Category Crypto Currency

What Are the Differences Between Tangle and Blockchain?

What if I told you that not every cryptocurrency uses a blockchain? And what if I told you that one of the most popular cryptos on the market is a blockchain nonbeliever? Well, you best bet your bottom dollar on it, because today we’re going to get acquainted with the Tangle, a cryptographic alternative to blockchain technology. In addition, we’ll be going over IOTA, the top 15 coin that has popularized the Tangle, and whose developers believe that it’s the future of the cryptographic economy. Blockchain: A Brief Review Before we look at the Tangle and what makes it unique, it’d be good to have a refresher on blockchain technology. For those of you who don’t need this refresher, go ahead and skip to the next section. The blockchain is a type of distributed ledger that stores a history of all transactions sent through its network. Validating and processing these transactions produces a distributed consensus, a fancy way of saying that the network agrees with all of the transactions it’s received. With Bitcoin, for example, every time a transaction is processed on the network, that transaction is stored as a hash (a cryptographic string of numbers) on this ledger in one of its blocks. Once a block reaches a certain height (its data limit on the number of hashes it can hold), this block is closed and it is added to the chain of pre-existing blocks (hence the name blockchain). After a block is built, it cannot be altered and its data is completely untouchable. Miners are responsible for processing the transactions that build these blocks. For example, when you send a transaction to the Bitcoin network, a miner solves the encryption puzzles within that transaction to add its hash to the current block being built. Miners are crucial to maintaining the integrity of the system, as they ensure that every transaction is legitimate and that no one is using the network to double spend (sending the same value to two different places). Blockchain networks that use miners process transactions using a mechanism called Proof of Work, meaning that miners have to actively do work (and compete against each other) with their computers to validate transactions. There are other mechanisms, such as Proof of Stake, wherein validators are chosen to build blocks based on the amount of a currency they hold in what is called a staking wallet. Regardless of the mechanism, Blockchain reaches distributed consensus thanks to an individual or individuals connected to network nodes who process transactions for the network. What is Tangle? That last point is where Tangle and blockchain differ the most. Instead of having a group of miners or validators dedicated to processing transactions, everyone sending a transaction is responsible for processing other transactions on the Tangle. What’s more, this means that no one is required to run a crypto’s core software and connect to network nodes to validate transactions. IOTA, for example, uses the Direct Acyclic Graph (DAG) algorithm to manage its distributed ledger. This allows the network to reach distributed consensus without using blockchain technology or storing transactions in blocks. To accomplish this, every transaction on the network must confirms two previous transactions before it can be validated. So if you were to send 10 IOTA to your friend, your computer would then single out two previously unconfirmed transactions, process them, and store them on the Tangle. Then, yours would be added to the queue and solved by another user on the network. According to IOTA’s website and whitepaper, there are a handful of noteworthy advantages that Tangle holds over blockchain technology: Decentralized protections: Since everyone using the network is responsible for its upkeep, it doesn’t require miners; and since it doesn’t require miners, it’s not susceptible to the sort of mining centralization that ASIC mining has brought to Bitcoin and other Proof-of-Work, non-ASIC-resistant cryptocurrencies. Quantum resistance: The IOTA team has laid out how the Tangle would offer a security buffer for cryptocurrencies against quantum computing, which could threaten the security of blockchain technology. Scalability and micropayments: Currently, these are two of the Tangle’s biggest benefits. In theory, Tangle networks actually scale more efficiently the more people use them. That’s because the more transactions that are pushed through the network, the more there are to process others. Furthermore, the consensus mechanism is inherently low-cost and friendly towards micropayments thanks to these peer-to-peer confirmations. The last two points are key to understanding the market IOTA is especially targeting. IOTA was built for the Internet of Things, the ecosystem of smart devices that use the internet in some fashion to function (e.g., Google Home, smart TVs, those fancy fridges that also tell you the weather). In a future where all of these machines are part of an interconnected infrastructure of internet-run devices, they’ll need a means to exchange data and value in real time at little to no cost. Theoretically, the Tangle makes it possible to perform such transactions, micro or otherwise, in a manner that won’t cause the same network bloat as Bitcoin (which, in its current state, does not scale too successfully). I say “theoretically” because, while IOTA and its Tangle sound like a godsend for scalability and micropayments, the network has not yet been proven on a mass scale. Within the speculative market, it’s held up, but we’ll wait to see how this rabbit runs when it’s implemented into the Internet of Things before we get too hopped up on the future of Tangle technology.

