Places that accept bitcoin - Spend Bitcoins

Litecoin

For discussion about Litecoin, the leading cryptocurrency derived from Bitcoin. Litecoin is developed with a focus on speed, efficiency, and wider initial coin distribution through the use of scrypt-based mining.
[link]

Places in the UK that accept bitcoins - nice resource

Places in the UK that accept bitcoins - nice resource submitted by Bitcoin-Yoda to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Places in the UK that accept bitcoins - nice resource

Places in the UK that accept bitcoins - nice resource submitted by HiIAMCaptainObvious to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

[video] Recorded 3 years ago at the first place that accepted bitcoin in the UK

[video] Recorded 3 years ago at the first place that accepted bitcoin in the UK submitted by BitcoinVideo to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

I've added a page to my website listing places in the UK that accept bitcoins and offer a discount

I've added a page to my website listing places in the UK that accept bitcoins and offer a discount submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

[video] Recorded 3 years ago at the first place that accepted bitcoin in the UK

submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAllTV [link] [comments]

[video] Recorded 3 years ago at the first place that accepted bitcoin in the UK

[video] Recorded 3 years ago at the first place that accepted bitcoin in the UK submitted by BitcoinAllBot to BitcoinAll [link] [comments]

Is this guy trying to scam me? Should I report him?

This morning, I had a guy (UK) reach out to me (USA) on Instagram. No mutuals, no reason us to be connected. After a few short messages, here's what he sent to me:
"I'm (name) and I work with a financial growth institute on Forex, I'm a professional Forex trader with 11 years experience where I'm able to achieve success where others find it difficult. ForexTrade is the fastest growing and easiest growing online trade very beneficial to everyone interested. It is trade made on Gold, Bitcoin, currencies, as well as cryptocurrencies (digital currency) and the stocks when there would be a rose or fall and it would be safe to buy or sell. You don't need any skill to do it because we are professional traders and account managers and study the stocks market and know when it's safe to sell or buy when favourable to your gain.
Forex trading is one of the highest paid investment treasury in the world, it is a lucrative platform worth trillions of dollars and you can earn tremendous profits with good experience in Forex trading. Here you can make twice your investment, no experience needed. Let's say I start trading on Forex with $5000, I'm sure to get a profit of $15000 at the end of every week or 21 days at most."
Me: "Cool, what's your role?"
Him: "I offer trading account management services with tutoring where you'll be able to watch your forex live trading account progression with each day I manage and trade your account. I charge a 20% commission of the total profits I make trading on your Forex live account.
I googled "Forex scam" and couldn't find too much online. I'm really suspicious for a few reasons:
  1. A lot of what he says seems like stringing along buzzwords in an effort to wow me. "Bitcoin... as well as cryptocurrencies" But bitcoin IS a cyrptocurrency...? Also what even is a financial growth institute?
  2. Why can't I find him on LinkedIn? That seems like an obvious place to be if you're trying to expand your network (and a whole lot more reasonable than Instagram)
  3. If we "don't need any skill to do it", why do I need to pay him 20% commission? Surely I could find someone else who will do it for less or do it myself?
  4. His Instagram says he has 8000 followers, following 7000 people. But his first post is from *3 days ago* and none of them has more than 80 likes. To me, it looks like he's bought most of his followers. Also just looking through a few of their profiles, none of them appear to be British.
  5. He seems very certain of his ability to succeed. That certainty seems misplaced for a few reasons.
  6. He has no reason to reach out to me. When I accepted his message request, I thought he had found me on Tinder or something. But no, he just saw that I'm military and I'd liked some pictures on a military page (which FUCK THIS GUY WITH A SPATULA if he's trying to scam fellow service members out of money).
So anyway. If this is a scam (which I am leaning toward yes), my follow-up would be:
  1. Can I report him to Instagram? Will anything be done?
  2. What else could I do? If he's actively targeting the military, I want to bring this guy down.
submitted by TheStairsGoUp to NoStupidQuestions [link] [comments]

Why we need to think more carefully about what money is and how it works

Most of us have overlooked a fundamental problem that is currently causing an insurmountable obstacle to building a fairer and more sustainable world. We are very familiar with the thing in question, but its problematic nature has been hidden from us by a powerful illusion. We think the problem is capitalism, but capitalism is just the logical outcome of aggregate human decisions about how to manage money. The fundamental problem is money itself, or more specifically general purpose money and the international free market which allows you to sell a chunk of rainforest and use the money to buy a soft drink factory. (You can use the same sort of money to sell anything and buy anything, anywhere in the world, and until recently there was no alternative at all. Bitcoin is now an alternative, but is not quite what we are looking for.) The illusion is that because market prices are free, and nobody is forced into a transaction, those prices must be fair – that the exchange is equitable. The truth is that the way the general money globalised free market system works means that even though the prices are freely determined, there is still an unequal flow of natural resources from poor parts of the world to rich parts. This means the poor parts will always remain poor, and resources will continue to accumulate in the large, unsustainable cities in rich countries. In other words, unless we re-invent money, we cannot overturn capitalism, and that means we can't build a sustainable civilisation.
Why does this matter? What use is it realising that general purpose money is at the root of our problems when we know that the rich and powerful people who run this world will do everything in their power to prevent the existing world system being reformed? They aren't just going to agree to get rid of general purpose money and economic globalisation. It's like asking them to stop pursuing growth: they can't even imagine how to do it, and don't want to. So how does this offer us a way forwards?
Answer: because the two things in question – our monetary system and globalisation – look like being among the first casualties of collapse. Globalisation is already going into reverse (see brexit, Trump's protectionism) and our fiat money system is heading towards a debt/inflation implosion.
It looks highly likely that the scenario going forwards will be of increasing monetary and economic chaos. Fiat money systems have collapsed many times before, but never a global system of fiat currencies floating against each other. But regardless of how may fiat currencies collapse, or how high the price of gold goes in dollars, it is not clear what the system would be replaced with. Can we just go back to the gold standard? It is possible, but people will be desperately looking for other solutions, and the people in power might also be getting desperate.
So what could replace it? What is needed is a new sort of complementary money system which both
(a) addresses the immediate economic problems of people suffering from symptoms of economic and general collapse and
(b) provides a long-term framework around which a new sort of economy can emerge – an economy which is adapted to deglobalisation and degrowth.
I have been searching for answers to this question for some time, and have now found what I was looking for. It is explained in this recently published academic book, and this paper by the same professor of economic anthropology (Alf Hornborg). The answer is the creation of a new sort of money, but it is critically important exactly how this is done. Local currencies like the Bristol Pound do not challenge globalisation. What we need is a new sort of national currency. This currency would be issued as a UBI, but only usable to buy products and services originating within an adjustable radius. This would enable a new economy to emerge. It actually resists globalisation and promotes the growth of a new sort of economy where sustainability is built on local resources and local economic activity. It would also reverse the trend of population moving from poor rural areas and towns, to cities. It would revitalise the “left behind” parts of the western world, and put the brakes on the relentless flow of natural resources and “embodied cheap labour” from the poor parts of the world to the rich parts. It would set the whole system moving towards a more sustainable and fairer state.
This may sound unrealistic, but please give it a chance. I believe it offers a way forwards that can
(a) unite disparate factions trying to provoke systemic change, including eco-marxists, greens, posthumanists and anti-globalist supporters of “populist nationalism”. The only people who really stand to lose are the supporters of global big business and the 1%.
(b) offers a realistic alternative to a money system heading towards collapse, and to which currently no other realistic alternative is being proposed.
In other words, this offers a realistic way forwards not just right now but through much of the early stages of collapse. It is likely to become both politically and economically viable within the forseeable future. It does, though, require some elements of the left to abandon its globalist ideals. It will have to embrace a new sort of nationalism. And it will require various groups who are doing very well out of the current economic system to realise that it is doomed.
Here is an FAQ (from the paper).
What is a complementary currency? It is a form of money that can be used alongside regular money.
What is the fundamental goal of this proposal? The two most fundamental goals motivating this proposal are to insulate local human subsistence and livelihood from the vicissitudes of national and international economic cycles and financial speculation, and to provide tangible and attractive incentives for people to live and consume more sustainably. It also seeks to provide authorities with a means to employ social security expenditures to channel consumption in sustainable directions and encourage economic diversity and community resilience at the local level.
Why should the state administrate the reform? The nation is currently the most encompassing political entity capable of administrating an economic reform of this nature. Ideally it is also subservient to the democratic decisions of its population. The current proposal is envisaged as an option for European nations, but would seem equally advantageous for countries anywhere. If successfully implemented within a particular nation or set of nations, the system can be expected to be emulated by others. Whereas earlier experiments with alternative currencies have generally been local, bottom-up initiatives, a state-supported program offers advantages for long-term success. Rather than an informal, marginal movement connected to particular identities and transient social networks, persisting only as long as the enthusiasm of its founders, the complementary currency advocated here is formalized, efficacious, and lastingly fundamental to everyone's economy.
How is local use defined and monitored? The complementary currency (CC) can only be used to purchase goods and services that are produced within a given geographical radius of the point of purchase. This radius can be defined in terms of kilometers of transport, and it can vary between different nations and regions depending on circumstances. A fairly simple way of distinguishing local from non-local commodities would be to label them according to transport distance, much as is currently done regarding, for instance, organic production methods or "fair trade." Such transport certification would of course imply different labelling in different locales.
How is the complementary currency distributed? A practical way of organizing distribution would be to provide each citizen with a plastic card which is electronically charged each month with the sum of CC allotted to him or her.
Who are included in the category of citizens? A monthly CC is provided to all inhabitants of a nation who have received official residence permits.
What does basic income mean? Basic income is distributed without any requirements or duties to be fulfilled by the recipients. The sum of CC paid to an individual each month can be determined in relation to the currency's purchasing power and to the individual's age. The guiding principle should be that the sum provided to each adult should be sufficient to enable basic existence, and that the sum provided for each child should correspond to the additional household expenses it represents.
Why would people want to use their CC rather than regular money? As the sum of CC provided each month would correspond to purchases representing a claim on his or her regular budget, the basic income would liberate a part of each person's regular income and thus amount to substantial purchasing power, albeit restricted only to local purchases. The basic income in CC would reduce a person's dependence on wage labor and the risks currently associated with unemployment. It would encourage social cooperation and a vitalization of community.
Why would businesses want to accept payment in CC? Business entrepreneurs can be expected to respond rapidly to the radically expanded demand for local products and services, which would provide opportunities for a diverse range of local niche markets. Whether they receive all or only a part of their income in the form of CC, they can choose to use some of it to purchase tax-free local labor or other inputs, and to request to have some of it converted by the authorities to regular currency (see next point).
How is conversion of CC into regular currency organized? Entrepreneurs would be granted the right to convert some of their CC into regular currency at exchange rates set by the authorities.The exchange rate between the two currencies can be calibrated so as to compensate the authorities for loss of tax revenue and to balance the in- and outflows of CC to the state. The rate would thus amount to a tool for determining the extent to which the CC is recirculated in the local economy, or returned to the state. This is important in order to avoid inflation in the CC sector.
Would there be interest on sums of CC owned or loaned? There would be no interest accruing on a sum of CC, whether a surplus accumulating in an account or a loan extended.
How would saving and loaning of CC be organized? The formal granting of credit in CC would be managed by state authorities and follow the principle of full reserve banking, so that quantities of CC loaned would never exceed the quantities saved by the population as a whole.
Would the circulation of CC be subjected to taxation? No.
Why would authorities want to encourage tax-free local economies? Given the beneficial social and ecological consequences of this reform, it is assumed that nation states will represent the general interests of their electorates and thus promote it. Particularly in a situation with rising fiscal deficits, unemployment, health care, and social security expenditures, the proposed reform would alleviate financial pressure on governments. It would also reduce the rising costs of transport infrastructure, environmental protection, carbon offsetting, and climate change adaptation. In short, the rising costs and diminishing returns on current strategies for economic growth can be expected to encourage politicians to consider proposals such as this, as a means of avoiding escalating debt or even bankruptcy.
How would the state's expenditures in CC be financed? As suggested above, much of these expenditures would be balanced by the reduced costs for social security, health care, transport infrastructure, environmental protection, carbon offsetting, and climate change adaptation. As these savings may take time to materialize, however, states can choose to make a proportion of their social security payments (pensions, unemployment insurance, family allowance, etc.) in the form of CC. As between a third and half of some nations' annual budgets are committed to social security, this represents a significant option for financing the reform, requiring no corresponding tax levies.
What are the differences between this CC and the many experiments with local currencies? This proposal should not be confused with the notion, or with the practical operation, of local currencies, as it does not imply different currencies in different locales but one national,complementary currency for local use. Nor is it locally initiated and promoted in opposition to theregular currency, but centrally endorsed and administrated as an accepted complement to it. Most importantly, the alternative currency can only be used to purchase products and services originating from within a given geographical range, a restriction which is not implemented in experiments with Local Exchange Trading Systems (LETS). Finally, the CC is provided as a basic income to all residents of a nation, rather than only earned in proportion to the extent to which a person has made him- or herself useful in the local economy.
What would the ecological benefits be? The reform would radically reduce the demand for long-distance transport, the production of greenhouse gas emissions, consumption of energy and materials, and losses of foodstuffs through overproduction, storage, and transport. It would increase recycling of nutrients and packaging materials, which means decreasing leakage of nutrients and less garbage. It would reduce agricultural intensification, increase biodiversity, and decrease ecological degradation and vulnerability.
What would the societal benefits be? The reform would increase local cooperation, decrease social marginalization and addiction problems, provide more physical exercise, improve psycho-social and physical health, and increase food security and general community resilience. It would decrease the number of traffic accidents, provide fresher and healthier food with less preservatives, and improved contact between producers and consumers.
What would the long-term consequences be for the economy? The reform would no doubt generate radical transformations of the economy, as is precisely the intention. There would be a significant shift of dominance from transnational corporations founded on financial speculation and trade in industrially produced foodstuffs, fuels, and other internationally transported goods to locally diverse producers and services geared to sustainable livelihoods. This would be a democratic consequence of consumer power, rather than of legislation. Through a relatively simple transformation of the conditions for market rationality, governments can encourage new and more sustainable patterns of consumer behavior. In contrast to much of the drastic and often traumatic economic change of the past two centuries, these changes would be democratic and sustainable and would improve local and national resilience.
Why should society want to encourage people to refrain from formal employment? It is increasingly recognized that full or high employment cannot be a goal in itself, particularly if it implies escalating environmental degradation and energy and material throughput. Well-founded calls are thus currently made for degrowth, i.e. a reduction in the rate of production of goods and services that are conventionally quantified by economists as constitutive of GDP. Whether formal unemployment is the result of financial decline, technological development, or intentional policy for sustainability, no modern nation can be expected to leave its citizens economically unsupported. To subsist on basic income is undoubtedly more edifying than receiving unemployment insurance; the CC system encourages useful community cooperation and creative activities rather than destructive behavior that may damage a person's health.
Why should people receive an income without working? As observed above, modern nations will provide for their citizens whether they are formally employed or not. The incentive to find employment should ideally not be propelled only by economic imperatives, but more by the desire to maintain a given identity and to contribute creatively to society. Personal liberty would be enhanced by a reform which makes it possible for people to choose to spend (some of) their time on creative activities that are not remunerated on the formal market, and to accept the tradeoff implied by a somewhat lower economic standard. People can also be expected to devote a greater proportion of their time to community cooperation, earning additional CC, which means that they will contribute more to society – and experience less marginalization – than the currently unemployed.
Would savings in CC be inheritable? No.
How would transport distances of products and services be controlled? It is reasonable to expect the authorities to establish a special agency for monitoring and controlling transport distances. It seems unlikely that entrepreneurs would attempt to cheat the system by presenting distantly produced goods as locally produced, as we can expect income in regular currency generally to be preferable to income in CC. Such attempts would also entail transport costs which should make the cargo less competitive in relation to genuinely local produce, suggesting that the logic of local market mechanisms would by and large obviate the problem.
How would differences in local conditions (such as climate, soils, and urbanism) be dealt with?It is unavoidable that there would be significant variation between different locales in terms of the conditions for producing different kinds of goods. This means that relative local prices in CC for agiven product can be expected to vary from place to place. This may in turn mean that consumption patterns will vary somewhat between locales, which is predictable and not necessarily a problem. Generally speaking, a localization of resource flows can be expected to result in a more diverse pattern of calibration to local resource endowments, as in premodern contexts. The proposed system allows for considerable flexibility in terms of the geographical definition of what is categorized as local, depending on such conditions. In a fertile agricultural region, the radius for local produce may be defined, for instance, as 20 km, whereas in a less fertile or urban area, it may be 50 km. People living in urban centers are faced with a particular challenge. The reform would encourage an increased production of foodstuffs within and in the vicinity of urban areas, which in the long run may also affect urban planning. People might also choose to move to the countryside, where the range of subsistence goods that can be purchased with CC will tend to be greater. In the long run, the reform can be expected to encourage a better fit between the distribution of resources (such as agricultural land) and demography. This is fully in line with the intention of reducing long-distance transports of necessities.
What would the consequences be if people converted resources from one currency sphere into products or services sold in another? It seems unfeasible to monitor and regulate the use of distant imports (such as machinery and fuels) in producing produce for local markets, but as production for local markets is remunerated in CC, this should constitute a disincentive to invest regular money in such production processes. Production for local consumption can thus be expected to rely mostly – and increasingly – on local labor and other resource inputs.

