Did Bitcoin prove itself to be a reliable store of value in 2020? Experts answer

Did Bitcoin prove itself to be a reliable store of value in 2020? Experts answer

Did Bitcoin prove itself to be a reliable store of value in 2020? Experts answer

Without any doubt, the year 2020 was unlike any other year in the 21st century: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, global governments unstoppably printing money, “lockdowns” and “social distancing” becoming the new normal, protests against racial discrimination and police brutality, and so on and so forth. It even made some claim it to be “the worst year ever.” But as they say: In every storm, each cloud has a silver lining. The most important thing is to learn from what we’ve been through and to improve our world and our future, as there are some problems that we have to solve ourselves.

It’s also true that 2020 was a significant, dramatic year not only for people all over the world but for Bitcoin (BTC) as well: the third halving, increased attention from institutional investors and global regulators, its white paper’s 12th anniversary, etc. Some even called it the “New Testament” of finance, and others suggested using it for the utopian idea of universal basic income. Bitcoin received global attention because of the Twitter hack in mid-July, which required the crypto community to defend Bitcoin’s integrity after the event placed the words “Bitcoin” and “scam” within one headline again. In October, PayPal announced it would offer crypto payments, and later in November, Bitcoin was on the homepage of the Wall Street Journal for its 80% price rally.

Related: Will PayPal’s crypto integration bring crypto to the masses? Experts answer

When 2020 started, it was hard to imagine how the world would change and how fast those changes would be. Despite all the negative impacts of the ongoing COVID-19 crisis, there have been some positive developments, at least within the crypto space. For instance, Bitcoin’s volatility has decreased since its peak in mid-March, and the pandemic has highlighted Bitcoin’s most important value: its decentralized nature. Some even argued that the pandemic has underlined the benefits of cryptocurrencies for the world. And while Europe experienced the shift to a cashless world, the United States remained more conservative and didn’t want to give up its paper money.

Related: How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the crypto space? Experts answer

One thing became certain due to the effects of COVID-19: There are some serious problems with the currently existing financial system that might be solved by Bitcoin and by the technology behind it. And the similarities between the two recent financial crises — the first back in 2008 and now in 2020 due to the pandemic — revealed the systemic problems of centralized financial systems. While the first crisis gave birth to Bitcoin, the current one has made people turn to decentralized tech and Bitcoin on a massive scale amid the global economic recession. Some even argue that during the next decade, Bitcoin will play a crucial role in the global economy’s transformation, called “The Great Reset,” and that crypto mass adoption will be led by the millennial generation.

Central banks printed an estimated $15 trillion in stimulus by May alone as anti-pandemic measures to save global economies, throwing the U.S. dollar under the bus, as some said. And these measures turned people toward alternative financial tools, making Bitcoin a hedge against inflation and even an alternative to traditional finance entirely. Some even suggested governments make a monetary transition to Bitcoin to solve the national debt problems.

Another important 2020 milestone was the rise of institutional investors’ interest in Bitcoin. Although this trend seemed to be “built on nothing more than hope” earlier this year, 2020 surprised everyone here as well. Forced by the possibility of rising inflation, the hedging abilities of Bitcoin couldn’t go unnoticed by high-profile investors who saw crypto as an important part of a diversified corporate treasury holding, becoming major holders of digital assets this year.

Unsurprisingly, the crypto space has started to consider the rise of Bitcoin mining institutions inevitable. Also, China’s dominance over the world’s Bitcoin mining operations seemed to be challenged. And most importantly, the future of crypto mining will become more sustainable.

With the 2020 shift in public discourse around Bitcoin, it’s becoming more and more important to create a regulatory framework for the crypto space, without which it will have no future. The regulation, some argue, has to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary, and most importantly, it requires dialogue and close collaboration between regulators and crypto businesses.

All in all, it is hard to predict the crypto’s future in the post-COVID-19 world, as the pandemic has not yet come to an end. Meanwhile, it is impossible to neglect the impact it has had on the crypto space this year. The new Bitcoin era, after everything that happened this year, is forming the new financial order. And if fiat money might lose up to 90% in 100 years, Bitcoin’s future seems to be much brighter than it is now, considering that Bitcoin just reached $27,000 for the first time in history and is now targeting $100,000 within the next 12 months and $500,000 within the decade. And with 2020 coming to its end, Cointelegraph reached out to experts in the blockchain and crypto space for their opinions on Bitcoin’s path this year.

Did Bitcoin mature enough this year to become a reliable store of value? Why or why not?

Brian Brooks, acting comptroller of the currency of the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of the Comptroller of the Currency:

“We hope that our July 2020 letter regarding crypto custody will make Bitcoin safer for institutional and retail holders. Bitcoin was the innovation that opened the door to decentralizing financial services, and the growth of it and other tokens in 2020 shows the beginning of a transformation of cryptocurrencies from an exotic concept to a more familiar and comfortable means of engaging in financial services.”

Da Hongfei, founder of Neo, founder and CEO of Onchain:

“Since its inception, Bitcoin has witnessed and survived various ups and downs, and it now appears that investors, on the whole, are increasingly more confident in its value. More significantly, I believe that this signals how quickly we are moving toward mainstream adoption.

Throughout 2020, the blockchain space experienced an explosion in terms of interest and creativity, and we’re seeing the results now: More and more people are recognizing that blockchain is here, and it is here to say.

Moving forward, I believe we’re on the cusp of mainstream adoption, and I’m very excited for what 2021 will bring.”

Denelle Dixon, CEO and executive director of the Stellar Development Foundation:

“I think that the institutional focus on Bitcoin has created positive momentum for the entire blockchain space. Personally, I think it is a reliable store of value. As is much debated throughout crypto circles and beyond, engagement with the network in the long term may present challenges and affect Bitcoin’s ability to translate to certain business applications and use cases, but I believe that storing value and holding value are irrefutably its strengths.”

Emin Gün Sirer, CEO of AvaLabs, professor at Cornell University, co-director of IC3:

“We’ve seen over time how narratives around cryptocurrencies can shift and evolve to fit market demand or a network’s capabilities. The Bitcoin narrative around store of value and hedge against currency inflation has hardened this year, and I believe it’s now the dominant positioning for BTC, as its most vocal supporters and institutional adopters have rallied around it.

That’s a perfectly fine position for Bitcoin to occupy.

Personally, I’m most excited about currencies that have both a scarce, hard-capped supply like Bitcoin but also push for more sophisticated utility with functionalities like smart contracts, DeFi applications and asset issuance.”

Heath Tarbert, chairman and chief executive of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission:

“We have definitely seen an increase in digital assets overall. Bitcoin is among that market, but let us not forget about Ether, which I declared a commodity last year. The two of these together represent a large portion of the crypto market. And it has been an interesting year in this market — not just with the halving but also the move to Ethereum 2.0 and both Bitcoin and Ether forking.

Despite this, however, we must still recognize that this market is small compared with other assets we regulate. I think over time, this market will be comparable. Until then, however, there will need to be more regulatory clarity around these digital assets for these markets to grow.”

James Butterfill, investment strategist at CoinShares:

“Bitcoin remains a volatile asset. Many expect a store of value to have much lower volatility, but as gold was developing into an investment store of value in the 1970s, it too had extremely high volatility. As it has matured as a store of value, so too has its volatility declined. We expect the same to happen to Bitcoin, and early evidence alludes to this.

2020 has been crucial for Bitcoin. We see it as the year of legitimization for the broader public and investors, fortuitously aided/accelerated by the COVID-19 crisis and the consequent rapid escalation of quantitative easing and fall in use of cash. Our conversations with institutional clients have changed considerably over the course of 2020. What was typically a desire to speculatively invest has now become one of being fearful of extreme loose monetary policy and negative interest rates, with clients looking for an anchor for their investments. As their understanding of Bitcoin improves, clients have grasped that Bitcoin has a limited supply and fulfills this role as an anchor for their assets while fiat is being debased.

This year, we have seen cumulative flows (stripping out the price effect) into investment products rise from $1.35 billion at the start of the year to $6.1 billion today, with only 24 days of outflows for a total of 241 trading days this year. Investors are buying and holding — a good indicator that it is slowly developing into a store of value.”

Jimmy Song, instructor at Programming Blockchain:

“It’s not that Bitcoin has matured, it’s that we have. The mainstream investors are starting to take notice of Bitcoin’s 12-year history and starting to recognize how valuable it really is in a world of near-infinite quantitative easing. Bitcoin gives us true scarcity, and that’s why it’s useful as a store of value. Literally, nothing like this has existed in human history.”

Joseph Lubin, co-founder of Ethereum, founder of ConsenSys:

“Despite this very difficult year, I think that the broader decentralized protocol ecosystem demonstrated poignantly that we, like our Web 3.0 technology, are anti-fragile and that this technology will prove a worthy evolutionary successor to Web 2.0 systems. We continue to demonstrate that this technology will serve as a new trust foundation for next-generation, increasingly decentralized, financial, economic, social and political systems.”

Michael Terpin, founder of Transform Group and BitAngels:

“Store of value is an interesting concept. It doesn’t mean nonvolatile; after all, both gold and real estate have had their cycles, booms and busts, but to date, they have returned to a reliable mean so that there are very few instances where a 20-year investment in either did not perform as a reliable way of keeping ahead of inflation with very low risk of losing one’s principal.

