Libre Blockchain
Finding Changpeng Zhao: Part One https://librehash.org/finding-changpeng-zhao-cz-pt-1/ Seems that hardly anyone has taken the time to really double back and ask, 'How did Changpeng Zhao get to where he's at currently in the bloickchain space?' That's what…
Follow Up on Finding Changpeng Zhao
A) Substantial clean-ups to the article (grammar, punctuation, general reading flow)
B) There is a part two that has already been written in entirety that will be released shortly
Those following this channel should really take a second to check out part two. That one is a treat.
Again, here is the link to part one = https://librehash.org/finding-changpeng-zhao-cz-pt-1/
A) Substantial clean-ups to the article (grammar, punctuation, general reading flow)
B) There is a part two that has already been written in entirety that will be released shortly
Those following this channel should really take a second to check out part two. That one is a treat.
Again, here is the link to part one = https://librehash.org/finding-changpeng-zhao-cz-pt-1/
Librehash
Finding Changpeng Zhao: Part One
There are a ton of stories that have been passed off as the 'origin story' for Changpeng Zhao (re: how he came to be aware that there was such a thing called, 'Bitcoin'). But this piece will focus on what can be publicly confirmed (rather than conjecture)…
Forwarded from LibreCharts
How to Create a Solid Stop Loss
https://librehash.org/how-to-create-a-solid-stop-loss/
Not a guide to create a literal stop loss on an exchange, but rather showing you where to put stop loss and how to come to that determination in any situation.
Stop losses are critical for traders that want to minimize their losses (especially in a market with a bunch of blockchain assets that can turn extremely volatile at any point)
https://librehash.org/how-to-create-a-solid-stop-loss/
Not a guide to create a literal stop loss on an exchange, but rather showing you where to put stop loss and how to come to that determination in any situation.
Stop losses are critical for traders that want to minimize their losses (especially in a market with a bunch of blockchain assets that can turn extremely volatile at any point)
Librehash
How to Create a Solid Stop Loss
One of the biggest dilemmas that I see traders run into is the issue of setting an appropriate stop loss. We’ve all heard the story before — “Ah man, my stop loss got hit!” because of a ‘shake-out’ or some other market event that’s going on. Source: https://www.
Fuck FinCEN ; They Dropped the Ball
We've all watched the usual suspects launder billions (literally) in this space for years...right under everyone's noses.
And nearly all federal agencies turned a blind eye to it.
But now that the financial situation is a bit more fragile and uncertain going forward, we see a rush for sweeping changes.
We Shouldn't Have to Overcompensate for the U.S. Gov't Being Lazy
If they wanted to stop money laundering, they would have done so years ago. There are over 20 billion USDT outstanding as we write. Not one of them are backed and it is confirmed fact that their "payment processor" was really working for an international drug cartel.
U.S. had a chance to clean up money laundering then and they didn't do shit.
They don't care. This is just a propped up excuse to justify extracting additional citizen information.
We've all watched the usual suspects launder billions (literally) in this space for years...right under everyone's noses.
And nearly all federal agencies turned a blind eye to it.
But now that the financial situation is a bit more fragile and uncertain going forward, we see a rush for sweeping changes.
We Shouldn't Have to Overcompensate for the U.S. Gov't Being Lazy
If they wanted to stop money laundering, they would have done so years ago. There are over 20 billion USDT outstanding as we write. Not one of them are backed and it is confirmed fact that their "payment processor" was really working for an international drug cartel.
U.S. had a chance to clean up money laundering then and they didn't do shit.
They don't care. This is just a propped up excuse to justify extracting additional citizen information.
Binance Switzerland AG
https://librehash.org/binance-switzerland-ag/
Felt like publishing this piece that digs into a few interesting tidbits related to Binance.
It looks at:
1. Binance's Switzerland entity.
2. Exposes the fact that Binance in Switzerland is co-owned by Changpeng Zhao and Pascal Schmid. Pascal Schmid was the head of the Cardano Foundation.
3. Pascal Schmid has also been the head of several projects in the blockchain space, including some of the most popular ones, period.
4. Changpeng Zhao was formerly listed as the head of "Sigma Chain AG" .That connection allowed us to verify reports that were published in 2017 claiming that China had put Binance on a short list of 60 crypto companies whom it was targeting.
There are more than likely several more leads that can be extracted from this research and they will be in due time.
But for right now, this should suffice.
This was just published to make sure that its out there in the general public in case folks were curious or felt that the revelation of this information warranted an actual, finite action in response / catalyst to begin conducting their own research.