submitted by anthropoz to sustainability [link] [comments]

Welcome to /r/CashApp. Read this first!

No one representing Cash App will ever ask for your sign-in code over the phone, on social media, or through any other medium. No one representing Cash App will ever ask you to make a payment.
Welcome to the unofficial Cash App subreddit. This subreddit was created as a place to talk about Cash App and to get assistance for simple problems. The mod team of this subreddit do not represent Cash App or Square, Inc. If you require specific help with your account, you must contact the Cash App support team directly via the app (never via a support phone line you found via Google). Do not share your account details with anyone.

How to Get Help

For general advice about Cash App, please post here in /cashapp. Do not include cashtags or any other personal information in your posts.
If you need help regarding your account, contact support via the app itself. Tap your profile picture, then choose Support. Follow the menu. You can also check https://cash.app/help
If you are unable to get help via the app, you can try `@cashsupport` on Twitter. https://twitter.com/cashsupport
Due to increased volume, support wait times are higher than normal.
At the time of writing (August 2020), subreddit members are reporting wait times in the order of days/weeks.
Never call a support phone number you found on the internet. There is only one legitimate number and it has a recorded message telling you to use in-app support. All other numbers are fraudulent.
Never accept help via private messaging on social media, including here in /cashapp. If someone wishes to help you, they can do it in public.

Posting Rules

This subreddit welcomes discussions, news and general (non account-specific) questions about Cash App.
The following content is not permitted and will be removed. Accounts breaching these rules may be temporarily or permanently banned, at moderators’ discretion.

How to Post

  1. Use the search function. Most questions have been answered before.
  2. Check the FAQ below. It might just answer your question.
  3. Use a descriptive and succinct post title.
  4. If someone has helped you, please pay it forward. Stick around to help make this community better. 🙏

FAQ

I received something. Is it a scam?
Did you receive something that looks fishy? Cash App emails only ever come from cash.app or squareup.com domains. No one representing Cash App will never ask you for money or your sign in code for any reason. Cash App will never ask you for pins or passcodes. If you get an email, compare it to other emails you’ve received you know to be from Cash App. If the fonts or logos look different or strange, or there is poor grammar, then it’s certainly a scam. If you are still in doubt, post a screenshot (with cashtags and other personal info removed).
Clearance fees?
Cash App will never ask you for money. Any request to pay a fee is a scam. Whether it is called a clearance fee, verification fee, shipping fee, whatever. They are all scams.
I’ve been scammed/hacked!
Unfortunately there’s not much anybody here can do. You can try contacting Cash App support, however they are not likely to reimburse you for your losses. If the scam involved a payment from your linked debit card, you should also contact your card-issuing bank as they may be able to reverse the charge.
How do I prevent being scammed?
I sent money to the wrong person!
Find the payment in he payment history, tap into the details and request a refund. If this fails, contact support. See How to get help above.
I received money from a stranger.
Find the payment in the payment history, tap into the details and issue a refund. Thanks for being awesome!
The recipient say they didn’t receive my payment and want me to send it again.
This is probably a scam. Contact support. See How to get help above.
Why is there a Cash App charge on my bank statement? I don’t even use Cash App!
It is likely that your debit card number has been stolen & the thief has used it to fund a Cash App account. Contact your card-issuing bank immediately.
I haven’t received the cash card I ordered!
It can take several weeks to arrive. If you have not received it within 3-4 weeks, contact support. See How to get help above.
Is the app down right now?
Check the status page. https://status.cash.app/
Will people I pay be able to see my real name?
Your full name, as recorded in your profile in the app, will be presented to people you pay or request payments from. However, this name does not need to be the same as your real name. Like any company, they may be obliged to share your personal information with authorities.
I can’t scan the back of my driver’s licence.
Don’t try to fill the viewport with the card. Try zooming in or out. Look at the edge of the viewport. Each edge will have a blue line when it is correctly aligned. It will work when you manage to get 4 blue lines to appear at once.
My account is frozen with money inside!
Contact support. If that fails, you will have to wait for them to release the money. The time frame for a release is currently unknown.
Why was my account locked?
While it’s not possible to know for sure, some common reasons may be for challenging cash app transactions with your bank (“chargebacks”), performing fraud (“flipping”) and using bitcoin you purchased for illicit goods & services.
I’m under 18. How can I withdraw my money?
You must be 18 or above to use Cash App. You won’t be able to withdraw your funds by yourself. Your parents can negotiate to have the balance transferred to their own account.
Why haven’t I been verified for Bitcoin yet?
The wait for identity verification may take several weeks.
Where is the bitcoin/investing tab? I only have 3 tabs.
Bitcoin and stock investing is not available for UK accounts.
submitted by satsophone to CashApp [link] [comments]

My Provisional List of COVID Anomalies, Red/ False Flags & Clear Indications of Scumbaggery And Scambuggery. LIHOP, MIHOP Or HOAX/SCAM? Def Not As Described. Very Much Updated Since 1st Posting. Please Let Me Know What I’ve Missed Or Add Links. Repost, Due To Strange Disappearance of 90% Of My Post.

My Provisional List of COVID Anomalies, Red/ False Flags & Clear Indications of Scumbaggery And Scambuggery. LIHOP, MIHOP Or HOAX/SCAM? Def Not As Described. Very Much Updated Since 1st Posting. Please Let Me Know What I’ve Missed Or Add Links. Repost, Due To Strange Disappearance of 90% Of My Post.
Here’s my Top 22 list of suspicious shenanigans and red flags surrounding the COVID narrative:

  1. The Imperial College Death data - Neil Ferguson and Gates-funded Imperial College, London Model that ‘persuaded’ Johnson and Trump to lockdown. Projected 500K deaths in UK and 2.2m deaths in US, EVEN WITH LOCKDOWN. Less than 10% accuracy but 110% alarmist, and evidence that the coding was deliberately flawed and designed to inflate numbers. Gates funding everyone involved in the staged 'debacle'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8164121/Professor-predicted-500-000-Britons-die-coronavirus-accused-having-patchy-record.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2020/05/16/coding-led-lockdown-totally-unreliable-buggy-mess-say-experts/
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/who-controls-british-government-response-covid19-part-one
https://www.corbettreport.com/gates/
Ferguson, with a terrifyingly consistent track record for hyping minor viruses that fail to transpire into pandemics (Swine Flu, Bird Flu, BSE etc), failing upwards as a ‘safe pair of hands‘.
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2020/05/08/so-the-real-scandal-is-why-did-anyone-ever-listen-to-this-guy/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11565369/useless-professor-neil-ferguson-antonia-staats/
EDIT: the material below has now disappeared twice, so I’m reposting with the 95% that disappeared some minutes ago....
2) Ferguson’s blasé attitude to his affair during lockdown - clearly not too worried for his lovers’ family, if he genuinely believed COVID was a threat. No "error of judgement", just a man who knew there was nothing to fear.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/06/ministers-hypocrisy-over-neil-ferguson-lockdown-affair
3) Hospitals cleared of patients in readiness for a pandemic that never came. Desperate for cash, doctors and nurses were financially incentivised to put down patients dying with/ of COVID on death certificates to gain payments. In US $13,000 per patient, and $39,000 per patient on ventilator etc.
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/72070/this-is-how-much-hospitals-are-making-if-patients-have-coronavirus/index.html
Footage of empty hospitals worldwide: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrJ9yaUOVKs
Nurses furloughed, sent home for suspected virus without testing. Nurses - with nothing better to do - on TikTok etc:
Nurses slammed for filming TikTok showing them carrying coronavirus 'body-bag':
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/nurses-slammed-filming-tiktok-showing-21960411
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMHU6MtPVqQ etc
4) Games played with age and numbers, proof that only the elderly and very sick elderly were dying, but less of pneumonia and flu than in previous years. Median age of 79 in US and 82 in UK. Meanwhile whole country on lockdown.
"The median age of the deceased in most countries (including Italy) is over 80 years (e.g. 86 years in Sweden) and only about 4% of the deceased had no serious preconditions. The age and risk profile of deaths thus essentially corresponds to normal mortality."
https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/
https://medium.com/wintoncentre/what-have-been-the-fatal-risks-of-covid-particularly-to-children-and-younger-adults-a5cbf7060c49
(table from 2/7 down the page...)
5) When this became apparent, initial scare stories in press about children dying of virus, later proven to have no merit, just to ensure the hysteria was generalised. Meanwhile, probability of a child dying from the 'virus' is 35m to 1.

https://preview.redd.it/ufir9p8nx8c51.png?width=2224&format=png&auto=webp&s=32ab3b0b0a83f3010abd9c6baf381f589bcc7c9b
"The second row shows that 2 deaths have been recorded among over 7 million school children aged between 5 and 14 (around 1 in 3.5 million), an extremely low risk — although additional deaths may be reported following coroners’ investigations. Over the last five years, there has been an average of 94 deaths registered over this 9-week period for those aged 5–14, and so the 2 Covid deaths represents only 2% of the normal risk faced by this group. That is, whatever average risk they would have faced in these 9 weeks if Covid had never existed — a risk which was extraordinarily low — was increased by Covid by only 2%."
from: https://medium.com/wintoncentre/what-have-been-the-fatal-risks-of-covid-particularly-to-children-and-younger-adults-a5cbf7060c49
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/08/kawasaki-like-disease-affecting-children-caused-coronavirus/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8264135/UK-says-children-died-syndrome-linked-COVID-19.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8316223/Up-100-British-children-mysterious-inflammatory-disease-linked-COVID-19.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8278963/Ill-youngsters-directly-exposed-corona-victims-refused-tests-medics.html
6) The ludicrous claim that they had never considered economic and psychological DEATH toll of lockdown.
Admission they knew 200,000 lives to be lost due to lockdowns:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/
"One of the most consistent themes that emerges from the minutes of SAGE meetings is how the Government repeatedly expected its scientists to account for the economic impact of lockdown restrictions – even though SAGE was not doing any economic modelling."
https://bylinetimes.com/2020/07/03/sagegate-part-one-treasury-and-downing-street-advisors-delayed-covid-19-lockdown/
Then on 20th July, the admission:
Official government estimates indicate more than 200,000 people could die as a result of lockdown and Covid’s impact on the NHS, it has been reported.Forecasts made in April calculated that 12,000 to 25,000 people could die from delays to treatment in the first six months of the pandemic, with another 185,000 deaths in the medium-to-long term.
Like they never considered this until AFTER the lockdown!
https://metro.co.uk/2020/07/20/coronavirus-lockdown-cause-200000-extra-deaths-13014848/
7) Doctors globally openly being told they can save paperwork and earn money by basing cause of death on ASSUMPTION of COVID, based on the vaguest of pretexts and symptoms.
https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-covid19-cause-death-certificate-pcom-20200401.html
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/anti-vax-doctor-covid-19-death-certificates-984407/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlGkCABfyLw
Also, from the UK...Health Secretary Matt Hancock calls for urgent review into coronavirus death data in England.
It follows confirmation from Public Health England that reported deaths may have included people who tested positive months before they died.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53443724
8) The propaganda campaign against any form of alternative to vaccine (Vitamin C and D, African cures, HCQ etc)
Here’s the NIH admitting in 2005 that Chloroquine was effective against SARS:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/
“The Government’s leading body for Covid19 drug trials – led by the controversial character Professor Peter Horby – Oxford’s Professor of Emerging Infectious Diseases and Global Health and heading the vaccine programme - stands accused of grossly misleading negative trial results for the coronavirus management drug Hydroxychloroqhine. (Conflict of interest, surely?)
The lead story in today’s France Soir – a long-respected and unaligned French daily – presents compelling evidence to suggest that the Whitehall/Cabinet Covid19 “advice” team cannot be trusted….and raises yet more doubts about BBC complicity in a false Coronavirus narrative.”
https://jonsnewplace.wordpress.com/2020/06/22/explosive-more-uk-covid-experts-facing-serious-data-manipulation-charges/
http://www.francesoir.fsociete-sante/remdesivir-une-molecule-dinteret-therapeutique-tres-discutable-sur-le-covid-19-partie ( in French)
The [Lancet’s] claim that hydroxychloroquine increases the risk of death in Covid-19 patients has been used by rivals as a stick to beat the US President, who has himself been taking the drug and hailed it a 'game-changer' in the war on coronavirus.
Mounting doubts over the study's reliability culminated yesterday when the authors retracted their study from the Lancet medical journal, whose editorial standards have also been thrown into question.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8391779/Lancet-paper-warned-against-Covid-19-drug-flares-accusations-political-point-scoring.html
“The Deputy Chief Investigator of the Recovery Trial, Prof. Martin Landray, gave an interview to France-Soir. What he revealed was quite remarkable.
Firstly, the mortality rate of the hydroxychloroquine patients was a staggering 25.7%.
The recommended hydroxychloroquine dose for an adult in the UK is no more than 200 — 400 mg per day. In France, 1800 mg per day is considered to be lethal poisoning.”
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/the-hydroxychloroquine-scandal
https://time.com/5840148/coronavirus-cure-covid-organic-madagasca
https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-vitamin-c-myth.html
9) The saturation of Gates into the narrative at every level.