To skeptics, Bitcoin was seen as the equivalent of investing in a single high-risk stock that could easily crash to zero — and in its early days, this certainly was possible. But no asset in history has ever gone from under one cent, as it was during the first P2P transactions, to this month’s high-water mark of $28,300. As each year has passed, the fluctuations have gotten more manageable — there will be no more 100-times gains in one year, as happened in 2013. This plus the clear signals from the United States, the European Union, China and Japan that they’re happy to cope with both the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and economic depression through massive money printing means that these currencies will vastly underperform hard assets in the next two to three years as the money supply in these nations expands at annual rates of above 20% instead of the historic 4% to 5%, which is near the true rate of inflation.

Barry Silbert primed the pump with Grayscale, allowing accredited investors an easy way to invest in Bitcoin that then makes its way into a publicly traded vehicle. Paul Tudor Jones, who made a fortune calling the gold boom in the 1980s, awoke the multitrillion-dollar institutional fund world by having his funds invest in Bitcoin, calling it ‘the fastest horse’ in the race.

Michael Saylor, CEO and founder of multibillion-dollar public firm MicroStrategy, then lit the fuse on corporate fear and greed by using 80% of its $500 million in cash earlier this year to invest in Bitcoin, which has now more than doubled. More recently, he went even further and issued debt to buy even more Bitcoin.

Bitcoin has never been great at microtransactions — dozens of low-fee, faster-settling cryptos are far better at this — but it needed to go through this use case in its infancy. Its true value now is in sending large transactions instantly and safely, and as a store of value for the next century and beyond.”

Mike Belshe, CEO of BitGo:

“The 2020 bull run of Bitcoin is very different from anything we’ve seen before. Unlike the previous rapid rise of 2017, this year saw the influx of new large institutional players. New entrants like PayPal, Square, JPMorgan and others are bringing a new level of credibility, liquidity and stability to the crypto markets.

Institutions and retail investors are recognizing the importance of the principle of scarcity, which is the basic economic principle of Bitcoin. With governments overprinting money across the globe, Bitcoin is the most reliable store of value at this time and a hedge against inflation. Those who understand this will be in a stronger economic position than those who don’t.

I agree with Paul Tudor Jones’ recommendation that individuals who have investable assets put a small amount, perhaps 2%, into Bitcoin. And I’d go a step further and say that institutions should invest 5% of their corporate treasuries in order to stay competitive. Investing small amounts can produce tremendous upside with minimal downside risk.”

Paul Brody, principal and global innovation leader of blockchain technology at Ernst & Young:

“Bitcoin has reached that mature, stable store-of-value stage, but I fear it will never be without some controversy. While the Ethereum ecosystem is becoming a vibrant economic entity — with DeFi, smart contracts and infrastructure services being built atop the system — Bitcoin remains very focused on taking a role as a store of value. This will make it hard for some people to grasp, in the same way that many people still don’t quite realize that there is no gold or other asset that backs any other modern currency either. ”

Roger Ver, executive chairman of Bitcoin.com:

“Clearly not. Anything that can fluctuate from $4,000 to $20,000 in a single year is anything but a store of value. It is still just a speculative investment at this point.”

Samson Mow, chief strategy officer of Blockstream:

“Bitcoin was always a reliable store of value. The only people that say otherwise are the ones looking at it on very short time horizons. As public market companies like MicroStrategy have recently realized, Bitcoin is the only safe haven to store value — cash will just melt away from inflation and quantitative easing, gold is stagnant, and tech stocks are overextended. Now, we’re seeing giants like Guggenheim Partners and Ruffer pile in as they come to that same realization as well. Hyperbitcoinization is inevitable.”

Serguei Popov, co-founder of the Iota Foundation:

“Bitcoin and other popular cryptocurrencies have been a store of value for many people for quite some time already. The considerable capitalization of the crypto market corroborates this, and it’s likely that quite a few readers of this article are using cryptos in this way already. Whether it is ‘reliable’ or not depends on the definition of reliability. Of course, it is true that Bitcoin’s — let alone other cryptos’ — price is quite volatile and will probably remain so, meaning anyone who uses it for a store of value might experience some strong emotions. On the other hand, it is very reliable in the sense that nobody can take your Bitcoin away, as long as you keep your private keys secret and store them safely. This constitutes a unique advantage of cryptocurrencies in the store-of-value context.”

Todd Morakis, co-founder and partner of JST Capital:

“The institutions are here. This year, we’ve seen a number of large traditional firms either announce or begin to explore Bitcoin. While custody is still challenging for institutions, the Paul Tudor Jones announcement earlier in the year as well as the improvement of institutional Bitcoin solutions have led to much broader acceptance of Bitcoin within the traditional financial community. Bitcoin is no longer a bad word on the street.”

Vinny Lingham, CEO of Civic:

“Bitcoin is a speculative investment. Even if we see the price goes up, we have to remember that it’s still speculative. When will it become a reliable store of value? As I’ve been saying for years, Bitcoin may eventually evolve into a reliable store of value, but this growth process will take at least five to 10 years. We’ll know that we’ve reached the goal when Bitcoin becomes far more stable and far less volatile — in a word, boring.”

These quotes have been edited and condensed.

This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision.

Title: Did Bitcoin prove itself to be a reliable store of value in 2020? Experts answer
Sourced From: cointelegraph.com/news/did-bitcoin-prove-itself-to-be-a-reliable-store-of-value-in-2020-experts-answer
Published Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 18:47:00 +0000

Did Bitcoin prove itself to be a reliable store of value in 2020? Experts answer
Did Bitcoin prove itself to be a reliable store of value in 2020? Experts answer was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/639058854279331840

2020 has provided the incentive to rethink our approach to money

2020 has provided the incentive to rethink our approach to money

2020 has provided the incentive to rethink our approach to money

2020 has been a year of upheaval throughout the world. Overshadowed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the events of this year brought forth new challenges no one was prepared for, upending the way we live, work, and transact. Early this year, global financial markets took a severe hit as stocks, commodities and even cryptocurrency prices fell. 

Against the backdrop of economic uncertainty and the declining value of the U.S. dollar, crypto assets are moving higher up the radar screens of commercial banks, hedge funds and other institutional investors. As we approach the end of a tumultuous year, it would be timely to recap the events that have been significant for the crypto industry this year, while looking ahead to new developments in 2021.

The DeFi boom

Unless you’ve had your head in the sand for most of 2020, you probably witnessed the explosive growth of the DeFi sector this year. Particularly with crypto lending and decentralized exchanges, which attracted an enormous amount of capital inflow in a very short period of time. DeFi applications have been running in parallel with legacy financial systems in the last few years, but the void left by traditional financial services during this crisis demonstrates the pressing need to move to a much wider adoption of DeFi services. In a world where cash payments are no longer welcome and people predominantly work from home and transact over the internet, the move to DeFi seems a natural one.

Related: Yield farming is a fad, but DeFi promises to change the way we interact with money

While there’s no denying the real potential of DeFi, one question we should be asking is: Will this growth be sustainable? As we’ve seen in the past with other subsectors of crypto, they tend to follow a cycle where, following exponential price increases of new tech platforms and protocol tokens, the market goes into profit-taking mode. This results in fast declining prices, which precedes a slow recovery phase. The platforms that have survived those volatile early stages are now slowly consolidating their positions as adoption increases, and token prices are starting to be driven by more fundamental criteria such as number of users and platform volumes.

As DeFi is still currently only experimented with by yield-seeking traders, it remains to be seen whether DeFi will chart the same path in 2021 and beyond; however, its transparent, highly liquid and flexible financial models certainly hold great potential to benefit the real economy at large.

Related: DeFi needs real-world adoption, not just disruptive pioneering

Seeing with fresh eyes

The economic rollercoaster of 2020 and high volatility of the financial markets have yet again cast a spotlight on Bitcoin (BTC) and its function as a store of value. This has attracted an increasingly large number of prominent financial players. While Bitcoin may not be used as a transactional currency anytime soon, it’s clear that Bitcoin still maintains its digital gold status and is now increasingly perceived as a credible store of value by mainstream market participants.

Large private and publicly-listed corporations are seen diversifying their treasury positions into Bitcoin as a way to hedge against the impending inflation and benefit from potential gains in Bitcoin’s price appreciation — most notably, Michael Saylors’s MicroStrategy, divesting $425 million into Bitcoin this September.

Related: Institutional investors won’t save crypto, but they will help it grow

What’s perhaps even more interesting is that we’re seeing the world’s central banks begin to warm to the world of crypto. While they have certainly watched the space from the sidelines with great interest, the COVID-19 crisis became a catalyst for them to act. In tandem with the Bank for International Settlements, several major central banks around the world took early steps in the right direction by publishing a report outlining a potential framework for introducing CBDCs as an alternative to cash.

Related: Central bank digital currencies and their role in the financial system

That said, significant technical and structural barriers must be overcome before any CBDCs become reality. To support these efforts, Mastercard created a virtual testing platform to allow central banks to assess and explore the implementation of national digital currencies, and is already beginning to test how it could incorporate CBDCs into its operations. PayPal has also marked its entry into the cryptocurrency market, enabling U.S.-based PayPal users to buy and sell digital currencies directly from their PayPal accounts.

