Daily Archives: June 28, 2017

Americans take the First Amendment for granted. They shouldn’t under Trump – Sacramento Bee

Posted: June 28, 2017 at 5:55 am


Sacramento Bee
Americans take the First Amendment for granted. They shouldn't under Trump
Sacramento Bee
The words of the First Amendment may be 45 of the the most important ever written. Those who doubt the value of those freedoms of religion, speech, the press, assembly and petitioning for redress of grievances might look to Asia, where I work, and ...

See the original post:
Americans take the First Amendment for granted. They shouldn't under Trump - Sacramento Bee

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Americans take the First Amendment for granted. They shouldn’t under Trump – Sacramento Bee

Iowa State officials knowingly violated students’ First Amendment rights, appeals court says – The College Fix

Posted: at 5:55 am

Officials were on notice they were flouting decades of precedent

It was a new day, but same result for Iowa State University.

After asking a federal appeals court to reconsider its February ruling that the public university violated the First Amendment rights of pro-marijuana activists on campus, ISU got an even worse ruling earlier this month.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals doubled down on its original decision in Gerlich v. Leath that ISU singled out the campus chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) by not letting it use the university logo on its T-shirts.

In a finding that could endanger college officials across the 8th Circuits jurisdiction of Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and North and South Dakota, the appeals court refused to shield individual administrators from liability.

The case had united a broad coalition of national college groups, from pro-life activists to press freedom defenders and libertarians, in favor of NORML ISU leaders Paul Gerlich and Erin Furleigh.

We wanted the court to be aware that discrimination against speakers on campus is a common occurrence and a real problem, Casey Mattox, director of the Alliance Defending Freedoms Center for Academic Freedom, told The College Fix in a phone interview.

The alliance, which represented several of the friend-of-the-court filers, conveyed to the judges that viewpoint discrimination on campus, particularly against conservative speakers on university campuses, has a long track record and needs to be addressed, said Mattox.

No reasonable university official can think this is government speech

In an opinion for the three-judge panel, Judge Diane Murphy wrote that ISU had discriminated against Gerlich and Furleigh because of their viewpoints and political pushback from Iowa politicians.

In addition, the court found ISU did not engage in government speech by letting campus groups use its trademarks: Rather, it provided a limited public forum that facilitated the speech of private persons.

NORML ISU also did not violate the terms of the limited public forum, because the organization advocates for reform to marijuana laws, not the illegal use of marijuana, according to the panel.

MORE: Potheads, press and pro-lifers unite for student speech

The judges split, however, on the issue of qualified immunity, which excludes government officials acting in their official capacity from civil lawsuits unless they violate a clearly established constitutional or statutory right.

Murphy and Judge Jane Kelly said ISU administrators, including then-President Steven Leath, should have been aware of legal precedents going back decades that ban universities from using viewpoint discrimination in a limited public forum.

It was clearly established when administrators singled out NORML ISU in rejecting a series of T-shirt designs the chapter had submitted, according to the judges.

Judge James Loken wrote a dissent specifically on the qualified-immunity issue, saying administrators were neither plainly incompetent nor knowing lawbreakers when they rejected a string of proposed T-shirt designs.

The court cites no case in which school officials administering a trademark licensing program violated, or were even accused of violating, the First Amendment by denying proposed uses of the schools registered trademark, Loken wrote.

Its trademark licensing policy already prohibited products causing potential health risks such as tobacco: Based on these undisputed program policies, it was far from clear prior to this litigation that ISUs trademark licensing program was not a form of government speech.

Loken blamed Gerlich, then the president of NORML ISU, for publicly suggesting the university gave its stamp of approval to pro-marijuana advocacy. Gerlich bragged in the media that the original approval of the clubs T-shirt reflected nothing but support from the university, support for the group that was blowing our minds.

MORE: Court tells ISU to stop suppressing pro-weed activists

Judge Kelly challenged Lokens dissent in a concurrence, saying qualified immunity does not require a case directly on point nor a previous ruling that the action was explicitly unlawful:

At the time of the challenged actions in fall 2012, the defendants were on notice of several cases that clearly established that their conduct violated plaintiffs First Amendment rights. In at least four cases, the Supreme Court has held that a university creates a limited public forum when it distributes benefits to recognized student groups.

Here, it is undisputed that ISU granted recognized status to NORML ISU as a student organization. ISU concluded that NORML ISUs purpose was consistent with the broad educational mission of the university, but it made clear that it does not support or endorse the purposes of any registered organizations, including NORML ISU.