Enjoy
https://librehash.org/binance-switzerland-ag/
Felt like publishing this piece that digs into a few interesting tidbits related to Binance.
It looks at:
1. Binance's Switzerland entity.
2. Exposes the fact that Binance in Switzerland is co-owned by Changpeng Zhao and Pascal Schmid. Pascal Schmid was the head of the Cardano Foundation.
3. Pascal Schmid has also been the head of several projects in the blockchain space, including some of the most popular ones, period.
4. Changpeng Zhao was formerly listed as the head of "Sigma Chain AG" .That connection allowed us to verify reports that were published in 2017 claiming that China had put Binance on a short list of 60 crypto companies whom it was targeting.
There are more than likely several more leads that can be extracted from this research and they will be in due time.
But for right now, this should suffice.
This was just published to make sure that its out there in the general public in case folks were curious or felt that the revelation of this information warranted an actual, finite action in response / catalyst to begin conducting their own research.
Enjoy
Librehash
Binance Switzerland AG
It appears that Binance is still on the Swiss corporate registry and Pascal Schmid (the former head of the Cardano Foundation) remains a co-founder right next to Changpeng Zhao. This has been independently verified through multiple different sources (all…
Telegram Chat Channel Changelog (@librehashdiscussion)
1. Reinstated the Combot in the chat, so a lot of the spam should be out of here from now on.
2. Auto-banned any accounts joining* saying something like "you wanna chat? :)" or some variation of that.
3. Users now have the option to report spam if any does manage to get through the cracks. You just need to type "/report" and the message you're reporting will be auto-DM'd to myself and other admins in the chat that will be able to ban that person immediately. In the event that neither myself or any other admins are on, spam + spammer will be temp removed for 24 hours if 3 or more reports are received. If users abuse that feature to have legitimate users banned, then they will be permanently banned.
4. Introduced a new 'rating' / 'reputation' system. Those that contribute good content in the chat can be upvoted by others, with those scores factoring into that user's overall reputation & rating in the chat. Soon this will translate into actual ranking in the chat. Those with a higher reputation will receive labels in the chat that reflect such.
Final Note
Still considering a bridged integration between this Telegram channel chat and a couple of other ones that are maintained by Librehash.
1. Reinstated the Combot in the chat, so a lot of the spam should be out of here from now on.
2. Auto-banned any accounts joining* saying something like "you wanna chat? :)" or some variation of that.
3. Users now have the option to report spam if any does manage to get through the cracks. You just need to type "/report" and the message you're reporting will be auto-DM'd to myself and other admins in the chat that will be able to ban that person immediately. In the event that neither myself or any other admins are on, spam + spammer will be temp removed for 24 hours if 3 or more reports are received. If users abuse that feature to have legitimate users banned, then they will be permanently banned.
4. Introduced a new 'rating' / 'reputation' system. Those that contribute good content in the chat can be upvoted by others, with those scores factoring into that user's overall reputation & rating in the chat. Soon this will translate into actual ranking in the chat. Those with a higher reputation will receive labels in the chat that reflect such.
Final Note
Still considering a bridged integration between this Telegram channel chat and a couple of other ones that are maintained by Librehash.
Cardano Foundation Head Co-Owns Binance With Changpeng Zhao
https://librehash.org/binance-switzerland-ag/
This is absolutely zero "clickbait" in that statement.
Its right there, in plain English, on the Swiss corporate register.
The only overstatement perhaps is the fact that Pascal Schmid is no longer the head of the Cardano Foundation at this very present second and moment in time.
But he is still listed as a co-owner right next to Changpeng Zhao on the Swiss corp registry.
Fun Exercise
Go see all of the other companies that Pascal Schmid is or has been an owner of in the blockchain space. Some of those names may surprise you and - yes - they are all blockchain projects that you know about and have heard of before.
Worth giving it a read whenever you get a chance. At the very least, you may begin to understand why certain projects are doing just a bit better than other ones (hint: it has nothing to do with their respective whitepapers).
https://librehash.org/binance-switzerland-ag/
This is absolutely zero "clickbait" in that statement.
Its right there, in plain English, on the Swiss corporate register.
The only overstatement perhaps is the fact that Pascal Schmid is no longer the head of the Cardano Foundation at this very present second and moment in time.
But he is still listed as a co-owner right next to Changpeng Zhao on the Swiss corp registry.