Related: Will PayPal’s crypto integration bring crypto to the masses? Experts answer

Overall, it seems as though the blockchain and crypto industry is now being taken into consideration more seriously as a technology and an asset class by both private and public institutions, who are finally starting to realise that this industry will be here to stay for the long run.

Crypto in a post-COVID-19 world

Even before the global pandemic, there had been growing interest in the use of non-physical forms for cash; but when COVID-19 struck, it accelerated the shift towards remote, contactless payments, and the use of cash has fallen — this has all but strengthened the case for a digital payment system which, once merely thought of as just a convenience, is now more important than ever.

Related: Digitized Europe: The shift to a cashless world

Moreover, in places where people cannot access closed banks but are connected to the internet, donations made in cryptocurrencies could serve as a practical alternative to enabling more individuals to receive financial help, including some of the most disadvantaged. In addition, donating in crypto can make moving money across borders much easier and much faster, with much lower processing fees.

Related: Philanthropy: A missing catalyst of blockchain adoption

As a distributed ledger technology, blockchain also has a key role to play in the post-COVID-19 world. Trust-minimising blockchain solutions can be helpful when dealing with remote parties, as is the case during times when travel has become nearly nonexistent. To foster innovation and creativity within the tech community, blockchain hackathons could promote the development of blockchain-powered solutions with the potential to enable financial inclusion, reduce the digital divide and tackle the challenges posed by the pandemic.

Looking ahead to 2021

As we begin our recovery from perhaps the most dangerous health crisis that humanity has faced in a very long time, financial topics such as increasing global stimulus measures, ongoing market volatility and the looming spectre of a global currency reset are set to dominate the headlines in 2021. The current and upcoming financial crises triggered by the world’s governments reactions to stop the spread of COVID-19 have the potential to fast-forward the adoption of digital currencies.

Related: How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the crypto space? Experts answer

We see these macro events as the prime drivers for central banks as they work to develop their digital currency models. Looking ahead, the advent of CBDCs will represent a seminal point in terms of the maturation of the technology, providing the crypto industry with a plethora of new opportunities — and challenges — for the creation of next-generation smart open finance products and solutions that will cater to the yet untapped global mainstream audience.

In addition, with signs of strong growth in the nonfungible token space, we can also expect to see a growing number of artists, NFT creators, games and marketplaces joining the space. As the world becomes more and more digitalised, NFTs are primed to be the solution to the question of ownership in the virtual marketplace as well as a new source of revenue — particularly when on-site events and sales are unavailable or out of reach.

In such turbulent times, what is clear is that while the coronavirus pandemic presents many challenges, it is also a unique opportunity to rethink how trust-minimising solutions like blockchain can help us discern legitimate data from social media noise.

Title: 2020 has provided the incentive to rethink our approach to money
Sourced From: cointelegraph.com/news/2020-has-provided-the-incentive-to-rethink-our-approach-to-money
Published Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:43:12 +0000

2020 has provided the incentive to rethink our approach to money
2020 has provided the incentive to rethink our approach to money was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638994652077359104

These 2020 blockchain tech developments have set the stage for 2021

These 2020 blockchain tech developments have set the stage for 2021

These 2020 blockchain tech developments have set the stage for 2021

January will mark 12 years since the Bitcoin genesis block. In that time, blockchain technology has made many significant strides forward. The launch of Ethereum in 2015 introduced smart contracts and token minting. Subsequent years saw developments in areas, such as transaction privacy with the launch of Zcash (ZEC), platforms such as EOS and Tezos attempting to compete with Ethereum on scalability, and dozens of use cases being explored.

In particular, 2018 and 2019 were difficult years. Following Bitcoin’s fall from its all-time high in December 2017, it’s fair to say that the general appetite for blockchain and cryptocurrencies waned significantly during the long crypto winter. However, there was still plenty of innovation happening, which has started to become evident and pay off in 2020.

This year, several key themes have emerged that are poised to shape the blockchain landscape for 2021 and beyond. Here, Cointelegraph tracks 2020’s most significant developments in blockchain.

Platform and infrastructure development

Scalability, interoperability and privacy have been core themes in infrastructure development during 2020. Of course, scalability has already become an age-old topic in blockchain conversations. However, in previous years, the focus was on new platforms claiming to be more scalable than Ethereum. In 2020, the scalability focus shifted to Ethereum itself — in part because the first phase of the Ethereum 2.0 upgrade finally launched at the end of the year, but also because 2020 saw several critical milestones for Ethereum’s second-layer platforms.

With the Eth2 project still at least two years away from full implementation, it seems likely that second-layer platforms are set to thrive well into 2021.

Several platforms have put interoperability at the front of their development efforts this year. Early in 2020, Syscoin and RSK were two of the first platforms to launch a bridge allowing developers to send tokens back and forth to the Ethereum blockchain. Others were quick to follow suit, with Solana, NEAR Protocol, and Ontology also launching their own interoperability solutions using bridge technologies.

In other interoperability news, Polkadot launched its mainnet in May after several years in development. Much like how Eth2 is aiming to be, Polkadot is a sharded network that enables high throughput. However, the project places particular emphasis on its “heterogeneous sharding” mechanism for interoperability.

Whereas Eth2 will only allow its own shards to connect to the central beacon chain, Polkadot’s heterogeneous sharding supports any kind of blockchain, allowing other platforms such as Bitcoin or Ethereum to connect using bridges. Polkadot is already making its mark, sitting comfortably in the top-10 ranked cryptocurrencies and attracting significant interest from the DeFi developer community.

At the infrastructural level, interoperability has been perhaps the most significant focus area across the board in 2020. Therefore, we can surely expect to see more applications taking advantage of this technology in 2021 and beyond.

Blockchain privacy gets a boost

The ability to transact in private via blockchains received a boost this year, with the launch of two privacy-protecting mechanisms. In January, Monero announced Triptych, a new ring signatures construction that offers a greater degree of privacy protection by making it more difficult to detect genuine transactions among decoys. Triptych went live in September.

Elsewhere, Aztec Protocol, a layer-two, privacy-preserving network for Ethereum, launched its mainnet in February. In its first iteration, Aztec was using Zcash technology to enable “confidential tokens” that hide transaction values. However, in October, Aztec launched its 2.0 version, which uses zero-knowledge rollups in private smart contracts that also boost Ethereum’s scalability.

The Electric Coin Company, the operator of Zcash, announced in September that it was working with the Ethereum Foundation to develop the open-source “Halo 2.” It uses a variation of advanced zero-knowledge proofs used by Aztec. The shared research among Ethereum, Aztec and Zcash is proving to accelerate developments in blockchain privacy for the benefit of users across all platforms.

Smoothing the user experience

Poor user experience has long plagued the cryptocurrency and blockchain industry. There were finally some signs in 2020 that showed promise for the benefit of crypto newcomers in retail and institutions.

The most significant development in UX for retail crypto newcomers was undoubtedly the news that PayPal is integrating cryptocurrency. The payments giant opened its crypto buy-and-sell services to U.S. users in November. The next big development will be a merchant integration in early 2021, allowing users to spend their crypto holdings on goods and services, with 26 million merchants on the PayPal network. PayPal says it will handle all the fiat conversions on behalf of the customers, meaning merchants can avoid cryptocurrency’s volatility if they wish.

However, because poor UX has been an ongoing issue for blockchain-based applications and crypto wallets for many years now, the good news is that we’re seeing developments among more decentralized solutions, too. Argent, a new type of wallet that reached significant popularity in 2020, uses smart contracts to enable non-custodial wallets without requiring private keys. In addition to its security features, the wallet also features direct integrations with decentralized finance, including an integration with flagship DeFi yield app Yearn.finance.

Another example is Authereum, a wallet that builds on the first layer of non-custodial wallets such as MetaMask. Authereum offers all the security benefits of a decentralized wallet while providing users with an easy and familiar onboarding experience, using a simple username and password access, backed up by apps such as Google Authenticator. It also eliminates gas payments.

Expect to see further developments in UX in 2021 as developers seek to remove barriers to entry for new users in the face of competition from giants such as PayPal.

DeFi leads the way on application development

DeFi was the undisputed leader of the application pack in 2020, achieving meteoric growth from $675 million to over $15 billion in total value locked.

The growth was fueled by several developments. Early in the year, several platforms, such as Aave and Uniswap, joined dYdX in offering flash loans, enabling limitless uncollateralized lending in DeFi for the first time. A user can borrow funds, stake them in other protocols to earn a profit, and repay the loan, all in a single Ethereum transaction. If they fail to repay, the entire transaction becomes null and void. Despite several high-profile attacks, flash loans have remained extremely popular among arbitrageurs seeking to make a profit from variations in price among decentralized exchanges.

The launch of Uniswap V2 was also a landmark event, with improvements to its oracle functionality, the introduction of flash swaps, and subsequently, an $11-million investment from Andreessen Horowitz. By August, volumes on Uniswap had exceeded those on Coinbase Pro.

While Uniswap’s automated market makers, or AMMs, have been around several years now, 2020 also saw a slew of newer entrants, including Balancer and Curve Finance. Both launched with the aim of iterating on the AMM concept. For instance, Curve offers multi-token stable pools, while Balancer further iterated on the concept by allowing custom token ratios — as opposed to Uniswap’s rigid 50-50 liquidity pools. Others, such as 1inch and Bancor, made strides in dealing with issues like impermanent loss, the phenomenon where liquidity providers make fewer gains than a comparable portfolio.

