This best crypto wallets review will guide you through the best places to store your Bitcoin and altcoins. Over the past 10 years, Bitcoin’s value has sky rocketed. Cryptocurrencies have…
tBTC Launches for the Second Time to Bridge Bitcoin and Ethereum
After a failed (but not regretted) attempt, Thesis, the blockchain development company behind Keep Network, has just released the new version of tBTC.
tBTC is simply Bitcoin tokenized in the Ethereum blockchain as an ERC20 token backed by the original Bitcoin. The initiative might seem like another one of the many projects that seek to bring Bitcoin into the smart contract chain. Still, Thesis adds a new -and exciting- ingredient: decentralization.
tBTC is Just Another Bridge Between Bitcoin and Ethereum… But Different
“As far as I know, this release is the first permissionless, censorship-resistant Bitcoin bridge on Ethereum. Anyone can mint $tBTC by connecting to the Bitcoin and Ethereum chains, and no one can censor transactions or redemptions,” said Matt Luongo, founder of Thesis, in a Twitter thread.
This means users can be assured that their funds are not being controlled or guarded by a centralized entity.
In short, tBitcoin is a Bitcoin token with the same philosophy as Bitcoin, with very similar features to Bitcoin, only it runs on Ethereum. Thus, concerns about funds centralization and the possibility of an third party exercising some kind of censorship are addressed, as Vitalik Buterin pointed out:
I continue to be worried about the fact that these wrapped BTC bridges are trusted…..
I hope that they can all *at least* move to a decently sized multisig
— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) August 17, 2020
The demand for Bitcoin tokens on Ethereum is high, especially considering the growing popularity of this blockchain after the DeFi boom. In wBTC alone, a centralized but popular tokenized version of BTC, there are more than 818 million dollars or 77860 BTCs locked up.
A Long Way to Success
tBTC had a rough start. After its first release, a bug that led to the introduction of untested functions into the code led developers to pause the project when it was only two days old. The new version, which Luongo refers to as rc1, corrected this problem and added important improvements over its predecessor:
5/ There are a number of differences between rc.1 and rc.0, which we shipped in May. The big ones are
1⃣ a guarded release, including a supply cap schedule for the first 9 weeks
2⃣ additional audits
3⃣ removing the team’s ability to pause new deposits after 6 months
— Matt Luongo (@mhluongo) September 22, 2020
Luongo and his team are optimistic, but also cautious: To avoid possible damage, they decided to set up a supply cap system that will increase over time to reach the 3000 BTC enclosed. Also, Luongo assured that he would put his investment in the project to have more skin in the game.
Who said that DeFi was not for bitcoiners?
FEW Brings Out DeFi Risks: Ethereum Proponents Caught Planning to Dump on Investors
Airdrops have apparently become the next big thing in DeFi as means of “fair” distribution of tokens of fresh projects.
The first one to really catch the attention of the masses was Uniswap with their UNI governance token. Everyone who used the platform received a minimum of 400 UNI tokens. At the time, many people sold their share to cash in some “free money.”
Another project to do so was MEME Protocol that airdropped around 350 MEME tokens, currently worth about $350,000 to the first few members to join their Telegram group. As CryptoPotato reported, that stack was worth around $700,000 at the peak price of the token.
Today, a bunch of screenshots of conversations between some of the most popular ETH influencers and proponents in what was apparently supposed to be a closed Telegram group shows their plans to create a worthless token with the sole intention of pumping its price. “An experiment,” as they called it.
FEW – Bringing Crypto Back to the Wild Wild West
Crypto Twitter is exploding today with screenshots of conversations between some of the most prominent ETH proponents, such as Anthony Sassano, DeFi Dude, and many others.
The goal was simple – create a group of 50 “smart people,” airdrop a bunch of tokens to them and watch them shill it away. A few screenshots, allegedly from the conversation between some of the members reveal what was going on:
“First we get the members, then we airdrop, then – we figure out what the fu*k we’re doing.” – DeFi Dude said. Not shady at all.
Anthony Sassano was caught saying that they “need people to dump on.” Another screenshot reveals DeFi Dude answering to a message saying, “… and we pump it, legally.” Sure, there’s not much context to this, but is this the expected behavior of people who’re supposedly helping this community move forward?
The group discussed how they intended to do something like MEME because they (or at least some of them) missed it. As CryptoPotato reported, Anthony Sassano was part of the MEME Protocol airdrop as well.
Many of the people involved in the initial FEW 50 explained their actions after the fact. Anthony Sassano said that all of it was a “joke” and urged people not to buy the token as “it’s worthless.”
Further in the thread, he explained that people attacking him “is just shitty… people who know me know this is just my sense of humor and was a joke. But it’s going to circulate and be taken out of context regardless.”
Other members of the first FEW 50 largely expressed the same idea – that it was nothing but a joke.
