[ANN] [BSV] [Bitcoin SV] Original Satoshi Vision

[hv_]

First 'stable' coin on bsv running -

https://www.relayx.com/usdc

Bitcoin can do anything - but check if you do all legally compliant pls

[hv_]

The USDC stable coins are coming on the BSV blockchain 🔥

RelayX, one of the most popular BitcoinSV portfolios, has just added the USDC as a US dollar token on BitcoinSV supported 1 to 1 by the USDC (ERC20). To get started, users can sign up for this service by converting their BSVs to USDC. They can then send their USDC with the lowest fees on the market, on average 0.0007€ per transaction thanks to the BSV blockchain!

The USDC-SV is issued on the smartcontracts protocol of the BSV blockchain. The development of token protocols on BSV is rapidly accelerating, including RUN, Tokenized, sCrypt, Bayesian, Elas, Bitcoin Computer, and more with innovation at both layer 2 and layer 1.

The launch of USDC-SV is a major milestone as the first open and publicly available token on Bitcoin SV. Widely regarded by the crypto community in general as an impossibility, we believe this is the beginning of a token explosion on Bitcoin. A stable token has long been desired by many applications and users in the BSV ecosystem for use cases such as social media, gaming, trading, financial services, etc.

RelayX also launches BSV / USDC-SV Exchange

Parallel to the release of USDC-SV, RelayX is also launching BSV / USDC-SV bi-directional swaps, allowing anyone to exchange almost instantaneously between the two cryptosystems on the BSV blockchain.

BSV / USDC-SV trading allows traders, businesses and users to hedge the risk of fluctuating BSV prices by instantly exchanging their BSVs for USDCs without ever leaving Bitcoin. BSV trading will no longer be limited to centralized trading, often with extremely conservative block confirmation times of 20 or more for deposits and withdrawals.

Even more interestingly, one can imagine a future where the currency you use on Bitcoin applications such as Twetch or Streamanity becomes only a parameter. A viewer could pay 10 cents in USDC, while the content creator receives the funds in the form of BSV.

USDC (ERC20) - issued by Circle and Coinbase, is the fastest growing stablecoin, supported by hundreds of fintech companies in their products and services. The USDC has recorded more than $50 billion in trading and settlement volume on public blockchains. In recent months, as a result of increased global demand for digital dollars, the USDC has experienced significant growth, with an increase of more than 200% in USDC outstanding from pre-pandemic levels, with more than $2.2 billion outstanding. But the explosion of Ethereum's fees has made it expensive to use.

About RelayX

A Bitcoin SV Superwallet allowing consumers, developers and businesses to access the blockchain. RelayX is used by thousands of people around the world and is integrated with leading Bitcoin SV applications including Twetch, Streamanity, Baemail, Dimely, ShaWars, BitPic and many others.

If you feel ready to take the first step in the future, join our page and test the best applications in the Metanet at https://metastore.app/apps?sort=money

The most popular Metanet site to date is twetchapp, an incensurable twitter version on the blockchain, check it out!

 https://www.relayx.com/

Yes - all cool, but here with 'ncensurable'  u might not meet proper expectations - there are reasons why content may not be shown to the puplic and I guess twetch can handle such

Correct me if i m wrong

The better value prop is that you re the owner of your content and stay - not like twitter et al


so it's not really possible to delete your stuff  (once all is legit)., that should put some pressure on the nature of you content and lead to better content / less trolling  ( so the theory)

[hv_]

Right, Satoshi told Mike Hearn:  There is only one chain

And that doesn't have SegWit forked  away - don't care about tickers

Hard to learn, if you can only think number goes up on a ticker ...

[hv_]

Geoaspock - just learned what they do, very interesting

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/nchain-leads-investment-round-in-extreme-scale-data-firm-geospock-301144586.html

so thing going realliy industrial now, bye bye hobby projects

[hv_]

https://coingeek.com/coingeek-live-2020-regulating-the-digital-assets-industry-is-key-to-future-growth/

CoinGeek Live 2020: Regulating the digital assets industry is key to future growth
 
The days when digital assets were considered a lawless wild west which was beyond the reach of regulators is way behind us. On Day 1 of the CoinGeek Live conference, some of the leading minds in the legal industry discussed the regulation of the digital asset industry, letting us in on how to build a compliant Bitcoin business in the U.S., Japan and the European Union.

While regulators started off on the back foot in policing the digital assets industry, most of them are now catching up, Joshua Ashley Klayman told the virtual audience. Klayman is a senior counsel at Linklaters LLP, a London-based law firm with over 3,000 lawyers across the world. Based in New York, Klayman works with digital asset companies that are seeking to get into the U.S. market.

“It’s been said many times that there’s a lack of regulatory clarity. I think at this point, that’s just an excuse. I think if you engage with the regulators, you can find a path forward,” she remarked.