Composability — DeFi’s secret sauce

The true driver of DeFi’s value in 2020 emerged from the fact that, combined, DeFi decentralized applications are greater than the sum of their individual parts. DeFi applications developed on Ethereum are composable, meaning that users are finding new ways to stack up these “money Legos” to offer new possibilities. Even on the simplest level, users can stake their ETH into Maker to take out a loan in Dai, which can earn them interest by lending on Compound. However, if users have the appetite for riskier strategies, such as margin trading, the possible configurations are endless.

DeFi developer Andre Cronje was one of the first to identify the need to make this feature more accessible, so he created Yearn.finance as the “gateway to DeFi.” Thanks to his efforts, Yearn has proven to be one of the most popular DeFi projects this year due to its features, which make DeFi’s composability both automated and accessible.

Decentralized governance also emerged as a key trend in 2020, after Compound unleashed its COMP token on the market in June. It immediately flew to the top of DeFi rankings.

While governance tokens are seeing a fair bit of speculation, it seems likely that decentralized governance will continue to rise in prominence over the next year. Nonetheless, some technological and economical issues need to be resolved in 2021, including the concentration of wealth, scalability and the proper way to implement governance proposals.

Digital Identity — A foundational challenge

Digital identity has long been identified as a strong potential use case for blockchain to rein in some of the excesses of personal data usage today. It is also becoming an ever more pressing issue for validating blockchain use cases. As member of Congress Bill Foster pointed out in October, cryptographic guarantees are worthless in the real world if the person behind them is a fraud.

Digital identity is already taking center stage as a test use case in the EU-sponsored European Blockchain Services Infrastructure. In Japan, Layer X is working on a blockchain-based voting system underpinned by digital identities.

This year, enterprise-focused Concordium burst onto the market, promising a platform that manages the trade-off between transaction privacy and the need for an identity solution. It uses off-chain identity verification combined with on-chain zero-knowledge proofs and an “anonymity revocation” process. The latter kicks in whenever there’s a legitimate legal order to identify a party to a transaction.

Other digital identity projects are also making significant headway. Oasis Labs announced in December that it was collaborating with BMW on a project focused on the privacy of user data. It allows internal and external parties to query user data without compromising privacy.

Decentralized identity platform Ontology has also focused on the motoring use case. In September, the team at Ontology showcased how its “ONT-ID” could be used to access vehicles and securely record driver data. However, Ontology’s ID also has applications in other areas, including a partnership with Waves on an e-voting solution.

Central Bank Digital Currencies gaining rapid traction post-Libra

With seeds sown in 2019, this year saw the popularity of CBDCs among central bankers worldwide explode perhaps in response to the 2019 events surrounding Facebook’s controversial plans for a proposed stablecoin initially called Libra but that has since been rebranded to Diem.

China has been trailblazing, although it’s still far from a blockchain-based solution. The People’s Bank of China launched a pilot version of the digital yuan in April and, by November, had processed over 4 million transactions totaling close to $300 million.

Despite European Central Bank head Christina Lagarde stating that the European Union won’t be “racing to be first” to issue a digital euro, the bloc seems likely to move ahead with its own CBDC following the outcome of a consultation in January 2021. However, based on an ECB executive’s comments, it could be a very long implementation period. Elsewhere, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Canada and Switzerland have all recently issued powerful indicators that they will move toward their own version of a central bank digital currency over the coming months and years.

Using blockchain tech against COVID-19

The global COVID-19 pandemic has cast a dark shadow over 2020. The emergence of several vaccines toward the end of the year has offered a glimmer of hope that “the new normal” may not be as permanent as it first seemed. However, blockchain technology seems set to play a role in managing the ongoing fight against COVID-19 and any other global pandemic that may arise in the near or distant future.

For instance, the aforementioned digital identity solutions could extend to “health passports” that convey a citizen’s immunity status, allowing a faster transition back to the pre-pandemic society. Privacy campaigners have understandably expressed concerns, but countries such as China and Singapore are already using blockchain technology to help generate verifiable health records.

The World Economic Forum has pointed to the effectiveness of using a blockchain in the global supply chain to distribute COVID-19 vaccines. IBM is also lending a helping hand and has expressed a similar viewpoint.

This year has seen a resurgence in blockchain development, along with the general appetite for cryptocurrencies and the advantages that the technology can bring. Whereas the last big boom of 2017 resulted in a bust phase and the long crypto winter of 2018 and 2019, there’s no reason to believe that this will happen again in 2021. Blockchain technology has progressed significantly since the last bull market, and the upcoming year is poised to continue delivering usable solutions for scalability, privacy and identity that may power the next major cycle of cryptocurrency adoption.

Title: These 2020 blockchain tech developments have set the stage for 2021
Sourced From: cointelegraph.com/news/these-2020-blockchain-tech-developments-have-set-the-stage-for-2021
Published Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 19:37:42 +0000

These 2020 blockchain tech developments have set the stage for 2021
These 2020 blockchain tech developments have set the stage for 2021 was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638968247087251456

Bitcoin mining: The next decade of sustainable crypto innovation begins today

Bitcoin mining: The next decade of sustainable crypto innovation begins today

Bitcoin mining: The next decade of sustainable crypto innovation begins today

Since the creation of the first cryptocurrency over a decade ago, many have often been skeptical of their legitimacy, with some even dismissing them as a fraud. But in 2020, this paradigm seemed to have shifted. What has emerged is a shared recognition that Bitcoin (BTC) and other digital assets are here to stay and that they will play a key role in the future of global finance. 

This is not some far-fetched vision reserved to crypto-anarchists — financial actors that were traditionally wary of cryptocurrencies are now expressing confidence in their disruptive potential. JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs, for instance, have recently reversed their initial opposition to cryptocurrencies, becoming some of the latest to offer new banking services and offerings for the digital assets market.

Related: Will PayPal’s crypto integration bring crypto to the masses? Experts answer

As optimism and appreciation for the long term potential of cryptocurrencies continue to grow, so will the opportunities for revenue expansion among players within the ecosystem. Bitcoin miners, for instance, saw their topline figures surge by close to 50% on a month-on-month basis in November, as Bitcoin prices rallied more than 60% to above $18,000 over the same time period. Yet, in a highly competitive environment, success has largely been confined to a few industry leaders while remaining elusive to many.

For miners, gaining access to highly advanced mining equipment — one that boasts the highest level of power and cost efficiencies, and the fastest processing speeds — remains the single most critical factor to securing a competitive edge.

Related: Cryptocurrency mining profitability in 2020: Is it possible?

The evolution

The crypto mining industry has undergone a succession of substantial transformations to arrive at today’s advanced technical state. In its early days, mining was done using simple computers without any complex or high-powered devices. General-purpose central processing units, or CPUs, were all it took to produce Bitcoin. This led to a rapid expansion of the Bitcoin network, as the allure of easy money prompted an influx of new entrants — so much so that these first-generation miners were unable to keep pace with demand, rendering them obsolete in just a year’s time.

Graphics processing units were introduced next and made mining Bitcoin more efficient and profitable. Combining several GPUs became a common sight, as miners sought to further increase their mining performance and capabilities while maximizing gains. Despite these advancements, second-generation miners did not stand the test of time due to their high energy consumption and lack of long-term efficacy.

In 2011, field-programmed gate arrays, or FPGAs, emerged as the next logical step of progression. They were fast, highly energy-efficient, offered better performance and easier cooling than their predecessors. Nonetheless, FPGA miners were short-lived and eventually replaced by ASICs, which, until today, remain the dominant technology for the Bitcoin mining industry. Designed, built and optimized for the sole purpose of mining, ASICs are recognized for their superior harmonization of power consumption, performance and cost — around a million times more energy efficient and 50 million times faster in mining Bitcoin than the CPUs used in 2009.

The road ahead

Indeed, crypto mining has come a long way. Aside from performance-related developments, there have also been notable improvements to the environmental aspect of the technology, such as higher energy efficiency and faster hash rates. With a growing emphasis on sustainability, this is a trend likely to continue as chip design providers look to develop innovative solutions to cater to this evolving demand.

Two main developmental areas come to mind. First, the reengineering of current mining hardware to radically utilize less energy; and, second, a reprogramming of current mining chips to allow the use of hybrid energy for optimal cost performance.

Reengineering of the current mining hardware. Already, there are several concepts out in the market that are being researched and rigorously put to test — one of them being the use of photonic chips to perform computing. In theory, the technology appears promising, with two to three orders of magnitude better energy efficiency over current electronic processors. Yet, in reality, it remains inconclusive as to whether the power savings are realizable, particularly as Bitcoin scales. Until then, ASICs and their ongoing enhancements will continue to dominate the crypto mining space and lead the charge on energy efficiency in crypto mining.

Reprogramming of the current mining chips. Against common belief, the crypto mining industry is a relatively green one. As of December 2019, Bitcoin was powered by over 70% of renewable electricity. While the benefits of using renewables are undisputed, the truth is that renewables are an intermittent source of energy and are not always reliable for Bitcoin miners, who have a constant energy requirement. Fossil fuel-based power, on the contrary, serves generally as a more steady source of energy. To strike a balance between the sustainability of the industry and sustainability more broadly, a hybrid model can be adopted, whereby renewables are used predominantly as an energy source, with fossil fuel-based power setting in during production shortages. This entails redesigning and reprogramming current mining chips to enable greater ease of toggling between the two variants of energy sources, with no disruption to the mining processes.

