Bitcoins long-lasting scaling debate appeared to be heading toward a climax lately, with two proposals gaining significant traction. At one end of the fence there is Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 148 (BIP148), a user activated soft fork (UASF) originally proposed by the pseudonymous developer shaolinfry. On the other, theres SegWit2x, an agreement forged between a significant number of Bitcoin companies and miners.

The good news is that both of these proposals have a short-term solution in common: both plan to activate Segregated Witness (SegWit) this summer. The bad news is that the activation method of the two has differed, which could lead to a coin-split.

As of today, it seems this schism will be avoided at least initially. The SegWit2x development team plans to implement BIP91, a proposal by Bitmain Warranty engineer James Hilliard that cleverly makes the two conflicting activation methods compatible.

Heres how.

The current implementation of Segregated Witness is defined by BIP141. This version is included in the latest Bitcoin Core releases, and is widely deployed on the Bitcoin network. BIP141 is activated through the activation method defined by BIP9. This means that 95 percent of all blocks within a two-week period need to include a piece of data: bit 1. This indicates that a miner is ready for the upgrade. As such, SegWit would be activated if the vast majority of miners are ready for it.

Or that was the intention. So far, only some 30 percent of hash power is signaling support for the upgrade. There is a lot of speculation as to why this is the case, but it almost certainly has nothing to do with (a lack of) readiness.

Thats why other activation methods are increasingly being considered.

BIP148 is a user activated soft fork (UASF), specifically designed to trigger BIP141.

On August 1st, anyone running Bitcoin software that implemented BIP148 will start rejecting all blocks that do not include bit 1, the SegWit signalling data.

This means that if a mere majority of miners (by hash power) runs this software, they will reject all blocks from the minority of miners that does not. As a result, this majority of miners will always have the longest valid chain according to all Bitcoin nodes on the network. Consequently, all deployed BIP141 nodes will see a chain that includes over 95 percent of bit 1 blocks, meaning SegWit would be activated on the network.

However, if BIP148 is not supported by a majority of miners (by hash power), Bitcoins blockchain could split in two. In that case, there would effectively be two types of Bitcoin, where one activated BIP148 and the other did not. This may resolve over time or it may not.

SegWit2x (also referred to as SegWit2MB or the Silbert Accord), is the scaling agreement reached by a numer of Bitcoin companies and over 80 percent of miners (by hash power), drafted just before the Consensus 2017 conference.

For some time, the details surrounding SegWit2x were not very specific. As the name suggests, all that was really known was that SegWit was included in the agreement, and that it included a hard fork to double Bitcoins base block size to two megabytes.

And, of course, SegWit was meant to be implemented using a different activation method. Like the original BIP141 proposal, SegWit2x was to be activated by miners through hash power. But where BIP141 requires 95 percent hash power support, SegWit2x would only require 80 percent. Moreover, SegWit2x readiness would be signaled using another piece of activation data: bit 4 instead of bit 1.

This makes SegWit2x largely incompatible with BIP141, and especially with BIP148: Different nodes would be looking at different activation bits, meaning they could activate SegWit under different circumstances and at different times; and that would mess up SegWit-specific block relay policy between nodes, potentially fracturing the network.

Now, it seems BIP91 has provided the solution.

BIP91 is a proposal by Bitmain Warranty (not to be confused with Bitmain) engineer James Hilliard which was specifically designed to prevent a coin-split by making SegWit2x and BIP148 compatible.

The proposal resembles BIP148 to some extent. Upon activation of BIP91, all BIP91 nodes will reject any blocks that do not signal support for SegWit through bit 1. As such, if a majority of miners (by hash power) run BIP91, the longest valid Bitcoin chain will consist of SegWit-signaling blocks only, and all regular BIP141 SegWit nodes will activate the protocol upgrade.

Where BIP91 differs from BIP148 is that it doesnt have a set activation date, but is instead triggered by hash power. BIP91 nodes will reject any non-SegWit signalling blocks if, and only if, 80 percent of blocks first indicate within two days thats what theyll do.

This indication is done with bit 4. As such, the Silbert Accord can technically be upheld 80 percent hash power activation with bit 4 while at the same time activating the existing SegWit proposal. And if this is done before August 1st, its also compatible with BIP148, since BIP148 nodes would reject non-bit 1 blocks just the same.

This proposal gives miners a little over six weeks to avoid a coin-split, under their own agreed-upon terms. With a SegWit2x launch date planned for July 21st, that should not be a problem assuming that the miners actually follow through.

Read the original post:

BIP91: The SegWit Activation "Kludge" That Should Keep Bitcoin Whole - Bitcoin Magazine

Before we get started, let me try and define some very important terms, which I hope will make it easier for me to fully convey what exactly is going to happen on August 1st.

Hard Fork - A hard fork is a permanent divergence in the blockchain, that occurs when non-upgraded nodes can't validate blocks created by upgraded nodes that follow newer block validation rules. This can be caused by a change in a blockchain's protocol that makes previously invalid blocks/transactions valid, and as such requires all nodes or users to upgrade to the latest version of the protocol software. This essentially creates a fork in the blockchain, one path which follows the new, upgraded blockchain, and one path which continues along the old path. Generally, after a short period of time, those on the old chain will realize that their version of the blockchain is outdated or irrelevant and quickly upgrade to the latest version.

Soft Fork - A soft fork is a change to the bitcoin protocol where some previously valid blocks/transactions are made invalid, and the rest of the previously valid blocks/transactions are kept valid. Old nodes will still recognize the new blocks as valid. Soft forks don't require any nodes to upgrade since all blocks with the new soft-forked rules also follow the old rules, therefore old clients accept them. This kind of fork requires only a majority of the miners to upgrade in order to enforce the new rules.

(Image Source: Bitcoin.org)

User Activated Soft Fork (UASF) - A UASF is a soft fork activated on a specified date, enforced by node enforcement instead of miner signaling. The idea is to have the economic majority, businesses and users (not miners) choose whether or not to activate this soft fork within their Bitcoin software client. On the proposed time, clients that have activated the soft fork will only accept blocks mined from miners that have also updated to start signaling for the soft fork, and will reject blocks that were created from miners that had not updated. Clients that have not updated to activate the soft fork will accept blocks mined from both miners that have updated and miners that have not updated.

