Amid Bitcoin Trading Resurgence, Chinese Miners Shut Down Without Warning

Amid Bitcoin Trading Resurgence,
Chinese Miners Shut Down Without Warning

    

A strange phenomenon is unfolding in China

as Bitcoin miners mysteriously close down or relocate their operations. Mines in the country’s Sichuan province were “reluctant” to discuss the reasons for withdrawal, major news resource People.cn reports. Bitcoin has recently continued its expanding price as Chinese exchanges get the green light to allow Bitcoin withdrawals. As traders delight in the new possibilities for sanctioned exchange use, however, a lack of corresponding regulation for miners is causing problems.

“A local official said the closure of the Bajiaoxi Mining Company aims at cracking down on illegal cash operations and on controlling systemic risks,” People reports, while no party was directly cited giving an explanation for the upset. Sichuan’s hydroelectric power is among the world’s cheapest, but the departure of miners is set to cost one power station $147,000 per month in lost billing. At a time when Bitcoin fees are higher than ever, the effect on miners themselves is also significant. “The southwestern region has abundant hydropower resources,” an “insider” source told fellow publication YiCai Global. “So electricity costs about half the price during the wet season. It’s hard to imagine why any mine would want to relocate now.”

Chuck Reynolds
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about –
TCC-Bitcoin.

Alan Zibluk – Markethive Founding Member

Financial Times Praises ‘Innovator’ Greek Lawyer For Bitcoin Use

Financial Times Praises
‘Innovator’
Greek Lawyer For Bitcoin Use

    

A Greek lawyer has made the Financial Times’ list

of top legal innovators in Europe for his use of Bitcoin during the country’s financial

crisis.

"Panos Giannissis came second on a list of eight finalists shortlisted by the publication, which praised his use of the virtual currency when capital controls appeared in Greece two years ago."

“When capital controls were imposed during the Greek financial crisis last year, Panos Giannissis helped clients to stay in business by converting some of their working capital to Bitcoin, the virtual currency,” it writes. “He also led the development and implementation of the information systems at his firm.”

Giannissis’ triumph is conspicuous for mainstream press’ continued treatment of Bitcoin as a bonafide “innovation.” “…He negotiated a deal with his clients’ suppliers from abroad to accept Bitcoin as collateral to back importation of supplies in case his clients would not be able to make payments in fiat money,” an accompanying press release further explains.

“After the Capital Controls were imposed, the deal was activated and his clients continued to receive their supplies as usually, while their suppliers were covered by the Bitcoin collateral.” The broader international media tone has shifted away from Bitcoin as a highly volatile, insincere investment towards one full of potential with valid use cases. As Cointelegraph reported earlier this week, however, a lot of the latest supportive comments appear tied solely to Bitcoin’s price.

Chuck Reynolds
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about –
TCC-Bitcoin.

Alan Zibluk – Markethive Founding Member

‘Russian Bitcoin’ Will Be Country’s ‘Only Freely Tradable’ Crypto: Sberbank CEO

‘Russian Bitcoin’ Will Be Country’s
‘Only Freely Tradable’
Crypto: Sberbank CEO

    

Sberbank CEO Herman Gref has “agreed” on the development of a Russian national cryptocurrency

with the country’s central bank. Sberbank is Russia’s major state-controlled bank. In unofficial reports from local news aggregators, the so-called “Russian Bitcoin” will use Sberbank as its base and will be “the only cryptocurrency freely available for sale and purchase” in the country. “All other [cryptocurrencies] will only be available via exchanges or trading platforms,” the Telegram news channel DeСenter reports Friday.

The news comes amid the ongoing economic forum in St. Petersburg, where the central bank deputy Olga Skorobogatova announced work had “already begun” on developing the national cryptocurrency. Skorobogatova had previously outlined plans to regulate Bitcoin and its like in 2018, on the basis that an outright ban was no longer feasible. On the topic of Blockchain, she told forum members that it “is without a doubt necessary to buy into” such “revolutionary technology,” yet understanding the associated risks was essential.

Fully-controlled integration would require “ seven to 10 years,” she added and continued: “In the coming years we will be concentrating on digital letters of credit, custodian accounting and digital bank guarantees using the Blockchain.” Gref had also been encouraging on Blockchain, estimating initial implementations by 2019. “Two to two-and-a-half years is the timeframe in which we could be talking about seeing Blockchain technology commercially operating,” he said in February.

Chuck Reynolds
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about –
TCC-Bitcoin.

Alan Zibluk – Markethive Founding Member

Bitcoin Scaling: Jeff Garzik AsicBoost Comments Lead to Frustration

Bitcoin Scaling:
Jeff Garzik AsicBoost Comments
Lead to Frustration

    

Bitcoin Core developer

Jeff Garzik has sparked contention with a post asking if further measures were needed to prevent covert AsicBoost. Addressing the work group (WG) on Github, Garzik put forward a selection of next steps aimed at “testing protocol/software changes that ban/disable/render ineffective this hardware optimization.” However, fellow contributor Greg Maxwell responded accusing Garzik of attempting to allow AsicBoost to, in fact, continue under his “modified version” of Segregated Witness with a hard fork.