And here’s what a lot of people have a problem with. Speaking on the matter was Udi Wertheimer, who said:
these GOD-TIER eth influencers were screaming for 2 months about how rich they became farming potatoes
how come they had to burn their reputations issuing some crappy nothingcoin NOW after making trillions of dollars?
or were they LARPing all along? hmm https://t.co/WfPBUpRWJF
— Udi Wertheimer (@udiWertheimer) September 22, 2020
The problem is that most of those people have a serious following and a lot of regular users consider their authority and reputation. Whether they wanted to be in this position of power is entirely irrelevant. Once you get to a point where your voice is heard and listened to, it’s nothing but common sense to be responsible.
Now, Sassano argues that this is the “first” joke that he made, and it will get him “cancel” without actual merits… that people are calling him out without context.
How much context do we really need, though? For me, personally, it looks like a bunch of people with serious influence over the Twitter masses attempted to create something they knew could net a lot of cash, got caught, and are now desperately trying to save their reputation.
If it truly was a joke, why not make it public from the get-go? Why wait for people to leak those screenshots before giving any explanation?
The token didn’t really reach the market, but some people created a fake and listed it on Uniswap – that’s likely irrelevant.
But what if those FEW 50 people went through with everything they planned? What if they created a token that people could purchase? What if they started talking about it on Twitter? What if its price really did explode (as they clearly intended based on their conversation)? What if their airdropped tokens were suddenly worth six figures? What if no one leaked those screenshots?
These are questions that we can’t really get an objective answer to, and each one of us has to make their own conclusions.
Sassano has since said that he burned his tokens to prove that he’s not “going to dump” on anyone.
Since this screenshot is going to circulate like crazy I want to get one thing straight – it was me making a joke when this group was just a few people.
— Anthony Sassano | sassal.eth ⛽ 🏴 (@sassal0x) September 22, 2020
He’s also said that “I was planning to donate any money that I got from it to Gitcoin (believe that or not).”
The most logical question about this is how you’d get any money if you didn’t “dump” on someone?
It’s entirely possible that all of this was a joke. It’s entirely possible that no one of those involved in this actually planned to scam people out of their money. But that’s not what matters.
What matters is the fact that reputable people with serious standing in the community shouldn’t even consider being involved in some shady, behind-the-curtain plays like this one, regardless of whether they think it’s a joke or not.
Transparency is one of the main and inherent postulates of the technology that we’re all supposedly “in it” for. And this goes against it directly.
Worst of all – these kinds of “jokes” set crypto back. It shatters the beliefs of anyone who thinks that we’re out of the Wild Wild West years of the industry when people were single-handedly moving markets. We’re right there in the center of it, it’s just a new narrative.
No one can take away the contribution of most of these people to the field. It’s just that you can’t afford to make jokes of the kind. Or, at least, you shouldn’t.
This article is entirely the opinion of the author.
Equals Takes £3.16 Million in Losses for H1 2020, Focusing on B2B
The Group’s B2C business was heavily impacted by COVID-19 restrictions.
Equals, formerly known as FairFX, has published its interim results for the first half of 2020 ended on June 30, reporting an after-tax loss of £3.16 million. The company was profitable in the similar period of the previous year with £445,000.
However, the forex provider’s loss for H2 2019 was £5.81 million, meaning there was a 46 percent reduction in after-tax losses for the latest year half compared to the past six months.
Finance Magnates earlier reported on Equals’ revenues for the same period, but the latest numbers give a much deeper understanding of the company’s performance.
The total revenue of the e-banking and international payments group stood at £13.8 million. Though, the revenue generated from the B2B streams was £9 million and the rest from B2C businesses.
EuropeFX Now Supporting PayPal DepositsGo to article >>
Compared to the reported numbers from the first half of the previous year, the company’s B2B revenue increased 32 percent year-on-year while the B2C revenues went down by 29 percent. This decline in the B2C business was mainly due to the impact in this sector by the uncertainties caused by the Coronavirus.
Moving from B2C to B2B
The Group also highlighted that it is shifting its focus from the legacy B2C travel money business to the B2B revenue streams.
Additionally, the company pointed out that its international payments business remained resilient in Q3 of 2020 with £3.8 million, compared to the previous quarter’s £3.5 million.
“We believe it is testament to the quality of the business and the resilience of our B2B focused model that we are reporting both an increase in revenue and decrease in underlying expenditure against the headwinds posed by a combination of Covid-19 and the changes forced upon the business as a result of the demise of Wirecard,” Equals Group CEO, Ian Strafford-Taylor said.
“Our revenues continue to grow against this unprecedented backdrop and we have not yet completed our exercise of cost savings which will benefit the second half of the year.”
Blockchain4 weeks ago
Market Wrap: Bitcoin’s Powell-Induced Price Swing; Ethereum Still High on Gas
Blockchain1 month ago
The US Post Office Files a Patent for a Blockchain-Based Voting System
Blockchain4 months ago
How to Identify the ‘Third Wave’ of Cannabis Investments
Blockchain2 months ago
Wealthfront Lures Millenials With Crypto Memes and Tactics
Blockchain2 months ago
Top Five Most Advanced Cryptocurrencies
Blockchain4 months ago
5 Tips to Interest the Press in Your Cannabis Business
Blockchain2 weeks ago
Blockchain Bites: Is DeFi an Inside Deal?
Blockchain3 months ago
Top 5 Most Effective Cannabis Marketing Strategies