Community Archives -
Kendall Jenner has another scary stalker, and it’s gotta be enraging to her because security at her multi-million dollar exclusive gated community left a gaping hole for the guy to enter. 37-year-old John Ford was arrested early last month for…
Business leaders and financial markets in Latin America’s largest economy are shaking off their misgivings to coalesce around the candidacy of poll leader Jair Bolsonaro, a retired army captain who has repeatedly said he doesn’t understand the economy.
See how one girl from CNN Hero Abisoye Ajayi-Akinfolarin’s program is using technology to solve a problem in her community—a ‘floating slum’—in Lagos, Nigeria.
CNN.com – RSS Channel – World
Lately, there’s been a lot of conversation directed at adding a canonical transaction ordering (CTOR) process to the Bitcoin Cash protocol. Then there’s the topic of whether or not the BCH developers should add the opcode OP_Checkdatasig (CDS) into the codebase. Some believe CDS will be beneficial to Bitcoin scripting applications and allow for all types of smart contracts and decision-based transactions. However, others think adding CDS is unnecessary, and may compromise network security.
OP_Checkdatasig: The Possibility of Oracles, and Cross-Chain Atomic Contracts
There’s a lot of discussion concerning the Bitcoin Cash (BCH) network hard fork coming this November. One of the topics is an implementation called OP_Checkdatasig (CDS) that’s been added to the Bitcoin ABC clients’ roadmap and codebase. Basically, CDS is an opcode that could theoretically enhance the BCH protocol’s scripting ability. When Satoshi created bitcoin, the software included a scripting system much like the programmable language Forth. In addition to the scripting, the codebase also included script words otherwise known as ‘opcodes.’ There are quite a few opcodes and all of them do various commands or binary functions but most of them were disabled long ago.
- OP_Checkdatasig is referred to as OP_Datasigverify in the same context throughout this article.
Some people believe that certain opcodes could add a ‘programmable money’ feature to the network. OP_Checkdatasig (also referred to as OP_Datasigverify or DSV) could possibly enable the creation of decentralized oracles that check the validation of certain signatures, and return two different outcomes in an autonomous fashion. Essentially the oracle determines a definitive outcome without the need for a third party or custodian’s decision. Oracles are the foundations of a smart contract because the software itself decides when and who to release the funds to based on the completion of meeting or not meeting certain requirements. When Bitcoin ABC announced version 0.18.0, included within the client is the addition of CDS and the development team’s announcement details the feature will be used for oracles and contracts.
“[Checkdatasig] will enable uses such as the use of oracles and cross-chain atomic contracts,” explains the Bitcoin ABC development team.
Pay To Identity
There are multiple posts people can read on the subject of CDS and the theoretical use cases. Mark Lundeberg has written a proposed use case of CDS called “Pay To Identity” which would allow the BCH protocol to determine the validity of a users identification.
“[Pay To Identity] is a mechanism where a Bitcoin Cash payment is made to a personally identifying string (real name, email address, social media handle, etc.) instead of directly to a cryptographic key,” Lundeberg details. “The payment can only be claimed by the recipient if they generate a public key and get it certified by a trusted identity verifier.”
This certification signature is confirmed in script via the new opcode OP_Checkdatasig.
Two posts authored by Bitcoin Unlimited’s lead developer Andrew Stone explain the possible use cases of CDS as well. Stone’s post,“Bitcoin Scripting Applications: Decision Based Spending,” gives a comprehensive look at how data and signatures can be verified in an autonomous manner.
Stone also determines “whether [common use cases] they are expressible in the Bitcoin scripting language and if they are not determined and propose the extensions are needed to support the use case.” In the enable binary contracts BUIP078 Stone gives a lot of color when describing what the opcode could do in the future as well.
“[The opcode] allows a script to validate the signature on arbitrary data using the same ECDSA algorithm (and code) used to validate the signature on Bitcoin transactions,” explains Stone’s BUIP078. “This opcode therefore enables the use of an external ‘oracle’, which is a very important too to enable external information to be imported into a transaction. Once the data is part of a transaction it is useful to be able to manipulate it to check various conditions on that data.”
Bitcoin Unlimiteds’ BUIP078 also states:
To enable the simplest form of programmable money we must have additional opcodes that either access data from prior blockchain transactions, or verify data and signatures pushed onto the script’s stack.
Can Rabid Signatures Work Without Introducing OP_Checkdatasig?
The blockchain firm Nchain and Craig Wright have been against adding concepts like OP_Datasigverify or CDS to the protocol and the opcode is not added to the Bitcoin SV client. Wright talked briefly about the opcode and oracles in a video with Reina Nakamoto on August 26. “There are so many problems with things like Datasigverify that people don’t think of — The first one is the entire concept is flawed,” Wright explains. “The idea is that you are going to have ‘permissionless oracles’ is what they try and sell.”
