Singapore said there is no strong reason to ban the encrypted transaction

Singapore said there is no strong reason to ban the encrypted transaction

   

A senior government official told lawmakers the monetary authority of Singapore has been encrypted currency development in research, there is no reason to ban the encrypted transaction. Other countries in the region of the city state regulations increase the pressure of the authorities, asking them to clarify their own country bitcoin position, because Asia more encryption company is seeking more business friendly environment.

Now say… It is still too early.

Singapore Deputy Prime Minister Shandaman told delegates, “encryption number and form of currency in the world are growing. Crypto currency is an experiment. Now say they will succeed too early, “he answered the lawmakers about prohibiting bitcoin transactions and other alternative problems.

Shanmugaratnam written in answer to Congress pointed out that “if some people succeed, they will be in full effect within a period of time not known.” After China and South Korea’s recent crackdown, someone asked him about the government’s intentions. He reminded them that the monetary authority of Singapore (HKMA, central bank) has been paying close attention to developments and potential risks. He insisted, “so far, banned in the country encrypted currency trading is not enough.”

According to news.Bitcoin.com reports, TharmanShanmugaratnam last month to clarify the government position on encryption currency. He stressed that the financial authorities do not distinguish the encryption currency and currency, to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing. Responsible for the HKMA minister also said that the central bank will encrypt the currency trading participants applied existing legal requirements.

This time, Shanmugaratnam was asked whether the government to take any measures in considering the ban bitcoin transaction, and what measures to take to protect consumers from investing in unregulated currency losses. Lawmakers want to know whether the encryption market crash to make any assessment of the impact of singapore. Deputy Prime Minister asked whether he plans to re consider the establishment of a regulatory framework.

There is no risk to the financial system

“Now, crypto currency has two main uses. The first is as a means of payment. Second kinds of situation has become more prominent, it is encrypted currency itself is an asset, “Deputy Prime Minister told lawmakers. He said: “in these two applications, the potential technology that exists in block chain or distributed in the form of books, may prove in the promotion of payment and trade settlement is one of the potential uses of the application.”

According to the deputy prime minister said that MAS is involved in the discussion of international supervision. Nevertheless, encryption monetary space is rapidly changing, the regulatory thinking is still in development, including in the United States, Britain and europe. Shanmugaratnam pointed out that the use of encryption currency in Singapore is limited, trading volume is much smaller than Japan and South Korea and other countries to. He said:

“At present, constitute the nature of risk Singapore encryption currency transactions and the scale does not affect our financial system security and integrity.”

“We will continue to encourage the blockchain field experiment, which may involve the use of encryption currency. Some of the innovations that may be useful in economy or society. But government officials promised, as we will remain vigilant for new risks.”

Regional encryption pressure

Neighbouring governments regulatory measures taken to increase the pressure of the Singapore authorities, asking them to clarify their attitude of encryption. At the same time, more and more from the area of encryption company is seeking a more friendly regulatory environment, their target of singapore.

Last year, for the first time Chinese ban bitcoin issue, as well as the encryption currency exchange main Huobi, Okcoin and BTCC were transferred to Hongkong, and further plans to transfer to South Korea and japan. Chinese largest mineral company has been in the planning of migration. According to reports, some of the largest mining facility operator Bitmain in Singapore to set up regional headquarters.

Working with Chinese and Japan encryption currency supervision cooperation in South Korea has taken measures to stop the anonymous encrypted transaction. South Korean regulators directed attacks against the major commercial banks are trying to prevent, to exchange encrypted virtual account customers open.

The Vietnamese government has accelerated the pace of monetary regulation using encryption. Thailand is to take further regulatory measures for the first time issued coins. The central bank has issued a strong warning to prohibit the transaction of encryption currency. To accept bitcoin payments by the government against the enterprise.

All of these for the development of Singapore has opened a window of opportunity. If the Singapore government commitment and encourage may involve currency without encryption test, under the ban, the city state can take advantage of this.

The U.S. financial regulatory agencies report: bitcoin will not threaten financial stability

The U.S. financial regulatory agencies report: bitcoin will not threaten financial stability

    

December 15th morning news, the U.S. Financial Stability Oversight Committee (FinancialStabilityOversightBoard) responsible for the supervision of the risk of the financial system, every year it released a report, the list of potential risks, in this year’s report, the Committee on digital currency (such as bitcoin) the threat of understatement, only in the 152 page mentioned.