By the specified date, miners are then given an opportunity to make a choice of their own, based on how much of the economic majority has activated the soft fork. If the economic majority upgrades, then miners have an economic incentive to update, as not following along would make it more difficult to sell coins mined after the chosen date, as the blocks would not be accepted by the economic majority. Essentially, miners on the old platform would be producing an altcoin not recognized by the majority of users and exchanges, making them less useful and in lower demand. Because of how the Bitcoin network only follows the longest blockchain, if a majority of hash power follows the soft fork, all nodes will follow the soft fork chain regardless of if they have updated or not, and the UASF is successful.

However, if the vast majority of the economic majority does not upgrade, then the UASF will have given miners no additional incentive to upgrade and thus miners will not update or they risk following fork rules that are or will surely be obsolete. And in fact, any of the economic majority that had upgraded now must roll back their clients to the old version, else they would be unable to spend their Bitcoin. Their updated clients would reject any blockchain that includes any non-upgraded blocks created past the specified date, so any transactions they attempt to make will be added to the soft forked blockchain which would be maintained by the soft forked nodes and miners (if there are any soft forked miners at all). This soft forked blockchain will undoubtedly remain shorter than the original blockchain containing the non-updated blocks. Thus, the soft forked blockchain will never be accepted by the non-updated clients, and the transactions of the updated clients will never be included in the original blockchain; the transactions from the updated clients will never go through.

In the unlikely case that neither side is the clear winner, this is where it gets messy. A chain split will occur, where two versions of the blockchain will emerge. All coins that existed prior to the chain split will exist on both chains. If the original "legacy" blockchain remains longer, any coins mined under the soft forked blockchain will be nonexistent according to the legacy chain, and will only exist on the soft forked chain. However, if the soft forked chain ever becomes one block longer than the original, "legacy" chain, all transactions on the legacy chain that occurred between the time of the split and the soft forked chain getting longer will be erased forever and replaced with those of the soft forked chain, at which point the soft forked blockchain will likely remain victorious.

I hope there remains no confusion over my definitions, especially so in my defining of a UASF. I will attempt to answer any questions in the comments in order to further clarify.

August 1st, and the Future of Bitcoin

Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 148 (or BIP148 for short) is a UASF that encourage users to push miners to upgrade to SegWit. SegWit, along with fixing third party transaction malleability allowing for sidechains to be developed, will also improve Bitcoin's scalability over both the short term and the long term, as the malleability fix will allow for the implementation of Lightning Network, a more permanent solution to Bitcoin's transaction speed bottleneck. As Bitcoin is a decentralized system, here's how SegWit is supposed to activate: In any consecutive chain of blocks that are 2016-blocks long, ending November 15th, 2017, 95% or more of mined blocks must signal that the miners are ready for SegWit. If that doesn't happen, SegWit activation dies. Once SegWit signaling meets the criteria, there's a 2016-block long "pause" where SegWit activation is pending, but voting no longer matters. After that point, the network will accept SegWit transactions and miners are expected to accept them into blocks.

BIP148 will activate on August 1st, 2017. All BIP148 does, is refuse to accept blocks that do not signal SegWit-ready after August 1st, 2017, either until SegWit activates or until the deadline of November 15th, 2017 hits. In so doing, it forces the existing activation mechanism to deploy SegWit. From that date on, miners that want their blocks to be accepted by nodes that have updated to BIP148 will be required to signal readiness for SegWit by switching to the creation of blocks with a new version, called 'bit 1'. After enough miners are mining 'bit 1' version blocks, enough so that 95% or more of mined blocks in any 2016-block chain are of the version 'bit 1', the above requirements for SegWit activation will be fulfilled. Then all SegWit ready nodes, which currently make up over 80% of the network, will activate and begin SegWit enforcement, and thus SegWit will have been successfully implemented into the Bitcoin Network.

(Image Source: uasf.co)

As a soft fork, BIP148 avoids having to force most users to upgrade their software. Also, the way BIP148 and SegWit are designed, once SegWit is activated, users who are not running BIP148 will still get the benefits of the activation of SegWit.

Possible Scenarios

A confrontation will happen on August 1st, but right now the exact outcome is unknown because the outcome will depend on the amount of support that miners give to the two sides. There are three possible outcomes:

BIP148 fails with very little economic majority support. BIP148 requires support from the economic majority, particularly exchanges and wallets. If this does not occur, users will not run BIP148 node software after August 1st so as to prevent a chain split. There are strong economic incentives in the Bitcoin system for nodes to cooperate and remain in consensus to prevent chain splits. If no nodes are running BIP148, then BIP148 has failed. Bitcoin goes on exactly as it did on July 31st. People who installed BIP148 nodes need to roll back their nodes to be able to spend their bitcoins. Everyone else is unaffected.

Neither side is the clear winner and the blockchain splits, where two versions of the blockchain emerge. This is the disaster scenario. All coins that existed prior to the chain split will exist on both chains. If there is a greater demand for the blocks produced by the BIP148 miners, then profit-driven miners would eventually flock to BIP148 chain and if the BIP148 chain ever becomes one block longer than the legacy chain, as in it accumulates the most proof of work, all transactions on the legacy chain that occurred between the time of the split and the BIP148 chain getting longer will be erased forever and replaced with those of the BIP148 chain. This is because both BIP148 nodes as well as legacy nodes would switch to the BIP148 blockchain, discarding the legacy chain. If 50% of the mining power goes to the BIP148, it will almost certainly become the only chain. Nobody will want to mine or transact on a chain where the mining reward and transactions can disappear at any moment forever. But unless and until this happens, there is always at least a theoretical risk that the legacy blockchain can be overtaken and be discarded like this. That chance should decrease as time goes on, but will realistically exist for hours, days, or maybe even longer. If the demand is less for the soft-fork chain, then both chains may co-exist indefinitely. BIP148 nodes will never acknowledge the legacy chain, so these nodes will not switch to the legacy blockchain regardless of which chain has more hash power. However, it is very risky to buy, accept or hold any of the BIP148 Bitcoin, too. Most importantly, there is no guarantee that BIP148 Bitcoin will continue to be used and thus the coin's long-term value is in contention.

Most likely, one of the first two scenarios will unfold, where BIP148 either succeeds triumphantly or fails definitively, and Bitcoin will go on as it were, for better or for worse. Yet despite the odds, however improbable, an investor must always consider the worst case scenario in his or her risk-reward evaluation and examine if taking on the according risk-reward is appropriate for the goals of his or her portfolio.

