• Breaking News

    Friday, November 5, 2021

    Home Unlabelled BTC BCH Builders - An idea for collaboration in BCH

    BTC BCH Builders - An idea for collaboration in BCH

    November 05, 2021

    BTC BCH Builders - An idea for collaboration in BCH

    BCH Builders - An idea for collaboration in BCH

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 07:05 PM PDT

    /u/georgedonnelly and I just did session 1 of a new initiative we are starting to help encourage voluntary collaboration of businesses and projects in the scene to help promote and build BCH.

    Watch the video and read the Google drive link to get the full details. Feedback and ideas welcome.

    Session 1 VOD: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1196227319

    Outline of initiative: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17xwqueUvKOfIx5edqX-juckWJs1xpi1XDll4DeYGEbg/edit?usp=sharing

    George's Panmoni Plan: https://bitcoincashsite.com/blog/panmoni-foundation-2022-strategy-action-plan/

    Figma link: https://www.figma.com/file/JcJmgJm5wcI5xjdtZSnP6Y/BCH-Builders-Roadmap?node-id=0%3A1

    submitted by /u/Shibinator
    [link] [comments]

    Bitcoin cash has consistently ranked top 5 of crypto in volume daily in exchanges. What it doesn't account for is how much more usage is happening p2p, just how Satoshi envisioned.

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 12:36 PM PDT

    Hallmarks of a crypto that merits the "currency" in cryptocurrency.

    submitted by /u/DrankTooMuchTequila
    [link] [comments]

    Bitcoin cash is best bought now, when people spit at it as a choice.

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 11:56 PM PDT

    I wrote a message a while back on several social medias to convince others, why BCH. Here's what I wrote.

    I hear it so much in mainstream crypto communities that BCH is just a "hard fork shitcoin", "wannabe copy of BTC", a "scam".

    BCH has heavy institutional support, active development team (including legend Roger Ver), low fees, smart contract sidechain (smartBCH)!, instant confirmation via 0conf.

    No need to rely on centralized hubs and spokes solutions (LN).

    BCH isn't just an investment but a safe shelter to economic collapse far better than BTC because it's a currency that is practical to spend (and not solely a SOV).

    Price suppression is just an opportunity to accumulate more.

    submitted by /u/DrankTooMuchTequila
    [link] [comments]

    Seemed relevant

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 04:18 AM PDT

    In re: the banning of links to read.cash, noise.cash, and others - can a social media site be tried under antitrust laws for censoring links to their competitors?

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 01:54 PM PDT

    One Bridge

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 06:40 AM PDT

    Hello everyone! As many of you know we have been working on a bridge that connects SmartBCH to Ethereum for some time, we are still solving a few challenges before we move it to mainnet. Recently a similar bridge led by anonymous developer Yumeko, that uses the same open-source code and also connects SmartBCH to Ethereum appeared. The community quickly pointed out several issues on the security of this other bridge and drama ensued on the Telegram groups. Shomary, an amazing developer, recently joined Yumeko bridge, apparently unaware of the early issues with it. And now we risk dividing our community among two bridges. I don't want to go again over the previous issues, instead, we can focus on moving everyone into a common goal.

    First I think is important we understand why having two competing bridges is an EXTREMELY bad idea

    Two competing bridges will divide liquidity, they will also create confusion and make things more difficult for users. As an example, if ETH is bridged by two different bridges, we end up having 2 tokens at the SmartBCH side that represent the same Asset on the Ethereum side. So then DEXs need to decide which one to list, and users that get them will also have to learn from which bridge it came. One ETH token won't be like the other. Liquidity is also divided into different DEX LPs of the same token. Perhaps you could add a letter to represent each token bridge, say yETH, but that still creates confusion and still divides liquidity. In previous discussions, we saw a great opportunity on just calling the bridged tokens by their local names, just as BCH remains BCH while on SmartBCH, ETH should remain as ETH while bridged on SmartBCH. We keep things simple and make things easy for everyone.

    I recently had the opportunity to quickly discuss some of these things with Shomary over a Reddit post and thankfully I can see we agree on most things! So let's first go over the 99% of things that I think most of us would agree on:

    What we can all agree on

    1.- Just like Sha-bridge is not a business, the bridge to Ethereum and others should NOT be a business, but a decentralized protocol. It should not seek to gain profits from users, instead, it should just be a service for users. A business out of a bridge could for example at any moment decide to change rates against the better interests of the community, or simply "sell the bridge". A business running a bridge also becomes a target for regulators and gov agencies. That would not happen if the bridge is simply a decentralized protocol. This is extremely important, and a make it or break it feature. The bridge needs to be for everyone and always have fees as small as possible. Not a product but a decentralized protocol.