Although Morgan chase CEO Jamie Damon (JamieDimon) and other financial giants have publicly warned that the encryption currency is doomed to collapse, but the Financial Stability Oversight Committee is not very worried. The Committee believes that digital currency impact on financial stability may be limited.

The committee pointed out in the report: “only a small number of consumers using virtual currency.” Innovation is supported by distributed ledger technology, this technology has wide application potential, the committee should give some support that. The committee also believes that the digital tide brings challenges to the regulators, because the digital information is stored, not stored, not for government supervision.

Bitcoin price shocks, the United States through the block chain from hackers

Bitcoin price shocks, the United States through the block chain from hackers

As of April 18, 2017 11, according to the bitcoin trading network btctrade shows the current market price of 7065 yuan. Yesterday morning at the beginning of currency price rose slightly, then enter the tumbled pattern. Late afternoon, long before the impact of high volume, due to the uncertain factors pulled up eagerly, the potential is increased, the market outlook is expected to continue to pick up.

Bitcoin trading network market

From the btctrade bitcoin K line, we can see the last week, bitcoin prices fell after the first rise, the whole week no change in the basic price. On average, the average price of coins in a slight concussion near the average cycle is more and more close, is a typical ready to shock pattern, but also indicates that the next wave of unilateral market arrival. Btctrade remind investors, bitcoin price limit, should be vigilant, pay attention to prevent risks.

Take a look at the global industry trends, the United States government investment block chain, protect medical companies from hackers.

The National Coordinator for health information technology office (ONC) recently published a response to block chain technology for medical records research papers.

In the health care industry within the company, usually running multiple databases and services, its purpose is to ensure that their protected health information (PHI) storage security. According to the definition of the laws of the United States, sensitive personal information and medical records of the patient are regarded as protected health information (PHI).

View from the United States government sponsored 15 proposals initiated in a contest. Some of the proposals, including a point-to-point network for medical data analysis, the increase of the privacy level; improve interoperability, patient tracking and identity assurance and verification system of information exchange; improve the medical claims processing, and used to the center of the record management system of electronic medical records.

According to the report, the 15 proposals of the author, has received a $1500-5000 grant to the United States government.

The United States National Health Coordinator VindellWashington said in a statement:

The effect caused by the challenge is incredible, we feel very excited. Although many people know the blockchain digital currency technology can be used in this application, the challenge is also showing its new application in the field of health care potential.”

Safety of electronic medical data sharing

Office for the coordination of health information technology (ONC) plans to evaluate 15 nominations proposal part of the project, and closely track their progress. By using the irreducible block chain, the office for the coordination of health information technology (ONC) to create a platform, where health care company can safely store patient data and real-time access to updated information, and also increased the transparency.

More importantly, the block chain technology through a token, allowing the potential intermediary and the third party service provider transactions.

In a report entitled “blockchain for medical data, and its potential application in the Research Report of health and medical research” of the author, LaureLinn said:

Block chain has interoperability challenges existing in the medical IT system to solve the potential, it will become to make personal, medical institutions and medical researchers in safety standard electronic medical data sharing technology.”

In the near future, the office for the coordination of health information technology (ONC) plans to launch a block chain infrastructure, allowing U.S. healthcare companies use it to create their own unique personal system.

Central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan: block chain technology is not easy to forecast the impact of the payment industry

Central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan: block chain technology is not easy to forecast the impact of the payment industry

In March 10th, the five meeting of the twelve National People’s Congress, the press center held a press conference, invited the people’s Bank of Chinese governor Zhou Xiaochuan, deputy governor Yi Gang, vice president and director of the State Administration of foreign exchange, Pan Gongsheng, deputy governor Fan Yifei on the financial reform and development related issues answered reporters’ questions.

Since the reform and opening up, China’s financial development has made remarkable achievements. Banking, securities and insurance industry overall development in commercial financial institutions and policy financial institutions, Internet banking and other new forms of financial market A new force suddenly rises. has made significant progress; construction, coordinated development of the money market, bill market, bond market, stock market, insurance market and foreign exchange market etc.. Especially in recent years, the third party payment industry is developing very rapidly, the people’s Bank has also taken a series of regulatory measures, including the tightening of license issuance, deposit centralized depository and so on. Fan Yifei believes that the payment industry is related to thousands of households, is a fundamental industry. With the industrial scale continues to expand, more and more innovative products, more and more rich. The payment industry in the broad and narrow sense, broad pay include non bank payment institutions and banking industry, the narrow sense mainly refers to the non bank payment industry.