Disclosure: I am/we are long BTC.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

See more here:

August 1st And The End Of Bitcoin? - Seeking Alpha

It was with the air of a Julliard-trainedviolinist reluctantly bowing the first notes of Devil Went Down To Georgia for a family weddingthat Goldman Sachs on Monday initiated coverage of the speculative money-laundering-based asset and digital blackmail vehicle known popularly as bitcoin. Due to popular demand, its worth taking a quick look at Bitcoin here Goldmans top technical analyst Sheba Jafari wrote in a note to clients, the ellipses presumably denoting a heavy sigh. Goldman didnt want to dothis, but you gotta go where the customers are.

Jafarisconclusion: expect a top soon. Heres achart, courtesy of Zerohedge.

Thespecific call: Wary of a near-term top ahead of 3,134. Consider re-establishing bullish exposure between 2,330 and no lower than 1,915.

ADVERTISEMENT

Unsurprisingly, the bitcoin community didnt take too kindly to Goldman wading into their turf. If the Fed is the archfoe of the paranoid cryptolibertarian imagination, Goldman is a close second. Goldman Sachs is exactly what bitcoin is meant to destroy, said some Redditor. Added another: Lol so, Goldman gets high demand for bitcoin research, and then they turn around and say its overvalued. Ironic? All they did with their deep wisdom is make a ratio and apply it forward. Great work guys. Thats a wrap.

Lo and behold:

See that top? Just over $3,000 on the same day Goldman issued the note. Three down dayslater, bitcoin is bouncing around $2,300, the upper bound of the range Jafari spelled out.

Sometimes technical analysts get lucky. Other times they make good calls. This looks like the latter. Itmakes you wonder about the whole technical analysis thing, which often gets mocked by others in the financial world as basically an occult practice, on the level of tarot cards or Federal Reserve macro forecasting. And not only was the analysis dead-on, it was dead-on about an asset that veteran investors tend to regard as the marketequivalent of K2, an asset advertised as a safe alternative to ordinary currencies that in reality exacerbates all their worst and most volatile qualities.

So anyway, kudos to Goldman. We look forward toJafaris take on Potcoin.

Link:

Goldman Sachs Side-Eyes Bitcoin Just Long Enough To Perfectly Call The Top - Dealbreaker

After surging briefly to an all-time high of $3,000, bitcoin has been undergoing a dazzling reversal of late, with the digital currency on track to post its worst weekly decline in more than two years.

Bitcoin BTCUSD, +3.18% has dropped 18.5% over the past week to a value of $2,317, which would mark its steepest weekly decline since Jan. 16, 2015, according to WSJ Market Data Group. Thursdays more-than-15% drop would represent its largest one-day plunge since Jan. 14, 2015.

Put another way, bitcoin has shed more than $10 billion in market value since the start of the week, based on data from CominMarketCap, which tracks the value of digital currencies. Thats a loss just a little under Twitter Inc.s TWTR, +0.42% market cap of $12 billion.

The retreat for bitcoin, which fell to an intraday low, down about 20% at $2,076.16, also coincides with a broad selloff in the technology sector XLK, -0.45% which has finished down for four of the past five trading sessions as some of the darlings of the spaceFacebook Inc. FB, -0.30% Apple Inc. AAPL, -0.60% Amazon.com Inc. AMZN, -1.26% Netflix Inc. NFLX, -0.29% and Google-parent Alphabet Inc. GOOG, -0.89% , GOOGL, -0.80% known colloquially on Wall Street as FAANG stocks, pullback from or near record heights.

That downshift has helped to yank the Nasdaq-100 index NDX, -0.46% representing the 100 largest tech names, the Nasdaq Composite Index COMP, -0.47% the S&P 500 index SPX, -0.22% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, -0.07% lower.

Read: MarketWatchs snapshot of the markets

Market bears have increasingly cited the up-until-now unfettered rise of both bitcoin and tech, with the heart of the digital currency, which is based on the so-called blockchain or ledger, being rooted in the very sector that has been recently getting mauled.

As an investment, separate from other fiat currencies like the dollar DXY, -0.02% or the EURUSD, +0.0987% bitcoin has benefited from its position as a decentralized currency, which also offers commodity-like elements, similar to gold GCQ7, +0.06%

But as the asset has risen, Wall Street analysts have sounded alarm bells, with Morgan Stanley as recently as this week, making the case that the cryptocurrency, which is seen as a sort of Wild West of currencies, can justifiably rise no further until its becomes more regulated.

It is not clear why cryptocurrencies are appreciating so rapidly (apart from the appreciation itself drawing in more speculation against a potentially inefficient ability to sell), Morgan Stanley warned.

Broader acceptance so far may be a while away, given the Securities and Exchange Commission in March rejecting a pair of funds that would have been underpinned by bitcoin, citing a lack of oversight and transparency.

Bitcoin and other digital currencies, including ethereum, litecoin and others, are underpinned by the so-called blockchain, which is a peer-to-peer network, or ledger, that records and verifies transactions.

Other digital currencies have been under siege as well. Ethereum, and its currency known as ether, threatening to overtake bitcoin in market value, also experiencing a sharp daily downturn, off 10.6%, according to data from digital currency site Coindesk.com. However, over the past week, ether are up 21% and has been mounting a steady ascent.

Read: How cryptocurrency ethereum looks set to overtake bitcoinin one chart

How long this slump for bitcoin, and for that matter the broader tech sector, will last is anyones guess.

However, one bitcoin watcher, Yves Lamoureux, who also predicts that one bitcoin could be worth $25,000, is near-term bearish. He predicts that bitcoin may tumble another 22% to around $1,800.

We think Bitcoin is worth more like $1,800, according to our model at this stage, and so its time to step back and stay liquid, he said.

Brian Benner contributed to this article

See original here:

Bitcoin is suddenly on pace to have its worst week since 2015 - MarketWatch

If youve ever wondered what cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, litecoin and ethereum are for, ask one of their legions of techie-libertarian fans.

And its dollars to dogecoins (yet another one) that the conversation will go something like this:

You: So whats the purpose of bitcoin?

Fan: The technology is absolutely amazing!

You: Yes, but whats it for?

Fan: Really, the blockchain technology is a total masterpiece, way ahead of its time!