Fun Exercise
Go see all of the other companies that Pascal Schmid is or has been an owner of in the blockchain space. Some of those names may surprise you and - yes - they are all blockchain projects that you know about and have heard of before.
Worth giving it a read whenever you get a chance. At the very least, you may begin to understand why certain projects are doing just a bit better than other ones (hint: it has nothing to do with their respective whitepapers).
Librehash
Binance Switzerland AG
It appears that Binance is still on the Swiss corporate registry and Pascal Schmid (the former head of the Cardano Foundation) remains a co-founder right next to Changpeng Zhao. This has been independently verified through multiple different sources (all…
Here's a tweet right from the Cardano Foundation on Twitter announcing when Pascal Schmid took over as the head of the Cardano Foundation —> https://twitter.com/CardanoStiftung/status/1062384674390073345?s=20
He was the head of the Foundation for over a year.
Why is he also listed as an owner right next to Changpeng Zhao over Binance? He's been listed over all of Binance's Swiss entities (many of their other business entities have since been closed or struck from the register ; the Swiss one appears to be their HQ though — especially since the Liechtenstein bank takeover attempt ended up being a no-go)
He was the head of the Foundation for over a year.
Why is he also listed as an owner right next to Changpeng Zhao over Binance? He's been listed over all of Binance's Swiss entities (many of their other business entities have since been closed or struck from the register ; the Swiss one appears to be their HQ though — especially since the Liechtenstein bank takeover attempt ended up being a no-go)
Parsiq Project Review
This review came at the request of someone that's in the Discord.
They insisted that we take a look at Parsiq, so that's what was done here: https://librehash.org/parsic-project-review-part-one/
Summary
1. Clean interface - that can be said; the idea is not innovative in the least bit though
2. Worth noting that they actually beat 'The Graph' to the punch in terms of creating a platform that is supposed to "trigger" events based on certain events that occur on the blockchain. An example of this would be a Telegram message firing off everytime Bitcoin rises / drops below $23k.
If you're thinking to yourself, "Do you need a blockchain / project to do that?" - the answer is 'no'. And, yes, you see examples of people creating these 'triggers' based on certain 'events'. This is damn near API in a nutshell.
This project is an OG though, so there's that.
3. The recent price increase for the project was enigmatic (increased by >50% in the last 1-2 days for some reason.
That price gain was suspicious (and unsafe) because the price doesn't match the volume / liquidity (the price increase, by itself, is not suspicious though - its the fact that the metrics don't match).
Therefore, this one was ruled an abstain (as in, don't throw your money in this project if you like retaining your funds).
Not worth the gamble in general. But a cool project nonetheless.
There is a much better use for projects than this though (hint: JWT / CBOR ; the data type is small enough to fit within a transaction on any chain in any scenario and the potential expansions to blockchain are significant).
This review came at the request of someone that's in the Discord.
They insisted that we take a look at Parsiq, so that's what was done here: https://librehash.org/parsic-project-review-part-one/
Summary
1. Clean interface - that can be said; the idea is not innovative in the least bit though
2. Worth noting that they actually beat 'The Graph' to the punch in terms of creating a platform that is supposed to "trigger" events based on certain events that occur on the blockchain. An example of this would be a Telegram message firing off everytime Bitcoin rises / drops below $23k.
If you're thinking to yourself, "Do you need a blockchain / project to do that?" - the answer is 'no'. And, yes, you see examples of people creating these 'triggers' based on certain 'events'. This is damn near API in a nutshell.
This project is an OG though, so there's that.
3. The recent price increase for the project was enigmatic (increased by >50% in the last 1-2 days for some reason.
That price gain was suspicious (and unsafe) because the price doesn't match the volume / liquidity (the price increase, by itself, is not suspicious though - its the fact that the metrics don't match).
Therefore, this one was ruled an abstain (as in, don't throw your money in this project if you like retaining your funds).
Not worth the gamble in general. But a cool project nonetheless.
There is a much better use for projects than this though (hint: JWT / CBOR ; the data type is small enough to fit within a transaction on any chain in any scenario and the potential expansions to blockchain are significant).
Librehash
Parsiq Project Review Part One
On the word of a Librehash community member, a project that we should be on the "lookout" for is one called 'parsiq'. Being entirely unfamiliar with the project or its general premise, this brief project report is being curated from a completely neutral perspective.…
Next Step For Blockchain
Sadly, we're still having this conversation, but here are the things that need to happen in order to push the blockchain space forward to the next level:
1. There needs to be a resurgence in the understanding of Proof of Work's importance and how it underpins this entire technology. Even if someone is going to run a 'consortium' chain, you would want it to be over Proof of Work - even if that Proof of Work is fixed or assigned to the "validators" in a round robin fashion. There should also be a network of some sort outside of those validators that can audit the results being propagated to whatever network its on (assuming that this network will still be "decentralized") ; that's another story - just remember, Proof of Work is the key.