He also said that with the development of the payment industry in recent years, it accumulated some problems and risks, there are several aspects:

First, because of the large number of market players, market supply and demand in general, there are some imbalances, the oversupply situation is more serious, so there is excessive competition in the industry.

Second, due to various reasons, including internal control mechanism, weak risk management to relax and other reasons, the lack of consumer protection. Two problems: one is the personal privacy of consumers especially about sensitive information was leaked, and even some of the information disclosed in the online sale. Two is to deposit misappropriated was also more serious, some institutions put the customer’s deposit for real estate, stock market, even for personal gambling, resulting in losses. Often a problem mechanism might involve a number of areas, the number of consumers may be tens of thousands of.

To solve these problems, in recent years mainly to do a few things:

First of all, the accumulative risk to resolve and dispose of, to help consumers to recoup their losses, the central and local governments have done a lot of work.

Two is to strengthen infrastructure construction, the basic rules of our field is built, which is consistent with the law of development of things. Because of the non bank payment industry development is a new thing, we started to make some observations on it, inclusive of its development, to a certain stage, a clear understanding of the objective law, we will try to regulate. These years we have introduced online payment methods, the classification system of accounts, Payment institutions also carried out classification.

The three is to strengthen supervision. It is divided into two aspects, one is on the market in addition to the organization, there are a large number of institutions engaged in unlicensed payment business. Until January, a national clearing 239 undocumented or illegal payment business organizations, to carry out rectification and clean-up, has been transferred to public security departments. On the other hand, to strengthen the supervision of Payment institutions certified, for violations of punishment, dare to sword.

After several efforts, the payment industry not stagnation, rapid development in a more healthy development. I can give you some numbers here. From 2013 to 2016, annual payment institutions business increased from 37 billion 100 million 185 billion 500 million pen pen, the amount increased from 18 trillion yuan to 120 trillion yuan, the annual compound growth rate of 71% and 90% respectively. Among them, the online payment business growth faster, last year payment institutions business volume and the amount increased by 102% and 87.6% respectively. It can be said that China’s payment service industry scale, inclusive degree is quite good in the world’s major economies.

The next step, the central bank also continue to uphold the five regulatory philosophy, the payment industry supervision work. After several years of efforts, the system framework of the four beams eight columns has been built up, the next step is to do a good job of implementation.

In this regard, Zhou Xiaochuan added, a people’s bank that the development of science and technology may cause some great changes for the future of the payment industry, this change is progress, because brings a lot of new means. The people’s Bank is also highly encouraged, and all kinds of industry cooperation, the development of the financial technology make up. A special emphasis is the development of network technology, as well as digital currency development, including new technology block chain, these new technologies will produce some of the people is not easy to fully imagine or predict to influence in the future.

But at the same time, such as vice president Fan Yifei said, we must encourage the development, but also to prevent risks, healthy development. The unhealthy behavior should be regulated. Of course, is not to say that from the beginning to bind people’s hands and feet, but in the process of development, we have seen some problems, must be regulated, including operating without problems, privacy problems, payment product safety problems.

In addition, there is a problem, there is a part of the payment mechanism of motivation and mind did not want to use the new network technology means to pay well, but staring at the customer’s deposit, think that money can be used to earn spreads, and even some playing their own ideas, when money from where some of the misappropriation. Is the motives. We support the payment industry truly focused on efficiency, and improve the safety payment system through scientific and technological means for customer service, rather than looking at people’s money, playing in the capital on the idea. Relevant policies and incentive mechanism and we are going to achieve this point, it is also very important for the healthy development of the future.

Hard fork and consensus network: nature and risk

Hard fork and consensus network: nature and risk

In the past few years, the term ‘consensus” understanding has let a person feel very confused. The term can refer to Nakamoto bitcoin written in the white paper on consensus mechanism, can also refer to the bitcoin network consensus principle. This confusion has led to the nature and limitations of network consensus risk generated a lot of misunderstanding — including hard bifurcation.