    2.- Communications should be open, work for a decentralized project should not happen behind closed doors.

    3.- It needs to be decentralized and it needs to be secure. Centralized companies will become targets of governmental agencies and hackers.

    4.- It needs to be for everyone. Fees should be as low as possible. Low fees will attract new users from multiple other chains. More transactions means stronger network effect and also increase the value of the base layer, for multiple reasons including reduction of the total supply.

    The one thing we don't agree on?

    After Shomari confirmed that it is not a good idea to depend on an anonymous dev, we already agree on 99% of how the bridge should work. There is just ONE thing left we need to agree on and that will result in a unique decentralized and much stronger bridge. We need to agree on who the Federators should be! If we can agree on this everybody wins!

    To decide on Federators first we need to understand what makes a good Federator. For each Federator you will want someone that is very technically capable so that it does not depend on third parties for updates, configuration, and the like. Even good companies get hacked, imagine having a federators in the hands of someone with only a moderated level of server management knowledge.

    Federators should have aligned interests, they do not benefit directly from fees on the bridge, but from the movement of value into the chain. They could eventually be able to cover part of the costs of bridging reducing the costs for users. Yet they benefit from the increased activity on the ecosystem. Example more users, would mean higher volumes on Dexes, or just higher transaction volume. Hint. Miners.

    About the number of Federators, while the Yumeko bridge proposed a high number of Federators as a way to improve over its previous versions of the same bridge, there is actually an optimal number. The reason to avoid a number too high is that it greatly increases costs that ultimately need to paid by users; while at the same time it does not necessarily improve security. More people just means a bigger surface attack.

    Example of great federators for an efficient 3 out 5 signatures Federation system:

    1. Mining pools
    2. SmartBCH devs
    3. Bridge DAO
    4. Coinflex
    5. Bitcoin .com

    We already have a level of trust in these possible federators, and they have aligned interests to maintain the bridge secure, and accessible to everyone. Remember these are just examples, not necessarily they will want to participate, yet it is my hope they will consider it.

    3 out of 5 signatures will be needed for a bridge transaction to be completed. There is No need to reinvent the wheel, a similar system is already in place between BTC and RSK.

    Yumeko bridge proposed to use 10 or even more members as Federators. Not a good idea! This result in higher costs for each transaction because when a token is moved, each one of the Federators needs to do a transaction on Ethereum to sign that the transaction did happen (consider Ethereum transactions costs * number of Federators). Imagine having 10 or 20 Federators, and then someone wanting to move say 10 USD worth of value. Do you see how the math does not work here? Besides an increased attack surface, that is still vulnerable to civil attacks. Further, funds to cover the transactions are directly accessible by the Federator on each server. Consider thousands or even millions of transactions happening.

    Also, the option proposed by the Yumeko bridge of Voting to select federators (to solve their previous version of the bridge) is a bad idea. It adds unnecessary complexity and creates new attacks vectors, including civil attack types. Again, the federation needs to be simple, well established, and with aligned interests.

    Those giving security to the bridge should have a lot of experience with security.

    Moving forward

    If we can agree on the correct validators, we will have created a single and stronger decentralized bridge! With safely deployed contracts by a well-known community dev and trustworthy validators, we only have one detail left. The front end, or the website that we use to access the bridge. Yumeko registered tokenbridge.cash, users would have to trust Yumeko to remain honest. Josh proposed using IPFS as an alternative, a great idea! Yet there is even a simpler solution. The bridge is a decentralized protocol so anyone can access the contracts. You can trust Yumeko site if you want but you don't have to! Users could bring up their own web3 front ends to the contracts, swaps could add the bridge web3 code, and interact directly with the contracts. Devs can build mobile phone apps. No need for permission! no need to trust anyone! The contracts are audited, the deployment is secure, and Federators understand security.

    I really hope that our comments are well received by the Yumeko bridge team, we look forward on helping create the most decentralized, secure, and efficient bridge on crypto!