You: Yes, yes, I understand that. But what is it actually for?

Fan: You dont understand! Its a completely decentralized money system! Totally revolutionary!

You: Honestly, does it have a purpose? Any purpose at all?

Fan: Its the wave of the future!

And on it will go.

$100 billion market

Cryptocurrencies, or cyber currencies, which have been in a massive financial mania until their sudden sell-off this week, have two actual uses: online gambling and money laundering. Neither is the heart of a major business model. But thats it.

And these, preposterously, are the fundamentals behind a mania that has driven these currencies up 30-fold, so that today in aggregate the market for them is a staggering $100 billion.

None of the defenders other arguments stack up.

Online currencies are hardly a store of value when they have fallen about 30% in a week.

Are they really protections against the ravages of inflation and monetary debasement imposed by wicked governments? If so, how come people who keep their money in bitcoin and ethereum and the like have experienced Weimar Republic levels of consumer price inflation just this week?

That is, after all, what it means when the price of your currency plunges. Bitcoins arent just down 30% against the dollar in the past week. Theyre down 30% against the potato, the sack of rice, the gallon of gasoline and the new car.

Pure speculation

Admittedly, before this the price of these cyber currencies had skyrocketed. Those who got in at the start of the year have turned $1 into $30. But this looks more like a speculation than a currency. And what will tomorrow bring? I have a pretty good idea how many potatoes I can buy with my dollars next week. Bitcoins? Good luck with that.

You notice, incidentally, that these bitcoiners continue to measure the market price of their beloved new currencies in terms of, er, old-fashioned U.S. dollars.

Cyber currencies may make online purchasing and international money transfers marginally more efficient in theory, but hardly in practice. Would you risk moving your money from dollars into bitcoins just to save a few percent in transaction fees? Youve seen that wiped out many times over this week just in price fluctuations.

Competition from all sides

Bitcoin, the grandaddy of them all, might at one point have claimed value as a unique entity. If it had a monopoly of the people who wanted to use a cryptocurrency so they could play online poker or finance international crime, it had some worth. Yet in the past few years, multiple competitors have erupted. There are now 25 with individual market values above $100 million, several above $1 billion. Yet all the bitcoins in the world are still valued at around $40 billion.

Fast-growing rival ethereum was worth bupkis at the start of the year. Today its valued at $31 billion, or almost 10 times as much as the company ESRT, -0.61% that owns the Empire State Building.

Preposterous? You make the call.

Follow this link:

Opinion: Stay away from bitcoin it's complete garbage - MarketWatch

After both hit all-time highs earlier this week, Bitcoin and Ethereum prices plummeted as much as 25% Thursday but many investors were unable to trade for much of the selloff.

Coinbase, a leading cryptocurrency exchange, confirmed that it was completely offline by 9:35 a.m., though the outage appears to have begun several hours earlier, with investors reporting problems on Twitter throughout the night. The company blamed "sustained heavy traffic," likely caused by intense Bitcoin and Ethereum trading, for crashing the Coinbase website and mobile app, which remained completely down for at least four hours.

As has become a familiar frustration to blockchain enthusiasts in recent days, Coinbase went offline at the worst possible time, just as extreme price swings in the cryptocurrencies made investors desperate to buy or sell.

Around 10 a.m. Thursday, the Bitcoin price fell as low as $2079, a more than 30% drop since breaking the $3,000 milestone last weekend (and a 19% decline in the previous 24 hours alone).

At the same time, Ethereum, a rival cryptocurrency whose eye-popping 40-fold gain this year has far outpaced Bitcoin's returns , was down as much as 25% from its price a day earlier. The Ethereum price dipped below $274, just three days after it traded above $400 for the first time.

Coinbase had a similar outage in late May while Bitcoin was trading at record highs, illustrating that new systems for trading blockchain currencies are not yet as reliable as traditional stock market exchanges a lesson a number of investors were learning the hard way, based on their tweets. (While Coinbase initially said it had restored full access to the exchange by mid-afternoon Thursday, it was still trying to repair service for at least some users after 5 p.m., according to a status report on its website.)

Bearish comments by influential investors have triggered several recent selloffs in Bitcoin and Ethereum, such as when Mark Cuban said he thought they were "in a bubble" last week. Morgan Stanley likely contributed to this week's declines by publishing a couple of research notes casting doubt on whether the surge in cryptocurrency prices is justified. "Market likely getting ahead of itself as we have not seen exponential rise in use case yet, but value is rising exponentially," Morgan Stanley analysts wrote in a note Wednesday.

That followed an even more skeptical research report the bank released a day earlier titled "Blockchain: Unchained?" "The rapid appreciation of Bitcoin and others is somewhat surprising in light of some developments that seemingly would have put downward pressure on the currency," another group of Morgan Stanley analysts wrote, citing the SEC's rejection of a Bitcoin ETF , among other factors. "Their values are too volatile and too hard to actually use for payment for most to consider them currencies," they added.

The cryptocurrencies prices bounced back later in the day. As of 6 p.m. Thursday, Bitcoin was down less than 3% and Ethereum was down just under 8% over a 24-hour period.

Read more:

Bitcoin and Ethereum Just Crashed, Taking Coinbase Down With Them - Fortune

A little-known Chinese company is threatening to put a fork in the high-flying bitcoin rally a hard fork, to be precise.

The controversial cryto-currency, long favored by tech geeks and drug lords alike, has taken a painful price hit this week, burning a recent wave of Wall Street investors and average Joes who have lately climbed on board.

It plunged by nearly a third on Thursday alone, changing hands as low as $2,074.69 after hitting an all-time high above $3,000 on Monday.

An outage at a key US bitcoin exchange played a role this week, as did warnings from analysts at Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley that bitcoin looks overvalued.

An even bigger problem for bitcoin, insiders say, may be that the currency itself could be split, or forked into two or more currencies as users squabble over how to fix growing lag times and fees for clearing transactions.

The main reason [for bitcoins drop this week] is that there is likely to be a split in bitcoin on Aug. 1, Marc van der Chijs, managing partner at CrossPacific Capital and a bitcoin investor, told The Post.

Aug. 1 is when a big contingent of bitcoin users has pledged to impose new standards for bitcoin mining, a costly, computer-intensive process for clearing transactions and creating new ones in the process. The change, which they call a soft fork in the currency, will make bitcoin transactions speedier and cheaper, they say.