Nakamoto consensus mechanism


Nakamoto So in the white paper describes the use of the network nodes work to reach a consensus, or “general agreement” – decide which effective block chain accumulation work up, this chain is the authoritative chain block:


“When a node finds a workload, this block will broadcast to all nodes… Only in the block trading node is effective and this block will accept not spending… When a node to create a block, which indicates that the node accepts the block… Always will be the longest chain node as a real block chain, and to continue to expand the chain.”


Christian? Dekker (ChristianDecker) and Roger (RogerWattenhofer)? Watanghuofu describes all the consequences of the best block chain dispute caused by:


“At the end of a block chain branch will take longer than other branches, with the branches of the partition will switch to the branch. At this time, the block chain bifurcation problem will be solved, at the same time also copy and block books chain head (head) agreement. The abandoned block called solitary block (orphanblock).”


So, when the block to comply with the provisions of the bitcoin protocol, the network consensus on the composition of the best block chain, basically by processing the ability to decide. The miners to keep rational incentive solitary block economy, these blocks may not be included in the best block chain. If a miner mining these blocks, so the possibility of their future mining reward will be accepted will reduce network. In this way, the network nodes can in which strand is authoritative to reach a comprehensive agreement.


How to deal with the node protocol rule block? If a miners dug a repeat block or pay output increased block size, what will happen? Nakamoto So for answering this question is fairly clear: reject the invalid block, refused to use them.


In other words, a consensus mechanism Nakamoto explicitly reject the invalid block. To comply with the agreement any block is invalid. This block contains any invalid block chain will not be able to participate in the bitcoin network, at the same time, can not participate in the best block chain competition.


No matter what you told the miners, invalid block chain and the difficulty of computing power with the bitcoin network irrelevant. The miners in the agreement consensus rules without any power, these rules by each network node to enforce. Only the power miners have is in accordance with these rules in order to block the transaction.



The basic rules of network consensus


Listen to the recent hard bifurcation debate, it is easy to ignore the fact: a consensus from the root of approval (rootconsent). In other words, when you choose to use the bitcoin network, you are agree with the provisions of the agreement from the source network. The user through the node in node is responsible for the implementation of the consensus rule. Therefore, individual users agree is the basis of network on the implementation of the consensus rule.


This is an important philosophical meaning of hard branch. Change is not only a hard bifurcation software; it means that every user to migrate to a new network. Hard bifurcation essence is the formation of a new system with the new regulations, and the network is not fully compatible with the original. Therefore, by definition, hard bifurcation violated user agreement, which is a consensus network (bitcoin foundation).


For the bitcoin network, there is no “hard to reach a consensus for the bifurcation. Never exist in these cases. There is not a kind of mechanism to allow all bitcoin software users can agree to transfer network. Essentially, the user does not agree with the hard bifurcation — the so-called ‘agree’ exists only in hindsight, that after the occurrence of bifurcation (when some users decide to choose the new network). Do not agree with any transfer network of people would not agree to change the agreement.


In other words, before any hard forked majority in favour of “(for example, through calculating the stress distribution of currency holdings or vote) is only an inaccurate poll, cannot be replaced by selecting the network obtained by the consent of the user. Hard fork violates the basic philosophical principles of distributed consensus of the underlying network, so hard bifurcation is a real threat to the integrity of the chain block.


The network consensus vs. “social consensus.”


Bitcoin and etheric Fang hard supporters tried to seek to define “bifurcation social consensus” instead of “social consensus consensus” means if most users agree to a specific plan, even if the plan will break the consensus rule can be implemented. The underlying logic is that if most people agree with the hard bifurcation, then the existing consensus can be subverted, which occupied most of the rulers of economically forced minority to transfer the network against his will.


Overall, this underestimates the controversial hard bifurcation of the risks, because it wrongly assumes only one block chain will survive. It is worth noting that the choice was the bifurcation of the agreement did not withdraw your original agreement with individual users may through their tokens on the two chains will seek to maximize the value of the token.


In the hard after the bifurcation, the etheric Fang now recognise the user simply assume that occupy the bifurcation block chain will die a few, this assumption is very dangerous. If users continue to use the original network market show the newly created demand — the original token block chain is worth of mining. In this case, a controversial hard bifurcation will lead to the emergence of a plurality of chain blocks. As ETH/ETC demonstrates, speculators can through the establishment of demand for the original chain and further challenge hard token bifurcation, incentive block chain network to defend the original miners by splitting network.