2. Blockchain needs to embrace other internet protocols a lot more. They're there for a reason. By virtue of even using a blockchain, you're at least running on a stable internet connection of some sort. There are a lot of moving parts in this structure called the ' internet' that are being entirely neglected by this space. For some reason, a lot of projects seem to have this fascination with the idea of "replacing" different facets of the internet. That's a really dumbass idea and almost disrespectful in how much it grossly underestimates the crazy level of difficulty of doing such a thing. Blockchain will derive its value from augmenting the OSI7 rather than attempting to replace items on it. Did Tim Berner's Lee replace anything? No. He built on the backbone of an already existing internet and things expanded from there. That is generally the way of the internet.
3. There must be a revival of folks in this space that know what the fuck they're doing. I mean people that really understand and know what they're talking about that have an interest in ensuring that the community is on the same wave. That was the case up until circa 2012, then all of that starting dying among the "block size debate" (one of the most fabricated, manufactured issues of all time).
4. There must be an honest, good-faith attempt within this space to expand Bitcoin / Litecoin / Bitcoin Cash / Bitcoin SV. These are the flagship currencies right now due to being first (Bitcoin) or a high-valued derivative of the first. Those other than Bitcoin present themselves as unique variations to Bitcoin's design. Rather than getting angry about their existence, we should observe their progress very closely so that we can gain confirmation on what actually does / doesn't work. Policing and fighting about ideas is insanely stupid and counter-productive. But not nearly as dumb as throwing all of one's eggs into one basket (i.e., Lightning Network) without even so much as independently establishing (through legitimate research, tests etc.), that your preferred method of "scaling blockchain" is the best way forward.
Sadly, we're still having this conversation, but here are the things that need to happen in order to push the blockchain space forward to the next level:
1. There needs to be a resurgence in the understanding of Proof of Work's importance and how it underpins this entire technology. Even if someone is going to run a 'consortium' chain, you would want it to be over Proof of Work - even if that Proof of Work is fixed or assigned to the "validators" in a round robin fashion. There should also be a network of some sort outside of those validators that can audit the results being propagated to whatever network its on (assuming that this network will still be "decentralized") ; that's another story - just remember, Proof of Work is the key.
2. Blockchain needs to embrace other internet protocols a lot more. They're there for a reason. By virtue of even using a blockchain, you're at least running on a stable internet connection of some sort. There are a lot of moving parts in this structure called the ' internet' that are being entirely neglected by this space. For some reason, a lot of projects seem to have this fascination with the idea of "replacing" different facets of the internet. That's a really dumbass idea and almost disrespectful in how much it grossly underestimates the crazy level of difficulty of doing such a thing. Blockchain will derive its value from augmenting the OSI7 rather than attempting to replace items on it. Did Tim Berner's Lee replace anything? No. He built on the backbone of an already existing internet and things expanded from there. That is generally the way of the internet.
3. There must be a revival of folks in this space that know what the fuck they're doing. I mean people that really understand and know what they're talking about that have an interest in ensuring that the community is on the same wave. That was the case up until circa 2012, then all of that starting dying among the "block size debate" (one of the most fabricated, manufactured issues of all time).
4. There must be an honest, good-faith attempt within this space to expand Bitcoin / Litecoin / Bitcoin Cash / Bitcoin SV. These are the flagship currencies right now due to being first (Bitcoin) or a high-valued derivative of the first. Those other than Bitcoin present themselves as unique variations to Bitcoin's design. Rather than getting angry about their existence, we should observe their progress very closely so that we can gain confirmation on what actually does / doesn't work. Policing and fighting about ideas is insanely stupid and counter-productive. But not nearly as dumb as throwing all of one's eggs into one basket (i.e., Lightning Network) without even so much as independently establishing (through legitimate research, tests etc.), that your preferred method of "scaling blockchain" is the best way forward.
For Those Sending a Letter to FinCEN on December 23rd, 2020 When Comments Open
FinCEN is expecting everyone to come at this from the obvious angle of 'privacy' / 'government overreach' etc., so we can expect that they'll hand wave those issues, citing "national security concerns".