https://preview.redd.it/3l08bdluole51.png?width=2224&format=png&auto=webp&s=d0311ee6b5d4df63d81c18801e740516fdf963e3
His hallowed and unquestioned presence in media as expert, the only Moses who can lead us out of this wilderness with his magic potions, release us from our prisons with his benevolence. His financial connections through BMGF to NIH, CDC, WHO, BBC, Guardian, CNN etc and of course every pharmaceutical company in existence....
https://www.corbettreport.com/gates/
Amazing Polly (pretty much every video this year):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm19xYwJ2nQ
Next year Gates will be the largest funder of WHO :
https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2020-05-29/gates-foundation-donations-to-who-nearly-match-those-from-us-government
Gates funding of Impossible burger just in time for lockdown beef shortages in the US:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/08/bill-gates-backed-impossible-burger-ceo-patrick-brown-on-fighting-meat.html
“A biometric digital identity platform that “evolves just as you evolve” is set to be introduced in “low-income, remote communities” in West Africa thanks to a public-private partnership between the Bill Gates-backed GAVI vaccine alliance, Mastercard and the AI-powered “identity authentication” company, Trust Stamp.”
https://www.mintpressnews.com/africa-trust-stamp-covid-19-vaccine-record-payment-system/269346/

BBC compromised:

“Transforming lives through media”? Gates and the CIA? Can we give up the pretence that neutral Auntie speaks for - or represents - us and our best interests?


Charities and foundations - without transparency, oversight and apparently universally trusted. Call your genocidal plans ‘charity’ and not only will you look like a philanthrApist, but people will even donate to their own demise.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaaction/about/funding
EDIT: For further information, I just found this webpage:
https://unitynewsnetwork.co.uk/revealed-bbc-charity-receives-millions-in-funding-from-gates-foundation/
UK Guardian compromised:
Hear the Guardian is regrettably letting 180 staff go this week. Hopefully BMGF can find them suitable homes...
https://hectordrummond.com/2020/05/22/the-bill-and-melinda-gates-foundations-sponsorship-of-the-guardian/
From the article:
“This story came from a Guardian sub-section called ‘Global Development‘.
But then I came across this 2010 Guardian story about how the Guardian has started up this new ‘Global Development’ site in partnership with… the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/how-bill-gates-buys-mainstream-outlets-journalists-and-fact-checkers/
https://www.cjr.org/criticism/gates-foundation-journalism-funding.php
So much information on Gates...almost “paralysed” with possibilities. Ideas?
10) Recent US and UK stories where people clearly dying of other things - cancer, suicide, motorcycle accidents etc are ascribed to COVID. Officially, George Floyd’s death should have been ascribed to COVID, since I believe he tested positive during autopsy. Might have led to a very different world...
https://cbs12.com/news/local/i-team-deaths-incorrectly-attributed-to-covid-19-in-palm-beach-county
https://cbs12.com/news/local/man-who-died-in-motorcycle-crash-counted-as-covid-19-death-in-florida-report
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/george-floyd-death-autopsy-coronavirus-protests-a9548386.html
HighImpactFlix video about case number “massage” and motorcycle anomalies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olz03OPeijM&feature=youtu.be
11) Recent US and UK stories of the deceitful practices by which:
i) the case numbers are conflated with all death numbers on certain days
ii) Dying "of" vs "with" COVID
iii) anyone who dies after testing positive is a COVID death
iv) cases being reported and subliminally conflated with deaths by the media, when death numbers fell too low to keep the public sufficiently terrified to accept coming measures
v) case numbers merely made up or inflated by a factor of ten, in Florida’s case last week.
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/why-no-one-can-ever-recover-from-covid-19-in-england-a-statistical-anomaly/
Too many to include all here, but the recent Florida 'mistake' is here:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/florida-labs-found-significantly-inflating-positive-covid-testing-rate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta7g8BgKAXE
If this is a genuine event, what possible reason would there be to commit fraud in so many ways to keep it looking genuine, besides the need to control demolish the world economy and vaccine-shill?
12) Event 201. Drill gone live. Nuff said.
https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/videos.html
CORBETT REPORT:
https://www.corbettreport.com/mml2020/
Amazing Polly:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/7O5RylrMUV8F/
13) The fact that there have been no surprises at all since the crisis began. Every next step had been telegraphed in the media well in advance. Everything began with the notion that a vaccine would be the only solution and the narrative has remained remarkably consistent to Event201.
14) Even with all of these statistical somersaults, the death numbers this year are not far from what they’ve been in previous years. Pneumonia and flu deaths are suspiciously down.


2020 - 6509 flu deaths in five months (Feb-June)
2020 - 6509 flu deaths in five months (Feb-June)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1113051/number-reported-deaths-from-covid-pneumonia-and-flu-us/
Compared with:

2019- Flu killed 34,157 - more than twice amount for a similar period of five months this year.
2019 Flu killed 34,157 - more than twice amount for a similar period of five months this year.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1124915/flu-deaths-number-us/
MUCH, MUCH MORE DATA NEEDED HERE....
15) That in the space of four months, they have managed to capitalise on this crisis and remove so many rights from us permanently. An opportunity for which they’ve been waiting for years, COVID sped up the process and kept us otherwise preoccupied.
Here is my list of achieved or achievable hidden agenda:
In no particular order:
  1. Controlled demolition of the stock market/ global economy. Global reset etc
  2. Transhumanist/ AI rollout (post-human, Gates patents for human batteries linked with cryptocurrency (60606). https://news.bitcoin.com/microsoft-cryptocurrency-system/
  3. Vaccine adulation and promotion (Gates etc promising vaccine = release from captivity - pharmaceutical companies in league with WHO to drum up mandatory sales)
  4. Expediting the climate change agenda, conflating it with the virus as a call for world government and global sustainability.
  5. Plus RFID/ ID2020 tracking through vaccines (mark of the beast, without which no transaction/ employment will be possible)
  6. Demonisation and eradication of cash (total financial dominion)
  7. Mass unemployment and Universal Credit system linked to Social Credit.
  8. Bank (and corporate) bailouts – this time round it looks legitimate and necessary, no public outcry.
  9. Using and conditioning us to the concept of quarantining as a future method of control should there be any hint of unrest.
  10. Cultification of the NHS to the point of a unifying religion (clapping and donations and lionisation of medical staff during what must be the quietest time in their history)
  11. Legitimation of multiculturalism and immigration (race-baiting through NHS and volunteers, #youclapforusnow
  12. A shot in the arm for the MSM and government as a whole: no longer irrelevant and dying, people watching 24-7 since pandemic. Taking attention away from alternative media.
  13. Privatisation of NHS/ public services – corporations will step in to ‘save’ us (public gratitude replacing scepticism)
  14. Makes government look noble and heroic (wartime/ WW2 mentality fostered)
  15. COVID19 as cover story for 5G radiation/ environmental pollution/ vaccine damage etc
  16. Mass Surveillance – using 5G ‘for our safety’ to track and trace
  17. Opportunity to pass draconian laws against human rights (assembly, sectioning, travel, speech)
  18. Social alienation/ conformity as preference/ patriotic duty
  19. Prevention of assembly in order to protest draconian laws
  20. Depopulation in stages (elderly first, then with vaccines and suicides/ bankruptcy etc due to system collapse)
  21. Censorship of social media and social discourse in general
  22. Installation of 5G during lockdown to avoid scrutiny
  23. Effecting the transition of the workplace, shopping district and school to the home, ending community and all nourishing human interactions.
  24. The ‘new normal’ - social revolution and culture creation through social distancing/ queuing for shops/reinvention of the word essential/ mask wearing etc
  25. Destruction of small and medium sized businesses and the high street in general
  26. Fauci’s early dismissive comments about virus, herd immunity and futility of masks, before the script was revised.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-fauci-in-march-masks-make-you-feel-a-little-bit-better-but-unnecessary-for-general-population-warns-of-unintended-consequences
”You don’t need a mask.”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUHsEmlIoE4
To the NEJM, he described COVID in March as a flu, with similar numbers predicted to suffer.
“WOW! Dr. Fauci in New England Journal of Medicine Concedes the Coronavirus Mortality Rate May Be Much Closer to a Very Bad Flu”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/03/wow-dr-fauci-in-new-england-journal-of-medicine-concedes-the-coronavirus-mortality-rate-may-be-much-closer-to-a-very-bad-flu/
Why the u-turn? Surely we define our experts by their consistency.
F William Engdahl article:
https://fort-russ.com/amp/2020/04/shedding-light-on-the-dishonorable-record-of-dr-fauci-a-real-mengele/
Christine Grady (Fauci’s wife) and her sinister connections to NIH and Gates:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkYen0g4TRU
17) Boris Johnson, Matt Hancock and Nadine Dorries - The statistical chances (14%) of three members of the UK Cabinet (made up of 22 people), including the prime minister, actually catching it and one almost dying apparently, right before reversing his decision to let it pass.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-list-of-senior-government-figures-affected-by-coronavirus
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51827356
A very intentionally dramatic start to our lockdown, announced by Johnson from his "death-bed", ensuring all were in the appropriate state of panic:
"Boris Johnson: Hospital doctors were ready to announce my death"
https://www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-hospital-doctors-were-ready-to-announce-my-death/
18) Meanwhile, racism knocks the virus off the front pages and our minds for a few weeks, but we’re meant to go right back to taking it seriously when requested.
https://summit.news/2020/06/05/1200-public-health-experts-sign-letter-advocating-mass-gatherings-because-white-supremacy-is-a-bigger-threat-than-covid-19/
19) The many proven fake media stories...of long lines for testing and hospital footage from NY, mannequins in beds etc
https://www.thedailybeast.com/cbs-news-accused-by-project-veritas-of-faking-footage-in-michigan-coronavirus-testing-report
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BUBTtUTOII
https://nypost.com/2020/04/01/cbs-admits-to-using-footage-from-italy-in-report-about-nyc/
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-video-operating-dummy-coron/partly-false-claim-video-shows-doctors-operating-on-a-dummy-to-exaggerate-extent-of-coronavirus-crisis-idUSKBN21P2Q8
20) International care home scandals - Deliberately mandating coronavirus carriers into crowded care homes to bump up death toll and concomitant hysteria, kill off elderly...murder?
"It is remarkable how many deaths during this pandemic have occurred in care homes. According to the Office for National Statistics, nearly 50,000 care home deaths were registered in the 11 weeks up to 22 May in England and Wales — 25,000 more than you would expect at this time of the year. Two out of five care homes in England have had a coronavirus outbreak; in the north-east, it’s half.
Not all these deaths, however, have been attributed to Covid-19. Even when death certificates do mention it, it is not always clear that it is the disease that was the ultimate cause of death..."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/dying-of-neglect-the-other-covid-care-home-scandal
Her daughter Linda hit out at what she called a “scandalous” policy to release coronavirus patients into care homes and called for her mum’s death to be investigated as part of a wider review."
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/health/scots-gran-who-died-covid-22172074
Also, more than 40% of US ‘virus‘ deaths occur in nursing homes:
https://thehill.com/homenews/news/504885-over-40-percent-of-us-covid-19-deaths-are-linked-to-nursing-homes-nyt
21) (thanks to Reddit’s lawofconfusion!) Ventilators - All of the sudden, a clamour for them generated panic demand and buying.
“88% death rate among Covid-19 patients in the New York City area who had to be placed on mechanical devices to help them breathe.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-22/almost-9-in-10-covid-19-patients-on-ventilators-died-in-study
https://off-guardian.org/2020/05/06/covid19-are-ventilators-killing-people/
22) Testing inconsistencies:
Half of CDC Coronavirus Test Kits Are Inaccurate, Study Finds.
”The study... found that the testing kits gave a 30 percent false-positive rate and a 20 percent false-negative rate.”https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/half-of-cdc-coronavirus-test-kits-are-inaccurate-study-finds/ar-BB16S6M6
“According to the creator of the PCR test, Kary Mullis himself, it cannot be totally and should never be used as a tool in “the diagnosis of infectious diseases.”
https://www.weblyf.com/2020/05/coronavirus-the-truth-about-pcr-test-kit-from-the-inventor-and-other-experts/
Tanzania scandal and the goat/ papaya ‘positive‘ testing (they had to put in the religious dig as a debunking attempt here, didn’t they?):
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-tanzania-testing-kits-questioned-after-goat-and-papaya-test-positive-11982864
Also, this about CT testing irregularities:
https://www.thewesterlysun.com/news/covid-19/connecticut-says-it-found-testing-flaw-90-false-positives/article_91811362-a9b3-53ab-9485-00067ce9e0d5.html
Funny how all the “mistakes” err on the side of positive...