Klayman was joined on stage by Howard Schweitzer, the CEO of Cozen O’Connor Public Strategies. The other panelists were Masakazu Masujima of Tokyo-based law firm Mori Hamada & Matsumoto, and Dr. Lukas Repa, the head of digital innovation and blockchain at the European Commission.

In a panel moderated by Bitcoin Association Founding President Jimmy Nguyen, the speakers shared some of the most common concerns that regulators have with digital assets. Consumer protection, cybersecurity, privacy, fraud, AML and KYC procedures and environmental friendliness were some of the most common across most jurisdictions.

Harmonization of digital asset regulations has also become one of the key talking points in recent years. In the U.S. for instance, digital asset service providers have to acquire licenses in every other state they operate in, making it quite hectic. The BitLicense in New York has been among the most controversial, with some major companies avoiding the state altogether.

The Digital Community Exchange Act in the U.S. is seeking to eliminate these state barriers. Approved by the House of Representatives, the bill is seeking to bring the industry under the jurisdiction of the CFTC. In Europe, the European Union is also working on an EU passport for digital asset companies that allows them to obtain a license in one country and use it across the 27 member states.

While there’s need for regulation, there must be a balance between consumer protection and promotion of innovation, the four panelists jointly proposed. In Europe, the EU has been encouraging the creation of regulatory sandboxes, while in Japan, self-regulatory bodies are bridging the gap for the authorities.

To conclude, the panelists urged digital asset service providers to engage with regulators more, presenting them with solutions to their concerns.

“There are people at these regulatory bodies who are willing to work with digital asset companies. Engage them, tell them this is how we plan on solving your concerns from the onset,” Klayman concluded.

The subject is interesting, without trust no regulation... without regulation... no state therefore no existence. All open and in conformity with the laws. This is not the case for many other coins.

It would be more than necessary for the E.U, CN, RU, U.S. and the world to understand that it can move legally and safely towards technology.

But it could ask for infallible and solid guarantees? I wonder if the protocol can withstand quantum technologies that explore all the tracks at the same time?

Tell my when quantum tech is ready to 'hack' sha2 ?
If so, some adresses might be  at risk, cause they carry high amounts >> go and split funds , good fees are lowes and tech like handcash is getting down to such
BSV is transparent and regulator friendly, you might get back your funds via  police & usual legal paths - good to have that
If such a hack gets real issue (50y?) the crypt algo can be replaced in a hard fork

- so I don't see issues here (for many years)

and regulation witll help against evil / stealing

https://coingeek.com/coingeek-live-2020-regulating-the-digital-assets-industry-is-key-to-future-growth/

[hv_]

https://coingeek.com/crime-cartel-bitmex-kraken-binance-bitcoin-com-blockstream-ethereum/

[hv_]

OK - and what exactly  IS  crypto ?

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-william-p-barr-announces-publication-cryptocurrency-enforcement-framework

https://decrypt.co/44394/attorney-general-plan-crack-down-crypto-framework


"The report also said that criminals CAN avoid being traced by using cryptocurrency instead of fiat and request digital assets to pay for illicit goods, such as child pornography or weapons—seemingly ignoring the fact that cash is used for much of the same, while crypto is transacted across transparent, public ledgers."

they CAN - if protocol's purpose is to enable it ..

BTC is crypto

BSV is Bitcoin

 - do your own research anyway

[hv_]

snip ... a crypto-shitcoin, that shouldn't even exist.

yep, you must love the Barr

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-william-p-barr-announces-publication-cryptocurrency-enforcement-framework

[hv_]

Gold must be 999 to get accepted by nearly any bank on this planet  , if too much lead in it -> scam


Bitcoin not different. Too much Segwit, ... ->   Do your own research

Nearly no bank accepts btc on this planet...  

[hv_]

A single hater just hi-trolling here

Bitcoin just never cared - it works & scales like a champ - best if engaged WITH the entire world - inlc regulators, banks (cough Kraken), govs, corporates,..  , not AGAINST

 

[hv_]

Bitcoin is nicely designed to be transparent

This is perfect opposition to crime and ana anarcho trolls

Proof: No trolls are posting on Twetch. They are on Twitter et al

[hv_]

  You're damaging freedom of expression and open up free censorship out of personal complacency. Since you insist you will be rightly served.

Thus spake the shill for bank cartels and tyrannical régimes.

 As BitcoinSV is bank compatible can the technology be carried under BSV or backed up?

  Crime Cartel: BitMEX, Kraken, Binance, Bitcoin.com, Blockstream & Ethereum

[...]

One only has to ask: Is this entity pro-regulation and anti-secrecy, like Dr. Craig Wright’s Bitcoin SV?

[...]

It seems that everything is tightening up, even BTC ETH and XPR will be banned in the kingdom united by FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) starting at January 2021 https://www.fca.org.uk/news/press-releases/fca-bans-sale-crypto-derivatives-retail-consumers

See that BSV is legal!