The best way to come at this is to argue that these restrictions will ultimately undermine the Treasury in their goal of countering money laundering, terrorism financing, etc.
If we can provide some credible arguments that prove that, then the FinCEN has to take a step back and reconsider.
Fortunately, I've brainstormed some potential angles users should consider when submitting comments:
1. The average value per transaction on Bitcoin's blockchain = $111k (right now) and there are 10k+ transactions per day. More than likely, transactions that are worthy of scrutiny by FinCEN fall within that range rather than the $3,000 range. Thus, by mandating a $3000 reporting limit, FinCEN is introducing a ton of additional noise that could actually make it more difficult for them to hone in on the supposed suspicious transactions that they're looking to track.
2. Recently the government handed down a federal indictment on BitMex - a cryptocurrency exchange - for violating the Bank Secrecy Act. The New York Attorney General is still engaged with Bitfinex (crypto exchange) in a lawsuit that alleges they perpetrated several hundred million dollars worth of fraud. Mt. Gox, BTC-e and QuadrigaCX are three more potent examples of extreme malfeasance, negligence and BSA violations in blockchain. If FinCEN's goal is to really crack down on potential laundering and crime on the blockchain, wouldn't it make sense to hone in on the actions of these platforms specifically before focusing on these lower transaction amounts? Also, is it a wise idea to trust entities with such a piss poor track record of compliance to...be compliant with this measure?
3. What checks / audits are in place to ensure that exchanges do not attempt to falsify data? After all, an exchange could send out funds on its own behalf and claim that they were a withdrawal initiated by some random customer on their platform. Chances are, that customer and FinCEN would be none the wiser. Not only would this defeat the purpose of their proposed restrictions, it could potentially make it easier for exchanges to launder funds and facilitate the ACTUAL criminal activity.
4. How will FinCEN make intelligible use of this information? At the time of writing, certain exchanges have well over 50-100+ traded pairs. Is FinCEN insisting that each exchange keep track of each and every single customer as well as each and every single transfer to and from the exchange for each and every single currency offered on the exchange? And if so, how does the government plan on doing the same? (since it is assumed that FinCEN will be archiving this information for future usage).
5. Multi-signature wallets and 'P2SH' addresses are left entirely unaddressed in the order. Additionally, there are no restrictions imposed on which addresses one can withdraw to, which may make it even easier for one to obfuscate their identity. Imagine Joe and Fred both send 6 bitcoins to exchange A. That exchange logs those transfers. What controls are in place to restrict Joe from withdrawing to Fred's wallet? And if he does, do we log this as a transaction on Fred's behalf or is it for Joe? Or both? Or do we restrict Joe? And if we choose the lattermost option, how restricted is Joe? Can he only withdraw to a wallet he identifies with the exchange?
FinCEN is expecting everyone to come at this from the obvious angle of 'privacy' / 'government overreach' etc., so we can expect that they'll hand wave those issues, citing "national security concerns".
The best way to come at this is to argue that these restrictions will ultimately undermine the Treasury in their goal of countering money laundering, terrorism financing, etc.
If we can provide some credible arguments that prove that, then the FinCEN has to take a step back and reconsider.
Fortunately, I've brainstormed some potential angles users should consider when submitting comments:
1. The average value per transaction on Bitcoin's blockchain = $111k (right now) and there are 10k+ transactions per day. More than likely, transactions that are worthy of scrutiny by FinCEN fall within that range rather than the $3,000 range. Thus, by mandating a $3000 reporting limit, FinCEN is introducing a ton of additional noise that could actually make it more difficult for them to hone in on the supposed suspicious transactions that they're looking to track.
2. Recently the government handed down a federal indictment on BitMex - a cryptocurrency exchange - for violating the Bank Secrecy Act. The New York Attorney General is still engaged with Bitfinex (crypto exchange) in a lawsuit that alleges they perpetrated several hundred million dollars worth of fraud. Mt. Gox, BTC-e and QuadrigaCX are three more potent examples of extreme malfeasance, negligence and BSA violations in blockchain. If FinCEN's goal is to really crack down on potential laundering and crime on the blockchain, wouldn't it make sense to hone in on the actions of these platforms specifically before focusing on these lower transaction amounts? Also, is it a wise idea to trust entities with such a piss poor track record of compliance to...be compliant with this measure?