Perhaps more importantly, this kind of management method and bitcoin (or any other similar distributed consensus network) security commitments directly contradict the basic. Even if we accept the actual argument about trading in a chain / mining will cause economic losses, it is enough to force a few people migrated to the hard bifurcation of the network, the philosophical foundation of this idea with the blockchain instead. When you choose this network, you and all the other participants will need to perform this agreement, which requires you to reject the invalid block, don’t give up the consensus rules, even if the 51% (or 75%) absenteeism tells you to do so. This attempt to undermine consensus is to participate in the network consensus idea attack. If a majority of the miners can be forced to abandon these network reached by all users, and just because it has an advantage, then Nick? Saab (NickSzabo) hard bifurcation called “technically equivalent to 51% attack” is correct.


We can learn from the TheDAO bifurcation of what?


TheDAO bifurcation is an ideal case of a controversial hard bifurcation. TheDAO is a building on the application of Ethernet protocol to raise the public square.


In June this year, unidentified attackers using TheDAO code vulnerabilities will transfer funds. This leads to the loss of investors tens of millions of ETH. A part of the etheric square community decided to implement the bifurcation hard to reverse this theft, ETH returned to the original owner.


Despite polls of the community, but most users (based on Ethernet Ethernet square currency holdings) and miners (according to the calculated stress) did not participate in the vote. But even so still a hard branch. If some users still use the original It is as expected, the chain, resulting in the two block of hard branch chain in separate and incompatible networks: Ethernet and Ethernet Fang Fang (bifurcation) (original chain).


Why TheDAO bifurcation is controversial?


The crux of the problem lies in the code that was used: the location of the application layer (not protocol layer). When the agreement has defect, all network participants will have a negative impact; therefore, all users will be motivated to fix this problem. Although unlikely to be hard to solve the defects of bifurcation of consensus, but according to rational user incentive analysis, this time will be hard to obtain a more widespread support branch.


The closest example is bitcoin occurred in 2010 the value of overflow error and subsequent soft bifurcation. Note: when the solution is soft bifurcation, break the consensus rule would not be a problem. Bitcoin has never been hard bifurcation.


Bitcoin value overflow original error (token supply accident exceeds the number of restrictions of agreement) destroyed the basic value of bitcoin Supply Co. limited premise. This Agreement caused a negative effect to all bitcoin users, diluting their share in all mining bitcoin (the overflow bitcoin supply expanded about 45000 times). After several hours of defects, the bitcoin network of illegal block implementation of the soft bifurcation, reject all output value overflow transactions, all transactions and payment of more than 21 million BTC. At the height of 74691 blocks, the soft branched chain of more than the violation of the chain, and the chain of isolated violations.


TheDAO bifurcation and obvious bitcoin is different, it is a hard to solve the defects of a bifurcation, the application layer instead of protocol layer. Because the protocol does not appear, so there is no reason to believe that this hard bifurcation will receive broad support.


However, the fund continues to describe the etheric etheric Fang Fang (bifurcation) is a “unstoppable application” platform, “written entirely in accordance with the operation, no downtime, review, possibility of fraud or third party interference. TheDAO co-founder StephanTual also claimed that the “code of law.”


Ethernet square community is based on ‘irresistible application “and” third party intervention “principle, so that the whole group of users can be motivated to bifurcation of their agreement, in order to rescue a third party applications, this assumption is not reasonable. Because TheDAO is an application, only a small number of users to participate in the TheDAO Ethernet square sale. When the TheDAO theft occurred, only a small number of users affected by the etheric fang. It is as expected, only a few ETH owners and miners support hard branch.


Although according to the distribution of miners after bifurcation, 99% miners Ethernet Fang (bifurcation), but the remaining 1% users are used to ensure adequate Ethernet (original square chain) can not change the nature and consensus. Therefore, two square blocks have the value of Ethernet chain — it is clear that for the miners, the two chains have the mining value, therefore the etheric Fang One divides into two.


Effect of bitcoin


The bitcoin means what? The answer is twofold.


First of all, bitcoin may start a hard fork is not controversial? The basic question is: remove the consensus rules generally involving security and philosophy of compromise. The block size argument as an example, one party is composed to the center of the doctrine, these people point out the necessity and the fee to the center of the market and node force is irresistible reason to enhance the throughput in the case of no expansion mechanism. The other side that maintain low fees and expand the use for all P2P to the center and security issues crucial bitcoin. When the two sides should give priority to ensuring the compatibility, how can we expect them to be able to reach hard bifurcation non controversial?


VitalikButerin pointed out that a very important point, he said thoughtfully:


“When someone tries to answer” I think A is good “and” why not do it at the same time than B, I suggest that we use the term “refuse to compromise doctrine”.”


Can you imagine 100% bitcoin people willing to sacrifice safety for a chance to expand the use of bitcoin? Any time the need for compromise, are inevitably there will be controversial.


Over the years, many bitcoin users have complained of a lack of use to promote bitcoin become the mainstream of the “APP killer”. On the contrary, bitcoin “APP killer” in the beginning of creation has been launched: go to the center of a controllable inflation on the books based on mathematics, anti censorship money. This is bitcoin is mainly used in the case; this drive bitcoin demand is the basis of bitcoin value. The controversial hard lead network split bifurcation risk is a serious threat to the use case and the idea for global books. PieterWuille said in a statement:


“No matter how you determine the handover date, do not know what time (or not) everyone changed their whole node (or other software). And even force the voting rate is very high, can not stop will occur after the bifurcation. The best case, people will not guarantee their transaction verification is meaningful (because sometimes verify obviously another person was adopted, and they need to switch). In the worst case, there will be a branch chain, two community, and you hold in the branch before coins in this time and in this two chain, you can reuse these coins, or repeat payment. This damage to the main design bitcoin purpose: to prevent duplicate payments.”


Secondly, the basic premise and the basic concept of security is hard bifurcation bitcoin attack. No software can be used to determine whether the user agrees to delete consensus rules. Bitcoin community there is a common misconception that the bifurcation can impose the hard to force. This idea wrong essence and essence of soft hard bifurcation bifurcation confusion together. EricVoskuil explained:


“Hard for bifurcation, the new deal even if did not comply with the original rules may also be effective. For soft bifurcation, the new deal only to comply with the original rules will be effective. In other words, some currency holders do not agree with the hard fork, but essentially accepted soft bifurcation… As long as the soft bifurcation has most stress conditions can be implemented. In other words, in fact, does not change the soft bifurcation between people’s consensus, a change it is only those who control most of the force is carried out by people… The first white paper does not clearly distinguish these rules, and the effect will be two situations as a consensus. However, the soft rules are called “consensus bifurcation rules” is wrong.”


So, have the most stress can through the implementation of the new rules to soft bifurcation. However, if that is what is the relationship between the force and the software consensus rules, which is not accurate. Absolutely cannot determine the user agrees to miners (e.g., consensus rules) – unless they run their own node. When some of the well-known developers, mining executives and Industry Promotion Center pool “by the miners’ vote to decide to change the idea of consensus,” this is equivalent to a direct bitcoin attack – this is your money for a direct attack. PieterWuille pointed out:


Bitcoin is not a democracy. The node security model is designed to minimize the required system of trust parties. This is in accordance with the rules by consensus as much as possible to verify the implementation of the. In particular, there is no so-called majority can override other things’ (which some people think so instead, this is not “the longest chain win, a majority of miners have decision-making power”; even with the support of most of the miners cannot steal your money or generate more than allowed subsidies, unless they convince all the other people to change their software).”


Hard fork should because of the risk and philosophical issues and objections


From the practical and philosophical point of view, obviously any attempt to split bitcoin protocol should be explicitly opposed. The bitcoin community should firmly oppose this idea — the user group (such as the mineral pool) by a vote to decide to change the rule of consensus. It is important to realize – break the consensus will threaten all weakened bitcoin can perform the basic rules of trust. If you believe the consensus rule is able to delete the democratic vote, then you will believe 21 million bitcoin supply constraints is feasible? Why? Because any future voting may eliminate the supply restrictions, as long as the majority of the dilution to early bitcoiners wealth. The only way you against this “consensus rule is theft”. Try to remove the consensus rule then opened Pandora’s box.


