Was die SEC ja auch schon mündlich bestätigt hat, alle ICOs sind (ausnahmslos) SEC relevant. (ETH auch)
Ein wahrscheinliches Nö: The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s chairman has seconded a colleague’s analysis that found the world’s second-largest cryptocurrency likely does not qualify as a security https://www.coindesk.com/jay-clayton-coin-center-letterEin (ziemlich) sicheres Doch:  Die Argumentation von SEC Chairman Jay Clayton gegen Ethereum als "security" war im Wesentlichen, dass Ethereum zwar beim ICO, also zum Zeitpunkt des direkten Verkaufs der Ether durch Ethereum an die "Anleger" eine security gewesen wäre, es aber im späteren Verlauf, also beim heutigen Verkauf von einem Anleger an den anderen auf einer Börse, nicht als solche zu betrachten ist. In einfacheren Worten: wenn ich einen ICO durchführe, unterliege ich der Aufsicht durch die SEC. wenn ich später die Coins weiterverkaufe, nicht. So lange es nix Schriftliches gibt z.B. No-Action Letters > alles SEC- (und Kurs-) relevant Die SEC kann nicht verbindlich - da mündlich sagen zuerst so aber dann mal später so - dazu hat sie ein zu klaren Auftrag / Rule-Sets (klar - gilt nur für Emittenten / Börsen) Grundsätzlich OK, dass man sich unter dem Deckmantel : "Wir wollen ja nicht gleich die Innovationen stoppen" ein bissel 'versteckt - aber die rechtliche Lage ist völlig eindeutig. Klar, man spielt hier noch eine Zeit lang, und schaut wo Strafen den US in die Kasse spielt, die ganz gossen Fische sind sicher bereits im Focus - Banken wissen das genau und warten zu.  |
|
|
|
The primary goal / purpose of bitcoin was (cheap) P2P eCash (cash tx are cheap) so btc or eth is not what u want here. But u can always link any (hashed) contract u want with the op_return and let a bunch of other payed services (incl yourself) execute the code (hashed) - so not all miners need to do that 'permissionless' < what is questionable to have anyhow. So smart contracts can be linked into bitcoin - better not such as ETH does - BSV is doing such best imo - and stays at P2P eCash as a base Service. Edit: Just seen - see how this is coming in https://www.coindesk.com/swiss-watchdog-rules-crypto-miners-ico-seriously-violated-laws |
|
|
|
Wenn das stimmt, wofür bekommt der Vogel einen Dr. h.c.? Weil er von Satoshi die Idee abgepaust hat und das Produkt ETH genannt wird?
Du scheinst Ethereum nicht so ganz verstanden zu haben. Buterin hat für die Entwicklung von Ethereum als turingtaugliche Programmiersprache schon den world technology award erhalten. Da hat er die Ehrendoktorwürde sicherlich auch verdient. Mit einer Pause von Bitcoin hat das nichts zu tun. Falsch. Falsch. Falsch. Ethereum ist keine turingtaugliche Programmiersprache, sondern nutzt eine*, nämlich Solidity. Und die hat auch keineswegs Vitalik Buterin entwickelt, sondern Gavin Wood. Vitalik hat lediglich das Whitepaper verfasst. Normalerweise lese ich das Klopapier von Shitcoins nicht, im Falle von Ethereum habe ich mir das dennoch mal angetan. Es ist zu (geschätzt) 75% eine Beschreibung bestehender Konzepte, insbesondere Bitcoin und Colored Coins. Nur ein vergleichsweise kleiner Teil des Papiers geht überhaupt auf die wenigen Anknüpfungspunkte für eine potentiell umfangreichere Skriptsprache ein. Anders gesagt: Vitalik hat Bitcoin kopiert, ein paar Datenfelder und Statusübergänge definiert, und dann eine Programmiersprache von Gavin Wood reinkopiert. Das kann jeder Drittsemester in Informatik. Wenn man dafür einen Doktor erhält, verstehe ich nicht, warum Herr Guttenberg nicht mindestens Prof. ist  * genau genommen nutzt Ethereum noch weitere Sprachen, bzw. eignet sich dafür So euphorisch Du auch gegen Ethereum stürmst und wütest, dennoch wird es eines Tages Bitcoin überholen. Ich verstehe auch nicht wo dein Problem ist? In der Zentralisierung? Ist doch super, jedes Land braucht einen Anführer ansonsten herrscht Anarchy. Gleiches trifft bei den kryptographischen Währungen zu. Ausserdem Laufe ich lieber einem Genie hinterher anstatt mich auf schlitzäugige Miner zu verlassen und mir einzureden Bitcoin wäre dezentral. Imho ist Ethereum schlicht ein weiterer Altcoin und das ist okay. Was mich auf die Palme bringt, sind der Hype, die Buzzwords und das Bullshitbingo, welches die Ethereum-Marketingabteilung nutzt, um unbedarfte Investoren zu verführen. "Weltcomputer" läßt grüßen. Dass der ein oder andere dann beim Hype mitmacht, weil er Geld in Ethereum versenkt hat, ist menschlich und verständlich. Ist ja in gewisser Weise das selbe, was Bitcoiner gegenüber Fiatlern machen. Nichtsdestotrotz, Ethereum bringt an sich nichts Neues sondern spaltet nur bzw. vergrößert die Möglichkeiten von Betrügern. Braucht das die Kryptocommunity wirklich? Verhindern kann man es nicht. Die Umstellung von PoW auf PoS wird einen Schlussstrich ziehen. Das selbe passiert, wenn diese Umstellung wegen technischer Probeme doch nicht kommt (Vertrauensverlust). Ersteres ist die sicherere Variante Ethereum loszuwerde. Zweiteres ist aber wohl die wahrscheinlichere Variante. Das ganze Beschreibt ziemlich gut, was eine Security im Sinne der SEC Aufgaben ausmacht. Es ist ein Spekulationsobjekt mit einem Versprechen, das Anleger dazu bewegt zu investieren und den Kursverlauf ( Thema !) zu beeinflussen / die Emmittentin reich zu machen. Was die SEC ja auch schon mündlich bestätigt hat, alle ICOs sind (ausnahmslos) SEC relevant. (ETH auch) Warum gibt es aber noch nichts schriftliches dazu ? Warum ist die BAKKT nicht ready ? Kommen bald die Strafen aus US ? |