The problem: Nobody has the authority to impose those new standards on bitcoins decentralized structure, and a major, Beijing-based bitcoin miner called Bitmain just threatened to derail the whole plan with a hard fork namely, carving out a new, alternative currency that could compete with bitcoin.

Bitmain is about 20 percent more efficient than average when it comes to mining bitcoin, and the upgrades in the Aug. 1 proposal could threaten that advantage, according to van der Chijs.

They would lose their efficiency, van der Chijs said.

Users have already nicknamed Bitmains new currency the Chinacoin, though its not known if it would only be open to Chinese investors.

Bitmain didnt return an e-mail requesting comment.

With a new market, especially one thats person-to-person, people are going to be a little more emotional, Alan Friedland, founder of bitcoin trading company Compcoin, told The Post.

See original here:

Small Chinese firm threatens to derail plummeting bitcoin - New York Post

A controversial new Congressional bill regarding digital currency has just been introduced by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA). The bill would require the Secretary of Homeland Security to work with the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection in order to put forward a "border protection strategy to interdict and detect prepaid access devices, digital currencies, or other similar instruments, at border crossings and other ports of entry for the United States." This bill, if passed, would have significant implications for digital currency holders around the world.

The proposed bill, designated U.S. Bill S.1241, was introduced on May 25 of this year and co-sponsored by Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI). The bipartisan group of Senators who have put the bill forward hope that it will deter individuals entering the United States from bringing in undetected and undeclared assets in the form of digital currencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum.

A portion of the bill stipulates that the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency would devise "an assessment of infrastructure needed to carry out the strategy" of blocking these undeclared funds from entering the country. The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection would be required to present their findings to Congress within 18 months of the passage of the bill.

Travelers entering the United States at the border are already obligated to declare any currency holdings of $10,000 or more, regardless of whether or not custom officials might have the means to detect those holdings. While digital currencies occupy a somewhat unusual place in many portions of finance law, a report by Smaulgld suggests that the situation is relatively clear in this case. Because digital currencies technically accompany a holder anywhere that he or she goes, including across a border, that traveler would need to declare his or her entire cryptocurrency portfolio every time he or she enters the United States. This is different from the requirements of travelers who hold bank accounts and/or precious metals valued at more than $10,000 which are stored outside of the country.

How would the federal government develop an infrastructure to detect foreign holdings including digital currencies? It is possible that the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act could be expanded to regulate foreign cryptocurrency exchanges. Alternatively, a global monitoring system could be put in place to watch over blockchain ledgers. Beyond that, there are a number of measures that agencies could take at the border to deter travelers from withholding information, including extreme vetting systems and harsh penalties for nondisclosure. Regardless, it is safe to assume that the cryptocurrency community, famously opposed to central regulation, will have something to say about this bill.

Originally posted here:

Proposed Bill Requires Travelers to Declare Bitcoin at US Border - Investopedia

Forbes

Raoul Pal: Bitcoin Is Mania And Not A Store of Value... I Sold-Out Last Week Forbes The price of Bitcoin has risen by 210% since March to over $2,900 and one of the world's most successful investment strategists is warning investors to stay away. Speaking at the Mauldin Economics' Strategic Investment Conference, Raoul Palauthor ... and more »

See the original post here:

Raoul Pal: Bitcoin Is Mania And Not A Store of Value... I Sold-Out Last Week - Forbes

Share

Share

Share

Share

Email

Bitcoins big surge continued on Sunday when the price per unit of the digital currency briefly broke the $3K mark.

That figure comes care of CoinDesks Bitcoin Price Index rival currency indexCoinMarketCap calculated the peak exchange rate at just a few cents short of $3,000. Because prices for bitcoin tend to vary across exchanges, there are slightly different ways to calculate the exchange rates hence the variation.

Whether it hit, or almost hit, $3K, however it is undeniable that bitcoin has been on a epic run for about the last six weeks or so. Bitcoins price hit $1,400 in early May and has been on a steady upward climb ever since, despite the now-frequent protests that this latest spike in the price of bitcoin is a bubble.

Billionaire Mark Cuban managed to briefly throw some cold water on the price surge by noting his concerns about a bubble. And those fears are not just for crypto-currency naysayers central figures in the bitcoin community were warning of a bubble from the stage atthe Consensus blockchain conference in May.

The enthusiasm is driven by the idea that bitcoin and its enabling technology, the blockchain, can bring data security innovation to a wide variety of fields fromhealth care record management tosupply chain tracking. Hence, bitcoin is not the only digital currency seeing a spike the tide is also lifting rival blockchain-based currencies like Ethereum, Dash, and Litecoin, which are mostly rising in tandem with bitcoin.

But a speculation-driven market is also an emotionally fragile market, and as bitcoin has shown in the past, rapidly cooling sentiment in bitcoin land can cool the price of coins as quickly as increased passion can raise them.

So whats next? With bitcoin, its always hard to say. This time next month we could be writing about how the bubble burst and bitcoin is back to $200 or we could be writing that bitcoin has broken $4K.

Well keep you posted either way.

Share

Share

Share

Share

Email

See more here:

Bitcoin Breaks $3K - PYMNTS.com

The prediction made regarding Bitcoins price in Saxo Banks report titled as Outrageous Predictions For 2017 has already been proven right. Now Kay Van-Petersen, Global Macro Strategist at Saxo Bank who made this prediction, has made a long-term call predicting Bitcoins price 10 years from now. He told CNBC that Bitcoins price has the potential to cross $100,000 in 10 years. This translates to an increase of more than 3000% from its record high.

The numbers are based on Van-Petersens prediction that cryptocurrencies will be equal to 10% of the average daily volumes (ADV) of fiat currency trade in 10 years. Trading in foreign exchange (FX) markets averaged $5.1 trillion per day in April 2016, according to the Triennial Central Bank Survey of FX and over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives markets. The figure was down from the $5.4 trillion reported in April 2013.

Ten percent of $5.1 trillion indicates around $510 billion of average daily volumes (ADV). With Bitcoin accounting for 35% of the market share, it alone would account for $175 billions in average daily volume. Going by Van-Petersens analysis, the market capitalization for Bitcoin would be 10 times the average daily volume, translating into a whopping $1.75 trillion.