Kelly said the university only claimed its trademarks were government speech because of the purported confusion around the NORML shirt: No reasonable university official could have relied on this single example of confusion, in a field of at least 2,195 student organization uses of ISU marks, to convert a historic forum for student speech into government speech.

Iowa State rebuked more severely by 8th Circuit in second ruling on First Amendment and marijuana by The College Fix on Scribd

Free speech has impacts on other people, and ISU must recognize that

We are very happy the 8th U.S. Circuit Court reaffirmed its earlier finding that Iowa State had violated our clients First Amendment rights, Robert Corn-Revere, head counsel for the plaintiffs and prominent First Amendment lawyer, told The College Fix in a phone interview.

Simply using the label trademark doesnt make government action immune from the First Amendment. College administrators need to be aware that if they violate students First Amendment rights there can be consequences, he said.

NORMLs national office referred The Fix to Dan Viets, the head of its Missouri affiliate, for comment. Iowa State was clearly discriminating against the NORML chapter because they did not agree with their message, Viets said in a phone interview, calling the incident an unusual occurrence for a NORML campus chapter.

ISU hasnt decided what its next steps will be, lead counsel Mike Norton told The Fix in a phone interview.

He said the 8th Circuits new ruling wont have much effect on how the university handles First Amendment issues: In the near term I dont think the ruling will have an impact except those directly related to trademark use.

While Iowa State is committed to the protections of the First Amendment, it cant ignore the impact that speech has on other people, Norton said.

MORE: Judge says students can sue president for t-shirt censorship

The case was reopened in March after the appeals court granted ISUs petition, according to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which sponsored the case through its three-year-old Stand Up for Speech litigation project.

The NORML ISU case was part of the first group of cases to be litigated under the project, and its the only one that has made it to an appeals court.

Iowa State has consistently lost in court. It lost its motion to dismiss more than two years ago, and a year later the district court issued a permanent injunction preventing the university from using the trademark policy to prohibit NORML ISU from making shirts containing marijuana symbols. It also lost on qualified immunity then.

Groups that joined the Alliance Defending Freedom brief in support of NORML ISU were Students for Life of America, Young Americas Foundation, Young Americans for Liberty, Ratio Christi and Christian Legal Society.

MORE: How license plates are like campus speech

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Africa Studio/Shutterstock, NORML ISU

About the Author

Zachery Schmidt is a senior at Western Washington University where he is majoring in political science and public relations. In his free time, Zach enjoys exercising, reading and writing.

Visit link:
Iowa State officials knowingly violated students' First Amendment rights, appeals court says - The College Fix

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Iowa State officials knowingly violated students’ First Amendment rights, appeals court says – The College Fix

Does "Beef: It’s What’s For Dinner" violate the First Amendment? In … – The New Food Economy

Posted: at 5:55 am

A state District Court hands independent ranchers a long-awaited win.

Last week, the United States District Court for the District of Montana issued a decision that could have major implications for the beef industry inside the state and beyond. Judge Brian Morris upheld a lower courts decision that the beef checkoff program, as currently operated, violates the First Amendment rights of the states cattle ranchers. As as result, the Montana Beef Council (MBC) will only be allowed to collect funds from producers who voluntarily opt in to the program.

Quick refresher: checkoff programs are a mandatory tax the federal government collects on certain agricultural commodities, money farmers are compelled to pay to fund industry research and promotion. Over the years, checkoffs have raised billions of dollarsand have paid for some iconic advertising, from Got Milk? to Beef: Its Whats for Dinner. But theyve also been a sore spot for farmers who claim they dont have enough say over the way the funds are being used, yet are forced to pay even when they feel the message doesnt serve their interests.

To understand why the Montana case could be such a big deal, heres what you need to know: In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that, in order to be constitutionally viable, checkoff programs must be overseen directly by the federal government. The government, after all, can compel certain forms of speech: I have to fund the military through my taxes, for instance, even if I dont like its actions. Legally, the government is granted that exception only because its supposed to be an extension of the peoples voice already (thanks to our democratically elected representatives). If you dont like a policy paid for by your taxes, the logic goes, you can always vote to change the government. (For more on this, see my piece on the fraught legal history of checkoffs.)

But private entities cannot compel speech, and thats where the Montana case comes in. Beef checkoff money is split evenly between the federal Cattlemens Beef Board and smaller, state-level organizations like the Montana Beef Councilprivate entities not subject to the same level federal oversight. Thats why the Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund (R-CALF) filed suit against the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), arguing that compelling payments to a private organization amounts to an unconstitutional first amendment violation.