On Reina Nakamoto’s Youtube channel Wright further states:
The reality is there is no such things as a permissionless oracle. An oracle exists in the world so if its actually creating something signed in a special format for use in bitcoin gambling. That oracle is not un-permissioned.
Moreover, last week Nchain’s senior researcher, Owen Vaughan, published a post on a subject called Rabin signatures. Vaughan details that Rabin signatures allow the verification of signatures in Bitcoin Cash script without introducing OP_Checkdatasig.
“All computationally expensive operations (key generation, signature construction) are performed off-block — Only the simple step of verifying that holds is performed within script,” Vaughan writes. “The existentially unforgeable property of the solution allows extra functionality to be added to the Bitcoin Cash platform without compromising the security of the network, nor changing the core protocol itself.”
We will continue to develop this solution using Rabin signatures, and will seek to collaborate with others on this work. Nchain does not intend to seek patent protection for its work on this solution; instead, Nchain will publish its work in this area for public review and usage.
OP_Checkdatasig is slated to be added to the Bitcoin Cash network if the miners decide to unanimously run with Bitcoin ABC’s roadmap. However, as news.Bitcoin.com has reported during the past few weeks, Nchain has an entirely different roadmap in mind for November. Instead, the Nchain development team, Bitcoin SV, and the hashrate that uses the client are shooting for a 128MB block size increase. Bitcoin SV also wants to introduce some opcodes to Bitcoin Cash protocol including OP_MUL, OP_LSHIFT, OP_RSHIFT, OP_INVERT, alongside removing the limit of 201 opcodes per script.
What do you think about OP_Checkdatasig and oracles in Bitcoin Cash? What do you think about Rabid signatures and the opinions opposing the opcode? Let us know what you think about this subject in the comment section below.
Images via Shutterstock, Nchain Logo, and Pixabay.
Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.
The post Programmable Money: Bitcoin Cash Community Debates Oracle Driven Upgrade appeared first on Bitcoin News.
A ProPublica story shines a light on what might be a new term for many: deadnaming. It refers to a practice abhorred in the transgender community: when somebody refers to a trans person by the name—and thus, the gender—they no longer use. The story by Lucas Waldron and…
Starting as early as this fall, students around Los Angeles will have the opportunity to learn to code in one of the biggest software growth areas: cloud computing, an increasingly popular online-based technology that is used for data analytics and file storage.
That’s due to a partnership announced…
Before it was turned into an investment asset, the invention of Bitcoin promised to usher in a world where anyone can pay for anything they like without a need for getting prior approval from the powers that be. The demand for uncensorable transactions still exists, and the latest example of this comes from Israel where the largest cannabis community market has turned to bitcoin payments.
Telegrass to Accept Bitcoin Payments
Telegrass, an Israeli community-based cannabis marketplace with over 100,000 members, has announced earlier today on social media that it will start charging merchants for some services, offering discounts for bitcoin payments. The community works to promote the legalization of recreational use of cannabis in Israel and offers a platform to connect buyers and sellers via the Telegram network. Merchants can still list their products for free in one city but will have to pay in order to expand their coverage.
The new funds raised with bitcoin are meant to help pay the Telegrass staff, which have been working as volunteers so far, and further public legalization efforts. The marketplace has been the target of continued police attention for working to provide anonymity to buyers and greater security for sellers, offering client verification methods that are meant to weed out undercover cops.
A Growing Demand Among Investors
While the recreational cannabis market in Israel has been going through a slow decriminalization process, the legal cannabis market has been growing fast in recent years. “Canna Tech” startups have sprung up, agricultural companies have established sophisticated farms to supply pharmacies around the world with medical marijuana, and Israeli investors have been clamoring to get in on the action. Stocks related to the field have experienced stellar performance, and analysts often compare them to investing in bitcoin-related ventures as the two hottest trends.
We recently reported about Fantasy Network, a company traded on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (TASE: FNTS), that has ended all the plans it previously had to enter the “blockchain” space and turned to the legal cannabis business.
Is this development good for the ecosystem? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.
Images courtesy of Shutterstock.
Verify and track bitcoin cash transactions on our BCH Block Explorer, the best of its kind anywhere in the world. Also, keep up with your holdings, BCH and other coins, on our market charts at Satoshi’s Pulse, another original and free service from Bitcoin.com.
The post Largest Cannabis Community Market in Israel to Accept Bitcoin Payments appeared first on Bitcoin News.