3. What checks / audits are in place to ensure that exchanges do not attempt to falsify data? After all, an exchange could send out funds on its own behalf and claim that they were a withdrawal initiated by some random customer on their platform. Chances are, that customer and FinCEN would be none the wiser. Not only would this defeat the purpose of their proposed restrictions, it could potentially make it easier for exchanges to launder funds and facilitate the ACTUAL criminal activity.
4. How will FinCEN make intelligible use of this information? At the time of writing, certain exchanges have well over 50-100+ traded pairs. Is FinCEN insisting that each exchange keep track of each and every single customer as well as each and every single transfer to and from the exchange for each and every single currency offered on the exchange? And if so, how does the government plan on doing the same? (since it is assumed that FinCEN will be archiving this information for future usage).
5. Multi-signature wallets and 'P2SH' addresses are left entirely unaddressed in the order. Additionally, there are no restrictions imposed on which addresses one can withdraw to, which may make it even easier for one to obfuscate their identity. Imagine Joe and Fred both send 6 bitcoins to exchange A. That exchange logs those transfers. What controls are in place to restrict Joe from withdrawing to Fred's wallet? And if he does, do we log this as a transaction on Fred's behalf or is it for Joe? Or both? Or do we restrict Joe? And if we choose the lattermost option, how restricted is Joe? Can he only withdraw to a wallet he identifies with the exchange?
6. Why does the FinCEN report leave out mining entirely? There is $150k-160k in value generated per block, which amounts $21.6 million generated per day (for Bitcoin). These funds are "coinbase" rewards for the miner with the winning nonce that finds it first at any given block height. Should that miner do KYC for their mining pool distributions now? How would they even go about doing so? And speaking of mining, what if there is large mining entity that is engaged in money laundering / violations of the Bank Secrecy Act? Are they just off the hook? Seems like the FinCEN restrictions never considered that.
Finding Changpeng Zhao: Part Two
Second part to our saga (first part was published on Friday).
https://librehash.org/next-chapter-okex-okcoin/
In this part, we take a really close look at that debacle between Roger Ver + Changpeng Zhao & OKCoin.
Not many remember / know this, but before Binance, Changpeng Zhao was the CTO of OKCoin.
Drama erupted over the Bitcoin.com domain that Roger Ver had loaned to the exchange (it appears they had some sort of licensing agreement with one another).
While OKCoin held the domain, Ver disagreed with what they advertised / promoted on the site, so he decided to yank back control of the domain before OKex's usage term was up.
Where it Gets Ugly
Ver claimed he could yank the domain back because their contract with one another (Ver and OKCoin) stipulated such a provision.
OKCoin claimed this was ludicrous, and accused Ver of colluding with Changpeng Zhao to craft a subversive contract to screw over OKCoin.
Changpeng Zhao's name was thrown in the mix because he was allegedly the one that was responsible for brokering the deal w Ver on behalf of OKCoin. They later claimed that Changpeng Zhao went behind their backs and adjusted the contract to be extremely favorable toward Ver.
Ver claimed this was bullshit and stated the copy of the contract OKCoin had was plagiarized. CZ added into the mix claiming OKCoin was a messy exchange that engaged in wash trading & all sorts of other illegal market practices and unsavory behaviors.
OKCoin's response, however, was a full blown military offensive. They dumped notarized videos and e-mail correspondence + hired an independent 3rd-party calligrapher to validate the signature given by Ver was not a forgery.
From there, they went on to state CZ knew NOTHING about tech while working there as a CTO and that he had essentially fooled them.
They also claimed to have fired CZ from OKCoin (vs. the common story we here that he left).
You all can be the judges of what went down. Enjoy!
Second part to our saga (first part was published on Friday).
https://librehash.org/next-chapter-okex-okcoin/
In this part, we take a really close look at that debacle between Roger Ver + Changpeng Zhao & OKCoin.
Not many remember / know this, but before Binance, Changpeng Zhao was the CTO of OKCoin.
Drama erupted over the Bitcoin.com domain that Roger Ver had loaned to the exchange (it appears they had some sort of licensing agreement with one another).
While OKCoin held the domain, Ver disagreed with what they advertised / promoted on the site, so he decided to yank back control of the domain before OKex's usage term was up.
Where it Gets Ugly
Ver claimed he could yank the domain back because their contract with one another (Ver and OKCoin) stipulated such a provision.
OKCoin claimed this was ludicrous, and accused Ver of colluding with Changpeng Zhao to craft a subversive contract to screw over OKCoin.