As cryptocurrencies continue to rise in prominence, so will the influx of competition from new providers wanting a slice of the pie. Healthy competition can be positive in that it can lead to more innovation that brings greater efficiencies and maturity to the industry. To fully capitalize on the growth of the nascent cryptocurrency market, however, incumbent chip designers will need to invest further into research and development, particularly in areas of energy optimization and power performance.

Title: Bitcoin mining: The next decade of sustainable crypto innovation begins today
Sourced From: cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-mining-the-next-decade-of-sustainable-crypto-innovation-begins-today
Published Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 19:37:00 +0000

Bitcoin mining: The next decade of sustainable crypto innovation begins today
Bitcoin mining: The next decade of sustainable crypto innovation begins today was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638877641977610240

Bringing carbon emissions reporting into the new age via blockchain

Bringing carbon emissions reporting into the new age via blockchain

Bringing carbon emissions reporting into the new age via blockchain

Blockchain for supply chain management is one of the most practical business applications for large, multi-party sectors seeking trust and transparency across daily operations. As such, the mining and metals sector has now started to leverage blockchain technology to effectively track carbon emissions across complex, global supply chains. 

This month, The World Economic Forum launched a proof-of-concept to trace carbon emissions across the supply chains of seven mining and metals firms. Known as the Mining and Metals Blockchain Initiative, or MMBI, this is a collaboration between the WEF and industry companies including Anglo American, Antofagasta Minerals, Eurasian Resources Group, Glencore, Klöckner & Co., Minsur, and Tata Steel.

Jörgen Sandström, head of the WEF’s Mining and Metals Industry, told Cointelegraph that the distributed nature of blockchain technology makes it the perfect solution for companies within the sector looking to trace carbon emissions:

“Forward-thinking organizations in the mining and metals space are starting to understand the disruptive potential of blockchain to solve pain points, while also recognizing that the industry-wide collaboration around blockchain is necessary.”

According to Sandström, many blockchain projects intended to support responsible sourcing have been bilateral, resulting in a fractured system. However, this new initiative from the WEF is driven entirely by the mining and metals industry and aims to demonstrate blockchain’s full potential to track carbon emissions across the entire value chain.

While vast, the current proof-of-concept is focused on tracing carbon emissions in the copper value chain, Sandström shared. He also explained that a private blockchain network powered by Dutch blockchain development company Kryha is being leveraged to track greenhouse gas emissions from the mine to the smelter and all the way to the original equipment manufacturer. Sandström mentioned that the platform’s vision is to create a carbon emissions blueprint for all essential metals, demonstrating mine-to-market-and-back via recycling.

To put things in perspective, according to a recent report from McKinsey & Company, mining is currently responsible for 4% to 7% of greenhouse gas emissions globally. The document states that Scope 1 and Scope 2 CO2 emissions from the sector (those incurred through mining operations and power consumption) amount to 1%, while fugitive-methane emissions from coal mining are estimated at 3% to 6%. Additionally, 28% of global emissions is considered Scope 3, or indirect emissions, including the combustion of coal.

Unfortunately, the mining industry has been slow to meet emission-reduction goals. The document notes that current targets published by mining companies range from 0% to 30% by 2030 — well below the goals laid out in the Paris Agreement. Moreover, the COVID-19 crisis has exacerbated the sector’s unwillingness to change. A blog post from Big Four firm Ernest & Young shows that decarbonization and a green agenda will be one of the biggest business opportunities for mining and metals companies in 2021, as these have become prominent issues in the wake of the pandemic. Sandström added:

“The industry needs to respond to the increasing demands of minerals and materials while responding to increasing demands by consumers, shareholders and regulators for a higher degree of sustainability and traceability of the products.”

Why blockchain?

While it’s clear that the mining and metals industry needs to reduce carbon emissions to meet sustainability standards and other goals, blockchain is arguably a solution that can deliver just that in comparison to other technologies.

This concept was outlined in detail in an NS Energy op-ed written by Joan Collell, a business strategy leader and the chief commercial officer at FlexiDAO, an energy technology software provider. He explained that Scope 1, 2 and 3 emission supply chains must all be measured accurately, requiring a high level of integration and coordination between multiple supply chain networks. He added:

“Different entities have to share the necessary data for the sustainability certification of products and to guarantee their traceability. This is an essential step, since everything that can be quantified is no longer a risk, but it becomes a management problem.”

According to Collel, data sharing has two main purposes: to provide transparency and traceability. Meanwhile, the main feature of a blockchain network is to provide transparency and traceability across multiple participants. On this, Collel noted: “The distributed ledger of blockchain can register in real time the consumption data of different entities across different locations and calculate the carbon intensity of that consumption.”

Collel also noted that a digital certificate outlining the amount of energy transferred can then be produced, showing exactly where and when emissions were produced. Ultimately, blockchain can provide trust, traceability and auditability across mining and metals supply chains, thus helping reduce carbon emissions.

Data challenges may hamper productivity

While blockchain may appear as the ideal solution for tracing carbon emissions across mining and metals supply chains, data challenges must be taken into consideration.

Sal Ternullo, co-lead for U.S. Cryptoasset Services at KPMG, told Cointelegraph that capturing data cryptographically across the entire value chain will indeed transform the ability to accurately measure the carbon intensity of different metals. “It’s all about the accuracy of source, the resulting data and the intrinsic value that can be verified end to end,” he said. However, Ternullo pointed out that data capture and validation are the hardest parts of this equation:

“Where, when, how (source-cadence-process) are issues that organizations are still grappling with. There are a number of blockchain protocols and solutions that can be configured to meet this use case but the challenge of data capture and validation is often not considered to the extent that it should be.”

According to Ternullo, the sector’s lack of clear standards on how emissions should be tracked further compounds these challenges. He mentioned that while some organizations have doubled down on the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board’s capture and reporting standard, there are several other standards that must be evaluated before an organization can proceed with automation, technology and analytical components that would make these processes transparent to both shareholders and consumers.

To his point, Sandström mentioned that the current proof-of-concept focused on tracing carbon emissions in the copper value chain demonstrates that participants can collaborate and test practical solutions to sustainability issues that cannot be resolved by individual companies. At the same time, Sandström stated that the WEF is sensitive to how data is treated and shared: “Having an industry approach enables us to focus on practical and finding viable ways to deliver on our vision.”

An industry approach is also helpful, with Ternullo explaining that an organization’s operating models for culture and technology must be aligned to ensure success. This is the case with all enterprise blockchain projects that require data sharing and new ways of collaboration, which may very well be easier to overcome when performed from an industry perspective.

Title: Bringing carbon emissions reporting into the new age via blockchain
Sourced From: cointelegraph.com/news/bringing-carbon-emissions-reporting-into-the-new-age-via-blockchain
Published Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:47:14 +0000

Bringing carbon emissions reporting into the new age via blockchain
Bringing carbon emissions reporting into the new age via blockchain was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638858764273008640

Why bitcoin adoption will speed up over the next decade

Why bitcoin adoption will speed up over the next decade

Why bitcoin adoption will speed up over the next decade

Quick take

1 minute read

Over the course of this year, mainstream adoption has been plentiful. Many people have looked towards the cryptocurrency industry as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic turmoil that came afterwards.

Over the course of this year, mainstream adoption has been plentiful. Many people have looked towards the cryptocurrency industry as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic turmoil that came afterwards.

With big mainstream financial players coming into the industry, the question must be asked as to how long it will take for bitcoin to become a day-to-day asset for everyone.

Brian Estes, the founder of the investment company known as Off The Chain Capital believes that there are about 10 years remaining until the leading cryptocurrency becomes “normal“ for everyone.

Speaking in an interview earlier this year with CT, Brian said:

“I think in 2029, 2030, when 90% of U.S. households and people in the United States use cryptocurrency and Bitcoin, then I think it becomes a stable part of the economy, and not just the U.S. economy, but I think the world economy.”

But where does he get his information from?

The reason behind Brian’s process is based on an analysis of the S-curve. For those that don’t know, this is a common graphical image that represents the acceleration and the overall process of adoption for new technologies such as blockchain or cryptocurrency. 

He further said:

“The amount of time it takes for a new technology to go from 0% adoption to 10% adoption is the same amount of time takes it to go from 10% adoption to 90% adoption.”

Interestingly, he highlighted that it took about one decade for the leading coin to go from 0 to 10% adoption. In hindsight, this makes a lot of sense as bitcoin is just over 11 years old at the time of writing and it was only in 2017 when it became mainstream after hitting $20,000.

For more news on this and other crypto updates, keep it with CryptoDaily

© 2020 CryptoDaily All Rights Reserved. This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Title: Why bitcoin adoption will speed up over the next decade
Sourced From: cryptodaily.co.uk/2020/12/why-bitcoin-adoption-will-speed-up
Published Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 13:45:13 +0000

Why bitcoin adoption will speed up over the next decade
Why bitcoin adoption will speed up over the next decade was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638832345316835328

The growth of Ethereum and how it has surpassed bitcoin as the biggest network

The growth of Ethereum and how it has surpassed bitcoin as the biggest network

The growth of Ethereum and how it has surpassed bitcoin as the biggest network

Quick Take

1 minute read

It seems that bitcoin is no longer the biggest network in the industry as Ethereum has been making a big name for itself in recent times growing its community and ecosystem.This is according to a recent report by Electric Capital. 