Time will be your witness...

---- What you are doing is not honest - you take sentences from articles that I quote and then paste them in, take the context out to model a false attribution.

This is dishonest, as is attacking the work of hundreds of people without constructing anything useful except gossip.

You are here to convince yourself of your own bullshit. For almost 2 years you have been targeting BSV, the company nChain, Calvin Ayre, crypto supporters, enthusiasts and especially Craig Wright, through various pseudonyms on multiple social networks. These are concrete facts and more serious beforehand since you had already started the same circus to go after people with BCH according to your Bitcointalk history.

All you produce are corridor noises, out of context, manipulated, you denigrate, you display, you clearly have multiple attacks. Your actions are like those of a compulsive and obsessive mental patient. You have several pseudonyms here, this has been noted several times. You must realise how far you are going, this is serious! I suggest that you be diagnosed in an emergency, that you be weaned off social networks.

Having your obsessive delusions cured could certainly be very useful to you. The history of your writings and your behaviour as a powerful asshole is proof of this. ----

Bitcoin is bound under contract

Bitcoin is a technical and economical phenomenon. However, there are legal dimensions to Bitcoin that are hidden to most but vital to understand as they hint at how things might play out in the future—especially concerning BSV in comparison to BTC.

Dr. Craig Wright has published an article called “Forking and Passing Off” on his website. While there are different legal topics presented in the article, I will only focus on the contractual side of Bitcoin today.

The topic of Bitcoin as bound under contract is also discussed by Dr. Craig Wright, Joel Dalais https://coingeek.com/joel-dalais-bitcoin-is-a-1000-year-mission/ and myself here:

Time to realize Bitcoin is a contract
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NlMHu5P5U0

In the article, Dr. Craig Wright says:

Bitcoin has an issuer. In January 2009 (…) I issued 21 million bitcoin, where each individual bitcoin is an indivisible set of 100 million tokens. To distribute the tokens (…), I set up a contractual arrangement where nodes (which many people call miners today) act within a set of common rules that I defined.

Pay attention to the passage, “I set up a contractual arrangement.” Bitcoin is bound under contract. But what does that mean?

Bitcoin is not just code running on its own since inception

A contract is an agreement between parties that creates mutual obligations.

Concerning Bitcoin as bound under contract, it means that Satoshi Nakamoto made an offer (unilateral, meaning to anyone who is willing to accept and fulfill the terms) and nodes (miners) accept this offer by enforcing the Bitcoin rules (validating transactions, creating blocks).

What are the obligations though? From Satoshi Nakamoto’s side, he declares to pay the nodes for performing work in the Bitcoin network by the automatically distributed Bitcoin block rewards. From the node’s side, they simply have to accept the offer and perform their work—if successfully done, they get remunerated in Bitcoins.

This is—in short—the Bitcoin contract.

The unilateral contractual offer is still ongoing in Bitcoin SV to this very day. Dr. Craig Wright writes in his “Forking and Passing Off” article:

“As long as the rules of Bitcoin, the basic protocol does not change, I am bound under a unilateral contract to the nodes, acting as agents within the system.”

Differentiating issuance and distribution

When Dr. Craig Wright initially brought Bitcoin into existence, all Bitcoin tokens (satoshis) were issued. That means there are no “new coins to be found” by miners/nodes, no Bitcoins are “created” when block rewards are paid out. All Bitcoins are already issued, period.

What nodes do is distribute the already issued Bitcoins, acting as agents of Dr. Craig Wright.

The transfer of ownership of Bitcoins from the creator of Bitcoin to the nodes happens in the distribution. Dr. Craig Wright is paying the nodes for their work in the Bitcoin network with transferring ownership of the Bitcoins to the nodes:

Node operators are paid at a predetermined rate, based on a combination of a decreasing subsidy and the collection of fees from users of the network. (…) The tokens are paid as consideration for the effort of validating transactions to the nodes.

Let us look at BTC then, especially since SegWit

For BSV, which is the original Bitcoin according to the Bitcoin whitepaper, all of this is not a problem at all. We are sure who the issuer of Bitcoin is, and we know the contract is still ongoing as nodes enforce the rules set by Satoshi Nakamoto.

However, what about BTC concerning the contractual arrangement?

Since SegWit was implemented, BTC nodes stopped enforcing the Bitcoin rules according to the whitepaper as well as the Bitcoin website from 2008 and the end-user license agreement (EULA) in the original Bitcoin software (which are, as a mixture, the content/basis of the Bitcoin contract).

