


Well, it’s a cool $2,993, or an average of 21.15 percent by buying and selling each day for 8 months. Granted, that’s too many transactions, 248 to be exact, and it doesn’t include order and withdrawal fees, but it’s still a good amount, isn’t it? In fact, if you would’ve ended your long trading game on 31 August, rather than 5 September, you would’ve made $4,476 or a 35.3 percent return by avoiding the 3 September drop from $12,000 to $10,000. In terms of a monthly return, five of the eight months returned positive and three negative. The positive returns totaled $7,765 and the negative $3,289. 

So, make of that what you will, but it does go on to state that Bitcoin trading on a day-to-day basis, provided you have the time, capital, and an exchange that doesn’t eat up a lot in fees, will allow you to make a good profit for yourself. 

Source: Coinstats


Continue Reading