|
|
|
I am beginning to appreciate any fud or fomo within this thread and its good for the coin to be talked about constantly as they always say " publicity be it a bad publicity, is a good publicity!". Except for in the case of bcash… in which I think bad publicity is actually bad. This coin is just getting back to where it was in late December, whereas most other coins are sitting on pretty substantial gains over this same time period (BSV is also an exception). Whatever fud is thrown on BCH by naysayers only supports the idea that its of high importance and that its competitors are trying to take it down but unfortunately, the crypto community are getting more mature now that they know better now how to spot a shitcoin easily. With maturity there comes industry. With industry there comes risks, legal & compliance. With latter there can only be a simple P2P electronic cash - with simplest stable impl and the road map max scale and to fix bugs - no games - just Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
This is pathetic, I have witnessed first-hand the countless attacks on twitter crypto community against Craig Wright. People are crazy, it's a shame to see their childish behaviour and total lack of respect. Read Craig Wright's work, the 3/4 of half of these morons parasitic will never understand anything, the other half are bots, but for the others they will move on. I read here the term idocracy seems to correspond to the climate. Instead of being supportive and advancing the research, the guys are out there sucking their dick on the networks and eating their own shit. Unity is strength and assholes divide it!
People who are criticizing Dr Craig are idiots and don't know what they are saying. Or they are bots! Nobody in their right mind would say anything bad about the founder of the real Satoshi's Vision coin, the true bitcoin. All this trolling can't have anything to do with our great founder claiming to be Satoshi but failing to prove it by moving coins or signing genesis addresses. It also can't have anything to do with BSV losing value all the time. Ppl who can ONLY talk about ppl i.o. to destroy a thing are not worth listening. Discuss about things in constructive ways about its Facts - that helps. Never ever go after ppl - that shows how ur mind works. |
|
|
|
What you posted concerns bitcoincash BCH not BSV. Understand this from 2018-2019: https://ibb.co/0XPdS1NTo sum up "it appears" that Bitcoin cash (BTC absolutely too maybe) belongs to Asia! The funds come from CiC visibly (sovereign investment fund) and return to the state coffers after all this journey. This is what we must remember from the graph and may be demonstrated, if it happens, it will not be without consequences. Mr Roger Ver, Mr Sterlin Lujan, Mr Sechet, Mr Chancellor, Mr Cox and the "BTC-BCH partisans" are clearly "maybe" being fooled (hoodwinked), as long as they have shit in their eyes, they won't realize the depth of the fuck received up until the Nanites. It would be desirable for him to join BSV if they want to support what "Bitcoin BSV is created for, the very essence of what will happen", this decision belongs to him. BCH, BTC, without Satoshi Vision has been a waste of time. Remember that Blockchain tip: When the lie takes the elevator, the truth takes the stairs, it takes longer to get there but it always happens in the end. I suggest strongly to support BSV Bitcoin Satoshi Vision not BCH, BTC and others vulnerable clone blockchain..... Communicate on your networks and share BSV Vision would be a good start to introduce your world. This is a result of ABC who tried (and enforced) to split the old BCH chain and community but wanted to keep the ticker BCH and forced to move clean and true Bitcoin impl into BSV. Bitcoin (as defined by the Satoshi White Paper) is not bound to any ticker - so that's a good lessen anyway. |
|
|
|
lightning will only save itself, like doctors, the army and the police are interested in treating, but not healing. Big block of BCH is more interesting at this reason