It seems that bitcoin is no longer the biggest network in the industry as Ethereum has been making a big name for itself in recent times growing its community and ecosystem.

This is according to a recent report by Electric Capital. The paper from the venture capital company was written by Maria Shen, a partner at the Business. More than 300 developers are getting ready to join the Ethereum network on a monthly basis and with such a large number of minds coming together on a project like this, it speaks volumes for the network and its future. Especially as many people are choosing ethereum over bitcoin and its own network.

Over the course of this year, it is good to see that the network has grown so massively during so much turmoil. Of course, with traditional markets taking a big hit following the coronavirus pandemic this year, crypto is an alternative that many have turned towards. Despite many people going towards this network, there are others who believe that bitcoin is still more active and the best ecosystem to be a part of. According to the venture capital company though, this couldn’t be any further from the truth.

The whole point of the report was to look into the results after looking at numerous blockchain-based cryptocurrency ecosystems. To be classed as actively contributing to the network, a developer would need to work on something related to the blockchain consistently. To that end, Ethereum is four times more active than the bitcoin network.

A big part of the Ethereum network is decentralised finance (DeFi) projects. These kinds of projects have been cropping up all over the mystery in recent times and as a result, activity on the network has increased massively.

Over the course of the next year, the network is expected to grow even more. Especially with the recent launch of the 2.0 upgrade.

For more news on this and other crypto updates, keep it with CryptoDaily

© 2020 CryptoDaily All Rights Reserved. This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Title: The growth of Ethereum and how it has surpassed bitcoin as the biggest network
Sourced From: cryptodaily.co.uk/2020/12/growth-of-ethereum-how-it-surpassed-bitcoin-as-biggest-network
Published Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 13:45:10 +0000

The growth of Ethereum and how it has surpassed bitcoin as the biggest network
The growth of Ethereum and how it has surpassed bitcoin as the biggest network was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638813462288613376

Ethereum Price Analysis: After 18% From Yesterday’s Low, Is $800 In Sight For ETH?

Ethereum Price Analysis: After 18% From Yesterday’s Low, Is $800 In Sight For ETH?

Ethereum Price Analysis: After 18% From Yesterday’s Low, Is $800 In Sight For ETH?

ETH/USD – Ethereum Bulls Print Fresh 2020 Highs Above $700

Key Support Levels: $720, $700, $675.
Key Resistance Levels: $750, $762, $780.

Yesterday, Ethereum finally penetrated beyond the $675 resistance provided by a bearish .786 Fib Retracement. It managed to spike above $700, but the bears stepped in to cause the daily candle to close around $680.

Today, the ETH bulls continue to drive further higher as they penetrated beyond $700 again to reach as high as $738. It has since dropped slightly as the buyers battle to break the $733 resistance (1.414 Fib Extension). In any case, the cryptocurrency increased substantially from yesterday’s low at $625.

ETH/USD Daily Chart. Source: TradingView

ETH-USD Short Term Price Prediction

Looking ahead, if the bulls break $733, the first level of strong resistance lies at $750 (bearish .886 Fib Retracement). This is followed by $762, $780, $790 (1.272 Fib Extension), and $800.

On the other side, the first level of support lies at $720. After that, there’s $700, $675, $665, and $641 (.382 Fib).

The RSI is above the mid-line as the buyers dominate the market momentum and are still far from being overbought. Additionally, the Stochastic RSI produced a bullish crossover signal a few days ago and still has room to continue further before becoming overbought.

ETH/BTC – ETH Continues Rebound From 0.024 BTC.

Key Support Levels: 0.0262 BTC, 0.026 BTC, 0.025 BTC.
Key Resistance Levels: 0.027 BTC, 0.0275 BTC, 0.028 BTC.

Against Bitcoin, Ethereum had dropped into the 0.024 BTC support yesterday, where it managed to rebound higher. In fact, ETH briefly dropped beneath 0.023 BTC yesterday, but the buyers regrouped to allow the daily candle to close above 0.026 BTC.

Today, the bulls continued to drive ETH higher as they penetrated back above the November lows 0.0262 BTC to reach as high as 0.0275 BTC. The sellers have since dropped the price as ETH now trades near the 0.0269 BTC resistance (bearish .382 Fib Retracement).

ETH/BTC Daily Chart. Source: TradingView

ETH-BTC Short Term Price Prediction

Beyond 0.027 BTC, the first level of resistance is expected at 0.0275 BTC. This is followed by 0.028 BTC, 0.0282 BTC (bearish .5 Fib), and 0.0284 BTC (Feb 2020 highs). Added resistance lies at 0.0287 BTC and 0.0295 BTC.

On the other side, the first level of support lies at 0.0262 BTC. This is followed by 0.026 BTC, 0.025 BTC, and 0.0245 BTC (Jul 2020 lows). Added support lies at 0.024 BTC and 0.0237 BTC.

The RSI is at the mid-line as indecision looms within the market. It will need to cross this line for the bullish momentum to take control of the market movement. The Stochastic RSI recently produced a bullish crossover signal, which is a promising signal for ETH holders.

Title: Ethereum Price Analysis: After 18% From Yesterday’s Low, Is $800 In Sight For ETH?
Sourced From: cryptopotato.com/ethereum-price-analysis-after-18-from-yesterdays-low-is-800-in-sight-for-eth/
Published Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 13:44:31 +0000

Ethereum Price Analysis: After 18% From Yesterday’s Low, Is $800 In Sight For ETH?
Ethereum Price Analysis: After 18% From Yesterday’s Low, Is $800 In Sight For ETH? was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638790814745690112

Did CBDCs affect the crypto space in 2020, and what’s next in 2021? Experts answer

Did CBDCs affect the crypto space in 2020, and what’s next in 2021? Experts answer
Did CBDCs affect the crypto space in 2020, and what’s next in 2021? Experts answer

Authentication failed. Unique API key is not valid for this user.

Did CBDCs affect the crypto space in 2020, and what’s next in 2021? Experts answer
Did CBDCs affect the crypto space in 2020, and what’s next in 2021? Experts answer was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638722872660131841

SEC vs. Ripple: A predictable but undesirable development

SEC vs. Ripple: A predictable but undesirable development

SEC vs. Ripple: A predictable but undesirable development

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has not been kind to crypto in the past year. In March 2020, in the SEC v. Telegram case, the Commission won a worldwide injunction against the proposed issuance of Grams by Telegram, undoing years of innovative work even in the absence of any allegations of fraud. Then, on the last day of September 2020, Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein dashed the hopes of Kik Interactive by ruling in favor of the SEC’s motion for summary judgment in SEC v. Kik Interactive, halting the sale of Kin crypto tokens. Both of these actions were filed in the Southern District of New York. On Dec. 22, 2020, the SEC decided that it was time to initiate another high-profile action, filing in the same district against Ripple Labs and its initial and current CEOs, Christian Larsen and Bradly Garlinghouse, respectively, for raising more than $1.38 billion through the sale of XRP since 2013.

The initial fallout from this action has been swift and severe: 24 hours after the lawsuit was filed, the price of XRP was down almost 25%. This still left XRP ranked fourth on CoinMarketCap, with a total market capitalization of over $10.5 billion.

The complaint

In its complaint, the Commission paints a straightforward pattern of sales of XRP that were never registered with the SEC or made pursuant to any exemption from registration. From the perspective of the Commission, this amounts to a sustained practice of illegal sales of unregistered, non-exempt securities under Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933.

For readers not familiar with legal procedure, it might seem unusual for the case to be brought in a New York federal court, especially since Ripple is headquartered in California, and both named individuals reside there. However, Ripple has an office in the Southern District of that state, some statements were made by Garlinghouse while he was present in New York, and significant sales of XRP were made to New York residents. In legal parlance, this would make venues in the Southern District of New York appropriate.

In addition, it might be surprising to some that both Larsen and Garlinghouse were named personally in an action that seeks primarily to recover for XRP allegedly sold illegally by Ripple, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, XRP II LLC. They are named both because they individually also sold significant volumes of XRP — 1.7 billion by Larsen and 321 million by Garlinghouse — and because the SEC contends they “aided and abetted” Ripple in its sales.

Aiding and abetting is a cause of action that depends on a primary violation by a third party, in which the aider and abettor voluntarily and knowingly participates with the goal of assisting in the venture’s success. In this case, Ripple would be the primary violator, and both Larsen and Garlinghouse are alleged to have substantially participated in the pattern of Ripple’s XRP sales, with the goal of allowing the company to raise funds without registering XRP under the federal securities laws or complying with any available exemption from registration.

The bulk of the complaint provides an overview of digital assets, details the SEC’s version of the history of Ripple and its marketing efforts with regard to XRP, illustrates how in the opinion of the Commission, XRP satisfies the elements of the Howey investment contract test under the federal securities laws, and seeks to demonstrate how Larsen and Garlinghouse participated in the on-going sales efforts.