Bitfinex’ed Twitter Account is Back in Action After Brief Suspension

It did not take long for someone to yell at Bitfinex once again. The infamous Bitfinex’ed account is back on Twitter in full force. It is evident this individual still has a lot of issues to settle with the exchange. It is worth mentioning this Twitter account was suspended a few hours ago. Ever since that time, it was only a matter of time until things returned back to normal. As one would come to expect, the Bitfinex’ed account is not done just yet. In fact, some new “evidence’ has come to services. The suspension of this Twitter account is highly controversial. While Bitfinex’ed has some strong opinions on Bitfinex and Tether, there is no reason to ban him or her from social media. For some reason, Twitter received sufficient complaints to get rid of the account altogether. Unsurprisingly, this didn’t last all that long. Earlier today, Bitfinex’ed began tweeting once again. It is still unclear why this account went dark for a while or how the situation was resolved so quickly. Bitfinex’ed is Back in Action It seems there are some bot-based reports to take into account. Unlike what people may think, Twitter bots are very real. Most of them focus on following and retweeting, but they also have reporting functions. With enough people or bots to report tweets, it’s only a matter of time until Twitter takes notice. More specifically, Bitfinex’ed claims a few thousand bots were deployed in quick succession. It seems the account also gained over 400,000 potentially fake followers in the past few weeks. Who is behind all of this, remains a big mystery for the time being. No one even knows who Bitfinex’ed is in real life either. Twitter acknowledges the ban was a big mistake and apologized for this unfortunate event. The relationship between Tether and Bitfinex is still very questionable as of right now. Unfortunately, there is no evidence to suspect foul play despite how shady things may look. It will be interesting to see how Bitfinex’ed will move on. More specifically, a recent tweet discusses the relationship between Tether and Friedman LLP. That relationship dissolved rather abruptly without much further explanation. Bitfinex’ed is convinced this is a move initiated by the auditor rather than Tether themselves. Whether or not that is effectively true, has yet to be determined at this time. Rest assured there are a lot of strong opinions on this development. Header image courtesy of Shutterstock The post Bitfinex’ed Twitter Account is Back in Action After Brief Suspension appeared first on Bitcoin Network, News, Charts, Guides & Analysis.

Slovenia: Local Bank Forced to Stop Selling Cryptocurrency Via ATMs

A tiny bank in Slovenia has been forced to stop selling cryptocurrency from its ATMs. Hranilnica Lon only had 15 automated teller machines but announced proudly last September that they’d decided to allow the purchase of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies directly from the machines. This was done via BitIns coupons, which are traded directly for digital currency. Since launching the initiative, the bank claims to have sold coupons for more than half a million euros worth of cryptocurrency. This is fairly impressive for such a small bank in just four months. The news that they’d be halting immediately followed a press conference by Banka Slovenije on January 18. There was little reasoning given at the time. However, since then STA and Total Slovenia News have learned from “unofficial information” that the decision was made based on a legislative provision restricting banks from selling financial products. Since the law in Slovenia does not recognise cryptocurrency as a financial product, Hranilnica Lon is excluded from offering Bitcoin and other digital currencies from their ATMs or in-branch. Slovenia has previously gained a reputation for being a cryptocurrency-friendly nation. Exchange platform BitStamp was headquartered there in their early years and the country has become something of a hotbed for initial coin offerings. However, with the rising popularity of the new sector, clamourings for more protective legislation have also been increasing. There are many who fear the risk of abuse has grown so pronounced that greater regulation is sorely needed. In the central bank’s press conference on January 18, it was stated that they were not seeking to regulate cryptocurrencies directly themselves. They did suggest that the European Central Bank was mulling over legislation to cover the entire eurozone, however. The bank also acknowledged that digital currency could pose a risk to the financial stability of nations should the amount of money pouring into them continue to increase. The post Slovenia: Local Bank Forced to Stop Selling Cryptocurrency Via ATMs appeared first on NewsBTC.