This sounds really blockstreamy, sadly BCH doesn't want to fully scale and stay at purpose of p2p cash. So bsv is the only committed solution for staying true Bitcoin for now. What's the point of "fully scaling" if nobody uses your coin? BCH blockchain size: 167.20 GB BSV blockchain size: 169.49 GB BTC blockchain size: 244.81 GBBCH active addresses: 23,353 BSV active addresses: 8,198 BTC active addresses: 580,395What's to point reporting static data and not getting the dynamics and potential down here? Trying to trick newbies? The point is relatively few people use BCH, and far less use BSV. "Dynamics" = nothing to help your cause. "Potential" = your shitcoiner hopes and dreams. Btc is not for u either. Go and ask Luke for permission  |
|
|
|
lightning will only save itself, like doctors, the army and the police are interested in treating, but not healing. Big block of BCH is more interesting at this reason
This sounds really blockstreamy, sadly BCH doesn't want to fully scale and stay at purpose of p2p cash. So bsv is the only committed solution for staying true Bitcoin for now. What's the point of "fully scaling" if nobody uses your coin? BCH blockchain size: 167.20 GB BSV blockchain size: 169.49 GB BTC blockchain size: 244.81 GBBCH active addresses: 23,353 BSV active addresses: 8,198 BTC active addresses: 580,395What's to point reporting static data and not getting the dynamics and potential down here? Trying to trick newbies? Watch out things always coming at different dynamics especially within Bitcoin https://de.scribd.com/document/395082279/Bcash-Suit |
|
|
|
lightning will only save itself, like doctors, the army and the police are interested in treating, but not healing. Big block of BCH is more interesting at this reason
This sounds really blockstreamy, sadly BCH doesn't want to fully scale and stay at purpose of p2p cash. So bsv is the only committed solution for staying true Bitcoin for now. |
|
|
|
How many people are using the Lightning Network?? I have seen many people are talking about it, but how long have you been using that in the recent days?
It's just miles away from being somehow secure (and never will be) like on-chain was proven for 10y now. |
|
|
|
I would prefer to read discussions centered on BCH and make this thread more productive rather than inject absurd ideas for the purpose of harming each other favorite coins, including all its competitors. Lets have sense of maturity guys. This one is quite a deep and good discussion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p716-H5Nc2cAnd yes - Bitcoin is P2P cash at first place - and Needs to scale as much as possible to serve the world. We do not have the time to cripple scaling (this is some fancy socialism like control inject). And sure this will end up in (many) big data Centers - no raspi nodes can Keep up here. But things will be open and 'decentralized' enough to be secure for the planet. All other gimmicks the Bitcoin could do are nice to haves and need to be of economical sense - but all Needs to stay clean and legal. DSV / Wormholehooks are not. |
|
|
|
BITCOIN SV SECURITY AUDIT HELPS RESOLVE MULTIPLE VULNERABILITIES ACROSS DIFFERENT BITCOIN BLOCKCHAINS
March 1, 2019
Denial of Service Vulnerabilities Repaired in Bitcoin SV version 0.1.1
The Bitcoin SV (BSV) community is committed to the “Satoshi Vision” for delivering a secure and scalable Bitcoin network that supports the world’s new money and use as the global enterprise blockchain. As part of its commitment to professionalise the Bitcoin development process, the Bitcoin SV Node implementation team engaged the services of Trail of Bits, a leading cybersecurity research company with expertise in blockchain technologies, to perform a security audit of the Bitcoin SV Node implementation source code. The security audit revealed multiple vulnerabilities that Bitcoin SV did not itself cause but likely inherited from the Bitcoin Core (BTC) and thus Bitcoin ABC software for Bitcoin Cash (BCH) from which the Bitcoin SV were forked. However, Bitcoin SV’s audit and professionalised approached to security has now helped all these major blockchains resolve the vulnerabilities.
A full security audit requires significant time and cost to perform, but the Bitcoin SV Node implementation team did so (with financial support from its partners at CoinGeek) as a critical step to bring more professionalism to the Bitcoin ecosystem. We believe this is the first time any Bitcoin node implementation has ever been security audited in the 10-year history of Bitcoin.
After conducting its security audit, Trail of Bits reported numerous findings. The Bitcoin SV Node implementation team considered three of these findings to be significant enough to warrant responsible and confidential disclosure to other potentially affected Bitcoin implementations – specifically to implementations for the Bitcoin Core (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) chains which compete against BSV.