Bitcoins come into circulation through a process called Bitcoin mining. Since the amount of new Bitcoin released with each mined block (called the block reward) is halved every 210,000 blocks, or roughly every four years, it is estimated that this diminishing block reward will result in a total release of Bitcoin that approaches 21 million. According to current Bitcoin protocol, 21 million is the cap and no more will be mined after that number has been attained. The 21 million cap would be reached only by 2140. It is further projected that in the next 10 years, Bitcoins in circulation would potentially be around 17 million. Based on this figure, coupled with the projected market capitalization, Van-Petersen has given a price estimate of $100,000 for each Bitcoin. (See also: What is Bitcoin Mining?)

Recently, the overall market capitalization for cryptocurrencies crossed the $100 billion mark, primarily driven by Bitcoin and Ethereum. The surge in Ethereums price beyond $300 has taken it past $110 billion in less than a week. (See also: Bitcoin Price Hits New All-Time High, Overall Market Cap Crosses $100 Billion)

Note:Van-Petersen's views are not the official view of Saxo Bank.

Follow this link:

Bitcoin's Price Could Cross $100000 in 10 Years - Investopedia

The Future of Bitcoin, a conference taking place on June 30 and July 01, 2017, in the Netherlands infamous Arnhem Bitcoin City, has unveiled its speaker lineup and agenda for the two-day event.

Conference speakers come from Russia, Poland, France, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, China, Canada, the US and Argentina and represent the global Bitcoin community. They will tackle some of the most pressing challenges in the Bitcoin space and present new and exciting projects.

Speakers include Jihan Wu, the co-founder of Bitmain and founder of 8btc.com, who will deliver a keynote presentation titled Why Bitcoin needs Multiple Implementations.

Ryan X. Charles, a prominent Bitcoin influencer who has worked for the likes of BitPay, BitGo and Reddit, will speak about Yours, his latest venture. Yours technology is based on payment channels, but unlike Lightning Network, is independent on SegWit and works on Bitcoin today.

Bitgos software engineering team lead Jameson Lopp will discuss coopetition in his presentation titled The Benefits of Coopetition in Adversarial Environments. Jameson is the creator of Statoshi, a fork of Bitcoin Core that analyzes statistics of Bitcoin nodes. He is also the founder of Mensas Bitcoin Special Interest Group, as well as the founder of the Triangle Bitcoin & Business meetup.

John Swingle, an attorney who focuses his practice on patent law as well as other areas of intellectual property law, will speak about cryptocurrencies and the overhyped smart contract in his presentation titled Smart Contracts vs. Dumb Money.

Juan Garavaglia will present the Bitprim Project, a new implementation of the Bitcoin protocol. Based on Libbitcoin, Bitprim is built with a modular architecture with a messaging platform to let modules be 100% independent. Based in Argentina, Bitprim has a team of 7 developers working full time on the open source implementation.

Rob Mitchell, the host of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency-focused podcast The Bitcoin Game, will be the master of ceremonies during the conference. Mitchell has interviewed many well-known Bitcoin personalities including Roger Ver, Charlie Shrem, and Jeff Garzik.

The Future of Bitcoin Conference 2017 is a two-day event consisting of presentations, panels, discussions and social events aimed at bringing together Bitcoin developers, researchers and enthusiasts to discuss the future of the network.

The conference will take place in Arnhem, the Netherlands, a city that rose to fame in 2014 when it became of the second Dutch city, following the Hague, to host a Bitcoin Boulevard. Today, over 100 merchants in Arnhem accept the digital currency.

Original post:

The Future Of Bitcoin Conference Unveils Speaker Lineup And Agenda - CoinJournal (blog)

When Mark Cuban tweets, people listen.

At least that appeared to be the case on Tuesday when the outspoken billionaire offered this bitcoin warning to his 7.1 million Twitter followers:

At the time, bitcoin BTCUSD, +5.00% was slightly off its high for the day but was still holding strong near the $2,900 level. As you can see, soon after the tweet, the volatile cryptocurrency drifted further from its peak.

Regardless, bitcoin has been on an absolute tear this year, surging some 200% and gaining more widespread recognition, even prompting one of social medias most popular gun-toting poker players to join the fun.

But Cuban remains unconvinced:

And:

Of course, this isnt a big departure for Cuban, who once told USA Today that bitcoins got no shot as a long-term digital currency.

He didnt, however, rule it out as a possible investment play.

Read: With bitcoin surge, cryptocurrencies top $100 billion in market capitalization.

See the rest here:

Mark Cuban tweets, and bitcoin drops - MarketWatch

Is bitcoins price in a bubble? Those who say so believe people are buying the cryptocurrency is for speculative purposes versus its original purpose for transactions.

Nathan Martin, writing in Economic Edge, believes most are buying bitcoin because its a better store of value. Bitcoin provides a better store of value than assets that are controlled by banks, he claims, and it will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Hence, the number of people using bitcoin will continue to increase.

People cannot earn anywhere near the pace of actual inflation by putting their money in traditional savings accounts. Central banks control the currencies most people use and are manipulating these currencies to keep interest rates low.

Stocks, bonds and real estate are all in a bubble, as is the U.S. dollar, Martin noted. Gold and silver are also being manipulated by central banks.

Hence, there is no good store of value. Retirees on fixed incomes simply cannot, and will not be able to keep up as the impossible math of the dollar debt continues on its vertical ascent, Martin wrote.

Bitcoin is a better store of value for the following reasons.

1. Bitcoin is decentralized. Martin and many others consider this the most important characteristic of bitcoin. No central power controls bitcoin. Central banks could indirectly manipulate cryptocurrencies by creating derivatives and exchange traded funds based on those cryptocurrencies. But this will not change bitcoins underlying store of value.

Should central banks create derivatives based on bitcoin, Martin encourages people to buy bitcoin directly. Banks cannot manipulate what they dont control.

2. Bitcoins supply is limited. There will only be 21 million bitcoins created, and 80% of this number has already been created. The more funds invested in bitcoin, the greater the value of each bitcoin. Other blockchain currencies could affect bitcoins value, but all the other cryptocurrencies combined are not yet equal to bitcoins market value. In addition, those cryptocurrencies that dont have limited supply will not hold their value.