The reader should ask yourself: do you think the ability to change these miners should have agreed to by our users and the rules? If the answer is yes, then you have to admit that the miners quite similar to the power of the central bank. Non mining node operator and the interests of miners is not the same; non mining nodes act as a sort of miners power check. The miners refused to trust and carry out the agreement alone rule is to prevent individual miners (between miners and others) collusion against your only way. If you do not go to the center of the node verification, there is no valid distinction between miners and the central bank does not exist; they must comply with the provisions of. If you give the miners to override the consensus rules based power, then you will sacrifice safe mode of all nodes in the basic safety you — your money will no longer provide security. The use of miners as a distributed voting mechanism is very attractive, but this is and whether the user agrees with the Never mind, therefore, should Never mind and common rules.


As we discussed in the previous 2010 bitcoin value overflow event, only one case we can hard bifurcation: a negative impact on all of the user’s real flaws. Indeed, this would violate the user with hard branch. However, if we know the protocol vulnerabilities affect every user – this is the essence of protocol defects — then obviously, fix this in line with the user incentive and expectation. Any rational users will support hard bifurcation in these cases.


To be clear, unchanged and consensus in favour of the agreement limits the implementation of soft solution bifurcation does not mean that the progress and development must be stagnant. On the contrary, the block size argument, soft forking will bring incredible improvement can be extended for bandwidth and bandwidth, and not as hard as the risks caused by bifurcation. Different from just by increasing the block size to increase transaction throughput, we can optimize the transaction as the size of such a Schnorr signature mechanism greatly, in order to improve the capacity of. Once the ductility of the repair is completed in place, the door will be open to the intelligent network contract: lightning can bring no custody risk without trust contract, which will directly reduce the backbone throughput. MAST can further optimize the complex intelligent contract size. Mining pre verification (weak block) can significantly reduce the critical bandwidth, so you can quickly spread / delay and alleviate “decrease” transaction verification, to solve the problem in mining center to improve the throughput under the condition of. Improvement such as batch verification and file node can further reduce the node resources demand, alleviate the center pressure increases with the increase of the throughput.


Good expansion solution in front of us, these solutions will directly enhance the block capacity, while reducing the external effects caused by improving throughput. Why should we just break the consensus in order to improve the capacity of the block? This idea is absurd.


On the etheric Fang (the original chain) (ETC) effect


Since the implementation of the ETH developers crustily skin hard bifurcation after the etheric Fang (the original chain) appeared in the community. The consensus of integrity rules and block chain unchangeability Ethernet workshop users have started to support ETC.


Unfortunately, ETH core developers is not confined to the consequences of persist in wilfully and arbitrarily TheDAO. ETH core developers through the preparation of this “difficult bomb” effectively destroy the Ethernet protocol workshop. VitalikButerin on these effects described:


“In the 3 million 500 thousand block (one year from now), the average generation time block block 100 thousand to 25 seconds (a total of about 1 months); after more than 100 thousand blocks of time for 35 seconds (about 1.4 months); then 100 thousand block averaged about 55 seconds, a total of 2.2 months later; about 95 seconds, a total of 3.8 months, in order to block until the time of about 655 seconds, 100 thousand block of time of 26 months (Bibite currency situation slightly worse), only in the 99/2048 agreement because the downward adjustment limit after the interruption, the last block will not occur before 2021 (although the second half of 2017 the situation will become very bad).”


In fact, the block was dug out of the time interval will be more long, until the last ‘destiny’ arrival, there will be no new block was dug up. It should be noted that, in order to forcibly break the consensus and deliberate destruction of the etheric Fang protocol, showing that ETH core developers of Ethernet users incredible disdain fang. However, it is processed by the ETC problem.


Fortunately, the ETC community has the means and the moral authority to break the consensus, in order to overcome the damage. This “difficult bomb” is a kind of flaws. All users are encouraged to repair this defect, they must do so, otherwise their agreement destined to be in active, actually is no longer an active block chain.


At this time, the only way is the only way to change the hard bifurcation of the agreement is to delay the time to reply to the general level of block. We are the only opportunity to prevent hard bifurcation in controversial circumstances is limiting the consensus protocol defects change.


Many bitcoin field people have begun to support the ETC community, some people expressed a desire to bifurcation ETC agreement to limit the supply of ETC in the future and permanent inflation. This idea is wrong, this risk may fall into the controversial bifurcation in hard. Specifically, ETC inflation is a kind of safety incentive to ensure honest — it needs to remove mining safety compromise obviously, each user view are not the same. In order to prevent the network division, should focus on the adjustment of consensus change consistent with global user motivation and expectation. Any changes in a narrow range to solve the defects of the agreement may lead to controversy.


summary


<p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; padding: 0px; font-family: tahoma, "Micro

The new gold coins — financial markets?