In addition to disgorgement of all “ill-gotten gains,” the requested order would permanently ban the named defendants from ever selling unregistered XRP or participating in any way in the sale of unregistered, non-exempt securities. It would also prohibit them from participating in the offering of any digital asset securities, and it seeks unspecified civil monetary penalties.

brief history of Ripple and XRP

The idea behind the current XRP dates back to late 2011 or early 2012, before the company changed its name to Ripple. The XRP Ledger, or software code, operates as a peer-to-peer database, spread across a network of computers that records data about transactions, among other things. In order to achieve consensus, each server on the network evaluates proposed transactions from a subset of nodes it trusts not to defraud it. Those trusted nodes are known as the server’s unique node list, or UNL. Although each server defines its own trusted nodes, the XRP Ledger requires a high degree of overlap between the trusted nodes chosen by each server. To facilitate this overlap, Ripple publishes a proposed UNL.

Upon the completion of the XRP Ledger in December 2012, and as its code was being deployed to the servers that would run it, a fixed supply of 100 billion XRP was set and created at little cost. Of those XRP, 80 billion were transferred to Ripple and the remaining 20 billion XRP went to a group of founders, including Larsen. At this point in time, Ripple and its founders controlled 100% of XRP.

Note that these choices represent a compromise between the fully decentralized, peer-to-peer network that was envisioned when Bitcoin (BTC) was first announced and a fully centralized network with a single trusted intermediary such as a conventional financial institution. In addition, Bitcoin was never designed or intended to be held or controlled by a single entity. In contrast, all XRP was originally issued to the company that created it and that company’s founders. This hybrid approach to a blockchain-based digital asset and more conventional assets created and controlled by a single entity led some crypto enthusiasts to complain that XRP was not a “true” cryptocurrency at all.

According to the SEC’s complaint, from 2013 through 2014, Ripple and Larsen made efforts to create a market for XRP by having Ripple distribute approximately 12.5 billion XRP through bounty programs that paid programmers compensation for reporting problems in the XRP Ledger’s code. As part of these calculated steps, Ripple distributed small amounts of XRP — typically between 100 and 1,000 XRP per transaction — to anonymous developers and others to establish a trading market for XRP.

Ripple then began more systematic efforts to increase speculative demand and trading volume for XRP. Starting in at least 2015, Ripple decided that it would seek to make XRP a “universal [digital] asset” for banks and other financial institutions to effect money transfers. According to the SEC, this meant that Ripple needed to create an active, liquid XRP secondary trading market. It, therefore, expanded its efforts to develop a use for XRP while increasing sales of XRP into the market.

At about this time, Ripple Labs, and its subsidiary, XRP II LLC, came under investigation by the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, acting pursuant to its mandates in the Bank Secrecy Act, or BSA. Acting in conjunction with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California, the two companies were charged with failing to comply with various BSA requirements, including failure to register with FinCEN and failure to implement and maintain proper Anti-Money Laundering and Know Your Customer protocols. According to FinCEN, Ripple’s failure to comply with these FinCEN requirements was facilitating the use of XRP by money launderers and terrorists.

This action did not proceed to trial, with Ripple Labs settling the charges by agreeing to pay a $700,000 fine and further agreeing to take immediate remedial steps to bring the companies into compliance with BSA requirements. The settlement was announced by FinCEN on May 5, 2015. The major contention of FinCEN throughout its investigation was that XRP was a digital currency. Ripple acceded to this position and has since worked to comply with BSA requirements.

At the same time, as noted in the SEC’s complaint, from 2014 through the third quarter of 2020, the company sold at least 8.8 billion XRP in the market and institutional sales, raising approximately $1.38 billion to fund its operations. In addition, the complaint asserts that from 2015 through at least March 2020, while Larsen was an affiliate of Ripple as its CEO and later chairman of the board, Larsen and his wife sold over 1.7 billion XRP to public investors in the market. Larsen and his wife netted at least $450 million from those sales. From April 2017 through December 2019, while an affiliate of Ripple as CEO, Garlinghouse sold over 321 million XRP he had received from Ripple to public investors in the market, generating approximately $150 million from those sales.

XRP is not like Bitcoin or Ether

The preceding description paints a picture of a digital asset that is widely held by persons scattered around the globe. In the case of both Bitcoin and Ether (ETH), this kind of decentralization was apparently enough to convince the SEC that those two digital assets should not be regulated as securities. As Director Bill Hinman of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance explained in June of 2018:

“If the network on which the token or coin is to function is sufficiently decentralized — where purchasers would no longer reasonably expect a person or group to carry out essential managerial or entrepreneurial efforts — the assets may not represent an investment contract. Moreover, when the efforts of the third party are no longer a key factor for determining the enterprise’s success, material information asymmetries recede. As a network becomes truly decentralized, the ability to identify an issuer or promoter to make the requisite disclosures becomes difficult, and less meaningful. […] The network on which Bitcoin functions is operational and appears to have been decentralized for some time, perhaps from inception. Applying the disclosure regime of the federal securities laws to the offer and resale of Bitcoin would seem to add little value.”

This kind of analysis does not really work for XRP, most of which continues to be owned by the company that created it, where the company continues to have significant influence over which nodes will serve as trusted validators for transactions, and where the company continues to play a significant role in the profitability and viability of the asset. Part of that role will now, of course, involve responding to this latest SEC initiative.

The court’s probable reaction

Unfortunately for Ripple and its former and current CEOs, the SEC has a strong case that XRP fits within the Howey investment contract test. Derived from the 1946 Supreme Court decision in SEC v. W. J. Howey, this test holds that you have bought a security if you: (1) make an investment (2) of money or something else of value, (3) in a common enterprise, (4) with the expectation of profits, (5) from the essential managerial efforts of others. Most of the purchasers of XRP, or certainly a very large number of them, would appear to fit within each of these categories.

Ripple raised more than $1.38 billion from the sale of XRP, so it is abundantly clear that purchasers were paying something of value. Moreover, as there was no effort to limit purchasers to the amount of XRP that they might reasonably “use” for anything other than investment purposes, that element appears likely to be present as well. The fact that the fortunes of all the investors rise and fall together along with the value of XRP in the marketplace should satisfy the commonality requirement.

The complaint highlights a number of things that Ripple has done to promote profitability, including statements that it has made, all of which suggest that a reason for purchasing XRP is the potential for appreciation. The limited functionality of XRP in comparison to its trading supply is another reason to believe that most purchasers were buying for investment, seeking to make a profit.

Finally, the significant on-going involvement and role of the company, especially given its huge continuing ownership interest in XRP, means that there is a strong case to be made that the profitability of XRP is highly dependent on the efforts of Ripple. All of this points to the reality that, under the Howey Test, XRP is likely to be a security.

Ripple’s response to the SEC’s action

Ripple’s response to the SEC’s enforcement action came even before the SEC’s complaint was officially filed. On Dec. 21, Garlinghouse tweeted out a condemnation of the SEC’s planned action, criticizing the agency for picking favorites and trying to “limit US innovation in the crypto industry to BTC and ETH.” Soon after, Ripple’s general counsel, Stuart Alderoty, gave a strong indication of how the company was likely to respond in the pending matter by pointing out the 2015 FinCEN issue, which he claimed was a government determination that XRP was a digital currency rather than a security under the Howey Test.

Unfortunately, classification as a digital currency does not necessarily preclude regulation as a security. As another New York district court decided in the 2018 case of CFTC v. McDonnell, in the context of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s authority to regulate digital assets, “Federal agencies may have concurrent or overlapping jurisdiction over a particular issue or area.”

Thus, even though FinCEN regulates crypto as a digital asset, the CFTC may treat it as a commodity; the SEC may regulate it as a security; and the Internal Revenue Service may tax it as property. All at the same time.

Conclusion

This comment should not be taken as approval of the SEC’s current approach and relative hostility to crypto offerings. As the SEC’s complaint notes, the XRP sales that are now being questioned took place over many years. The initial sales date back to 2013, which had happened considerably before the SEC first publicly announced its position that digital assets should be regulated as securities if they fit within the Howey investment contract analysis, which did not come until 2017 with The DAO Report. Moreover, since 2015, Ripple has been proceeding in accordance with the settlement reached with FinCEN. Since that time, Ripple has worked to bring its operations into compliance with BSA requirements, operating as if XRP is a currency rather than a security.

The opinions expressed are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University or its affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

Title: SEC vs. Ripple: A predictable but undesirable development
Sourced From: cointelegraph.com/news/sec-vs-ripple-a-predictable-but-undesirable-development
Published Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 17:17:00 +0000

SEC vs. Ripple: A predictable but undesirable development
SEC vs. Ripple: A predictable but undesirable development was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638696435135774720

The pandemic year ends with a tokenized carbon cap-and-trade solution

The pandemic year ends with a tokenized carbon cap-and-trade solution

The pandemic year ends with a tokenized carbon cap-and-trade solution

It has been a blazing start to a new decade, with 13% more large, uncontrolled wildfires around the world this year compared with 2019. This has spelled dire consequences for CO2 levels, which have made worse a terrible COVID-19 pandemic that has led to unprecedented worldwide lockdowns that have rapidly pushed the economy toward digitization.