Changpeng Zhao's name was thrown in the mix because he was allegedly the one that was responsible for brokering the deal w Ver on behalf of OKCoin. They later claimed that Changpeng Zhao went behind their backs and adjusted the contract to be extremely favorable toward Ver.
Ver claimed this was bullshit and stated the copy of the contract OKCoin had was plagiarized. CZ added into the mix claiming OKCoin was a messy exchange that engaged in wash trading & all sorts of other illegal market practices and unsavory behaviors.
OKCoin's response, however, was a full blown military offensive. They dumped notarized videos and e-mail correspondence + hired an independent 3rd-party calligrapher to validate the signature given by Ver was not a forgery.
From there, they went on to state CZ knew NOTHING about tech while working there as a CTO and that he had essentially fooled them.
They also claimed to have fired CZ from OKCoin (vs. the common story we here that he left).
You all can be the judges of what went down. Enjoy!
Libre Blockchain
Do Not Get the Ledger Wallet App Either they are bad actors or they're extremely incompetent - can't figure out which. In either case, you've been warned. Ledger, as a company, also deserves zero trust. If you have a ledger, I'd recommend moving your…
On October 22 this channel told everyone to avoid Ledger. Begged you all in fact. Published research, breakdowns, etc.
https://news.1rj.ru/str/librehash/26854
Before the breach.
Once again, if you would’ve listened to this channel - you would’ve been spared.
Starting to notice a theme with the stark accuracy of what’s published in here?
https://news.1rj.ru/str/librehash/26854
Before the breach.
Once again, if you would’ve listened to this channel - you would’ve been spared.
Starting to notice a theme with the stark accuracy of what’s published in here?
Telegram
Cryptomedication
Do Not Get the Ledger Wallet App
Either they are bad actors or they're extremely incompetent - can't figure out which.
In either case, you've been warned.
Ledger, as a company, also deserves zero trust. If you have a ledger, I'd recommend moving your…
Either they are bad actors or they're extremely incompetent - can't figure out which.
In either case, you've been warned.
Ledger, as a company, also deserves zero trust. If you have a ledger, I'd recommend moving your…
We told you all about “The Graph” on October 5th.
Even published a full 2k+ word article about it. Told you it was guaranteed money and to just wait for it & cash out when it drops and that you didn’t even need to trip about pre-investment etc because everyone would eat from it.
And.... we were right again
https://news.1rj.ru/str/librehash/26778
Even published a full 2k+ word article about it. Told you it was guaranteed money and to just wait for it & cash out when it drops and that you didn’t even need to trip about pre-investment etc because everyone would eat from it.
And.... we were right again
https://news.1rj.ru/str/librehash/26778
Telegram
Cryptomedication
'The Graph': An Actually Useful Project
This is a write- up on 'The Graph' (because I was done with NuCypher quite some time ago).
Take a look here: https://librehash.org/the-graph-an-actually-useful-project/
There are some gripes that I have with the…
This is a write- up on 'The Graph' (because I was done with NuCypher quite some time ago).
Take a look here: https://librehash.org/the-graph-an-actually-useful-project/
There are some gripes that I have with the…
November 16th, Bitcoin hit $16.5k, which was quite a bump from where it had been previously.
The rest of the market assumed short. We longed everything in crypto and told people Bitcoin was just warming up.
$6-8,000 later, hard to say we were off base: Bitcoin Banged Over $16.5k As Forecasted
https://news.1rj.ru/str/librehash/27034
The rest of the market assumed short. We longed everything in crypto and told people Bitcoin was just warming up.
$6-8,000 later, hard to say we were off base: Bitcoin Banged Over $16.5k As Forecasted
https://news.1rj.ru/str/librehash/27034
Telegram
Cryptomedication
Bitcoin Banged Over $16.5k As Forecasted
You're welcome. Slid that forecast in here yesterday.
Not sure how many people paid attention to it, joined or left the channel - but once again, ended up being right on another forecast this year (as has been the…
You're welcome. Slid that forecast in here yesterday.
Not sure how many people paid attention to it, joined or left the channel - but once again, ended up being right on another forecast this year (as has been the…
Conclusion - Librehash is the only channel that will help you make a shitload of money AND keep your funds safe in a space full of hackers & landmines.
For free. This channel costs nothing. No kickbacks needed - there’s not even a tip jar in here.
Just spread the word & enjoy
For free. This channel costs nothing. No kickbacks needed - there’s not even a tip jar in here.