Winklevoss Twins Lay Into “Privileged Minority” Cryptocurrency Critics

The post Winklevoss Twins Lay Into “Privileged Minority” Cryptocurrency Critics appeared first on CCN While speaking to CNBC at the Milken Institute’s MENA Summit in Abu Dhabi, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, better known as the Winklevoss twins, took a dig at the older generation of the financial community who mostly criticizes cryptocurrencies, stating that they don’t understand the future of money. The Winklevoss twins were asked to respond to The post Winklevoss Twins Lay Into “Privileged Minority” Cryptocurrency Critics appeared first on CCN

T-Mobile Faces Lawsuit Over Stolen Crypto Funds

T-Mobile is one of the biggest mobile carriers in the US. This status does not protect it from lawsuits being filed against it, though. One T-Mobile customer has decided to file a lawsuit after hackers stole his cryptocurrency portfolio. In his opinion, the company failed to enforce sufficient security measures. Several thousand dollars worth of money was stolen, including some BitConnect funds. T-Mobile Finds Itself in a Pickle It is never fun to hear about people having their cryptocurrency portfolios stolen. Anyone who relies on exchanges or online wallets to store cryptocurrency funds is always at risk of losing money in one way or another. According to the lawsuit against T-Mobile, the mobile provider did not enact sufficient security measures to keep the hackers out. As it happened, the user lost access to his account altogether because the culprits had taken over his T-Mobile account, which is absolutely unacceptable in this day and age. Carlos Tapang filed the lawsuit after noticing his family’s phones suddenly restarted and were wiped of all their data without warning. After getting in touch with T-Mobile, he found out his phone number had been canceled and ported to AT&T. While it is not uncommon for people to change mobile providers, this change of heart was not initiated by Tapang or any of his family members. If someone provides sufficient personal information, they can simply have things switched over to a new provider in a matter of minutes. It seems at least one hacker – or potentially a group of hackers – provided T-Mobile with sufficient information to trick a call center operator into porting Tapang’s number to AT&T. With this phone number under their control, the culprits gained access to one of Tapang’s cryptocurrency accounts and changed the password. All holdings in this account were liquidated on the open market. According to sources, the account held 1,000 OMG tokens and 19.6 BitConnect coins. A total of 2.875 Bitcoin was then transferred out of Tapang’s account. Even though this attack occurred on November 7, Tapang only recently decided to take T-Mobile to court. As cryptocurrency transfers are non-refundable, the financial loss is squarely on him. The exchange affected by this “hack” is not to blame, as the assailants had access to Tapang’s phone number to verify and authorize all transactions. Claiming T-Mobile is the “bad seed” may also be a stretch too far, even though the company could make it harder for people to switch phone numbers to a different carrier over the phone. The lawsuit claims the US telco failed to implement a security measure outlined in its own policies. More specifically, users can attach a private PIN to their account as an extra layer of security. Even though Tapang has such a private PIN, the transfer of his phone number was authorized without this code. It is evident a call center operator is to blame in this regard, even though the parent company failed to train its staffers properly. It’s a very dicey situation which will hopefully have a positive outcome. It is evident the theft of Tapang’s BitConnect balance may not be a bad thing. This notorious Ponzi scheme has collapsed entirely in recent weeks and the value per BCC has plummeted. That doesn’t mean Tapang shouldn’t be reimbursed for losing his money, though. This debacle further highlights the need for people to store cryptocurrencies in an offline manner. Leaving money on an exchange or online wallet is asking for trouble, regardless of how little you may own.

Online Sex Shops Are Hoping to Revolutionize Industry with Cryptocurrencies

Despite the fact that her industry brings in billions of dollars per year, Polly Rodriguez, founder of online sex shop Unbound, and her peers, have faced a lot of flak from banks and credit-card companies. “When you get labeled as an adult company, you get blacklisted, effectively,” Rodriguez said. “The moment you put it into code and take out the subjective moral judgment, it’s a shift.” Many established financial firms consider sex-toy sellers high risk, lumping them in with businesses such as escort services and pornography websites, which can sometimes flirt with illegality. And credit-card companies are also wary of chargebacks, which happen when a cardholder claims a transaction is fraudulent. In the quest for freedom from these complications, some adult companies are cheering the rise of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and the other digital-payment tokens, which can help them skirt skeptical intermediaries and allow customers to make direct payments. This is big news for the cryptosphere: According to London-based market-research firm Technavio, sex toys alone haul in more than $20 billion per year around the world, and by 2020, sales are expected to reach almost $30 billion. Xavi Clos, head of production at BaDoink VR, a virtual-reality porn-production company, said that tokens show big potential in the adult industry because they’re anonymous and direct ways to accept payment. The problem, he said, is “for actual commercial use, there’s nothing that’s ready for prime time yet.” Transaction costs are still too high, and the infrastructure, subject to hacks and freezes, must improve first. Things are quickly developing. A cottage industry of digital-payment mechanisms for sex-focused businesses is emerging. One early entrant, SpankChain, is setting up a payment system based on the Ethereum blockchain. In the white paper, authored by “Spanktoshi Nakabooty” — a reference to Bitcoin’s anonymous creator(s) Satoshi Nakamoto — SpankChain explains how the tokens can be used as payment tools for webcams. The virtual payment arrangement will differentiate itself by charging a 5% fee on performer earnings, compared with the 30% to 50% charged by traditional cam services. Such tokens could revolutionize webcams, which allow performers to stream live shows while users reward them with virtual tips. Another coin for the adult-entertainment industry, called Intimate, aims to cater to webcam businesses but also extend to other areas of the industry including sex-toy retailers, short-stay hotels, and escort services (where law permits). Intimate founder Reuben Coppa spread the word about the company’s initial coin offering (ICO) late last year: it is developing something called Intimate Reputation, a blockchain-enabled rating system that allows escorts to know more about their customers before meeting them in person. The post Online Sex Shops Are Hoping to Revolutionize Industry with Cryptocurrencies appeared first on NewsBTC.