The USDA lacks the authority to appoint or remove any of the Montana Beef Councils members. The USDA does not control how the Montana Beef Council spends the checkoff assessments, Judge Morris agreed, in his decision. Defendants claim that it effectively can control the Montana Beef Council through the Beef Board proves incorrect. The Beef Board is not a democratic[ally] accountab[le] body that is mandated to respond to and implement citizenss concerns.

The suits unwitting catalyst was a famous fast food chain: advertisements ran put out byWendys that promoting the companys use of fresh, North American beef in its four-cornered burgers. Since the ads were funded, in part, by the Montana Beef Council, some of the states ranchers felt their checkoff dollars were being used against them. Why were they being forced to fund the promotion of beef that came not just from the U.S., but alsoMexico and Canada?

Thats what I think made the case unique: It was a clear, in-your-face insult to U.S. cattlemen that were paying into the Montana beef checkoff, says Mike Callicrate, a Kansas rancher and activist whos been a longtime critic of the beef checkoff.

Where some saw an insult,R-CALF, another vocal opponent, saw opportunity.

After the Supreme Court ruling that said that the checkoff was government speech, we knew we had to find another avenue, Bill Bullard, R-CALFs CEO, tells me. Thats why we focused on money taken by the states.

The states cattle ranchers will still have to pay into the checkoff program$1 per head of cattle. But the Montana Beef Council will only receive its fifty percent share of that money when a rancher opts in. In Bullards view, state funds like Montanas have long been used to suit the interests of politically powerful meat packers. He thinksthe ruling will deprive them of a crucial source of income, and may help level the playing field between beef producers and processors. (Again,you can read more inmy history of the beef checkoff and its discontents.)

Our industry has been dominated by multinational meatpackers that have been working to vertically integrate and control the supply chain of the U.S. cattle industry, Bullard says. Now, this case gives us hope that were able to pull further away from the integration that the packers have already accomplished, ensuring that we can maintain a widely dispersed family farm system of cattle production in America.

Weve found a court that was willing to take our concerns seriously and act on them. Thats huge.

Its not a done deal yet: USDA may decide to appeal. But it also has the opportunity to respect the ruling, or even play an active role in rolling out voluntary state-level checkoff participation in other statesheading off a raft of potential lawsuits elsewhere. No ones quite sure what will happen, but Dudley Butler of Butler Farm & Ranch Law, which represented the plaintiff, feels that future arguments against this decision would face a tough legal battle.

People look at the constitution sometimes like they look at the Bible, they pick and choose what parts they want to use, he tells me. But the First Amendment right is extremely important. Under our system of government, you just cannot force speech on someoneunless it passes the rigors of being determined by a court it is government speech.

For its part, the Montana Beef Councilwhich was not named in the suitis taking a hard look at its post-ruling future.

As a result of the preliminary injunction, after assessments are collected from Montana beef producers, if they do not provide prior affirmative consent to the Montana Beef Council, their full assessment will be forwarded to the Cattlemens Beef Board for general use on national programs and projects, it says, in a statement. MBC is working through the details to develop a process for this Court Order and a way for producers to provide consent.

It could be an onerous task.And complaints about the federal checkoff program are likely to remain. But for now, the victors are celebrating as they look ahead.

Its probably the biggest thing that independent producers have achieved in trying to get their interests represented by the government, Bullard says. Weve failed to convince Congress to listen to the producers. Weve failed to convince the USDA to listen to the concerns of the producer. But here, in our third branch of government, weve found a court that was willing to take our concerns seriously and act on them. Thats huge.

Go here to read the rest:
Does "Beef: It's What's For Dinner" violate the First Amendment? In ... - The New Food Economy

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Does "Beef: It’s What’s For Dinner" violate the First Amendment? In … – The New Food Economy

The best ways to make your search private in 2017 – KnowTechie

Posted: at 5:53 am

Have you noticed that immediately after you search for something online, any other website you open brings adverts related to your previous search? Whats more, the ads are filtered to show solutions near you. What else does Mr. Google know about you if he already can figure out your interests or where you are? Who else could be accessing this information?

Its hard to rely on your privacy settings to keep your information secure online. In fact, anyone, not only the annoying marketers but also malicious hackers and snooping governments, has easier access to your online profiles today than ever before. It may not seem like a serious problem, especially, if you havent faced a real case of malicious attacks like phishing. Besides, you have nothing to hide! But, isnt some little privacy gratifying? Here is a look at some of the best ways to make your search private in 2017;

Anytime you log into the internet, your internet provider can see your Domain Name System, and so is the search engine you use and, possibly, malicious people. This makes it easy for them to associate your search log with your DNS information they can use to monitor your online behavior. To avoid any malicious attacks, or simply keep what you do online to yourself, consider a different computer for particular searches that you consider sensitive. Also, try connecting through different internet providers now and then by changing your browsing locations.