submitted by secretymology to conspiracy [link] [comments]

A realistic way forwards (long, but I believe important)

Most of us have overlooked a fundamental problem that is currently causing an insurmountable obstacle to building a fairer and more sustainable world. We are very familiar with the thing in question, but its problematic nature has been hidden from us by a powerful illusion. We think the problem is capitalism, but capitalism is just the logical outcome of aggregate human decisions about how to manage money. The fundamental problem is money itself, or more specifically general purpose money and the international free market which allows you to sell a chunk of rainforest and use the money to buy a soft drink factory. (You can use the same sort of money to sell anything and buy anything, anywhere in the world, and until recently there was no alternative at all. Bitcoin is now an alternative, but is not quite what we are looking for.) The illusion is that because market prices are free, and nobody is forced into a transaction, those prices must be fair – that the exchange is equitable. The truth is that the way the general money globalised free market system works means that even though the prices are freely determined, there is still an unequal flow of natural resources from poor parts of the world to rich parts. This means the poor parts will always remain poor, and resources will continue to accumulate in the large, unsustainable cities in rich countries. In other words, unless we re-invent money, we cannot overturn capitalism, and that means we can't build a sustainable civilisation.
Why does this matter? What use is it realising that general purpose money is at the root of our problems when we know that the rich and powerful people who run this world will do everything in their power to prevent the existing world system being reformed? They aren't just going to agree to get rid of general purpose money and economic globalisation. It's like asking them to stop pursuing growth: they can't even imagine how to do it, and don't want to. So how does this offer us a way forwards?
Answer: because the two things in question – our monetary system and globalisation – look like being among the first casualties of collapse. Globalisation is already going into reverse (see brexit, Trump's protectionism) and our fiat money system is heading towards a debt/inflation implosion.
It looks highly likely that the scenario going forwards will be of increasing monetary and economic chaos. Fiat money systems have collapsed many times before, but never a global system of fiat currencies floating against each other. But regardless of how may fiat currencies collapse, or how high the price of gold goes in dollars, it is not clear what the system would be replaced with. Can we just go back to the gold standard? It is possible, but people will be desperately looking for other solutions, and the people in power might also be getting desperate.
So what could replace it? What is needed is a new sort of complementary money system which both
(a) addresses the immediate economic problems of people suffering from symptoms of economic and general collapse and
(b) provides a long-term framework around which a new sort of economy can emerge – an economy which is adapted to deglobalisation and degrowth.
I have been searching for answers to this question for some time, and have now found what I was looking for. It is explained in this recently published academic book, and this paper by the same professor of economic anthropology (Alf Hornborg). The answer is the creation of a new sort of money, but it is critically important exactly how this is done. Local currencies like the Bristol Pound do not challenge globalisation. What we need is a new sort of national currency. This currency would be issued as a UBI, but only usable to buy products and services originating within an adjustable radius. This would enable a new economy to emerge. It actually resists globalisation and promotes the growth of a new sort of economy where sustainability is built on local resources and local economic activity. It would also reverse the trend of population moving from poor rural areas and towns, to cities. It would revitalise the “left behind” parts of the western world, and put the brakes on the relentless flow of natural resources and “embodied cheap labour” from the poor parts of the world to the rich parts. It would set the whole system moving towards a more sustainable and fairer state.
This may sound unrealistic, but please give it a chance. I believe it offers a way forwards that can
(a) unite disparate factions trying to provoke systemic change, including eco-marxists, greens, posthumanists and anti-globalist supporters of “populist nationalism”, as well as large numbers of confused and worried "ordinary" people. The only people who really stand to lose are the supporters of global big business and the 1%.
(b) offers a realistic alternative to a money system heading towards collapse, and to which currently no other realistic alternative is being proposed.
In other words, this offers a realistic way forwards not just right now but through much of the early stages of collapse. It is likely to become both politically and economically viable within the forseeable future. It does, though, require some elements of the left to abandon its globalist ideals. It will have to embrace a new sort of nationalism. And it will require various groups who are doing very well out of the current economic system to realise that it is doomed.
Here is an FAQ (from the paper).
What is a complementary currency? It is a form of money that can be used alongside regular money.
What is the fundamental goal of this proposal? The two most fundamental goals motivating this proposal are to insulate local human subsistence and livelihood from the vicissitudes of national and international economic cycles and financial speculation, and to provide tangible and attractive incentives for people to live and consume more sustainably. It also seeks to provide authorities with a means to employ social security expenditures to channel consumption in sustainable directions and encourage economic diversity and community resilience at the local level.
Why should the state administrate the reform? The nation is currently the most encompassing political entity capable of administrating an economic reform of this nature. Ideally it is also subservient to the democratic decisions of its population. The current proposal is envisaged as an option for European nations, but would seem equally advantageous for countries anywhere. If successfully implemented within a particular nation or set of nations, the system can be expected to be emulated by others. Whereas earlier experiments with alternative currencies have generally been local, bottom-up initiatives, a state-supported program offers advantages for long-term success. Rather than an informal, marginal movement connected to particular identities and transient social networks, persisting only as long as the enthusiasm of its founders, the complementary currency advocated here is formalized, efficacious, and lastingly fundamental to everyone's economy.
How is local use defined and monitored? The complementary currency (CC) can only be used to purchase goods and services that are produced within a given geographical radius of the point of purchase. This radius can be defined in terms of kilometers of transport, and it can vary between different nations and regions depending on circumstances. A fairly simple way of distinguishing local from non-local commodities would be to label them according to transport distance, much as is currently done regarding, for instance, organic production methods or "fair trade." Such transport certification would of course imply different labelling in different locales.
How is the complementary currency distributed? A practical way of organizing distribution would be to provide each citizen with a plastic card which is electronically charged each month with the sum of CC allotted to him or her.
Who are included in the category of citizens? A monthly CC is provided to all inhabitants of a nation who have received official residence permits.
What does basic income mean? Basic income is distributed without any requirements or duties to be fulfilled by the recipients. The sum of CC paid to an individual each month can be determined in relation to the currency's purchasing power and to the individual's age. The guiding principle should be that the sum provided to each adult should be sufficient to enable basic existence, and that the sum provided for each child should correspond to the additional household expenses it represents.
Why would people want to use their CC rather than regular money? As the sum of CC provided each month would correspond to purchases representing a claim on his or her regular budget, the basic income would liberate a part of each person's regular income and thus amount to substantial purchasing power, albeit restricted only to local purchases. The basic income in CC would reduce a person's dependence on wage labor and the risks currently associated with unemployment. It would encourage social cooperation and a vitalization of community.
Why would businesses want to accept payment in CC? Business entrepreneurs can be expected to respond rapidly to the radically expanded demand for local products and services, which would provide opportunities for a diverse range of local niche markets. Whether they receive all or only a part of their income in the form of CC, they can choose to use some of it to purchase tax-free local labor or other inputs, and to request to have some of it converted by the authorities to regular currency (see next point).
How is conversion of CC into regular currency organized? Entrepreneurs would be granted the right to convert some of their CC into regular currency at exchange rates set by the authorities.The exchange rate between the two currencies can be calibrated so as to compensate the authorities for loss of tax revenue and to balance the in- and outflows of CC to the state. The rate would thus amount to a tool for determining the extent to which the CC is recirculated in the local economy, or returned to the state. This is important in order to avoid inflation in the CC sector.
Would there be interest on sums of CC owned or loaned? There would be no interest accruing on a sum of CC, whether a surplus accumulating in an account or a loan extended.
How would saving and loaning of CC be organized? The formal granting of credit in CC would be managed by state authorities and follow the principle of full reserve banking, so that quantities of CC loaned would never exceed the quantities saved by the population as a whole.
Would the circulation of CC be subjected to taxation? No.
Why would authorities want to encourage tax-free local economies? Given the beneficial social and ecological consequences of this reform, it is assumed that nation states will represent the general interests of their electorates and thus promote it. Particularly in a situation with rising fiscal deficits, unemployment, health care, and social security expenditures, the proposed reform would alleviate financial pressure on governments. It would also reduce the rising costs of transport infrastructure, environmental protection, carbon offsetting, and climate change adaptation. In short, the rising costs and diminishing returns on current strategies for economic growth can be expected to encourage politicians to consider proposals such as this, as a means of avoiding escalating debt or even bankruptcy.
How would the state's expenditures in CC be financed? As suggested above, much of these expenditures would be balanced by the reduced costs for social security, health care, transport infrastructure, environmental protection, carbon offsetting, and climate change adaptation. As these savings may take time to materialize, however, states can choose to make a proportion of their social security payments (pensions, unemployment insurance, family allowance, etc.) in the form of CC. As between a third and half of some nations' annual budgets are committed to social security, this represents a significant option for financing the reform, requiring no corresponding tax levies.
What are the differences between this CC and the many experiments with local currencies? This proposal should not be confused with the notion, or with the practical operation, of local currencies, as it does not imply different currencies in different locales but one national,complementary currency for local use. Nor is it locally initiated and promoted in opposition to theregular currency, but centrally endorsed and administrated as an accepted complement to it. Most importantly, the alternative currency can only be used to purchase products and services originating from within a given geographical range, a restriction which is not implemented in experiments with Local Exchange Trading Systems (LETS). Finally, the CC is provided as a basic income to all residents of a nation, rather than only earned in proportion to the extent to which a person has made him- or herself useful in the local economy.
What would the ecological benefits be? The reform would radically reduce the demand for long-distance transport, the production of greenhouse gas emissions, consumption of energy and materials, and losses of foodstuffs through overproduction, storage, and transport. It would increase recycling of nutrients and packaging materials, which means decreasing leakage of nutrients and less garbage. It would reduce agricultural intensification, increase biodiversity, and decrease ecological degradation and vulnerability.
What would the societal benefits be? The reform would increase local cooperation, decrease social marginalization and addiction problems, provide more physical exercise, improve psycho-social and physical health, and increase food security and general community resilience. It would decrease the number of traffic accidents, provide fresher and healthier food with less preservatives, and improved contact between producers and consumers.
What would the long-term consequences be for the economy? The reform would no doubt generate radical transformations of the economy, as is precisely the intention. There would be a significant shift of dominance from transnational corporations founded on financial speculation and trade in industrially produced foodstuffs, fuels, and other internationally transported goods to locally diverse producers and services geared to sustainable livelihoods. This would be a democratic consequence of consumer power, rather than of legislation. Through a relatively simple transformation of the conditions for market rationality, governments can encourage new and more sustainable patterns of consumer behavior. In contrast to much of the drastic and often traumatic economic change of the past two centuries, these changes would be democratic and sustainable and would improve local and national resilience.
Why should society want to encourage people to refrain from formal employment? It is increasingly recognized that full or high employment cannot be a goal in itself, particularly if it implies escalating environmental degradation and energy and material throughput. Well-founded calls are thus currently made for degrowth, i.e. a reduction in the rate of production of goods and services that are conventionally quantified by economists as constitutive of GDP. Whether formal unemployment is the result of financial decline, technological development, or intentional policy for sustainability, no modern nation can be expected to leave its citizens economically unsupported. To subsist on basic income is undoubtedly more edifying than receiving unemployment insurance; the CC system encourages useful community cooperation and creative activities rather than destructive behavior that may damage a person's health.
Why should people receive an income without working? As observed above, modern nations will provide for their citizens whether they are formally employed or not. The incentive to find employment should ideally not be propelled only by economic imperatives, but more by the desire to maintain a given identity and to contribute creatively to society. Personal liberty would be enhanced by a reform which makes it possible for people to choose to spend (some of) their time on creative activities that are not remunerated on the formal market, and to accept the tradeoff implied by a somewhat lower economic standard. People can also be expected to devote a greater proportion of their time to community cooperation, earning additional CC, which means that they will contribute more to society – and experience less marginalization – than the currently unemployed.
Would savings in CC be inheritable? No.
How would transport distances of products and services be controlled? It is reasonable to expect the authorities to establish a special agency for monitoring and controlling transport distances. It seems unlikely that entrepreneurs would attempt to cheat the system by presenting distantly produced goods as locally produced, as we can expect income in regular currency generally to be preferable to income in CC. Such attempts would also entail transport costs which should make the cargo less competitive in relation to genuinely local produce, suggesting that the logic of local market mechanisms would by and large obviate the problem.
How would differences in local conditions (such as climate, soils, and urbanism) be dealt with? It is unavoidable that there would be significant variation between different locales in terms of the conditions for producing different kinds of goods. This means that relative local prices in CC for agiven product can be expected to vary from place to place. This may in turn mean that consumption patterns will vary somewhat between locales, which is predictable and not necessarily a problem. Generally speaking, a localization of resource flows can be expected to result in a more diverse pattern of calibration to local resource endowments, as in premodern contexts. The proposed system allows for considerable flexibility in terms of the geographical definition of what is categorized as local, depending on such conditions. In a fertile agricultural region, the radius for local produce may be defined, for instance, as 20 km, whereas in a less fertile or urban area, it may be 50 km. People living in urban centers are faced with a particular challenge. The reform would encourage an increased production of foodstuffs within and in the vicinity of urban areas, which in the long run may also affect urban planning. People might also choose to move to the countryside, where the range of subsistence goods that can be purchased with CC will tend to be greater. In the long run, the reform can be expected to encourage a better fit between the distribution of resources (such as agricultural land) and demography. This is fully in line with the intention of reducing long-distance transports of necessities.
What would the consequences be if people converted resources from one currency sphere into products or services sold in another? It seems unfeasible to monitor and regulate the use of distant imports (such as machinery and fuels) in producing produce for local markets, but as production for local markets is remunerated in CC, this should constitute a disincentive to invest regular money in such production processes. Production for local consumption can thus be expected to rely mostly – and increasingly – on local labor and other resource inputs.
submitted by anthropoz to ExtinctionRebellion [link] [comments]

My Beermoney sites I've been using, thanks to these subreddits.