The three vulnerabilities have been rated as medium severity with low difficulty to exploit and expose the Bitcoin node software to Denial of Service attacks resulting in a high overall risk rating. The Bitcoin SV Node implementation team disclosed the details of these vulnerabilities to other Bitcoin implementations (for Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Cash) on 10 January 2019, requesting full confidentially until 11 February 2019 and that detailed information about the vulnerabilities be kept confidential until 1 March 2019. This process follows industry best practice by providing sufficient time for development teams to release and deploy updated software before the details of the vulnerabilities become public knowledge.
The details of the vulnerabilities were disclosed to the software development teams of Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin XT, Bitcoin ABC, and Bitcoin Core. An analysis of the vulnerable portions of the source code indicated that these software implementations may be affected by these vulnerabilities – most likely because the vulnerabilities first existed in the Bitcoin Core software before it was forked by Bitcoin ABC to create ABC (an implementation for Bitcoin Cash), and before Bitcoin SV thus inherited these vulnerabilities from Bitcoin ABC.
1) The first vulnerability, CVE-2018-1000891, would enable an attacker to send specially crafted network packets to the target node which would needlessly consume large amounts of processor and network resources. The attack could result in a Denial of Service by exhausting processor and network resources and would not be detected or prevented by the software.
2) The second vulnerability, CVE-2018-1000892, would similarly enable an attacker to send specially crafted network packets which would needlessly consume large amounts of processor and network resources. The attack could result in a Denial of Service by exhausting processor and network resources and would not be detected or prevented by the software.
3) The third vulnerability, CVE-2018-1000893, would also enable an attacker to send specially crafted network packets which would needlessly consume large amounts of memory resources. The attack could result in a Denial of Service by exhausting memory resources and causing system failure. The attack would not be detected or prevented by the software.
For Bitcoin SV, these vulnerabilities were addressed in release 0.1.1 of the Bitcoin SV Node implementation which was released on 11 February 2019.
Bitcoin SV Node Lead Developer Daniel Connolly remarked:
“By organising this security audit (with funding by CoinGeek) and by sharing the results in a responsible and secure manner, the Bitcoin SV Node team, nChain and our partners at CoinGeek demonstrate our commitment to increase the quality of Bitcoin software and professionalise the engineering process.”
Even though the Bitcoin SV Node implementation team did not create these vulnerabilities and likely inherited them from Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin ABC, its groundbreaking approach to apply software industry best practices to Bitcoin node development has now also benefited the competing Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Cash ecosystems.
The Bitcoin SV Node reference implementation is a project of the Bitcoin Association. The Bitcoin Association’s Founding President Jimmy Nguyen observed:
“As I’ve said before, it’s time for Bitcoin to grow up and professionalise. This security audit is a big step in that direction, because no other Bitcoin project is taking such a comprehensive approach to security. The results and improvements exemplify how the Bitcoin SV Node team is taking steps to prepare Bitcoin SV to have the reliability needed to become the world’s new money and the global enterprise blockchain. It also demonstrates that Bitcoin SV is now leading the Bitcoin industry, even helping other projects that deviated from the Satoshi Vision for Bitcoin.”
Source : https://bitcoinsv.io/2019/03/01/bitcoin-sv-security-audit-helps-resolve-multiple-vulnerabilities-across-different-bitcoin-blockchains/
Thx for so much oversight. Good manners |
|
|
|
Also "suspended": twitter.com/DrCSWright Nuked for plagiarism would be my guess Plagerism on the Twitter platform? https://youtu.be/jd6H4tVsrNwActually I was referring to the times he was caught plagiarizing academic articles. I listened to as much of that youtube as I could stand. He's a vengeful moron, all bark and no bite. Have a nice life. Typical blubber trolling. If u have facts stand up and sue him. If not, all ignore u |
|
|
|
Nope, he seems to be about nuking twitter and trolls, but this gets over trolls heads... Twitter s first solution was to run away as trolls always do |
|
|
|
bin ich ein BTCitcoin fundamentalist oder öffne ich mich notwendigen entwicklungen um BTC zur weltwährung zu machen? die frage aller fragen!  die antwort ist 21Ich fordere nur maximale Blocksize bei minimaler Protokolldefinition, wer ist der fundamentalere Bitcoinmaximalist? SW , LN , .. is kein Bitcoin und hilft nüscht. |
|
|
|
Mir egal Ver oder Wright, Hauptsache das Bitcoin - Satoshi Protokoll bleibt sauber und folgt der einzig existierenden Speck / bindenden Definition und skaliert on chain. Alles andere ist experimental Müll und wird nix für den Globus.
Lightning ;-) Speck ist weg mit Lightning ^ Inwiefern? Skalierung, OnChain, Protokoll... was passt aus deiner Sicht nicht? On chain Sicherheit und Bitcoin in a nutshell. Oder warum gibt s Bitcoin eigentlich nochmal? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
reeeeeeeeeee