If you value your privacy online, private search options are a great way to go. Today, weve plenty search engines offering such options. For instance, MyPrivateSearch, DuckDuckGo, and SearX are among private search engine options you can use for free. Unlike commercial search engines, private search engines enable you to browse without leaving behind a hint of your online activity.

This is open source tool is referred to as The Onion Router because of its numerous layers of protecting online data. It offers safe data transfer by causing online communication to travel through an overlay of channels, rather than directly.

When using Tor, youll need to configure your applications properly, directing them to send their internet traffic through the software. The Tor Browser will prevent anyone spying on your internet connection from gathering information on the sites you visit. It also bars such websites from determining your location, while allowing you to gain access to websites that are blocked.

Virtual Private Networks are becoming handy for people who want to browse anonymously. This is because VPNs are simply not easy to bypass, which makes it difficult for someone to track source of traffic back to the specific internet user. Basically, VPNs employ dedicated networks and encryption protocols to create a virtual Peer-to-Peer connection through which subscribers send and receive search data.

Since your search results are not direct, its hard for hackers to steal information, and in case they do, its encrypted. Besides, VPNs shield your IP address. In this case, anyone watching will only see the network providers address.

Now, here is something to beware of: VPN providers have a potential of harming you if they wish. This is because they can actually see your browsing details. To be completely sure that no one is watching what you are doing online, verify that your VPN provider is trustworthy. It can be difficult but begin by verifying that the company doesnt store logs of your online activity for longer than expected.

Many browsers have the option of turning the computer into private search mode. For instance, Google Chrome allows you to open an incognito browsing window. Any pages you access anonymously are not stored in your browsers search history or cookies. It will only leave downloaded files and bookmarked sites.

However, beware that you are not completely invisible. Actually, in this case, only your computer doesnt store your browsing information. Other parties such as the ISP, the website you visited, and Google will still see any information disseminated in a private search session. Furthermore, if you are logged into Gmail, YouTube, and Google Maps when browsing incognito in Chrome, these applications will still keep a record of your online activity.

Making a private search is a task that is getting increasingly difficult. It doesnt mean you have something to hide for you to want to search information privately. On the contrary, protecting your privacy online has become of utmost importance. Its the only way to keep off manipulative ads and cyber attacks as well as ensure you enjoy control of your personal information.

James Cohen has been doing digital marketing and web development for the last 20 years. He strives to increase public awareness of the risks of unsecured web browsing. Find out more onhttps://www.myprivatesearch.com/.

Continue reading here:
The best ways to make your search private in 2017 - KnowTechie

Posted in Tor Browser | Comments Off on The best ways to make your search private in 2017 – KnowTechie

Could TenX Make Cryptocurrency More Usable In the Real World? – Investopedia

Posted: at 5:53 am

TenX has big plans to change the world of cryptocurrencies. How will they do it? One word: liquidity. An ongoing issue plaguing the digital currency landscape is the question of how to make use of virtual money in real-world spending applications. Generally speaking, only the top few cryptocurrencies see a large enough trading volume and liquidity in order to be viable in this way and on a large scale. TenX, a startup which recently earned $34 million in seven minutes with their initial coin offering, or ICO, believes that they have a solution.

The startup, a 2017 graduate of Paypal's incubator program and based in Singapore, has prepared a debit card to facilitate the spending of blockchain assets in the real world. A report by Bitcoinist outlines some of the technology behind the card. On the front end, the card will use a payment system, and on the back, it will use COMIT. This protocol allows disparate blockchains, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, to communicate and interact with one another without having to generate a common token between them. Theoretically, this will speed up transaction times and allow for real-world applications that would not have previously been possible.

Beyond the debit card, TenX has also reportedly developed an app for iOS and Android which will assist in the process of introducing the TenX currency, called PAY, into the real world. Inc.com reports that the app will act as both a wallet and as a decentralized, fee-free exchange. Beyond that, the app will also include a debit/credit card functionality as well. It seems that TenX may be preparing both digital credit cards as well as tangible plastic cards for use. In either case, the user would theoretically be able to make use of the card at any brick and mortar store where they would use a standard credit card. To further facilitate these transactions, TenX has provided for the card to convert the digital currency which is stored within it into the local fiat currency, allowing for global use. This last point in particular is especially helpful, as a barrier to spending virtual currency in the past has been the necessity to convert it into local currency, adding a timestaking additional step and potential fees.