Hello everyone, I’ve been a lurker on this subreddit and a few others for awhile now, I’ve always loved it when people post a list of the sites and apps they use, most of the sites that I’ve found and use regularly have been from subreddits like this, which I’ve used quite a few referrals and I’m very grateful, so I thought other people may appreciate it if I share mine.

Firstly, I recommend doing all these sites on Brave Browser (The only Bitcoin site on the list)
Brave Browser | Minimum Payout: 0 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)

Surveys, Offers, Daily Tasks, Searches etc
Swagbucks | Minimum Payout: £3 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
Earn points when you shop at your favourite retailers, watch entertaining videos, search the web, answer surveys and find great deals.
OhMyDosh | Minimum Payout: £10 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
To earn money with OhMyDosh! Just look through the site and take any offers that are of interest to you, my favourite section is the no spend section and getting paid for activating free trials.
Spider Metrix | Minimum Payout: $30 | (Non-Referral) (Referral)
I like this survey site mainly for the very short surveys, you do get longer surveys as well, but I tend to stay away from long surveys in general.
Microsoft Rewards | Minimum Payout: £5 | (Non-Referral)
Get rewarded for doing what you love with Microsoft Rewards. It's simple, win free stuff by searching, shopping, and gaming with Microsoft. You can even earn points for fun activities like taking quizzes and polls.
Time Bucks | Minimum Payout: $10 | (Non-Referral) (Referral)
TimeBucks is a reward site that pays you to do Surveys, View Funny Photos, Watch Videos, Install Apps, Play Games and more! TimeBucks helps people pay extra bills and earn extra cash online.
I Say | Minimum Payout: £5 | (Non-Referral) (Referral)
You earn i-Say points when you complete surveys and can redeem your accumulated points for PayPal cash, gift cards, and as a Virtual Visa Prepaid card.
Rewards 1 | Minimum Payout: $5 | (Non-Referral) (Referral)
Take surveys and get paid Amazon Gift Cards, Paypal Cash, Bitcoin and more.

Addons and Extensions
UpVoice | Minimum Payout: $5 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
Add the UpVoice extension to your browser and earn passive income.
Serpclix | Minimum Payout: $5 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
SerpClix is an extension that pays you to make a Google search and click on a particular result.
Qmee - | Minimum Payout: £0 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
Qmee allows you to share your opinions through surveys tailored to you, as well as earn instant cash rewards when shopping and searching online.

Watching Videos
FruitLab | Minimum Payout: £5 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
With FruitLab you receive PIPS, which you can then spend in the FruitLab Shop buying digital vouchers and merch.
Hideout TV (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
You can earn rewards points watching videos. You can then redeem your credits via the partner's platform (Swagbucks, InstaGC, PrizeRebel, GG2U, Gain.GG etc).

Cashback
TopCashback | Minimum Payout: £1 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
TopCashback pays out a portion of the cashback it receives from the merchant, it's able to do this because it passes on a little of the bonuses it gets for generating lots of sales. My preferred cash back site.
Quidco | Minimum Payout: £1 | (Non-Referral) | (Referral)
Same as above, but sometimes the cashback is better on Quidco than TopCashBack.

Apps
Receipt Scanning
Huyu | Minimum Payout: £5 | Android | Apple (Referral Code: Currently no referral code)
Scan receipts and answer surveys for real rewards, like shopping vouchers. It’s the fair way to share your data.
Shopprize | Minimum Payout: £5 | Android - (Referral Code: x6ueu)
Shopprize is a receipt scanning app that will reward you for submitting photos of your receipts, most of the time you will be on a waiting list, but I strongly recommend that you put your email down, it's well worth it when you get accepted.
SnapMyEats | Minimum Payout: £10 | Android | Apple
SnapMyEats is an easy to use app where you can earn great rewards just for taking online and offline surveys and snapping pictures of receipts from your food.
Shoppix | Minimum Payout: £5 | Android | Apple
Snap your receipts to collect tokens and view all of your receipts in one handy place. Exchange your tokens to claim rewards from your favourite retailers.
Receipt Hog | Minimum Payout: £3 | Android | Apple
Receipt Hog is a fun and rewarding way to turn receipts from everyday shopping into cash - no matter where you shop or what you buy!
ZipZero | Minimum Payout: £0 | Android | Apple
ZipZero gives you 0.5% of the value of any purchase every time you snap a photo of your receipt, ZipZero does not pay you in cash, but rather, it will pay your bills.
Shopmium | Minimum Payout: £0 | (Android) | Apple (Free can of pringles when using my Referral Code: en3et5)
The app uses your location to provide offers from supermarkets nearby. It's a three-step process: Buy the product. Upload a picture of your receipt and get cash back, some offers even give you 100% cashback.
Checkout Smart | Minimum Payout: £1 | Android | Apple
Earn cashback in cash rewards from your favourite brands by simply snapping a photo of your supermarket receipt and uploading to CheckoutSmart, some offers even give you 100% cashback.
Green Jinn | Minimum Payout: £1.50 | Android | Apple
Earn Cashback with GreenJinn on your in-store & online shopping at different stores,
some offers even give you 100% cashback.
Click and Snap | Minimum Payout: £1 | Android | Apple
Owned by Quidco, earn cashback in cash rewards from your favourite supermarket brands with ClickSnap

SMS
McMoney | Minimum Payout: $5 | Android APK | (Referral Code: 8BTB2DZD)
Get paid real money for helping McMoney improve worldwide communication. All you have to do is receive text messages on your mobile phone once in a while.

Others
BigCash | Minimum Payout: $15 | Android | (Referral Code: folytnnc)
BigCash allows you to earn real money or Free gift cards by downloading free apps, games or completing surveys
Sweatcoin - Android | Apple | Non-Referral
Sweatcoin converts your steps into a new digital currency called "sweatcoins". Spend sweatcoins earned on goods, services and experiences with our vendor partners or other users, donate to charity or exchange them with your friends and family for whatever you fancy.
Google Opinion Rewards | Minimum Payout: £0 | Android | Apple
Answer quick surveys and earn Google Play credit with Google Opinion Rewards, an app created by the Google Surveys team.
submitted by MiikeyDay to beermoneyuk [link] [comments]

How Data Centralization Ends by 2030

Link to Coindesk: https://www.coindesk.com/data-centralization-2030
The next 10 years will witness the systematic manipulation of human life at a scale unrivaled in history. For all the recent controversies over privacy and surveillance, the real threat is ahead of us.
Unless new approaches to online identity and data management take hold, both governments and private actors will move inexorably from knowing you to shaping you. Blockchain-enabled decentralization will develop as the only viable response to the iron logic of data centralization.
Blockchain believers often talk as though today’s early-adopter use cases, such as cryptocurrency trading and decentralized finance, will lead straight to mass market adoption. As the inevitable ‘killer apps’ appear, so the story goes, blockchain-based systems will conquer the mainstream. One might imagine that we’ll all soon be trading digital collectibles and relying on token-curated registries for accurate information. Governments will lose control over money, and blockchain-based smart contracts will replace court-enforced legal agreements. Uber, Facebook and the banks will wither away in the face of tokenized alternatives.
This narrative is wishful thinking. In most markets, intermediaries will endure for the same reasons they always have: they provide value. The Ubers and Facebooks – and yes, even the banks – tame complexity and produce coherent, convenient, de-risked experiences that no decentralized community can ever match. Early adopters use blockchain-based systems for ideological reasons or to get rich on cryptocurrency speculation. The billions behind them in the mainstream will not. The lock-in power of network effects creates high barriers for alternative economic systems. And the need for trust disqualifies decentralized solutions that are havens for criminals, incapable of effective compliance or vulnerable to catastrophic attacks – which, regrettably, means virtually all of them today.
Truly decentralized blockchain systems will reach critical mass not out of hope but out of necessity. Powerful actors and mainstream users will adopt blockchain as a counterbalance to digital behavior-shaping by governments and private platforms. Dramatic innovations such as decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs), which manage activity automatically through smart contracts, will become significant at the end point of this process, once the foundations are in place.
Big data and artificial intelligence, pitched as freeing us from human frailties, are becoming powerful tools for social control. This is occurring along two parallel tracks: surveillance authoritarianism and surveillance capitalism. Through massive data collection and aggregation, China’s social credit system envisions an airtight regime of perfect compliance with legal and social obligations. Many other governments, including liberal democracies, are adopting similar techniques. The potential for catching terrorists, child predators and tax evaders is simply too appealing – whether it’s the real objective or a cover story.
"WHAT WE NEED IS A TECHNOLOGY THAT ALLOWS FOR SHARING WITHOUT GIVING UP CONTROL. FORTUNATELY, IT EXISTS."
Meanwhile, private digital platforms are using troves of data to shape online experiences consistent with their business models. What you see online is, increasingly, what maximizes their profits. Companies such as Google, Amazon, Tencent and Alibaba can build the best algorithms because they have the most data. And they aren’t interested in sharing.
Regulatory interventions will fail to derail the self-reinforcing momentum for ever more centralized data repositories. They may even accelerate it by creating layers of compliance obligations that only the largest firms can meet. Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) actually increased the market share of Google and Facebook in online advertising, and so it is not surprising to see such incumbents actively welcoming the prospect of more regulation.
The only lasting solution is to change the economics of data, not to impose private property rights; that would accelerate the market forces promoting data centralization. Giving you “ownership” over your data means giving you legal cover to sell it, by clicking “OK” to a one-sided contract you’ll never read. The problem is not ownership, but control. In today’s algorithm-driven world, sharing and aggregating data increases its value, producing better models and better predictions. The trouble is that once we share, we lose control to centralized data hogs.
What we need is a technology that allows for sharing without giving up control. Fortunately, it exists. It is called blockchain. Blockchain technology is, fundamentally, a revolution in trust. In the past, trust required ceding control to counter parties, government authorities or intermediaries who occupied the essential validating roles in transaction networks. Blockchain allows participants to trust the results they see without necessarily trusting any actor to verify them. That’s why major global firms in health care, finance, transportation, international trade and other fields are actively developing cross-organizational platforms based on blockchain and related technologies. No database can provide a trusted view of information across an entire transactional network without empowering a central intermediary. Blockchain can.
Adopting any new platform at scale, along with the necessary software integration and process changes, takes time – especially when the technology is so immature. But today’s incremental deployments will serve as proofs-of-concept for the more radical innovations to come. Chinese blockchain networks are already managing tens of billions of dollars of trade finance transactions. Pharmaceutical companies are tracking drugs from manufacturing to pharmacies using the MediLedger platform. Boeing is selling a billion dollars of airline parts on Honeywell’s blockchain-based marketplace. Car insurance companies are processing accident claims in a unified environment for the first time. These and other enterprise consortia are doing the essential technical and operational groundwork to handle valuable transactions at scale.
The need for transformative approaches to data will become acute in the next five years. Every week, it seems, another outrage comes to light. For instance, users who posted photos under Creative Commons licenses or default-public settings were shocked they were sucked into databases used to train facial-recognition systems. Some were even used in China’s horrific campaign against Uighur Muslims. Clearview AI, an unknown startup, scraped three billion social media images for a face identification tool it provided, with no oversight, to law enforcement, corporations and wealthy individuals. The examples will only get worse as firms and nations learn new ways to exploit data. The core problem is there is no way to share information while retaining control over how it gets used.
Blockchain offers a solution. It will be widely adopted because, behind the scenes, the current data economy is reaching its breaking point. Outrage over abuses is building throughout the world. The immensely valuable online advertising economy attracts so much fraud that the accuracy of its numbers is coming into question. Communities are looking for new ways to collaborate. Governments are realizing the current system is an impediment to effective service delivery.
The technologist Bill Joy famously stated that no matter how many geniuses a company employs, most smart people work somewhere else. The same is true of data. Even giants such as Google, Facebook and Chinese government agencies need to obtain information from elsewhere in their quest for perfect real-time models of every individual. These arrangements work mostly through contracts and interfaces that ease the flow of data between organisations. As Facebook discovered when Cambridge Analytica extracted massive quantities of user data for voter targeting, these connection points are also vulnerabilities. As tighter limits are placed on data-sharing, even the big players will look for ways to rebuild trust.
The blockchain alternative will begin innocuously. Government authorities at the subnational level are deploying self-sovereign identity to pull together information securely across disparate data stores. This technology allows anyone to share private information in a fine-grained way while still retaining control. You shouldn’t have to reveal your address to confirm your age, or your full tax return to verify your stated income. The necessary cryptography doesn’t require a blockchain, but the desired trust relationships do.
Once people have identities that belong to them, not to banks or social media services, they will use them as the basis for other interactions. Imagine a world where you never need to give a third-party unnecessary data to log into a website, apply for a job, refinance a mortgage or link your bank account to a mobile payment app. Where you can keep your personal and professional profiles completely separate if you choose. Where you can be confident in the reputation of a car mechanic or an Airbnb or a product made in China without intermediaries warping ratings for their own gain. The convenience of user experiences we enjoy within the walled gardens of digital platforms will become the norm across the vastness of independent services.
We will gradually come to view access to our personal information as an episodic, focused interaction, rather than fatalistically accepting an open season based on preliminary formal consent. Major hardware companies such as Apple, which don’t depend on targeted advertising, will build decentralized identity capabilities into their devices. They will add cryptocurrency wallets linked behind the scenes to existing payment and messaging applications. Stablecoins – cryptocurrencies pegged to the dollar, pound or other assets – will help tame volatility and facilitate movement between tokens and traditional currencies. Privately created stablecoins will coexist with central bank digital currencies, which are under development in most major countries throughout the world.
Once this baseline infrastructure is widely available, the real changes will start to occur. DAOs will begin to attract assets as efficient ways for communities to achieve their goals. These entities won’t replace state-backed legal systems; they will operate within them. As numerous controversies, crashes and hacks have already demonstrated, software code is too rigid for the range of situations in the real world, absent backstops for human dispute resolution. Fortunately, there are solutions under development to connect legal and digital entities, such as OpenLaw’s Limited Liability Autonomous Organisations and Mattereum’s Asset Passports.
Today, the legal machinery of contracts strengthens the power of centralized platforms. User agreements and privacy policies enforce their control over data and limit individuals’ power to challenge it. Blockchain-based systems will flip that relationship, with the legal system deployed to protect technology-backed user empowerment. Large aggregations of information will be structured formally as “data trusts” that exercise independent stewardship over assets. They will operate as DAOs, with smart contracts defining the terms of data usage. Users will benefit from sharing while retaining the ability to opt out.
"DATA WILL BE TREATED NOT AS PROPERTY BUT AS A RENEWABLE RESOURCE, WITH THE COMPETITION FOR ECONOMIC VALUE IN THE APPLICATIONS BUILT ON TOP OF IT."
Many significant applications require aggregation of data to drive algorithms, including traffic monitoring (and eventually autonomous vehicles); insurance and lending products serving previously excluded or overcharged customer groups; diagnosis and drug dosing in health care; and demand forecasting for economic modeling. Collective action problems can prevent constructive developments even when rights in data are well defined. DAOs will gradually find market opportunities, from patronage of independent artists to mortgage securitization.
The big data aggregators won’t go away. They will participate in the decentralized data economy because it provides benefits for them as well, cutting down on fraud and reinforcing user trust, which is in increasingly scarce supply. Over time, those who provide benefits of personalization and targeting will more and more be expected to pay for it. A wide range of brokering and filtering providers will offer users a choice of analytics, some embedded in applications or devices and some providing services virtually in the cloud. Governments will focus on making data available and defining policy objectives for services that take advantage of the flow of information. Data will be treated not as property but as a renewable resource, with the competition for economic value in the applications built on top of it.
The most powerful benefit of open data built on blockchain-based decentralised control is that it will allow for new applications we can’t yet envision. If startups can take advantage of the power of data aggregation that today is limited to large incumbents, they are bound to build innovations those incumbents miss.
The surveillance economy took hold because few appreciated what was happening with their data until it was too late. And the cold reality is that few will accept significantly worse functionality or user experience in return for better privacy. That is why the blockchain-powered revolution will make its way up from infrastructural foundations of digital identity and hardware, rather than down from novel user-facing applications.
This vision is far from certain to be realized. Business decisions and government policies could make blockchain-based data decentralization more or less likely. The greatest reason for optimism is that the problem blockchain addresses – gaining trust without giving up control – is becoming ever more critical. The world runs on trust. Blockchain offers hope for recasting trust in the networked digital era.
submitted by BlockDotCo to u/BlockDotCo [link] [comments]