Fortune 500 Firms Express ‘Deluge of Interest’ in ICOs: Indiegogo

The post Fortune 500 Firms Express ‘Deluge of Interest’ in ICOs: Indiegogo appeared first on CCN An executive at crowdfunding giant Indiegogo said that the company has seen a “deluge of interest” since launching its initial coin offering (ICO) platform, with both startups and Fortune 500 companies approaching the company about holding token sales through the service. Jason White, who heads Indiegogo’s equity crowdfunding and token sale division, made this comment The post Fortune 500 Firms Express ‘Deluge of Interest’ in ICOs: Indiegogo appeared first on CCN

The Story of the Four BitConnect Lawsuits

Things have certainly gone from bad to worse for the BitConnect Ponzi scheme. After defrauding hundreds of investors, the company decided to pull the plug on its operation and the associated exchange. With so many people left in the dust, it was only a matter of time until the lawsuits started piling up. So far, we have seen a total of four lawsuits filed against BitConnect in various regions. It is evident this company will continue to face a lot of backlash over its business venture. Four BitConnect Lawsuits Have Appeared Anyone who dislikes BitConnect or lost money in this notorious Ponzi scheme will be glad to learn that lawsuits are being filed as we speak. More specifically, there are now four different lawsuits against this project and its parent companies. The most recent litigation was filed in Minnesota around a week ago. Patricia Mengesha wants to hold BitConnect accountable for tricking investors by running a well-coordinated investment scam. It is evident a lot of people lost money due to this project, even though they mainly have themselves to blame in this regard. According to the lawsuit, BitConnect scammed “thousands of Minnesotans” and “hundreds of thousands of Americans”. While these claims are rather bold, no one will deny that BitConnect attracted a lot of attention throughout 2017. Even though most people know it was a scam, some took the risk in the hopes of making good money. That decision has backfired for a lot of people, which was to be expected. Mengesha herself invested a total of US$12,770 into BitConnect, all of which was reduced to a few hundred dollars in the end. This lawsuit comes on the heels of Paul Long and Kiandra Love’s similar lawsuit against BitConnect. They’ve also targeted Ryan Maasen, one of the Ponzi scheme’s most active promoters on YouTube. By making investors believe they will obtain an interest-bearing asset, a lot of people were tricked into buying BCC over the months. Especially with all cryptocurrency markets rising last year, the promises made by BitConnect seemed more than legitimate to these plaintiffs. Both had invested several thousand dollars into BitConnect and saw their earnings reduced by 90% or more when the scam shut down. A class action lawsuit against this Ponzi was filed in late January. A temporary restraining order was subsequently issued, which made a lot of headlines. That lawsuit was filed in Kentucky and accused BitConnect of scamming thousands of people in the state. The lawsuit also names Ryan Maasen, who is quickly becoming one of the most wanted people in the world of online fraud. Promoting a notorious Ponzi scheme on YouTube will eventually catch up with you, to say the least. All this drama was set in motion by the first BitConnect lawsuit filed in Florida. Several victims joined forces and filed a lawsuit representing their combined US$771,000 in losses. Unlike the others, this lawsuit specifically goes after BitConnect and five individual YouTube promoters. This list includes Trevon James, CryptoNick, Glenn Arcaro, Ryan Hildreth, and Craig Grant. It is evident this is only the beginning of the end of the notorious Ponzi scheme and anyone who has publicly recruited investors through referral marketing. We can only hope all victims recover their money in one way or another, but that seems highly unlikely at this stage.