Maxwell wrote:

“So to be clear about what you've written between the lines: you have decided that impeding covert asicboost would be a violation of the "SegWit2x charter" and so you will assure that covert asicboost continues to function in your modified version of segwit and HF as people have been alleging you would do? This will require further departure and incompatibility with the segwit proposal.”

Infighting among Core members has continued on the topic of Bitcoin’s future following Barry Silbert’s attempt to ratify an agreement which would see SegWit introduction in September followed by a cooling-off period for a block size increase to 2 MB. Reactions have been mixed, while practicality problems on the Bitcoin network are resulting in greater user calls than ever to initiate a binding solution. Garzik, meanwhile, faced pressure to state whether he intends to have AsicBoost disabled. “Anything that was not discussed is, by definition, A New Issue To Raise And Discuss. Which is what was done here,” he wrote.

Chuck Reynolds
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about –
TCC-Bitcoin.

 

Alan Zibluk – Markethive Founding Member

Ponzi Alert: New Zealand Lawyer Labels “We Grow Bitcoins” Simple Scam

Ponzi Alert:
New Zealand Lawyer Labels
“We Grow Bitcoins”
Simple Scam

    

A New Zealand lawyer has called suspected pyramid scheme

We Grow Bitcoins a “simple scam” after a news investigation. In an article by local platform Newshub, consumer law specialist Prajna Moodley concluded that investors funneling money into the scheme, which promises 62 BTC ($148,300) monthly returns, would never see their cash again.

“I would go as so far as to say it's a simple scam, from what I can work this involves people investing money and never hearing from the company again," she told the publication. The investigation focuses on the story of a New Zealand investor by the name of Daniel Tepania, who sent the so-called “crowdfunding community” the required NZ$30 minimum entry fee and is awaiting payouts. "It's only been here about a month so I thought I would give it a go, sounded quite good," he told Newshub.

New Zealand’s Commerce Commission pointed journalists to its legislation on pyramid schemes when approached about We Grow Bitcoins, such schemes being illegal under local law. “WeGrowBitcoins is a member to member donation platform,” the website states. “Members pay a monthly subscription to have access to the platform. Platform access allows members to receive donations directly into their bitcoin wallet from other members.” Cointelegraph would like to remind readers that investing in projects purporting to deliver unproven profits in return for direct payment should be avoided.

Chuck Reynolds
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about –
TCC-Bitcoin.

Alan Zibluk – Markethive Founding Member

How Do Bitcoin Transactions Actually Work

How Do Bitcoin Transactions Actually Work

How Do Bitcoin Transactions Actually Work

 

Whether you’re interested in becoming a developer for blockchain applications, or you’re just looking to understand what happens under the hood when you send bitcoin to a friend, it’s good to have a working knowledge of what happens when you create and broadcast Bitcoin transactions to the Bitcoin network. Why?

Because transactions are a basic entity on top of which the bitcoin blockchain is constructed. Transactions are the result of a brilliant collision of cryptography, data structures, and simple non-turing-complete scripting. They’re simple enough that common transaction types aren’t overly-complex, but flexible enough to allow developers to encode fairly customized transactions types as well. Today we’ll take a tour of the former.

As a developer, how does your bitcoin client post a new transaction to the network (and what happens when it’s received)?

What exactly is happening when you send some bitcoin to a friend?

This post will assume that the reader has a basic understanding of hashing, asymmetric cryptography, and P2P networking. It’s also a good idea to have a good sense for what exactly a blockchain is, even if you’re unfamiliar with any specific mechanics.

Bitcoin Transactions and their role in the bigger picture

Bitcoin is comprised of a few major pieces: nodes and a blockchain. The role of a typical node is to maintain its own blockchain version and update it once it hears of a “better” (longer) version. Simply put, the blockchain has blocks, and blocks have transactions.

 

With this simplified but accurate picture in mind, you might be wondering what exactly a transaction is made out of.

How will understanding transactions help me to become a better blockchain developer?How do transactions allow me to transfer some bitcoin to a friend?

It turns out that the answers to these questions vary based on many things. Even assuming that we’re talking only bitcoin, we can use transactions in a number of creative ways to accomplish a variety of personalized goals. Let’s start at the beginning, that is, let’s take a look a good old-fashioned pay-to-PK-hash transaction type. After all, this type of transaction accounts for over 99% of all transactions on the bitcoin blockchain.