There’s been a lot happening this week within the Bitcoin Cash (BCH) ecosystem, and much of the community’s discussion revolves around tokenization concepts on the BCH chain. Meanwhile, the network has been running smoothly, and BCH markets seem to be reversing their trend after cryptocurrencies values were experiencing bearish sentiment for the past six months.
Also read: Ross Ulbricht Joins Twitter
This Week’s BCH Network and Market Action
In twelve days the Bitcoin Cash community will be celebrating the anniversary of the blockchain split that occurred last year on August 1. There’s been a lot going on within the BCH environment as far as infrastructure support and development. At the time of publication, the BCH chain is 7,031 blocks ahead of the Bitcoin Core (BTC) chain and BCH is operating at 12.47% of BTC’s difficulty. There are roughly 13 mining pools three of which are unknown and the BCH hashrate over the past seven days has been between 4.3 to 4.9 exahash per second. There have also been a few big blocks processed recently like one that measured 7.9 MB and was mined by Viabtc.
BCH markets this week have done well as the cryptocurrency’s value is up 19.5 percent over the last seven days. Today on Thursday, July 19 at 2 pm EDT the digital asset is worth $ 814 per BCH. Right now BCH has a $ 14Bn market valuation and it’s seeing $ 700Mn to $ 900Mn in daily trade volumes. The top BCH exchanges today include Coinex ($ 84.84 Mn), Huobi Pro ($ 83.15 Mn), Okex ($ 70.45 Mn), Binance ($ 59.14 Mn), and Hitbtc ($ 36.41 Mn). The top currency today paired with BCH is tether (USDT) commanding 47.7 percent of BCH trades. This is followed by BTC (29.9%), USD (11.2%), KRW (3.1%) and ETH (2.9%).
A Flurry of New Tokenization Projects and the Criticism Against OP_Return Token Systems
This week there were three tokenization projects announced that aim to add more depth to the Bitcoin Cash network. The first project revealed was called ‘Wormhole’ which is a fork of Omni Layer and is reportedly being developed by Bitmain developers. The next two projects announced is a Color Coin protocol implementation designed by the Cryptonize.it developers and also the Simple Ledger Protocol paper written by six well known BCH developers. However, the following day after these two ideas were made public a new discussion revolving around the flaws of OP_Return operations.
One blogpost on Yours.org, fully critiques the two papers that utilize OP_Return within their framework and further states that there is no friendly, simplified payment verification (SPV) support. The writer @lawn states that token systems that rely on BCH OP_Return operations must choose from reduced SPV wallet security, light wallet based validation, and trusted third-party validation or a combination.
“I think token schemes based on OP_Return is a dead end and we should focus our energy on miner validated and fully SPV capable tokens,” explains the critique. “Thus far only GROUP fits the bill,” the writer adds.
Bitcoin Unlimited’s Andrew Stone Analyzes the Tokeda Project
Then on Wednesday the lead developer for Bitcoin Unlimited (BU) Andrew Stone published a paper that reviews the Tokeda paper written by Joannes Vermorel. Stone’s ‘Tokeda Criticism’ says that the “Early Draft: Incomplete” paper written by Vermorel has been presented as a viable option against GROUP so it should be analyzed. The BU developer concludes that a lot of specifics within the Tokeda idea are general and unspecified and further would likely require some sort of “authority-based system.”
“Although much of Tokeda is completely unspecified, it seems to propose a system where token holders control a UTXO that should only be spent to the issuer, who has the opportunity to apply arbitrary policy before forwarding the spend to its actual destination — It is, therefore, an authority-based, SPV capable system,” Stone’s criticism explains.
However, it ineptly deploys the power of authority-based systems resulting in problems easily solved by other authority systems. By placing its UTXO on the blockchain, and requiring 2 transactions per transfer, it compares very unfavorably with respect to scalability with many other token proposals, including the permissionless Group tokenization. Authority-based tokens should be able to do much better in their ability to shard the UTXO.
Stone continues, “For example, authority-based extension block systems such as FSHblocks can move all token transfers completely off-chain — out of history AND UTXO. The only on-chain transfers required are those that are actually moving BCH value between the BCH blockchain and the extension block.”
Given its lack of interactivity with BCH and authority-based architecture, there seems to be no reason whatsoever for Tokeda’s implementation on a blockchain.
With So Much Going On, BCH Proponents Hardly Notice the Market Uptrend
Overall the Bitcoin Cash community seems to enjoy evaluating these proposals, and the criticisms have also been welcomed to some degree. There are definitely developers who believe that their systems that utilize OP_Return operations are not dead ends and will continue in this permissionless environment — After all, no one can stop them from producing these tokenization systems.