3. Bitcoin is secure. Encryption and decentralization make it so. It can be stored in cyber vaults, where owners keep a hard copy of the encryption cipher. While a bitcoin exchange and a computer can be hacked, bitcoin that is in a vault will not reside in the exchange or the computer, and only the owner has the code to access the stored bitcoin. No one can confiscate it.

4. Bitcoin transactions are stored on a public ledger that lists all confirmed transactions. Decentralized bookkeeping is more secure than centralized ledgers.

Also read: Bitcoin is no bubble in climb to $3,000

Bitcoin will someday be in a bubble, but that time is far away, Martin noted.

One benefit of cryptocurrencies is that they coexist with other forms of money used for transactions. Bitcoin is not in a bubble. Instead, people are using it to park their dollars so central banks cannot destroy their value.

Volatility will continue for bitcoin, as nothing moves in a straight line. Martin believes cryptocurrencies will trade along with sovereign currencies and eventually replace them.

He will not be convinced that the growth of bitcoins price has stalled until its market cap rivals that of the United States money supply, which is $13.5 trillion.

Featured image from Shutterstock.

See the original post here:

4 Reasons Why Bitcoin Is Not In A Bubble - CryptoCoinsNews

SERDANG: Following the recent ''WannaCry'' ransomware cyber attack, which blackmailed computer users worldwide, those dealing in digital currencies such as Bitcoin need to be more vigilant and keep their accounts secure.

Network security expert Assoc Prof Dr Zuriati Ahmad Zukarnain said although Bitcoin operates using two key types - public and private - to make transactions, the private key could be hacked by third parties using highly capable quantum computers.

"Quantum computers are able to create a 'large factorisation' and can detect the public and private keys used in Bitcoin transactions.

"The threat is when the 'private key' is sniffed by third parties, they are free to make transactions using a hacked account as the 'private key' proves the ownership of a Bitcoin address (used to send and receive the currency)," she told Bernama.

Last month, the "WannaCry" ransomware affected hundreds of thousands of users worldwide, locking access to the files on their computer, and then requesting Bitcoin payments to unlock them.

Zuriati said the Bitcoin's private key was used to keep safe the Blockchain, a public digital database which keeps records on all bitcoin transactions.

Zuriati, a lecturer at Universiti Putra Malaysia's Communication Technology and Networking department, said if the third party managed to hack the private key, they could have access to the value of Bitcoin in a hacked account.

She said studies showed that the use of digital currency had become popular in Malaysia as payment transactions were more convenient than using credit cards, besides being secure, fast and cheap.

In an effort to enhance the safety of Bitcoin, Zuriati said the Russian Quantum Centre had suggested that each account's blockchain is coupled with Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) and ''post-quantum cryptography''.

In this way, she said the ''peer-network'' architecture used in Bitcoin system would be more secure, thus preventing the private key from being stolen by third parties.

The Bitcoin currency was created by a computer expert using the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto, and it operates independently of any central bank, allowing transfers by electronic means without middlemen for free.

While the value of currency is typically backed with gold or silver, Bitcoin is backed with mathematical calculations.

The currency has become popular because central banks of countries cannot control a person's financial affairs, and it has become one of the preferred mode of transactions for small businesses.

Link:

Bitcoin users told to be vigilant of cyber attacks - The Star Online

Forbes

Bitcoin Will Make Many More Millionaires Before Diving Forbes Bitcoin has been flying high lately, making many investors overnight millionairesinvestors who poured money into the digital currency when it was trading at a tiny fraction of its current price. And it will make more millionaires, as it could reach ... You can't hold a bitcoin, but the web currency's value has skyrocketed. Why?Phys.Org 3 Reasons Volatility Is Still a Serious Concern for Bitcoin InvestornewsBTC all 6 news articles »

Originally posted here:

Bitcoin Will Make Many More Millionaires Before Diving - Forbes

One of the biggest financial stories of 2017 has been the seemingly unstoppable rise of bitcoin, which has more than tripled this year and seems to make new records by the day.

Such a rally has inevitably raised questions over whether there is a bubble in the digital currency, or in the broader space of cryptocurrencies, which earlier this week topped $100 billion in combined market capitalization. Breaking that milestone was largely due to bitcoin BTCUSD, +1.99% which by itself accounts for nearly half the value of the still-nascent sector. However, a new measure of bitcoin valuation, one based roughly on the price-to-earnings ratio applied to stock valuation, suggests that rally still has room to grow.

Read: 3 reasons why bitcoins surge may not be a bubble

Opinion: Three reasons to fear the coming crash in bitcoins

Gauging whether bitcoin is overvalued is tricky, as it is divorced from many of the standard attributes that can measure a securitys fundamentals. Unlike a stock, bitcoin has neither traditional revenue nor profits behind it, ruling out such equity statistics as price to sales or earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization.

And because it isnt backed by a central bank or government, viewing it in the way one might a currency isnt an apples-to-apples comparison. A commodity like oil can be measured based on the principles of supply and demand; bitcoin has no equivalent underlying asset. (The Internal Revenue Service classifies bitcoin as property rather than a currency, while the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission classifies it as a commodity.)

However, some analysts have developed what could be considered a price-to-earnings ratio for bitcoin, one that suggests the recent surge may not have taken it to bubble territory.

Bitcoins P/E ratio looks at the digital currencys network valuethe number of outstanding bitcoins multiplied by price; this figure is currently $44.69 billionagainst its daily transaction volume.

The reason I call it a P/E ratio is because when I think about what a P/E signifies for equities, it is basically the function of market cap and earnings. The earnings are the underlying utilitythe cash flow of the company, explained Chris Burniske, a blockchain analyst at ARK Invest, who has helped to develop this metric.

Bitcoin P/E is composed of similar concepts. Instead of market cap, you have network value. Thats then divided by the underlying utility of bitcoin, which is its ability to move money. Thats bitcoins core utility, same as a companys core utility is earnings.

This metric currently gives bitcoin a ratio of roughly 50, which is under its long-term average and well below past peaks, which have been above 200, and one time spiked to nearly 450.

On a stock, a P/E ratio of 50 would be pricey, Burniske noted, but I dont know if it should be considered pricey for bitcoin. It looks to be in a comfortable range, it isnt an outlier and right now the broad takeaway I have is that it doesnt look like were due for a mean revision.

He added that over time, cryptocurrencies would find a base range for valuation on this metric, one that lets investors know what would be reasonable to pay based on the cryptos daily utility.