The Next Crypto Wave: The Rise of Stablecoins and its Entry to the U.S. Dollar Market

The Next Crypto Wave: The Rise of Stablecoins and its Entry to the U.S. Dollar Market

Author: Christian Hsieh, CEO of Tokenomy
This paper examines some explanations for the continual global market demand for the U.S. dollar, the rise of stablecoins, and the utility and opportunities that crypto dollars can offer to both the cryptocurrency and traditional markets.
The U.S. dollar, dominant in world trade since the establishment of the 1944 Bretton Woods System, is unequivocally the world’s most demanded reserve currency. Today, more than 61% of foreign bank reserves and nearly 40% of the entire world’s debt is denominated in U.S. dollars1.
However, there is a massive supply and demand imbalance in the U.S. dollar market. On the supply side, central banks throughout the world have implemented more than a decade-long accommodative monetary policy since the 2008 global financial crisis. The COVID-19 pandemic further exacerbated the need for central banks to provide necessary liquidity and keep staggering economies moving. While the Federal Reserve leads the effort of “money printing” and stimulus programs, the current money supply still cannot meet the constant high demand for the U.S. dollar2. Let us review some of the reasons for this constant dollar demand from a few economic fundamentals.

Demand for U.S. Dollars

Firstly, most of the world’s trade is denominated in U.S. dollars. Chief Economist of the IMF, Gita Gopinath, has compiled data reflecting that the U.S. dollar’s share of invoicing was 4.7 times larger than America’s share of the value of imports, and 3.1 times its share of world exports3. The U.S. dollar is the dominant “invoicing currency” in most developing countries4.

https://preview.redd.it/d4xalwdyz8p51.png?width=535&format=png&auto=webp&s=9f0556c6aa6b29016c9b135f3279e8337dfee2a6

https://preview.redd.it/wucg40kzz8p51.png?width=653&format=png&auto=webp&s=71257fec29b43e0fc0df1bf04363717e3b52478f
This U.S. dollar preference also directly impacts the world’s debt. According to the Bank of International Settlements, there is over $67 trillion in U.S. dollar denominated debt globally, and borrowing outside of the U.S. accounted for $12.5 trillion in Q1 20205. There is an immense demand for U.S. dollars every year just to service these dollar debts. The annual U.S. dollar buying demand is easily over $1 trillion assuming the borrowing cost is at 1.5% (1 year LIBOR + 1%) per year, a conservative estimate.

https://preview.redd.it/6956j6f109p51.png?width=487&format=png&auto=webp&s=ccea257a4e9524c11df25737cac961308b542b69
Secondly, since the U.S. has a much stronger economy compared to its global peers, a higher return on investments draws U.S. dollar demand from everywhere in the world, to invest in companies both in the public and private markets. The U.S. hosts the largest stock markets in the world with more than $33 trillion in public market capitalization (combined both NYSE and NASDAQ)6. For the private market, North America’s total share is well over 60% of the $6.5 trillion global assets under management across private equity, real assets, and private debt investments7. The demand for higher quality investments extends to the fixed income market as well. As countries like Japan and Switzerland currently have negative-yielding interest rates8, fixed income investors’ quest for yield in the developed economies leads them back to the U.S. debt market. As of July 2020, there are $15 trillion worth of negative-yielding debt securities globally (see chart). In comparison, the positive, low-yielding U.S. debt remains a sound fixed income strategy for conservative investors in uncertain market conditions.

Source: Bloomberg
Last, but not least, there are many developing economies experiencing failing monetary policies, where hyperinflation has become a real national disaster. A classic example is Venezuela, where the currency Bolivar became practically worthless as the inflation rate skyrocketed to 10,000,000% in 20199. The recent Beirut port explosion in Lebanon caused a sudden economic meltdown and compounded its already troubled financial market, where inflation has soared to over 112% year on year10. For citizens living in unstable regions such as these, the only reliable store of value is the U.S. dollar. According to the Chainalysis 2020 Geography of Cryptocurrency Report, Venezuela has become one of the most active cryptocurrency trading countries11. The demand for cryptocurrency surges as a flight to safety mentality drives Venezuelans to acquire U.S. dollars to preserve savings that they might otherwise lose. The growth for cryptocurrency activities in those regions is fueled by these desperate citizens using cryptocurrencies as rails to access the U.S. dollar, on top of acquiring actual Bitcoin or other underlying crypto assets.

The Rise of Crypto Dollars

Due to the highly volatile nature of cryptocurrencies, USD stablecoin, a crypto-powered blockchain token that pegs its value to the U.S. dollar, was introduced to provide stable dollar exposure in the crypto trading sphere. Tether is the first of its kind. Issued in 2014 on the bitcoin blockchain (Omni layer protocol), under the token symbol USDT, it attempts to provide crypto traders with a stable settlement currency while they trade in and out of various crypto assets. The reason behind the stablecoin creation was to address the inefficient and burdensome aspects of having to move fiat U.S. dollars between the legacy banking system and crypto exchanges. Because one USDT is theoretically backed by one U.S. dollar, traders can use USDT to trade and settle to fiat dollars. It was not until 2017 that the majority of traders seemed to realize Tether’s intended utility and started using it widely. As of April 2019, USDT trading volume started exceeding the trading volume of bitcoina12, and it now dominates the crypto trading sphere with over $50 billion average daily trading volume13.

https://preview.redd.it/3vq7v1jg09p51.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=46f11b5f5245a8c335ccc60432873e9bad2eb1e1
An interesting aspect of USDT is that although the claimed 1:1 backing with U.S. dollar collateral is in question, and the Tether company is in reality running fractional reserves through a loose offshore corporate structure, Tether’s trading volume and adoption continues to grow rapidly14. Perhaps in comparison to fiat U.S. dollars, which is not really backed by anything, Tether still has cash equivalents in reserves and crypto traders favor its liquidity and convenience over its lack of legitimacy. For those who are concerned about Tether’s solvency, they can now purchase credit default swaps for downside protection15. On the other hand, USDC, the more compliant contender, takes a distant second spot with total coin circulation of $1.8 billion, versus USDT at $14.5 billion (at the time of publication). It is still too early to tell who is the ultimate leader in the stablecoin arena, as more and more stablecoins are launching to offer various functions and supporting mechanisms. There are three main categories of stablecoin: fiat-backed, crypto-collateralized, and non-collateralized algorithm based stablecoins. Most of these are still at an experimental phase, and readers can learn more about them here. With the continuous innovation of stablecoin development, the utility stablecoins provide in the overall crypto market will become more apparent.

Institutional Developments

In addition to trade settlement, stablecoins can be applied in many other areas. Cross-border payments and remittances is an inefficient market that desperately needs innovation. In 2020, the average cost of sending money across the world is around 7%16, and it takes days to settle. The World Bank aims to reduce remittance fees to 3% by 2030. With the implementation of blockchain technology, this cost could be further reduced close to zero.
J.P. Morgan, the largest bank in the U.S., has created an Interbank Information Network (IIN) with 416 global Institutions to transform the speed of payment flows through its own JPM Coin, another type of crypto dollar17. Although people argue that JPM Coin is not considered a cryptocurrency as it cannot trade openly on a public blockchain, it is by far the largest scale experiment with all the institutional participants trading within the “permissioned” blockchain. It might be more accurate to refer to it as the use of distributed ledger technology (DLT) instead of “blockchain” in this context. Nevertheless, we should keep in mind that as J.P. Morgan currently moves $6 trillion U.S. dollars per day18, the scale of this experiment would create a considerable impact in the international payment and remittance market if it were successful. Potentially the day will come when regulated crypto exchanges become participants of IIN, and the link between public and private crypto assets can be instantly connected, unlocking greater possibilities in blockchain applications.
Many central banks are also in talks about developing their own central bank digital currency (CBDC). Although this idea was not new, the discussion was brought to the forefront due to Facebook’s aggressive Libra project announcement in June 2019 and the public attention that followed. As of July 2020, at least 36 central banks have published some sort of CBDC framework. While each nation has a slightly different motivation behind its currency digitization initiative, ranging from payment safety, transaction efficiency, easy monetary implementation, or financial inclusion, these central banks are committed to deploying a new digital payment infrastructure. When it comes to the technical architectures, research from BIS indicates that most of the current proofs-of-concept tend to be based upon distributed ledger technology (permissioned blockchain)19.

https://preview.redd.it/lgb1f2rw19p51.png?width=700&format=png&auto=webp&s=040bb0deed0499df6bf08a072fd7c4a442a826a0
These institutional experiments are laying an essential foundation for an improved global payment infrastructure, where instant and frictionless cross-border settlements can take place with minimal costs. Of course, the interoperability of private DLT tokens and public blockchain stablecoins has yet to be explored, but the innovation with both public and private blockchain efforts could eventually merge. This was highlighted recently by the Governor of the Bank of England who stated that “stablecoins and CBDC could sit alongside each other20”. One thing for certain is that crypto dollars (or other fiat-linked digital currencies) are going to play a significant role in our future economy.

Future Opportunities

There is never a dull moment in the crypto sector. The industry narratives constantly shift as innovation continues to evolve. Twelve years since its inception, Bitcoin has evolved from an abstract subject to a familiar concept. Its role as a secured, scarce, decentralized digital store of value has continued to gain acceptance, and it is well on its way to becoming an investable asset class as a portfolio hedge against asset price inflation and fiat currency depreciation. Stablecoins have proven to be useful as proxy dollars in the crypto world, similar to how dollars are essential in the traditional world. It is only a matter of time before stablecoins or private digital tokens dominate the cross-border payments and global remittances industry.
There are no shortages of hypes and experiments that draw new participants into the crypto space, such as smart contracts, new blockchains, ICOs, tokenization of things, or the most recent trends on DeFi tokens. These projects highlight the possibilities for a much more robust digital future, but the market also needs time to test and adopt. A reliable digital payment infrastructure must be built first in order to allow these experiments to flourish.
In this paper we examined the historical background and economic reasons for the U.S. dollar’s dominance in the world, and the probable conclusion is that the demand for U.S. dollars will likely continue, especially in the middle of a global pandemic, accompanied by a worldwide economic slowdown. The current monetary system is far from perfect, but there are no better alternatives for replacement at least in the near term. Incremental improvements are being made in both the public and private sectors, and stablecoins have a definite role to play in both the traditional and the new crypto world.
Thank you.

Reference:
[1] How the US dollar became the world’s reserve currency, Investopedia
[2] The dollar is in high demand, prone to dangerous appreciation, The Economist
[3] Dollar dominance in trade and finance, Gita Gopinath
[4] Global trades dependence on dollars, The Economist & IMF working papers
[5] Total credit to non-bank borrowers by currency of denomination, BIS
[6] Biggest stock exchanges in the world, Business Insider
[7] McKinsey Global Private Market Review 2020, McKinsey & Company
[8] Central banks current interest rates, Global Rates
[9] Venezuela hyperinflation hits 10 million percent, CNBC
[10] Lebanon inflation crisis, Reuters
[11] Venezuela cryptocurrency market, Chainalysis
[12] The most used cryptocurrency isn’t Bitcoin, Bloomberg
[13] Trading volume of all crypto assets, coinmarketcap.com
[14] Tether US dollar peg is no longer credible, Forbes
[15] New crypto derivatives let you bet on (or against) Tether’s solvency, Coindesk
[16] Remittance Price Worldwide, The World Bank
[17] Interbank Information Network, J.P. Morgan
[18] Jamie Dimon interview, CBS News
[19] Rise of the central bank digital currency, BIS
[20] Speech by Andrew Bailey, 3 September 2020, Bank of England
submitted by Tokenomy to tokenomyofficial [link] [comments]

[WRITEUP] Criticism of r/privacy and r/privacytoolsio moderation censorship and how Apple/Brave/Chrome/GrapheneOS cult armies are destroying privacy communities

Hello! I wanted to discuss this on the soon-to-come occasion of 400 subscribers (398 as I write this), but I guess I will do it now, since the time is just right. This is a long post, so embrace yourself. This is an untalked topic, and you will rarely, if ever, find a record or post about the same.
Censorship in privacy communities is ironic, especially when the communities stand as the biggest ones on reddit. A lot of voices either go silent by account deletion and reappearing as new usernames, or they never speak up since they have been effectively "banned" so have no representation. A lot of this can be easily credited to folks breaking rules, which moderation would claim is certainly a need to manage large public forums. However, there is a section of people who criticise the Apple/Brave/Chrome/GrapheneOS cult armies, and this is where the problem starts to rise.