The new gold coins — financial markets?

In the past few weeks, the price of gold has been in decline, especially China reserves data recently showed gold reserves than expected to decrease. Gold has been used as a hedge against inflation, when investors seek to avoid risks, the price of gold will rise.

But this time, even if all the central bank to implement monetary policy, inflation has recession phenomenon, can the price of gold does not rebound. Some financial market experts said, in a short period of time, the price of gold may not be a big rise in space. Because investors may be alternative investment funds, such as bitcoin.

比特币vs黄金

At the time of this writing, the price of gold fell from the highest point in 2011 nearly 40%. At that time, the demand for gold is very large, the central bank had to intervene in the foreign exchange market to control their currency value and stimulate the economy. This caused some trust in the financial system, many traders have diversified investment lead to safer assets such as gold.

Like bitcoin, gold has been a rarity, the number of circulation and limited demand to promote the consistent from beginning to end a sustained high prices. However, significantly reduced in demand over the past few months. Now, bitcoin provides a rare asset to the center.

IOSCO reminded investors to be wary of ICO risks

nBankruptcy Commentary: Last year, many countries’ financial regulators issued risk notices for hot ICOs. The possible fraud in such new financing activities is still the focus of regulators. Recently, IOSCO also issued a similar circular advising investors to be wary of the ICO’s risk. By 2018, the major countries will be for the ICO to implement what measures will also be one of the topics of great concern.n
nTranslation: Inan
IOSCO, a nationwide regulatory agency, released a circular on January 19 reminding investors to be wary of the risks in the ICO.n
The organization pointed out that this “highly speculative investment” is attracting the participation of retail investors from all over the world, as cryptocurrencies are freely manipulated across borders.n
There may be fraud in the sales of tokens, but they may not be in the jurisdiction of the investor’s country. Therefore, the group advises investors to be very cautious before participating in the ICO.n
This circular represents the latest effort by global financial regulators to actively monitor the progress of ICO activities.n
Last year, many countries took remarkable steps to regulate ICO. Both China and South Korea have formally banned such activities. The United States, Britain, Malaysia and the United States are also intensifying their review of tokens issuance and may regard them as securities.n
According to the IOSCO official website detailed instructions, at least 26 countries have the financial regulator for the risk of ICO issued a warning.n
Headquartered in Madrid, Spain, IOSCO is a member of the highest financial regulator in more than 100 countries around the world, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Conduct Authority of the United Kingdom and the European Securities and Markets Authority.n

Dubai financial regulators have issued ICO warnings


nnnThe Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA) has also issued a statement urging potential consumers to be alert to ICO risks and become the most recent issue of such warnings. After the rumors of Russia, Canada and the United States, the Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA) Regulatory Authority. But unlike other countries, DFSA said that it would not currently be able to regulate these product types, “or to the Dubai International Financial Center (DFSA managed by the Dubai Special Economic Zone) to provide such products or services issued by the enterprise. So far, it is not clear whether DFSA will take further steps to regulate any relevant activities in the economic zone.n
nnTranslation: Clovern
nDubai Financial Services Regulatory Agency recently issued a warning about the first digital tokens (ICO).n
nThe Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA) today issued a statement urging potential consumers to take care of ICO risks and join the market regulators in countries such as Russia, Canada and the United States as the last regulator to issue such warnings.n
nA significant difference between this statement is that DFSA says it “does not currently regulate these product types” or offers such products to Dubai International Financial Center (Dubai Special Economic Zone managed by DFSA) or The service of the enterprise issued a license.n
nThe agency said:n
nn”DFSA would like to emphasize that these types of products and systems and technologies that support them are complex and have their own unique risks, but these risks may not be easily identifiable or understood; and this risk may be provided across the globe These products should be considered high – risk investments. “n
nnAnd so far, it is not clear whether the DFSA will take further measures to regulate any activities within the economic zone.n
nAccording to the present situation, the statement is concerned only with the risk of the investor and does not provide any advice as to whether the agency considers that the ICO tokens may be securities, and if the result is derived, the institution’s guidelines Will be consistent with other international regulatory bodies.n