While high P/E ratios are often seen as sell signals for stocks, Burniske suggested that any kind of extreme reading on this metric could signal a bitcoin selloff.

This ratio drops when bitcoin is in the late stages of rallies, because investors would take profits or move their money between exchanges out of nervousness. That leads to a lot of transaction value, which makes the denominator higher. Thats why its important to me, from a valuation standpoint, that it isnt high or low.

See the original post:

Is bitcoin in a bubble? This metric suggests there's more room to grow - MarketWatch

Bitcoin is like gold in many ways. Like gold, Bitcoin cannot simply be created arbitrarily. Gold must be mined out of the ground, and Bitcoin must be mined via digital means. Linked with this process is the stipulation set forth by the founders of Bitcoin that, like gold, it have a limited and finite supply. In fact, there are only 21 million Bitcoins that can be mined in total. Once miners have unlocked this many Bitcoins, the planet's supply will essentially be tapped out, unless Bitcoin's protocol is changed to allow for a larger supply. Supporters of Bitcoin say that, like gold, the fixed supply of the currency means that banks are kept in check and not allowed to arbitrarily issue fiduciary media. But what will happen when the global supply of Bitcoin reaches its limit?

It may seem that the group of individuals most directly effected by the limit of the Bitcoin supply will be the Bitcoin miners themselves. On one hand, there are detractors of the Bitcoin limitation who that say that miners will be forced away from the block rewards they receive for their work once the Bitcoin supply has reached 21 million in circulation. In this case, these miners may need to rely on transaction fees in order to maintain operations. Bitcoin.com points to an argument that miners will then find the process unaffordable, leading to a reduction in the number of miners, a centralization process of the Bitcoin network, and numerous negative effects on the Bitcoin system.

This argument assumes that transaction fees alone will be insufficient to keep Bitcoin miners financially solvent once the mining process has been completed. On the other hand, there are reasons to believe that transaction fees and mining costs will even out in the future. Looking ahead by several decades, it is not difficult to imagine that mining chips will become small and highly efficient. This would reduce the burden placed on miners and would allow mining to become an activity with a lower threshold of initial cost. Further, transaction fees may increase, and this could help to keep miners afloat as well.

Bitcoin has already seen massive hikes in price in just the past few months. While no one is entirely sure how Bitcoin will continue to spread to the larger financial world, it seems likely that a limited supply of the currency may cause prices to continue to increase. There are also stockpiles of inactive coins that are held around the world, the largest supply of which belongs to the person or group who founded Bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto. Perhaps this supply, consisting of roughly one million Bitcoins, is intentionally being saved for a time when the global supply is facing increased levels of demand.

Go here to see the original:

What Happens to Bitcoin After All 21 Million are Mined? - Investopedia

So, youve bought Bitcoin (or another cryptocurrency) and hey! its shot up in value. Good for you. But what do you do with your digital money now? If youve made a serious profit, you might be wary of leaving it on an exchange such as Coinbase or stashing it in an online wallet (after all, North Korean hackers have reportedly stolen almost $90,000 of Bitcoin in the last two years). The most secure alternative is to take your currency offline altogether with a hardware wallet. This is a purpose-built, secure device for cold-storing the private keys that allow you to spend your digital currency. Two of the most popular are the Ledger Nano S and the Trezor, both of which employ open-source code (meaning that even if the companies were to fold, the devices would not be rendered obsolete). We tested them both

The Ledger Nano S looks like a USB stick, except it comes with a tiny screen that means you can operate it independently of your computer (as otherwise it would be vulnerable to malware). The controls are pared back to two buttons on the top of the device, which are used for everything from scrolling through menus to entering your PIN.

Set-up is simple. On-screen instructions take you through configuring your PIN and randomly generating your passphrase. The passphrase is important. If you were to lose or break the device, you can restore your entire balance on a new Ledger by entering this 24-word phrase.

Next, you download a set of Chrome extensions: a main device manager, and wallets for the different currencies you hold. Ledger currently supports Bitcoin, Ethereum / Ethereum Classic, Ripple, Litecoin, Dogecoin, Zcash, Dash and Stratis. If you wish to send or receive currency you do so via these browser-based apps, and your Ledger will ask you to press buttons to confirm that you do indeed want to carry out that function. Without the Ledger plugged in, moving your currency is impossible.

Pros: This is a compact device that has found clever systems to make a two-button control system viable. It supports a multitude of currencies, and is the most affordable of the two hardware wallets on test.

Cons: The build quality on our model could have been better. The left-hand button often registered one click as two, and it encountered problems a number of times during setup, though we succeeded eventually.

61, ledgerwallet.com

The Czech-built Trezor which translates as vault in its native language has many similarities with the Ledger. It, too, has a screen that means you can use it to keep your money safe even on an infected computer, and operating it also comes down to two buttons. The set-up is similar as well its all about choosing a PIN and a 24-word passphrase that allows you to restore the device. How you interface with this dongle from your computer, however, is rather different.

Whereas the Ledger asks you to tap away on its buttons in order to input your PIN, the Trezor displays the numbers 1 - 9 in a random formation, and asks you to click the corresponding buttons on a digit-less pad displayed on your computer screen.

The Chrome app through which you control your Trezor and your wallets is slicker than the Ledgers. It involves opening fewer windows, and the visuals are rather more glossy though it essentially offers the same functionality. It feels like a more expensive product, and it is. The only downside is that, for now, it lacks support for currencies such as Ripple.

Pros: Higher production values, both in terms of software and hardware.

Cons: Fewer currencies supported.

76, trezor.io

Follow this link:

So, you've bought Bitcoin. Now what? - GQ.com

Forbes

Bitcoin Is At An All-Time High, But Is It About To Self-Destruct? Forbes The bitcoin price has been on a tear recently, more than doubling to about $2,900 over the last three months. (It didn't hurt that Sunday, the popular Tim Ferriss podcast released a two-and-a-half-hour episode on the subject.) But its meteoric rise ... Mark Cuban Asserts That Bitcoin is Not CurrencyFuturism Mark Cuban's Twitter Trolling Sent Bitcoin Prices TumblingFortune Will Bitcoin ETF Ever Be Accepted by US Regulators?CoinTelegraph CNBC -Bloomberg -The Merkle all 59 news articles »

Original post:

Bitcoin Is At An All-Time High, But Is It About To Self-Destruct? - Forbes