THE FOUR CULT ANTI-PRIVACY ARMIES

APPLE

Apple cult armies are in denial of Apple devices being privacy nightmares due to being closed source blackboxes. These are good for no more than protecting your data from your nosy girlfriend or the neighbour computer whiz kid.
There is plenty of evidence that goes to prove why Apple devices are nightmares for privacy. This is a comprehensive list of links, images and articles for read:
https://gist.github.com/iosecure/357e724811fe04167332ef54e736670d
https://i.imgur.com/n8Bk0bA.jpg
Siri still recording conversations 9 months later despite Apple's promise to not do it: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/05/20/apple_siri_transcriptions/
Apple Mail vulnerability, and Apple's denial of acceptance of the flaw: https://9to5mac.com/2020/04/27/iphone-mail-vulnerabilities-2/
Apple sells certificates to third-party developers that allow them to track users: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/01/apples-hypocritical-defense-data-privacy/581680/
Apple themselves were one of the main partners buying data from Facebook: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/06/03/technology/facebook-device-partners-users-friends-data.html
The San Ferdandino shooter thing was completely fraudulent: https://www.aclu.org/blog/privacy-technology/internet-privacy/one-fbis-major-claims-iphone-case-fraudulent
Louis Rossmann dismantles Apple's PR stunt "repair program": https://invidio.us/watch?v=rwgpTDluufY

Brave

Brave Browser is funded by DoD: https://np.reddit.com/privatelife/comments/fe34ls/exclusive_brave_browser_funded_by_dod_contracto
Brave traffic detected with Cryptocompare despite BAT rewards disabled: https://removeddit.com/privacytoolsIO/comments/gr8nue/
Brave also has a known history of whitelisting Facebook and Twitter trackers, and has a crippled adblocker that does not work on Brave's "acceptable" advertisements.
NEW EVIDENCE (June 6, 2020): Brave Browser hardcoded their crypto partner Binance referral links (https://twitter.com/cryptonator1337/status/1269201480105578496) alongwith Ledger and soon-to-be-compromised Coinbase (https://decrypt.co/31461/coinbase-wants-to-identify-bitcoin-users-for-dea-irs)

Chrome

These people are partly joint with the GrapheneOS cult, primarily due to its lead developer orchestrating all these things in hindsight and his followers purposely sharing his opinion garbage as "facts".
Most of this was debunked by u/saintjohnny (no longer on reddit) here: https://removeddit.com/firefox/comments/gokcis/
Ridiculous things like lead developer accusing firefox of being a "deployed" army against him and 4chan being used to harm his image: https://i.postimg.cc/3RwLT8Nj/Screenshot-from-2020-05-26-23-10-20.png

GrapheneOS

The moderator u trai_dep has taken his time to censor me off completely, so that none of my criticisms can be ever read about his dictatorial moderation and the GrapheneOS discussion I had with its lead developer, who at the end gave me plenty evidence about his rudeness, ironically which was against the rules of the subreddit.
https://removeddit.com/privacytoolsIO/comments/gs4uv7/_/fs2ysdm/
Criticism of GrapheneOS lies on one of his comments about OnePlus and Xiaomi apparently not making good enough devices: https://np.reddit.com/privacytoolsIO/comments/gs4uv7/i_dont_fully_trust_grapheneos/fs82fdv/
There is also the issue that he always claims Google Pixel 3/3a is a must with Titan M chip running non verifiable code that one has to rely on for Google's claim of being same as open sourced code, and that it does not have spyware. And he maintains his stand about developing the ROM exclusively for the Pixel devices, which also house Pixel Visual Core, a proprietary Google-only CPU+GPU unit independent of the Snapdragon SoC and with negligible documentation claimed "only" to be used for HDR+ camera algorithm processing. Google has had a history of lying with things like the Location History toggle, or their known data collection business and known relationship with NSA.

EVIDENCE RECORD

I have managed to collect and create what is an evidence record establishing the fact that select moderators either have some kind of agenda or are destroying the privacy community as a whole on the internet itself.
The below large part is a direct copy of the "Criticism of..." section in my Threat Model writeup in the sidebar.

OTHER ISSUES, CRITICISM OF MODERATION OF R_PRIVACY

Telling me that I am a burden to the subreddit is outright super offensive, in my most humble opinion. Moreover, they have a strong opinionated bias towards Apple (here too), however no reason to complain for their opinions if they talk outside /privacy and /privacytoolsIO where they moderate. Take the mod hat off if you want. To their credit, one of them did confirm they have a light threat model and primary goal is to thwart mass surveillance, around Level 3 in my book.
You will always be criticised for complaining about US and rationally judging Chinese technology, and effectively repeatedly banned by American moderators and muted from modmail everytime you complain about people personally name calling you "Chinese intelligence proponent" or "Chinese/Huawei plant" or "idiot".
I cannot make text posts anymore in that subreddit as of 11/02/2020.
Lots of evidence events happened followed after my smartphone guide linked above: https://imgur.com/a/TqOkQk6
In atomicratsen image, you can see proof of them allowing Sinophobic propaganda in the name of arguments, followed by the last image. So that is another thing allowed here.
Below comment is the admission of being lazy, incompetent and calling actual gilded contributor users "burden": https://np.reddit.com/privacy/comments/enoui9/5_reasons_not_to_use_whatsapp/fe6qgd7/ Just in case comment goes poof, screenshot.
Moreover, one of them made it clear in modmail that Sinophobic propaganda are "arguments" and will go uncriticised, likely patriotism owing to a global subreddit's moderation which seems unfair and caters not to all but to favouritism to a larger US/West EU audience on reddit, as said earlier:
The thing is, making an argument that China is shady is that: an argument. I mean, geez: Hong Kong. Enough said. So long as they're being civil about it, it's actually what this Sub is for.
Do you mention anything related to China or their products in your post? If so, it's fair game, and we expect everyone to conduct themselves like rational adults.
I'll check out the reports, but if they're conducting themselves along the lines of our sidebar rules, I (obviously) won't be taking any action. But I also hope that you don't get drawn into arguments that might end up earning yourself a time-out. We're somewhat patient, but at the same time, we can't spend too many man-hours tending a particular subscriber too much. Our time is volunteered and there are 600K+ subscribers. It's not fair to them.
Is this all fair to me, a cooperating member? If moderation and volunteering time is such a great issue, it would be a good step to take a backseat and discuss this in a rational non-prejudiced and less authoritarian manner. Why not allow others to take part and aid in moderating that subreddit?
They have repeatedly banned me for nonsensical reasons, standing on last warning, and will likely do so after this post (once for claiming this comment means I called the user asshat instead of their comment, when it never violated /privacy 's rule 5, and another comment where I said to use Win 7/8.1 instead of Win 10, mods claimed it as gatekeeping and banned me for 14 days because I am criticising some things they truly love).
New evidence as of few days ago (Feb 11, 2020): https://i.imgur.com/vOyaidS.png

NEW EVIDENCE

(May 31, 2020)

https://np.reddit.com/privacytoolsIO/comments/gtd3pl/fsb0m7f/ Use removeddit or snew.github.io in case the moderator deletes my comments. The modmail message thread (https://i.imgur.com/JwYaGJU.jpg) and my now shadowbanned comment (https://i.imgur.com/uUrMqyk.png).

NEW EVIDENCE

(June 10, 2020)

The moderator trai_dep now wants a sitewide ban on me for what is informing a reddit user of legitimate logical criticism of GrapheneOS. He calls this harassment, as he has done this multiple times with me in the past (unfortunately for which comments are deleted and evidence not being able to be recorded). However, this is taking it too far. https://i.imgur.com/dX73ZNX.png

NEW EVIDENCE

(June 15, 2020)

trai_dep revengefully deletes my famous gilded smartphone hardening no root guide with 1400+ votes. Modmail proofs post with timestamps: https://old.reddit.com/privatelife/comments/h8hsdh/exclusive_rprivacy_moderator_deleted_smartphone/

SELF TAKE ON THE MATTER

This happened with me on privacy, which is a major why I started this community. There must exist a place free of prejudiced bias and free of any forms of bigotry for privacy, truth and freedom loving folks. The fact that the moderators can get away with it by saying nice words after the ban reeks of a dictator that loves to give speech about care of its citizens, yet will slice anyone up. trai_dep and his friends continue to support the bigotry and these cult armies, which is likely because they do not understand nearly any higher order of technical aspect of privacy threat modelling, and have got no education on the same.

CONCLUSION

Privacy communities on reddit are a huge problem when it comes to dealing with the cult brigading, and instead critics are targeted by the cult armies which are let loose in these very communities. privacy and /privacytoolsIO are not true representatives of communities giving good advice for higher privacy and security, unfortunately ruined both by the moderators (many of whom are iPhone users themselves just like trai_dep) and the cult brigade armies.
submitted by TheAnonymouseJoker to privatelife [link] [comments]

How To End The Cryptocurrency Exchange "Wild West" Without Crippling Innovation


In case you haven't noticed the consultation paper, staff notice, and report on Quadriga, regulators are now clamping down on Canadian cryptocurrency exchanges. The OSC and other regulatory bodies are still interested in industry feedback. They have not put forward any official regulation yet. Below are some ideas/insights and a proposed framework.



Many of you have limited time to read the full proposal, so here are the highlights:

Offline Multi-Signature

Effective standards to prevent both internal and external theft. Exchange operators are trained and certified, and have a legal responsibility to users.

Regular Transparent Audits

Provides visibility to Canadians that their funds are fully backed on the exchange, while protecting privacy and sensitive platform information.

Insurance Requirements

Establishment of basic insurance standards/strategy, to expand over time. Removing risk to exchange users of any hot wallet theft.


Background and Justifications


Cold Storage Custody/Management
After reviewing close to 100 cases, all thefts tend to break down into more or less the same set of problems:
• Funds stored online or in a smart contract,
• Access controlled by one person or one system,
• 51% attacks (rare),
• Funds sent to the wrong address (also rare), or
• Some combination of the above.
For the first two cases, practical solutions exist and are widely implemented on exchanges already. Offline multi-signature solutions are already industry standard. No cases studied found an external theft or exit scam involving an offline multi-signature wallet implementation. Security can be further improved through minimum numbers of signatories, background checks, providing autonomy and legal protections to each signatory, establishing best practices, and a training/certification program.
The last two transaction risks occur more rarely, and have never resulted in a loss affecting the actual users of the exchange. In all cases to date where operators made the mistake, they've been fully covered by the exchange platforms.
• 51% attacks generally only occur on blockchains with less security. The most prominent cases have been Bitcoin Gold and Ethereum Classic. The simple solution is to enforce deposit limits and block delays such that a 51% attack is not cost-effective.
• The risk of transactions to incorrect addresses can be eliminated by a simple test transaction policy on large transactions. By sending a small amount of funds prior to any large withdrawals/transfers as a standard practice, the accuracy of the wallet address can be validated.
The proposal covers all loss cases and goes beyond, while avoiding significant additional costs, risks, and limitations which may be associated with other frameworks like SOC II.

On The Subject of Third Party Custodians
Many Canadian platforms are currently experimenting with third party custody. From the standpoint of the exchange operator, they can liberate themselves from some responsibility of custody, passing that off to someone else. For regulators, it puts crypto in similar categorization to oil, gold, and other commodities, with some common standards. Platform users would likely feel greater confidence if the custodian was a brand they recognized. If the custodian was knowledgeable and had a decent team that employed multi-sig, they could keep assets safe from internal theft. With the right protections in place, this could be a great solution for many exchanges, particularly those that lack the relevant experience or human resources for their own custody systems.
However, this system is vulnerable to anyone able to impersonate the exchange operators. You may have a situation where different employees who don't know each other that well are interacting between different companies (both the custodian and all their customers which presumably isn't just one exchange). A case study of what can go wrong in this type of environment might be Bitpay, where the CEO was tricked out of 5000 bitcoins over 3 separate payments by a series of emails sent legitimately from a breached computer of another company CEO. It's also still vulnerable to the platform being compromised, as in the really large $70M Bitfinex hack, where the third party Bitgo held one key in a multi-sig wallet. The hacker simply authorized the withdrawal using the same credentials as Bitfinex (requesting Bitgo to sign multiple withdrawal transactions). This succeeded even with the use of multi-sig and two heavily security-focused companies, due to the lack of human oversight (basically, hot wallet). Of course, you can learn from these cases and improve the security, but so can hackers improve their deception and at the end of the day, both of these would have been stopped by the much simpler solution of a qualified team who knew each other and employed multi-sig with properly protected keys. It's pretty hard to beat a human being who knows the business and the typical customer behaviour (or even knows their customers personally) at spotting fraud, and the proposed multi-sig means any hacker has to get through the scrutiny of 3 (or more) separate people, all of whom would have proper training including historical case studies.
There are strong arguments both for and against using use of third party custodians. The proposal sets mandatory minimum custody standards would apply regardless if the cold wallet signatories are exchange operators, independent custodians, or a mix of both.