Furthermore, BCH proponents seem pleased with the current development progress from programmers like Unwriter since the upgrade took place this past May. Markets have been better all around for most cryptocurrencies including bitcoin cash but the BCH community seems more focused than ever on the people building with the BCH chain. Most would agree that eventually, market uptrends will follow cryptocurrencies that show steady innovation.
What do you think about the latest events and announcements taking place within the Bitcoin Cash environment? Let us know your thoughts on this subject in the comment section below.
Images via Pixabay, Bitcointalk.org, Chaintrend, and Satoshi Pulse.
Want to create your own secure cold storage paper wallet? Check our tools section.
The post BCH Roundup: Markets Spike While the Community Debates Token Protocols appeared first on Bitcoin News.
Over the past few weeks, the Bitcoin Cash (BCH) community has been discussing the subject of merchants accepting zero confirmation BCH transactions. Lots of BCH merchants have been accepting zero confirms lately as well, making the discussion topical again as it was a few years ago.
Zero Confirmation Transactions and the Bitcoin Snack Machine
Zero confirmation transactions are transactions that are broadcast to the network but have not been etched into the blockchain. People like the idea of zero confirm acceptance because the method makes fast payments desirable for both the merchant and customer. However, the topic is also controversial at times because some individuals think the concept can be risky due to double spends and because there have been a few occasions of double spends within both the Bitcoin Core (BTC) and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) networks. Even with these statistics, individuals think the use of zero confirmation transactions is key to broader cryptocurrency acceptance and others have proposed solutions to the zero confirmation doubles spending.
In a discussion called the “Bitcoin Snack Machine” on the website Bitcointalk.org, Satoshi Nakamoto talked about zero confirmation acceptance back in July 2010.
“I believe it’ll be possible for a payment processing company to provide as a service the rapid distribution of transactions with good-enough checking in something like 10 seconds or less,” Nakamoto details. “The network nodes only accept the first version of a transaction they receive to incorporate into the block they’re trying to generate.”
When you broadcast a transaction, if someone else broadcasts a double-spend at the same time, it’s a race to propagate to the most nodes first. If one has a slight head start, it’ll geometrically spread through the network faster and get most of the nodes.
Double Spend Relaying
Lots of BCH accepting merchants have been accepting zero confirmations for quite some time, now including Cryptonize.it, Bitasia Exchange, Keys4coins, Bitpay, Satoshi Dice, Mini-POS, Lieferando, and more. Furthermore, Bitcoin developers have been discussing making zero confirmations even safer on the network by using different signaling methods for years.
A while ago, back in 2015, the Bitcoin developer Mike Hearn discussed some solutions in a paper called, “Double spending in Bitcoin and how to make it harder.” In the paper, he discusses a relay method introduced into the Bitcoin Core (BTC) network that was later removed by Core developers.
“That’s why Gavin Andresen and Tom Harding have implemented double spend relaying. This is a change to Bitcoin that makes nodes relay the first double spend of any given transaction that they see (but not others, in order to conserve bandwidth),” Hearn explains.
Both the Bitcoin Core wallet and the next release of the bitcoinj wallet know how to inform the user of conflicting unconfirmed transactions. BitcoinJ already tells you when an unconfirmed transaction is “killed” by a double spend getting confirmed, but informing the user as soon as the double spend is broadcast will go a lot further.
Because of endless arguments about the attempt to fight double spends, Bitcoin Core squashed the protocol but Hearn and Harding kept it in Bitcoin XT. Tom Harding, the Lead Developer of Bitcoin XT, has been discussing and heavily researching the topic with BCH and talked about a relay system in his presentation ‘Native Respend Resistance’ at the Satoshi Vision Conference in Tokyo.
A Mechanism to Construct Special Transaction Outputs
There have been others who have researched other methods like the researchers at the Department of Information Engineering and Communications, at the Autonomous University of Barcelona.
“In order to discourage double-spending attacks, we propose a mechanism to construct special transaction outputs,” details the research paper called ‘Double-spending Prevention for Bitcoin Zero-Confirmation Transactions.’ “Such outputs can be spent with a single signature but have the property that if two different signatures for the same output are disclosed (for instance, in two different transactions spending the same output as a double-spending attack), the private key used to sign the transaction is revealed.”
This allows any observer to generate a third transaction spending the same output and sending the amount to an address controlled by himself.