For the time being, TenX's platform supports Dash, Bitcoin, and Ethereum, among other lesser-known currencies. The company has ties with Ethereum, as Vitalik Buterin, the founder of the latter, is an official advisor to TenX. The app is fully functional and ready for distribution into the broader world. More and more talk is emerging about cryptocurrency debit cards as a possible way of linking the virtual with the tangible. TenX hopes to lead the charge in bringing cryptocurrency spending into stores across the globe.

View post:
Could TenX Make Cryptocurrency More Usable In the Real World? - Investopedia

Posted in Cryptocurrency | Comments Off on Could TenX Make Cryptocurrency More Usable In the Real World? – Investopedia

Illinois Is Venezuela and the Solution Is Cryptocurrency – Observer

Posted: at 5:53 am

The reason Im so much fun at parties is that my idea of a good time is to lecture everyone on cryptocurrency. I can pretty much talk bitcoin and blockchain with Hamiltonian fervor all night.

Ever since I began writing about cryptocurrency in general in 2013I believe this story I wrote for Esquire in fall of that year was the first ever mainstream media mention of Ripple (on whose board I now sit) I have been making one point to anyone who will endure my what is cryptocurrency lecture. People are all wrong about the difference between cryptocurrency and real money.

By real money, people invariably mean fiat currency issued by a government. To counter the argument that real money is somehow safer than crypto Ive pointed to Argentinas 40 percentinflation rate, or the Weimar Republic, and its famous wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread (which was arguably intentional as Germany sought to repay Treaty of Versailles debt with devalued deutsche marks). And of course the world has watched in horror as Venezuela has devalued the bolivar to the point of meaninglessness.

These are not hypothetical examples. If you think this is all futurist theoretical BS, read up on the devastating effect hyperinflation is having as it transforms what was once South Americas most promising economy into a hellish nightmare in which people are eating their pets. Governments constantly, reliably, invariably and maddeningly ruin their own currencies by giving in to the temptation to overprint it. The beauty of bitcoin is that, like gold, the entire supply of it that will ever exist on earth (21 million coins), is known about, finite, and will never increase.

Still, as powerful as these examples aresome from recent second-world countries and others from past first-world countriesthey do not vividly resonate with Americans. That makes perfect sense. The U.S. dollar, after all, has been so reliable that the very countries I am criticizing, like Argentina and Venezuela, turn to the greenback and use it as a shadow currency to store value as their own money fails.

Even when we see American commodities change dramatically in price, like we witnessed with gasoline in 2008 when it reached $4.11 in July and fell to $1.84 in January, people dont readily seem to connect that its not just gasoline fluctuating but American money fluctuating. If my $10 bought 4 gallons of gas on October 1 and two gallons of gas on November 1, gas doubled in price just as the buying power of the American dollar was cut in half. Its the same thing. (Not precisely the same, actually, but close enough for the point Im making.)

So what Ive been searching for in these years of evangelizing and explaining the revolutionary power of cryptocurrencyincluding bitcoin, ethereum, ripple, litecoin, this new one BAT that Im interested in and othersto transform basically everything, are examples that will resonate without sounding like Im talking about 1930s Germany or the struggles of the second world. These last few weeks, I think Ive got what I need. And it comes heartbreakingly from my home state.

Illinois faces financial distress thats unprecedented for any American state. Without a budget for two years and sitting on top of over $15 billion in unpaid bills, the state is, to use a phrase that State Comptroller Susana Mendoza borrowed from Bonfire, hemorrhaging money as the states spending obligations have exceeded receipts by an average of over $600 million per month over the past year.

While the United States Constitution prevents a state from declaring bankruptcy the way places like Detroit and Orange County have, the situation is so dire that the Tribunes prestige columnist, John Kass, is only partially kidding when he calls for the state to be divided up between its five Midwestern neighbors.

Again, this is not just wonky penciling. The people of Illinois are being crushed by the burden imposed by a state that cannot pay its bills. The Chicago Public Schools, for example, must now pay 9 percent on its adjustable bonds because they are rated as junk. S&P is warning of a negative credit spiral and threatened to lower its rating even further if the state cannot hammer out a budget by July 1, which is less than a week away.

In other words, a bridge that used to cost $100 million to build because thats what it cost to borrow the money from bondholders, now might cost $150 million. Just as we saw in the gasoline example, anytime something costs more US dollars for the exact same product, you can look at it as the cost of a bridge going up, or you can look at it as the value of a dollar falling.

Thats why I believe in cryptocurrency.

Illinois cannot print its own money. I dont know what theyre going to do to crawl out of this mess. But there is no denying that all governments, including the United States, have manipulated their money supplies for political ends. And thats why I am so bullish on the future of cryptocurrency.