From a sole contractual perspective, this means that BTC miners are not in a contract with Satoshi Nakamoto anymore. This leads to a lot of questions:

Who did issue the SegWit-coins?
Who is distributing them?
Who is offering “BTC/SegWit” to the BTC nodes?
What is the content of the “BTC/SegWit contract”, as it cannot be the original Bitcoin whitepaper?
What about BTC nodes that mined BTC before SegWit (in accordance with the original Bitcoin contract) and then switched to mining SegWit (not in accordance)? Have they violated non-contractual or secondary contractual obligations (bad faith / deceptive practices / non proper care)?
Keep in mind: when Dr. Craig Wright issued all Bitcoins, Bitcoin had little or no valuation/market cap, you could say there was no value to Bitcoins back then. So he basically issued something that was not worth anything (and he even incurred hard costs to issue and set up Bitcoin).

This is different in BTC/SegWit though. When SegWit was implemented, which means an issuance and distribution of a new digital asset, BTC/SegWit-Coin already traded at a very high valuation.

If you issue a billion dollar worth of coins, you have an issue. And this issue is: taxes.

Bitcoin SV is stable in more ways than we thought

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBkLgATDigg

The whole contractual perspective on Bitcoin helps us understand that Bitcoin SV is not only

1) stable code-wise (locked down protocol on a software level),
2) economically stable (stable foundation to build onto),
3) but also contractually stable.

Bitcoin SV nodes are enforcing the original Bitcoin rules and are getting enumerated accordingly. They are in an ongoing contractual agreement with Dr. Craig Wright.

Users and even nodes do not have “a say” in this contract, as the unilateral offer in itself is not negotiable.

Dr. Craig Wright recently wrote an article called “The Myth of Bitcoin as a Voting System”:

I wasn’t ever voted into the system; I created Bitcoin, and I didn’t give over the control of the protocol. (…) There are no democratic changes that come from miners, or, as they are really called, nodes. The only changes in Bitcoin are cosmetic or selectively created, within the protocol. I set the protocol in stone so that there wouldn’t be any voting on anything other than on honesty. It is how Bitcoin really works.

There is no voting in Bitcoin as many BTC proponents think. You cannot just democratically vote yourself into a contract between private parties. Democracy is a political structure, while contracts are legal structures.

Users of Bitcoin are not part of the contractual agreement between Satoshi Nakamoto and the nodes, and even the nodes cannot “vote” afterwards on the contractually set rules.

Therefore, Bitcoin SV is not only stable on a software level and economically, but is also stable as bound under contract.


Source: https://coingeek.com/bitcoin-is-bound-under-contract/ Thanks to Dr. Michael Wehrmann

Here is an article reported here that leads to an interesting consideration

Oh yes, nice written up and with some tough German contribution of quality.

Meh, some might not like / few will understand:)

Regulators getting a guide

[hv_]

Cheers.

Satoshi gave a lot

I wonder what he might still wish for birthday?

 

[hv_]

BitCoin is to use for the ppl as electronic cash system for micro / nano fees (free)

PayPal, Revolut and hodl ponzi is no help at all (except number up shill trolls), good to see BitCoin is free of that shit

Happy days

[hv_]

Bitcoin is about the White Paper and its legal definition

Not about specific ppl and their own understanding or agendas

But, meh - bad Aussie is too good target, easy to: 'don't listen!'

https://youtu.be/tPecIL1FEM4

 

[hv_]

Wonder how they ll stay in a compliant world

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeldelcastillo/2020/10/29/leaked-tai-chi-document-reveals-binances-elaborate-scheme-to-evade-bitcoin-regulators/


Checkin DYOR compliant Bitcoin does not have Segwit, rbf, ctor, schnorr,... it is locked down by Satoshi at 0.1 Version

[hv_]

Dr. Wright has never brought out a brand new crypto coin BSV is Bitcoin, traceable from the Genesis block of January 2009. Other assets, such as BTC and BCH, claim the Bitcoin name and their backers will naturally attack anything that claims legitimacy on theirs.

Hoooo - yes. bad aussie, ex-BDO accountant, dont trust : listen - think for yourselfes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVeoixuHQUw

 

[hv_]

Trump calls for victory, early

He as well, who is rigth ?


https://calvinayre.com/2020/11/04/bitcoin/craig-wright-smells-victory-ahead-in-mccormack-libel-case/

[hv_]

The BSV shitshow, with their broken multisig...


https://twitter.com/dailyzhou/status/1325284207103410176

"STOP using multisig accumulator feature in ElectrumSV 1.3.7 immediately. Script “0 0” can unlock directly. Someone stolen 600 BSV of mine."

-> https://whatsonchain.com/tx/20adad8bd4cc694cfed4ccadff911433601e55b0f8779e839bc6579cb8d234f9

Bugs happen - nothing special

But: PPL stealing - this goes into  courts -  lets see what happens

[hv_]

There is no bug in BSV - there are  more in other protocols - bsv code gets audited btw

the issues are apps / 2nd layer tech

and trolls



sigh