Two Bitcoin Cash Proposals Geared Towards Double Spend Alerts and Proofs
Lastly, there are two protocol development proposals that would also bolster the use of zero confirmation transactions on the BCH chain. The Openbazaar developer Chris Pacia has written a proposal called “Double Spend Alerts” which is a BCH network message that alerts nodes when a double spend occurs on an unconfirmed transaction. However, Pacia notes the detection does not prevent all types of double spends and states “further technical advances are needed.”
The Bitcoin Unlimited team has a method under development called “Double Spend Proof Creation and Forwarding.”
“By receiving double spend proofs sellers learn about attempts to defraud them faster and can take appropriate steps — This will make a 0-conf transaction on Bitcoin Cash more safe and will give it broader acceptance,” the proposal ‘BUIP088’ reads.
The goal of the implementation is that any node that has access to both transactions can create the proof — And that any other node (even with none of those transactions in the mempool) can validate and forward it.
So far, many Bitcoin Cash supporters are supportive of these ideas and concepts that would prevent and alert network participants of future double spends. Moreover, a lot more merchants and businesses are accepting zero confirmation BCH transactions as well by trusting the network and the low probability of double spend risks. As Satoshi once stated in 2010, the risk of double spends towards zero confirmation transactions on the Bitcoin network, would be far less than the fraud that takes place with credit cards. But at the end of the day, its the merchants’ decision whether or not they want to accept instantaneous payments or wait for a confirmation on the blockchain.
What do you think about zero confirmation transactions? Let us know your thoughts about the subject in the comment section below.
Images via Shutterstock, Pixabay, The Incredibles, and Wiki Commons.
Get our news feed on your site. Check our widget services.
The post Bitcoin Cash Community Embraces Zero Confirmation Transactions appeared first on Bitcoin News.
Tezos was conceived as a governance-based blockchain to rival Ethereum, but it’s become more synonymous with protracted legal battles and internecine conflict. As the latest class action lawsuit drags its way through the courts, the Tezos community has petitioned for an end to all the legal turmoil so that everyone can move on.
Tezos Community Prepares an Amicus Brief
Tezos community leaders are sick of all the lawsuits, so much so that they’re preparing to go to court themselves – to put an end to all the courtroom battles. The Stop The Class Action Lawsuits Against Tezos petition, which is to be filed in a San Francisco Court, asserts that the class actions filed by various other Tezos investors have no merit and should be dismissed. They write:
We do not feel the plaintiffs have been sufficiently harmed to warrant a class action against the program, which further delays and encumbers it by creating large legal difficulties which becomes self-fulfilling and induced by the very plaintiffs themselves who complain of delay. We denounce the plaintiffs as having done more harm to Tezos than the delays inherent in software and network development.
Don’t Fight, Just BUIDL
In essence, the Tezos community members behind the petition want to draw a line under the sand and move on. Their goal is to show the court that it is highly unlikely that the plaintiffs can form a class. If enough people denounce the class, and there are just six plaintiffs claiming they can form a class, the plaintiff’s case becomes much more difficult. The plaintiffs have claimed that they are speaking on behalf of the entire Tezos community…but it appears that a significant portion of that community demurs.
“Everything else appears to be on track for the project now, just the looming threat of legal action limits the foundation’s ability to speak,” explained Shaun Belcher, a board of directors member with Tezos Commons Foundation. He believes that what is at stake has ramifications, not only for Tezos, but for the future of blockchain projects in general, adding:
“We must understand that the Tezos class action case could set a precedent for all ICOs, past and future. If the community can prevail, not only will it help Tezos but it will immunize other blockchain projects from facing a class action, because failure here against Tezos would discourage law firms in the future.”
Bitcoin Suisse Also Washes Its Hands of Class Actions
Last week, Bitcoin Suisse AF, a BTC brokerage, also filed a motion seeking to dismiss itself from the Tezos class action lawsuit is has been named in, writing:
Bitcoin Suisse submits that it is not properly named as a defendant in the Tezos litigation because of its lack of contacts with both California and the United States sufficient to establish personal jurisdiction and because the alleged, limited currency conversion services it provided, solely in Switzerland, prior to the alleged Tezos ICO, and its alleged post-ICO conduct, cannot establish liability under Sections 5 and 12(a)(1) of the Securities Act.
With a betanet launch of the Tezos blockchain planned for late June, the race is on to clear the air of all impediments that could further delay proceedings. Before that can happen though there’s still code to audit, tokens to list on exchanges and countless other development tasks to tick off. Meanwhile, the class action lawsuit rumbles on while the Tezos community grows ever weary.
Do you think the Tezos community have a chance of dismissing the class action lawsuit? Let us know in the comments section below.
Images courtesy of Shutterstock, and Tezos.
Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.
The post Tezos Community Petitions to End the Class Action Lawsuits appeared first on Bitcoin News.