Related: How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the crypto space? Experts answer

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments around the world have been forced to focus on integrating blockchain technology into their financial services. At the 75th anniversary of the United Nations General Assembly, Sky Guo, a founding member of the Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum and co-founder of Cypherium — an enterprise-focused platform facilitating interoperability between blockchains and central bank digital currencies, or CBDCs — discussed how the next generation of foreign policy leaders can leverage emerging digital technologies to solve the world’s most pressing challenges, given that 80% of world central banks are evaluating adopting CBDCs.

Related: Not like before: Digital currencies debut amid COVID-19

Switching to CBCDs and a world financial infrastructure that heavily relies on blockchain technology can nevertheless have a formidable impact on CO2 levels all over the world if the electricity used for energy is produced from coal or other fossil fuels that cause the highest levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gas pollution.

Related: The need to report carbon emissions amid the coronavirus pandemic

According to the study “The Carbon Footprint of Bitcoin,” conducted by researchers from the Technical University of Munich and MIT, Bitcoin (BTC) mining alone generates between 23.6 and 28.8 megatons in CO2 emissions each year, which contributes to climate change. The world’s CO2 levels hit new highs last year, a trend that is expected to repeat itself in 2020 despite coronavirus-related lockdowns that have forced a global industrial slowdown, according to a recent report published by the World Meteorological Organization.

In the time of the global pandemic, the economy will continue to digitize. So, the best way to avoid climate change is by adopting a climate policy that limits emissions and puts a price on them, according to the Environmental Defense Fund.

Carbon credits and markets are frequently incorporated into national and international efforts to mitigate increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere by putting a price on them. Experts often debate the pros and cons:

A carbon tax directly establishes a price on greenhouse gas emissions, so companies are charged fees that accumulate for every ton of emissions they produce.A cap-and-trade/energy-trading system issues a set number of emissions “allowances” each year that can be auctioned to the highest bidder as well as traded on secondary markets, thereby creating a carbon price.

Blockchain technology can be used to track carbon credits — a generic term for any tradable certificate or permit representing the right to emit one ton of CO2 — to reduce environmental pollution and carbon emissions, according to the report “Blockchain of Carbon Trading for UN Sustainable Development Goals.”

World’s first tradable carbon token

The Universal Protocol Alliance, a coalition of leading blockchain companies and crypto firms, launched the world’s first tradable carbon token on a public blockchain, dubbed Universal Carbon (UPCO2). It can be bought and held as an investment or burned to offset an individual’s carbon footprint. Each token represents one year-ton of CO2 emissions that have been prevented by a certified REDD+ project preventing rainforest loss or degradation. It is backed by a Voluntary Carbon Unit, a digital certificate issued by Verra — an international standards agency — that enables projects to turn their greenhouse gas reductions into carbon credits that can be traded.

As Juan Pablo Thieriot, co-founder of the UPA and CEO of Uphold, explained:

“This year may go down as the key inflection point for climate change. The year it went from a far-off issue enshrined in distant accords like Kyoto and Paris, to an existential threat affecting the lives of tens of millions of people. In recent months, we’ve seen Australia and California on fire, ever more powerful hurricanes, the U.S. president-elect Joe Biden announcing a Climate Administration, and companies such as Apple, Microsoft, and Nike voluntarily committing to carbon neutrality.”

He also added that “Combating climate change is likely to become the dominant economic issue of the next 20 years.”

The UPCO2 token could lead to the establishment of a global clearing price for tokenized carbon credits by allowing market mechanisms to drive industrial and commercial processes in the direction of low emissions or less carbon-intensive approaches, as the supply of carbon credits in 2020 has only represented 22% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the World Bank.

Cap-and-trade programs of the top six CO2-emitting countries/regions of the world

Cap-and-trade programs use market forces to reduce emissions cost-effectively. This stands in contrast to “command-and-control” approaches where the government determines performance standards or technology choices for individual facilities. It also differs from a carbon tax in that it provides a high level of certainty about future emissions but not about the price of those emissions (carbon taxes do the inverse).

With cap-and-trade programs, the market determines a price on carbon, which drives investment and market innovation. It is the preferable policy when a jurisdiction has a specified emissions target, such as set by the Paris Agreement. There are a number of studies that have reviewed the success of cap-and-trade programs by identifying some key issues from the top six CO2-emitting countries/regions in the world.

China

China launched the initial phase of a national carbon market in 2017 with help from the Environmental Defence Fund to limit and reduce CO2 emissions from factories and other industries in a cost-effective manner. This year, China’s Ministry of Ecology and Environment moved closer to completing the launch of the market, releasing draft rules — in addition to registry and settlement regulations — for its national energy trading system.

The emissions trading scheme, or ETS, will initially cover coal- and gas-fired power plants.

Based on the plant’s power generation output, it will allocate allowances, or permits, and each fuel and technology will have different benchmarks. The ETS is expected to be the world’s largest and expand to seven additional sectors, covering one-seventh of worldwide CO2 emissions from fossil fuels. A report by the International Energy Agency dubbed “China’s Emissions Trading Scheme: Designing efficient allowance allocation” makes policy recommendations for China’s ETS.

Related: How the biggest CO2 polluter is becoming the world’s leading producer of solar panels

United States

Efforts in the United States to create a nationwide cap-and-trade system in 2009 proved unsuccessful. Instead, 10 states now participate in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a cap-and-trade program established in 2009, while California has operated a cap-and-trade program since 2013 that is linked with a program in Quebec, Canada.

A study published by the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements dubbed “Carbon Taxes vs. Cap and Trade: Theory and Practice” argues that an economywide carbon pricing system is essential for any U.S. national policy that seeks to achieve meaningful, cost-effective reductions in CO2 emissions. Another study by the World Resources Institute titled “Putting a Price on Carbon: Reducing Emissions” finds that a well-designed carbon tax or cap-and-trade program could be the centerpiece of U.S. efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Related: Is US environmental tax policy hindering solar power to fuel digital technologies?

European Union

The European Union has the world’s first, and its largest, major carbon market. Its ETS is at the core of its policy for fighting climate change, and it is one of the most important tools at its disposal for the cost-effective reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

A study titled “Personal carbon trading: a review of research evidence and real-world experience of a radical idea” points out that personal carbon trading, a catch-all term for multiple downstream cap-and-trade policies, is an innovative CO2 mitigation approach. It seeks to limit a society’s carbon emissions by engaging individuals in the process, and it is able to cover over 40% of national carbon emissions by combining various mechanisms to drive socioeconomic and psychological behavioral change.

Another study dubbed “The European Union Emissions Trading System reduced CO2 emissions despite low prices” points out that the prices produced by carbon markets are often considered too low relative to the social cost associated with carbon, but nevertheless, the EU’s ETS resulted in a 3.8% reduction of total EU-wide emissions.

Related: Green policy and crypto energy consumption in the EU

India

In 2019, the Indian state of Gujarat launched the first-ever emissions trading system for particulate pollution. It serves as a pilot for the rest of India, as well as the world, and a means of reducing air pollution and facilitating economic growth. Additionally, leading companies in India set up their own carbon pricing mechanisms in a three-phase process. India’s emissions trading systems were reviewed in a report prepared by the Environment Defence Fund titled “India: An Emissions Trading Case Study.”

Related: India is fostering a solarized digital future

Russia

Currently, there is no cap-and-trade carbon pricing mechanism in Russia. A study dubbed “Carbon Tax or Cap-and-Trade for Russia? Evidence from RICE Model and Other Considerations” states that Russia should select a carbon tax over a cap-and-trade system due to political, economic and historical factors, but it concludes that Russia is unlikely to take decisive action to tackle climate change in the near future.

Related: Russia leads multinational stablecoin initiative

Japan

Japan has had a cap-and-trade program in place for Tokyo since 2010. A study titled “The impact of the Tokyo emissions trading scheme (ETS) on office buildings: what factor contributed to the emission reduction?” evaluates Tokyo’s ETS, which was the first emissions trading program for greenhouse gas emissions from office buildings.

While the government of Tokyo called the ETS successful, not everyone believes that it was the driving force behind the nation’s emission reductions. Some have argued that it was actually due to the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, which resulted in increased electricity prices. In the aforementioned study, researchers conducted an econometric analysis using a facility-level data set for Japanese office buildings, finding that half of the emission reduction resulted from the ETS, while the other half was a result of the electricity price increases.

Related: Japan to solarize its burgeoning digital economy

Conclusion

As Patricia Espinosa, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, pointed out: “COVID-19 hasn’t put climate change on hold.”

And as Alexandre Gellert Paris of the UNFCCC explained:

“As countries, regions, cities and businesses work to rapidly implement the Paris Climate Change Agreement, they need to make use of all innovative and cutting-edge technologies available. Blockchain could contribute to greater stakeholder involvement, transparency and engagement and help bring trust and further innovative solutions in the fight against climate change, leading to enhanced climate actions.”com. Every investment and trading move involves risk, you should conduct your own research when making a decision.

Title: The pandemic year ends with a tokenized carbon cap-and-trade solution
Sourced From: cointelegraph.com/news/the-pandemic-year-ends-with-a-tokenized-carbon-cap-and-trade-solution
Published Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:27:00 +0000

The pandemic year ends with a tokenized carbon cap-and-trade solution
The pandemic year ends with a tokenized carbon cap-and-trade solution was originally published here https://dailynwssheet.tumblr.com/post/638651141287280640