On The Subject Of Insurance
ShakePay has taken the first steps into this new realm (congratulations). There is no question that crypto users could be better protected by the right insurance policies, and it certainly feels better to transact with insured platforms. The steps required to obtain insurance generally place attention in valuable security areas, and in this case included a review from CipherTrace. One of the key solutions in traditional finance comes from insurance from entities such as the CDIC.
However, historically, there wasn't found any actual insurance payout to any cryptocurrency exchange, and there are notable cases where insurance has not paid. With Bitpay, for example, the insurance agent refused because the issue happened to the third party CEO's computer instead of anything to do with Bitpay itself. With the Youbit exchange in South Korea, their insurance claim was denied, and the exchange ultimately ended up instead going bankrupt with all user's funds lost. To quote Matt Johnson in the original Lloyd's article: “You can create an insurance policy that protects no one – you know there are so many caveats to the policy that it’s not super protective.”
ShakePay's insurance was only reported to cover their cold storage, and “physical theft of the media where the private keys are held”. Physical theft has never, in the history of cryptocurrency exchange cases reviewed, been reported as the cause of loss. From the limited information of the article, ShakePay made it clear their funds are in the hands of a single US custodian, and at least part of their security strategy is to "decline[] to confirm the custodian’s name on the record". While this prevents scrutiny of the custodian, it's pretty silly to speculate that a reasonably competent hacking group couldn't determine who the custodian is. A far more common infiltration strategy historically would be social engineering, which has succeeded repeatedly. A hacker could trick their way into ShakePay's systems and request a fraudulent withdrawal, impersonate ShakePay and request the custodian to move funds, or socially engineer their way into the custodian to initiate the withdrawal of multiple accounts (a payout much larger than ShakePay) exploiting the standard procedures (for example, fraudulently initiating or override the wallet addresses of a real transfer). In each case, nothing was physically stolen and the loss is therefore not covered by insurance.
In order for any insurance to be effective, clear policies have to be established about what needs to be covered. Anything short of that gives Canadians false confidence that they are protected when they aren't in any meaningful way. At this time, the third party insurance market does not appear to provide adequate options or coverage, and effort is necessary to standardize custody standards, which is a likely first step in ultimately setting up an insurance framework.
A better solution compared to third party insurance providers might be for Canadian exchange operators to create their own collective insurance fund, or a specific federal organization similar to the CDIC. Such an organization would have a greater interest or obligation in paying out actual cases, and that would be it's purpose rather than maximizing it's own profit. This would be similar to the SAFU which Binance has launched, except it would cover multiple exchanges. There is little question whether the SAFU would pay out given a breach of Binance, and a similar argument could be made for a insurance fund managed by a collective of exchange operators or a government organization. While a third party insurance provider has the strong market incentive to provide the absolute minimum coverage and no market incentive to payout, an entity managed by exchange operators would have incentive to protect the reputation of exchange operators/the industry, and the government should have the interest of protecting Canadians.

On The Subject of Fractional Reserve
There is a long history of fractional reserve failures, from the first banks in ancient times, through the great depression (where hundreds of fractional reserve banks failed), right through to the 2008 banking collapse referenced in the first bitcoin block. The fractional reserve system allows banks to multiply the money supply far beyond the actual cash (or other assets) in existence, backed only by a system of debt obligations of others. Safely supporting a fractional reserve system is a topic of far greater complexity than can be addressed by a simple policy, and when it comes to cryptocurrency, there is presently no entity reasonably able to bail anyone out in the event of failure. Therefore, this framework is addressed around entities that aim to maintain 100% backing of funds.
There may be some firms that desire but have failed to maintain 100% backing. In this case, there are multiple solutions, including outside investment, merging with other exchanges, or enforcing a gradual restoration plan. All of these solutions are typically far better than shutting down the exchange, and there are multiple cases where they've been used successfully in the past.

Proof of Reserves/Transparency/Accountability
Canadians need to have visibility into the backing on an ongoing basis.
The best solution for crypto-assets is a Proof of Reserve. Such ideas go back all the way to 2013, before even Mt. Gox. However, no Canadian exchange has yet implemented such a system, and only a few international exchanges (CoinFloor in the UK being an example) have. Many firms like Kraken, BitBuy, and now ShakePay use the Proof of Reserve term to refer to lesser proofs which do not actually cryptographically prove the full backing of all user assets on the blockchain. In order for a Proof of Reserve to be effective, it must actually be a complete proof, and it needs to be understood by the public that is expected to use it. Many firms have expressed reservations about the level of transparency required in a complete Proof of Reserve (for example Kraken here). While a complete Proof of Reserves should be encouraged, and there are some solutions in the works (ie TxQuick), this is unlikely to be suitable universally for all exchange operators and users.
Given the limitations, and that firms also manage fiat assets, a more traditional audit process makes more sense. Some Canadian exchanges (CoinSquare, CoinBerry) have already subjected themselves to annual audits. However, these results are not presently shared publicly, and there is no guarantee over the process including all user assets or the integrity and independence of the auditor. The auditor has been typically not known, and in some cases, the identity of the auditor is protected by a NDA. Only in one case (BitBuy) was an actual report generated and publicly shared. There has been no attempt made to validate that user accounts provided during these audits have been complete or accurate. A fraudulent fractional exchange, or one which had suffered a breach they were unwilling to publicly accept (see CoinBene), could easily maintain a second set of books for auditors or simply exclude key accounts to pass an individual audit.
The proposed solution would see a reporting standard which includes at a minimum - percentage of backing for each asset relative to account balances and the nature of how those assets are stored, with ownership proven by the auditor. The auditor would also publicly provide a "hash list", which they independently generate from the accounts provided by the exchange. Every exchange user can then check their information against this public "hash list". A hash is a one-way form of encryption, which fully protects the private information, yet allows anyone who knows that information already to validate that it was included. Less experienced users can take advantage of public tools to calculate the hash from their information (provided by the exchange), and thus have certainty that the auditor received their full balance information. Easy instructions can be provided.
Auditors should be impartial, their identities and process public, and they should be rotated so that the same auditor is never used twice in a row. Balancing the cost of auditing against the needs for regular updates, a 6 month cycle likely makes the most sense.

Hot Wallet Management
The best solution for hot wallets is not to use them. CoinBerry reportedly uses multi-sig on all withdrawals, and Bitmex is an international example known for their structure devoid of hot wallets.
However, many platforms and customers desire fast withdrawal processes, and human validation has a cost of time and delay in this process.
A model of self-insurance or separate funds for hot wallets may be used in these cases. Under this model, a platform still has 100% of their client balance in cold storage and holds additional funds in hot wallets for quick withdrawal. Thus, the risk of those hot wallets is 100% on exchange operators and not affecting the exchange users. Since most platforms typically only have 1%-5% in hot wallets at any given time, it shouldn't be unreasonable to build/maintain these additional reserves over time using exchange fees or additional investment. Larger withdrawals would still be handled at regular intervals from the cold storage.
Hot wallet risks have historically posed a large risk and there is no established standard to guarantee secure hot wallets. When the government of South Korea dispatched security inspections to multiple exchanges, the results were still that 3 of them got hacked after the inspections. If standards develop such that an organization in the market is willing to insure the hot wallets, this could provide an acceptable alternative. Another option may be for multiple exchange operators to pool funds aside for a hot wallet insurance fund. Comprehensive coverage standards must be established and maintained for all hot wallet balances to make sure Canadians are adequately protected.

Current Draft Proposal

(1) Proper multi-signature cold wallet storage.
(a) Each private key is the personal and legal responsibility of one person - the “signatory”. Signatories have special rights and responsibilities to protect user assets. Signatories are trained and certified through a course covering (1) past hacking and fraud cases, (2) proper and secure key generation, and (3) proper safekeeping of private keys. All private keys must be generated and stored 100% offline by the signatory. If even one private keys is ever breached or suspected to be breached, the wallet must be regenerated and all funds relocated to a new wallet.
(b) All signatories must be separate background-checked individuals free of past criminal conviction. Canadians should have a right to know who holds their funds. All signing of transactions must take place with all signatories on Canadian soil or on the soil of a country with a solid legal system which agrees to uphold and support these rules (from an established white-list of countries which expands over time).
(c) 3-5 independent signatures are required for any withdrawal. There must be 1-3 spare signatories, and a maximum of 7 total signatories. The following are all valid combinations: 3of4, 3of5, 3of6, 4of5, 4of6, 4of7, 5of6, or 5of7.
(d) A security audit should be conducted to validate the cold wallet is set up correctly and provide any additional pertinent information. The primary purpose is to ensure that all signatories are acting independently and using best practices for private key storage. A report summarizing all steps taken and who did the audit will be made public. Canadians must be able to validate the right measures are in place to protect their funds.
(e) There is a simple approval process if signatories wish to visit any country outside Canada, with a potential whitelist of exempt countries. At most 2 signatories can be outside of aligned jurisdiction at any given time. All exchanges would be required to keep a compliant cold wallet for Canadian funds and have a Canadian office if they wish to serve Canadian customers.
(2) Regular and transparent solvency audits.
(a) An audit must be conducted at founding, after 3 months of operation, and at least once every 6 months to compare customer balances against all stored cryptocurrency and fiat balances. The auditor must be known, independent, and never the same twice in a row.
(b) An audit report will be published featuring the steps conducted in a readable format. This should be made available to all Canadians on the exchange website and on a government website. The report must include what percentage of each customer asset is backed on the exchange, and how those funds are stored.
(c) The auditor will independently produce a hash of each customer's identifying information and balance as they perform the audit. This will be made publicly available on the exchange and government website, along with simplified instructions that each customer can use to verify that their balance was included in the audit process.
(d) The audit needs to include a proof of ownership for any cryptocurrency wallets included. A satoshi test (spending a small amount) or partially signed transaction both qualify.
(e) Any platform without 100% reserves should be assessed on a regular basis by a government or industry watchdog. This entity should work to prevent any further drop, support any private investor to come in, or facilitate a merger so that 100% backing can be obtained as soon as possible.
(3) Protections for hot wallets and transactions.
(a) A standardized list of approved coins and procedures will be established to constitute valid cold storage wallets. Where a multi-sig process is not natively available, efforts will be undertaken to establish a suitable and stable smart contract standard. This list will be expanded and improved over time. Coins and procedures not on the list are considered hot wallets.
(b) Hot wallets can be backed by additional funds in cold storage or an acceptable third-party insurance provider with a comprehensive coverage policy.
(c) Exchanges are required to cover the full balance of all user funds as denominated in the same currency, or double the balance as denominated in bitcoin or CAD using an established trading rate. If the balance is ever insufficient due to market movements, the firm must rectify this within 24 hours by moving assets to cold storage or increasing insurance coverage.
(d) Any large transactions (above a set threshold) from cold storage to any new wallet addresses (not previously transacted with) must be tested with a smaller transaction first. Deposits of cryptocurrency must be limited to prevent economic 51% attacks. Any issues are to be covered by the exchange.
(e) Exchange platforms must provide suitable authentication for users, including making available approved forms of two-factor authentication. SMS-based authentication is not to be supported. Withdrawals must be blocked for 48 hours in the event of any account password change. Disputes on the negligence of exchanges should be governed by case law.

Steps Forward

Continued review of existing OSC feedback is still underway. More feedback and opinions on the framework and ideas as presented here are extremely valuable. The above is a draft and not finalized.
The process of further developing and bringing a suitable framework to protect Canadians will require the support of exchange operators, legal experts, and many others in the community. The costs of not doing such are tremendous. A large and convoluted framework, one based on flawed ideas or implementation, or one which fails to properly safeguard Canadians is not just extremely expensive and risky for all Canadians, severely limiting to the credibility and reputation of the industry, but an existential risk to many exchanges.
The responsibility falls to all of us to provide our insight and make our opinions heard on this critical matter. Please take the time to give your thoughts.
submitted by azoundria2 to QuadrigaInitiative [link] [comments]

How to buy Bitcoin in the UK (5 Easy Steps with NO Fees ... Best Way To Buy Bitcoin Instantly (I Ditched Coinbase ... How to Accept Bitcoin Payments, Tips, and/or Donations on ... Where To Spend Your Bitcoin - Top 5 Places Online - YouTube 3 Best Ways To Buy BITCOIN in 2019

Online Services West Midlands, CV1 2F United Kingdom. dinodirect.com Huge online store. Currently accepting Bitcoin for orders under 100$ with the USD or EUR currency. Namecheap.com. Domain Registrar, Hosting, Online Services. Namecheap.com Namecheap is a Domain Registrar and Web Host. Buy Domain Names with bitcoin or host your website here. Note: You can also use Spendabit to find places to buy most items with Bitcoin. Major Retailers Microsoft. Microsoft has been accepting Bitcoin for use in its online Xbox Store since 2014. They temporarily took a pause from accepting it due to the volatility and now again are accepting it strictly for the Xbox store credits.. Bill Gates has commented on Bitcoin many times saying things such as ... Unfortunately, Bitcoin payment is currently only accepted for hotel bookings. eGifter. eGifter is an online service that allows you to use your hard-earned Bitcoins to purchase gift cards from places that don’t directly accept Bitcoins, such as Amazon, JCPenny, Sephora, Home Depot, Kohl’s and many others. Just like Expedia and Overstock ... Nevertheless, whilst Bitcoin is growing in popularity, finding places that will accept Bitcoin can still prove to be tricky. So, we’ve saved some of the hard work for you and come to the rescue! Here are just some of the options available to you if you do decide to indulge your curiosities and invest in a Bitcoin or two. Places That Accept Bitcoin in UK Bitcoin payment is supported in many establishments in the UK , both physical stores and online. These including music and video games stores, web hosting and domains companies, gift card suppliers, books, sports and recreational services, schools, clothing stores, office space, computer components, data backup ...

[index] [8423] [14378] [779] [11501] [34384] [13481] [26027] [24599] [30883] [35000]

How to buy Bitcoin in the UK (5 Easy Steps with NO Fees ...

10 best places to buy bitcoin with a credit debit card or PayPal in USA - Duration: ... How to Accept Bitcoin Payments, Tips, and/or Donations on Your Website - Duration: 3:39. Welcome to Bitcoin for Beginners. This episode I'll be showing the best way to buy Bitcoin in the UK with NO fees! (This is NOT a sponsored video) • Get $10 ... I love to see new things and having a travel agency accept bitcoin seems to be right on being the fact that Bitcoin is a international currency. So there you have it the 10 major companies ... Who accepts bitcoin as a valid payment? We look at the companies, shops & stores that are currently accepting bitcoin as payment. Here is the list of the companies accepting bitcoin as payment ... Coinbase lets you accept Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin and Bitcoin Cash, while BitPay is solely used for Bitcoin payments. Coinbase is by far the world’s biggest crypto-exchange and management ...

#