This isnt about whether bitcoin will soar to $5,000 or sink to $500. I think either is possible and equally likely, and Im not looking to give investment advice. All Im saying is that I trust currencies that are cryptographically enshrined and limited by the hard realities of math, at least as much as I trust human beings who are subject to the allure of popularity and other shiny objects.

The best book about cryptocurrency is Digital Gold by Nathaniel Popper. And the parts of it that most moved me occurred when he described how this incredibly complicated and novel technology actually affected human lives. One of the early innovators of the bitcoin ecosystem was Wences Casares, who founded Xapo and a bunch of other crypto-friendly fintech startups. When Casares was growing up in Patagonia in the early 80s, the Argentinian government was messing with its currency to disastrous effect. First, they issued a new peso, exchangeable for 10,000 of the old peso. When that failed, they rolled out something called the austral, which was worth 1,000 new pesos (ie, 10 million of the currency that had been in use two years earlier). The inflation rate was more than 1,000 percent a year. Casares describes his mother carrying two grocery bags filled with moneyher wages. He and his sisters rushed with her to the store to buy what they could because the market employed people who did nothing but walk the aisles all day repricing items.

These math-based moneys from the future have a lot of user-unfriendliness and even getting money into and out of accounts can be a customer service hassle. But bagfuls of nearly worthless cash are not an unimaginable reality for millions of people on the planet. Thats the human reason Im willing to continue to bore people with cryptoevangelism.

See the original post:
Illinois Is Venezuela and the Solution Is Cryptocurrency - Observer

Posted in Cryptocurrency | Comments Off on Illinois Is Venezuela and the Solution Is Cryptocurrency – Observer

BlockPay, the Universal Merchant Payments Solution for Fiat and Cryptocurrency Transactions – newsBTC

Posted: at 5:53 am

BlockPay is a blockchain based FinTech company from Munich that helps businesses with fast and straightforward payment processing services.

Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are gradually gaining increased adoption among people across nations. The rate of cryptocurrency adoption is further driven by the recent legalization of Bitcoin by the Japanese government, which is expected to be followed by other countries soon.

In spite of these developments, cryptocurrency trading activities make up for a majority of the transactions across various blockchains. The use of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as an exchange of value, for everyday transactions are yet to pick up, which is mainly due to the lack of widespread cryptocurrency acceptance among businesses. While some business owners still have apprehensions about accepting cryptocurrencies due to its volatile nature, there are others unable to do so due to lack of proper tools. BlockPay intends to change this by offering a simple, easy to use, and free platform that enables merchants and businesses to accept cryptocurrency payments.

The Munich, Germany-based payment solutions platform provides a way for merchants to accept a variety of digital currencies including Bitcoin, Steem, Ethereum, Dash and other Smartcoins. Apart from the standard cryptocurrencies it also allows businesses to manage Loyalty Points, eReceipts, etc. The BlockPay platform itself is built using IPFS powercore, which enables it to be blockchain agnostic. The very thing also makes connecting almost any cryptocurrency wallet to the platform easier.

BlockPay can easily integrate with existing Point of Sale systems, work with online platforms and even as a standalone application. In addition, the platform will also ensure security by preventing fraud, ID theft, chargebacks, etc., something made easier by blockchain assets. And, the zero fees charged by BlockPay makes it even more attractive.

BlockPay recently conducted an ICO to make the platform a reality. The crowdsale carried out in association with CCEDKs OpenLedger offered an opportunity for the investors to become part of the project by purchasing Blockpay tokens.

Some of the BlockPays features include Automated Bookkeeping, Loyalty and Reward Programs, Customer Analytics, QR Code and NFC support and more. It also seamlessly supports traditional payment options like cash, credit and debit cards as well.

BlockPay boasts of helping over 60.000 Odoo businesses across the world, and the adoption is expected to increase even further with time.

Follow this link:
BlockPay, the Universal Merchant Payments Solution for Fiat and Cryptocurrency Transactions - newsBTC

Posted in Cryptocurrency | Comments Off on BlockPay, the Universal Merchant Payments Solution for Fiat and Cryptocurrency Transactions – newsBTC

Cryptocurrency ICO vs Cryptocurrency Pre-ICO The Merkle – The Merkle

Posted: at 5:53 am

The world of cryptocurrency ICOs has been on fire as of late. In most cases, these ICOs cause quite a bit of strain on the Ethereum network, which is anything but enjoyable. It now appears a lot of projects are running so-called pre-ICO token sales as well. This allows teams to collect even more money, while investors get cheaper tokens.

The concept of a cryptocurrency ICO has been documented quite a few times already. In fact, we have a whole series on this particular market phenomenon, which covers most of the information people need to know. Although investing in a cryptocurrency ICO can be quite lucrative, it is taking longer for tokens to get listed on decent exchanges. This causes a lot of users to get quite nervous about their investment, which is understandable.

This brings us to how cryptocurrency ICOs are currently developing. The money is raised a lot quicker compared to how much time it takes to sort out technical issues, refunds, and getting listed on exchanges. To a lot of people, this makes no sense, especially when projects raise over $10m during their ICO. Surely they could use that money to speed up the listing process and make investors a lot happier? Unfortunately, that is not how things work right now.

Contrary to what most people expect, there is a lot more to getting listed on an exchange than just paying a fee. Especially where ERC20 tokens are concerned, as smart contracts need to be audited by a third party. This causes some delays, which means some investors will panic sell on smaller exchanges as a way to minimize losses. If this trend keeps up, a lot of ICO projects will go under well below they even get a listing on Bittrex or Poloniex. That is very unfortunate, to say the least.

This brings us to a somewhat newer phenomenon, which is known as a pre-ICO token sale. As the name suggests, a pre-ICO allows investors to buy tokens before the official crowdsale begins. In most cases, these pre-ICOs raise a much smaller amount of money, and offer tokens at a lower price with a substantial bonus. More specifically, finding a pre-ICO with a bonus of 40% or more compared to the ICO price is not all that uncommon.

It is worth noting a pre-ICO often uses a very different smart contract compared to the actual ICO itself. This is done to separate funds and ensure these is no confusion. However, it can also create some uncertainty regarding how much money has been raised in total. Since the pre-ICO numbers are not included in the actual ICO numbers, there can be some sort of a discrepancy. Plus, it also means there may be far more tokens issued than people initially assume.

When a project launches a pre-ICO token sale, they need to do their due diligence. Being transparent about the money raised and the number of tokens issued is of the utmost importance. Onenegative side effect of pre-ICOs is how early investors often sell at ICO prices once a token hits an exchange. In doing so, they still make a very big profit and cripple the tokens price in the process. A pre-ICO is an amazing investment opportunity for a quick buck, but it can hurt the projects appeal and credibility when large amounts of tokens are sold at bottom prices.

If you liked this article, follow us on Twitter @themerklenews and make sure to subscribe to our newsletter to receive the latest bitcoin, cryptocurrency, and technology news.

Go here to read the rest:
Cryptocurrency ICO vs Cryptocurrency Pre-ICO The Merkle - The Merkle

Posted in Cryptocurrency | Comments Off on Cryptocurrency ICO vs Cryptocurrency Pre-ICO The Merkle – The Merkle

Bitcoin Bull Novogratz Unfazed as Cyberattacks Resume Globally – Bloomberg

Posted: at 5:53 am

Michael Novogratz says cryptocurrencies could be worth north of $5 trillion in five years -- if the industry can come out of the shadows.

The Nasdaq got to $5.4 trillion in 1999, why couldnt it be as big? the former hedge fund manager said in an interview, referring the Nasdaq Composite Index. Theres so much human capital and real money being poured into the space and were at the takeoff point.

To get there, though, companies need to develop sound business principles to satisfy regulators and lend legitimacy to the budding industry, one of Wall Streets biggest bitcoin bulls said Tuesday at the CB Insights Future of Fintech conference in New York.

Thats proving an uphill battle amid Bitcoins growing reputation as a currency favored by black marketeers and hackers. The industry took another reputational hit Tuesday after a cyberattack spread around the world, disabling computers and demanding users pay $300 in cryptocurrency to unlock them. It follows the WannaCry hack in May.

While bitcoin was little changed at $2,339.66 as of 2 p.m. in New York, some chipmakers whose products are used in mining the cryptocurrency also retreated. The PureFunds ISE Cyber Security ETF, known as HACK, erased earlier gains to trade little changed.

Bitcoin, the biggest cryptocurrency, is up more than 140 percent this year, and ether, the digital asset based on the ethereum blockchain, has surged to about $240 from just $8 at the beginning of the year. The cyberattack comes after questions about the sustainability of this years rally and the scaleability of the digital assets had already been dragging down prices.

The recent selloff has shrunk cryptocurrencies total market cap to about $90 billion from a high of over $110 billion, according to Coinmarketcap.com.

For more on the latest cyberattack hitting port operators.