Just spread the word & enjoy
Forwarded from Libre Blockchain
Myth #1 — Ripple did not create the Ripple Token ($XRP)
This is the biggest myth that has been perpetuated repeatedly throughout Twitter and other social media outlets/publications. The reason why this lie has been perpetuated is because individuals do not want the $XRP token to be deemed a security.
Big source for a lot of information that is going to be included below comes from: https://twitter.com/mdudas/status/1065804676690518017
This is the biggest myth that has been perpetuated repeatedly throughout Twitter and other social media outlets/publications. The reason why this lie has been perpetuated is because individuals do not want the $XRP token to be deemed a security.
Big source for a lot of information that is going to be included below comes from: https://twitter.com/mdudas/status/1065804676690518017
Twitter
Mike Dudas
🤔 @Ripple & $XRP 2013: "Ripple Labs created 100 billion XRP within the Ripple network, and that amount will never increase." https://t.co/kGUjfNE6i2 2018: "Ripple the company didn’t create XRP; 100 billion XRP was created before the company was formed" h…
Forwarded from Libre Blockchain
In order to get down to the center of this, we need to look at the history of the Ripple token’s creation:
1. Jed McCaleb is the co-founder of the Ripple token. This is indisputable and it is on Ripple’s website as well (https://archive.fo/pZgRT). The link has been archived. On Ripple’s site, in a blog post that they published on April 17th, 2013, they specifically stated that, “Jed McCaleb is the co-founder and CTO of OpenCoin Inc. and the original developer of Ripple.”
2. From here, we must look at ‘Who is OpenCoin Inc.’? Numerous sources attest to the fact that $XRP was created by OpenCoin Inc., and so has Ripple themselves (see #1); this is indisputable (http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/opencoin-developer-ripple-protocol-closes-funding-from-andreessen-horowitz-ff-angel-1777707.htm). The company, OpenCoin Inc., did not cease to exist, they simply re-named themselves to ‘Ripple Labs’ in 2015 (https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=235707311). This is also information that is well-known, publicized in reputable locations (like the Bloomberg link just cited), and easy to verify.
3. When you put #1 and #2 together, it is impossible to dispute the fact that Ripple Labs created $XRP. Many in the community have attempted to depict OpenCoin Inc., as an entirely separate entity from Ripple Labs, but this is not the case. OpenCoin Inc. = Ripple Labs. OpenCoin Inc., created $XRP. Therefore, Ripple Labs created $XRP.
4. On top of the information contained in points #1, #2, and #3, Ripple Labs has directly stated that they are the founders and creators of the Ripple token. Credit to (twitter.com/mdudas) for providing the screenshot to make us all aware that Ripple Labs owns the Ripple Token. The link (archived) to that is here: https://archive.fo/lGbf0
1. Jed McCaleb is the co-founder of the Ripple token. This is indisputable and it is on Ripple’s website as well (https://archive.fo/pZgRT). The link has been archived. On Ripple’s site, in a blog post that they published on April 17th, 2013, they specifically stated that, “Jed McCaleb is the co-founder and CTO of OpenCoin Inc. and the original developer of Ripple.”
2. From here, we must look at ‘Who is OpenCoin Inc.’? Numerous sources attest to the fact that $XRP was created by OpenCoin Inc., and so has Ripple themselves (see #1); this is indisputable (http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/opencoin-developer-ripple-protocol-closes-funding-from-andreessen-horowitz-ff-angel-1777707.htm). The company, OpenCoin Inc., did not cease to exist, they simply re-named themselves to ‘Ripple Labs’ in 2015 (https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=235707311). This is also information that is well-known, publicized in reputable locations (like the Bloomberg link just cited), and easy to verify.
3. When you put #1 and #2 together, it is impossible to dispute the fact that Ripple Labs created $XRP. Many in the community have attempted to depict OpenCoin Inc., as an entirely separate entity from Ripple Labs, but this is not the case. OpenCoin Inc. = Ripple Labs. OpenCoin Inc., created $XRP. Therefore, Ripple Labs created $XRP.
4. On top of the information contained in points #1, #2, and #3, Ripple Labs has directly stated that they are the founders and creators of the Ripple token. Credit to (twitter.com/mdudas) for providing the screenshot to make us all aware that Ripple Labs owns the Ripple Token. The link (archived) to that is here: https://archive.fo/lGbf0
Forwarded from Libre Blockchain
As if all of the above evidence were not enough, here is what the total distribution of XRP tokens was on August 31st, 2015
Source: https://archive.fo/VA0a4
Source: https://archive.fo/VA0a4