First, let’s build a mental model. It’s tempting to think of bitcoin as an account-based system. After all, when I send bitcoin to somebody, that person receives money and I’m left with a remaining balance. In the real world though, things are represented a bit differently. Generally speaking, when I send money to somebody I am sending spending all of that money (minus transaction fees). Some of that money will be spent back to my own personal account if there exists a remaining balance. The point is that all of the money moves every single time.

How Do Bitcoin Transactions Actually Work?Save

This was somewhat confusing to me when I first saw it, so I’ll elaborate a bit. When I post a transaction, I’m essentially “claiming” an output and proving that I have permission to spend the amount of money at that output. So if I’m Bob and I want to pay Alice, those inputs are my proof that I have been given a certain amount of money (although this might just be a portion of my total balance), and the outputs will correspond to Alice’s account. In this simple case, there would be only a single input and a single output.

A deeper look into Bitcoin transactions

Let’s understand the mechanics of a real bitcoin transaction. We’ll use the image above as a reference.

If you were to cut open a typical bitcoin transaction, you’d end up with three major pieces: the header, the input(s), and the output(s). Let’s briefly look at the fields available to us in these sections, as they’ll be important for discussion. Note that these are the fields that are in a so-called raw transaction. Raw transactions are broadcast between peers when a transaction is created.

The Header

hash: The hash over this entire transaction. Bitcoin generally uses hash values both a pointer and a means to check the integrity of a piece of data. We’ll look at this more in the next section.

ver: The version number that should be used to verify this block. The latest version was introduced in a soft fork that became active in December 2015.

vin_sz: The number of inputs to this transaction. Similarly, vout_sz counts the number of outputs.

lock_time: We’ll look at this more in later articles, but this basically describes the earliest time at which a block can be added to the blockchain. It is either the block height or a unix timestamp.

Input

previous output hash: This is a hash pointer to a previously unspent transaction output (UTXO). Essentially, this is money that belongs to you that you are about to spend in this transaction.

n: An index into the list of outputs of the previous transaction. This is the actual output that you are spending.

scriptSig: This is a spending script that proves that the creator of this transaction has permission to spend the money referenced by 1. and 2.

 

Output

value: The amount of Satoshi being spent (1 BTC = 100,000,000 Satoshi).

scriptPubKey: The second of two scripts provided in a bitcoin transaction, which points to a recipient’s hashed public key. More on this in the last section of this article.

Transaction verification

One of the jobs of a bitcoin node is the verify that incoming transactions are correct (data hasn’t been tampered with, money isn’t being created, only intended recipients spend UTXOs, etc). A more exhaustive list can be found online, but I’ll list out a few of the important ones here:

 

All outputs claimed by inputs of this transaction are in the UTXO pool. Unspent outputs can only ever be claimed once.

The signatures on each input are valid. More precisely, we’re saying that the combined scripts return true after executing them one after the other. More on this in the last section.

No UTXO is spent more than once by this transaction. Notice how this is different than the first item.

All of the transaction’s output values are non-negative.

The sum of this transaction’s input values is greater than the sum of its output values. Note that if the numbers are different, the difference is considered to be a transaction fee that can be claimed by the miner.

A basic pay-to-PK-hash transaction

Bitcoin has its own custom (Forth-like) scripting language that is powerful enough to allow developers to create complicated and custom types of transactions. There are five or so standard transaction types that are accepted by standard bitcoin clients [5], however, there exist other clients that will accept other types of transactions for a fee. We’ll just cover the mechanics of pay-to-PK-hash here.

For any transaction to be valid, a combined scriptSig/scriptPubKey pair must evaluate to true. More specifically, a transaction spender provides a scriptSig that is executed and followed by the scriptPubKey of the claimed transaction output (remember how we said inputs claim previous unspent transaction outputs?). Both scripts share the same stack.

In the interest of efficiency, let’s use (official bitcoin wiki) a reference as we discuss. When you visit the link, go about halfway down to find a table containing 7 rows. This table shows how the scripts are combined, how execution occurs, and what the stack looks like at each step.

One thing to note is that, because bitcoin addresses are actually hashes (well, it gets even a bit more complicated. See ), there is no way for the sender to know the actual public key to check against the private key. Therefore, the Redeemer specifies both the public key and private key, and the scriptPubKey will duplicate and hash the public key to make sure that the Redeemer is indeed the intended recipient.

During execution, you can see that constants are placed directly onto the stack when they are encountered. Operations add or remove items from the stack as they are evaluated. For example, OP_HASH160 will take the top item from the stack, and has it twice, first with SHA-256 and then with RIPEMD-160. When all items in our script have been evaluated, our entire script will evaluate to true if true remains on the stack, and false otherwise.

All in all, the pay-to-PK-hash is a pretty straightforward transaction type. It ensures that only a redeemer with the appropriate public/private key pair can claim and subsequently spend bitcoin. Assuming that all other criteria are met (see the previous section), then the transaction is a good one and it can be placed into a block.

David Ogden
Entrepreneur

Alan Zibluk – Markethive Founding Member