Novogratz said he took some profits on his bitcoin and ether holdings as prices surged, but still has 10 percent of his net worth invested in the sector, including blockchain-based assets he bought in fundraising mechanisms known as initial coin offerings. Hes looking to add more ether if it falls between $200 and $150, and more bitcoin if it falls to $2,000.

Bitcoin could become a viable store of wealth, similar to gold, while ethereum could be the platform underpinning the Googles and Facebooks of the future, while money transfers to securities settlement will probably be done using blockchaintechnology, he said.

Novogratz, who has spoken about investments in bitcoin since 2013 andformerly managed Fortress Investment Group LLCs liquid strategies business, has been one of the most prominent supporters of cryptocurrencies on Wall Street.

Companies need to develop sound business principles to satisfy regulators and lend legitimacy to the budding industry, he said.

"Pay your taxes, because nobody in that space pays taxes. Its a bunch of libertarians," he said, adding he thought a core group of developers have good intentions. "There really is a revolutionary spirit amongst the guys that are building this system."

Visit link:
Bitcoin Bull Novogratz Unfazed as Cyberattacks Resume Globally - Bloomberg

Posted in Cryptocurrency | Comments Off on Bitcoin Bull Novogratz Unfazed as Cyberattacks Resume Globally – Bloomberg

Bitcoin bull unfazed by cyberattacks – Philly.com

Posted: at 5:52 am

Michael Novogratz says cryptocurrencies could be worth more than $5 trillion in five years - if the industry can come out of the shadows.

"The Nasdaq got to $5.4 trillion in 1999, why couldn't it be as big?" the former hedge fund manager said in an interview. "There's so much human capital and real money being poured into the space, and we're at the takeoff point."

To get there, though, companies need to develop sound business principles to satisfy regulators and lend legitimacy to the budding industry, one of Wall Street's biggest bitcoin bulls said Tuesday at the CB Insights Future of Fintech conference in New York.

That's proving an uphill battle amid bitcoins' growing reputation as a currency favored by black marketeers and hackers. The industry took another reputational hit Tuesday after a cyberattack spread around the world, disabling computers and demanding users pay $300 in cryptocurrency to unlock them. It follows the WannaCry hack in May.

While bitcoin was little changed at $2,379.62 as of 4 p.m. in New York, some chipmakers whose products are used in mining the cryptocurrency also retreated. The PureFunds ISE Cyber Security ETF, known as Hack, erased earlier gains to trade little changed.

Bitcoin, the biggest cryptocurrency, is up more than 140 percent this year, and ethereum, the digital asset based on the ethereum blockchain, has surged to about $240 from just $8 at the beginning of the year. The cyberattack comes after questions about the sustainability of this year's rally and the scalability of the digital assets had already been dragging down prices.

The recent sell-off has shrunk cryptocurrencies' total market cap to about $90 billion from a high of more than $110 billion, according to Coinmarketcap.com.

Novogratz said he took some profits on his bitcoin and ethereum holdings as prices surged, but still has 10 percent of his net worth invested in the sector, including blockchain-based assets he bought in fund-raising mechanisms known as initial coin offerings. He is looking to add more ethereum if it falls between $200 and $150, and more bitcoin if it falls to $2,000.

Bitcoin could become a viable store of wealth, similar to gold, while ethereum could be the platform underpinning the Googles and Facebooks of the future, while money transfers to securities settlement will probably be done using blockchain technology, he said.

Novogratz, who has spoken about investments in bitcoin since 2013 and formerly managed Fortress Investment Group LLC's liquid strategies business, has been one of the most prominent supporters of cryptocurrencies on Wall Street.

Companies need to develop sound business principles to satisfy regulators and lend legitimacy to the budding industry, he said.

"Pay your taxes, because nobody in that space pays taxes. It's a bunch of libertarians," he said, adding he thought a core group of developers have good intentions. "There really is a revolutionary spirit among the guys that are building this system."

Bloomberg's Alexandria Arnold contributed to this article.

Published: June 28, 2017 3:01 AM EDT

We recently asked you to support our journalism. The response, in a word, is heartening. You have encouraged us in our mission to provide quality news and watchdog journalism. Some of you have even followed through with subscriptions, which is especially gratifying. Our role as an independent, fact-based news organization has never been clearer. And our promise to you is that we will always strive to provide indispensable journalism to our community. Subscriptions are available for home delivery of the print edition and for a digital replica viewable on your mobile device or computer. Subscriptions start as low as 25 per day. We're thankful for your support in every way.

Read the original post:
Bitcoin bull unfazed by cyberattacks - Philly.com

Posted in Bitcoin | Comments Off on Bitcoin bull unfazed by cyberattacks – Philly.com