    ​

    Some references:How bridges work: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/osynga/lets_talk_about_bridges/
    What is a DAO: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/oyrgxi/lets_talk_about_daos/

    submitted by /u/estebansaa
    [link] [comments]

    BCH Unlimted 1.9.2.0 is not starting Electrum server

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 02:49 PM PDT

    Here's my bitcoin.conf:

    #Set database cache size in megabytes (4 to 16384, default: 100) dbcache=4096 #How many blocks to check at startup (default: 288, 0 = all) checkblocks=144 #How thorough the block verification of -checkblocks is (0-4, default: 3) checklevel=2 #Set the number of script verification threads (-2 to 16, 0 = auto, <0 = leave that many cores free, default: 0) par=0 #Accept connections from outside (default: 1 if no -proxy or -connect/-noconnect) listen=0 #Maintain at most <n> connections to peers (default: 125) maxconnections=256 #Maintain a full transaction index, used by the getrawtransaction rpc call (default: 0) txindex=0 #Use hierarchical deterministic key generation (HD) after BIP32. Only has effect during wallet creation/first start (default: 1) #usehd=0 #Set key pool size to <n> (default: 100) keypool=512 #Start Electrum server electrum=1 electrum.host=127.0.0.1 electrum.port=50001

    But when I issue the getelectruminfo RPC call, I get this as a result:

    { "status": "stopped", "index_progress": 0, "index_height": -1, "debuginfo": { } }

    Any idea why this isn't working?

    submitted by /u/GuessWhat_InTheButt
    [link] [comments]

    Hi guys mr beast and other youtubers have launched team seas and they accept crypto as well lets help them all together!

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 12:02 PM PDT

    They Will Take Everything From Us

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 07:46 AM PDT

    Fun times

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 05:09 PM PDT

    Smartbch Defi Universe Expands — Dozens of SEP20 Tokens, $12.8M Total Value Locked in Dex Platforms

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 07:44 AM PDT

    I think we should all take a moment to observe that pro-BTC posts do in fact make it to the front page of this sub

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 09:11 AM PDT

    Bitcoin Price Resurgence Could See It Hit $100,000 By December

    Posted: 05 Nov 2021 01:38 AM PDT

    New York City mayor-elect: will accept the first three months of salary in the form of bitcoin

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 04:00 PM PDT

    Golden Finance reports that Miami Mayor Francis Suarez previously tweeted that he will receive his next full paycheck in the form of bitcoin. Not to be outdone, New York City Mayor-elect Eric Adams plans to receive his first three months' salary in the form of bitcoin after his term in office. according to Adams, "In New York, we always go big. New York will be the center of the cryptocurrency industry and other fast-growing innovative industries!"

    ​

    https://www.jinse.com/lives/276345.html

    submitted by /u/ChocolateClean84
    [link] [comments]

    India’s top payment firm Paytm reportedly considers Bitcoin services

    Posted: 05 Nov 2021 12:22 AM PDT

    SEC Chair Gary Gensler warned the financial industry that he won’t shy away from going after big firms pushing the limits in areas including crypto trading, cyber fraud and SPACs

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 03:29 PM PDT

    Is bitcoinwiki.org a phishing scam?

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 05:16 PM PDT

    So in the #bitcoin:matrix.org chat room, they have a disclaimer in their MOTD header which reads:

    bitcoinwiki dot org is a PHISHING SCAM

    Of course, like all obvious scams, I checked out it for curiosity's sake. From what I could see on the page, there's isn't very much nefarious about it.

    I also found [their bitcointalk.org thread](bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2709833.0), in which they seem very non-scammy. It is even used in a Coinbase blog from 2019 as a source explaining how thin clients work. There's a 5-year-old thread on the differences between it and wiki.bitcoin.it, but that's about all I can find.

    There doesn't seem to be a lot of ground to stand on calling it a phishing scam. Is there some type of history there that I'm not aware of?

    submitted by /u/SMACz42
    [link] [comments]

    SmartIndex: the first deflationary and governance token on SmartBCH

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 09:38 AM PDT

    CashCats (sep20) token that got airdropped for free is now worth over $7,500 per 1m airdrop

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 06:34 PM PDT

    Millennials bullish on crypto even during crashes

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 12:35 PM PDT

    How to buy an Unstoppable Domains' domain name with BitcoinCash?

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 09:54 AM PDT

    Laymen Explanation On *How* Infrastructure & Reconciliation Bill Kills DeFi & Drives Innovation Offshore *How* It Destroys Open Permissionless Systems

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 11:05 AM PDT

    Shhh...

    Posted: 04 Nov 2021 11:05 AM PDT
    Read more
    at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment