?>

Things Ray Dalio Hasn’t Learned About Crypto Yet

Things Ray Dalio Hasn't Learned About Crypto Yet

 

“Bitcoin today you can't make much transactions in it. You can't spend it very easily."

That's what Ray Dalio, founder of mega hedge fund Bridgewater, had to say about Crypto last month.

He went on to say:

"It's not an effective storehold of wealth because it has volatility to it, unlike gold […] Bitcoin is a highly speculative market. Bitcoin is a bubble."

These remarks (as well as a recent barrage on the topic by JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon) got me excited. Excited because the very people who have built modern “Big Money” don't understand the power that crypto is unleashing around the world. What’s being built isn’t a new area of finance—it’s an entirely new parallel replacement. So Ray, Jamie—these are the highlights of crypto that opened my eyes to what may be coming. And now I can hardly look away.

Some ground rules:

 
  • It's not new money—don't bring the biases you have tied to government-issued currency—it's something far more powerful.
  • Remember: it's still extremely early. In Internet terms, recall the days of the 14.4 KB/s modem. We can squint and begin to imagine Netflix playing on a iPhone, but we are still very far away.
  • No one knows where this leads (this author included) — but it's important to understand why this is like nothing before.

What the internet is for information, blockchain tech is for transactions.

This is important. The Internet is, at it’s core, a series of protocols that allow people—who have no prior relationship—to move data back and forth. This goes from low-level things like semi-structured text all the way to streaming 360-degree video. But as soon as the smallest snippet of text was transferred, everything else could follow. What the internet also did—that wasn’t really possible in the previous world of proprietary machine data connections—was provide smart linkage between content. Example primitives here include embedding a photo and linking to a different web page.

How does this apply to transactions?

Bitcoin’s key “academic” revelation was the first practical solution to a long-standing (since 1982) problem—called the Byzantine Generals Problem.

This problem is as follows:

Several armies surround a castle they are going to attack. Each army faction is led by a general. However, they must all attack simultaneously to ensure success. It doesn’t matter what time they attack, so long as they agree. Since they are spread out, it makes communication unreliable. If two attack times were proposed, some generals might hear a different one first. And worse, some of the generals are traitors, and may relay an incorrect message (wrong attack time or similar) to the other generals. So how can the generals ensure a coordinated attack?

In Satoshi's (the pseudonymous founder of Bitcoin) own words:

They use a proof-of-work chain to solve the problem. Once each general receives whatever attack time he hears first, he sets his computer to solve an extremely difficult proof-of-work problem that includes the attack time in its hash. The proof-of-work is so difficult, it's expected to take 10 minutes of them all working at once before one of them finds a solution. Once one of the generals finds a proof-of-work, he broadcasts it to the network, and everyone changes their current proof-of-work computation to include that proof-of-work in the hash they're working on. If anyone was working on a different attack time, they switch to this one, because its proof-of-work chain is now longer.

After two hours, one attack time should be hashed by a chain of 12 proofs-of-work. Every general, just by verifying the difficulty of the proof-of-work chain, can estimate how much parallel CPU power per hour was expended on it and see that it must have required the majority of the computers to produce that much proof-of-work in the allotted time. They had to all have seen it because the proof-of-work is proof that they worked on it. If the CPU power exhibited by the proof-of-work chain is sufficient to crack the password, they can safely attack at the agreed time.

If you are new to crypto: a “hash” is basically a fingerprint—a secure, repeatable reduction of information. Imagine I send you a file via an insecure channel. Someone could tamper with the file. But if I’ve told you (offline, or another secure channel) what the “hash” is, then you can check to make sure the file arrived without tampering. With the solution for the Byzantine Generals in hand, “Money” as we know it is the easy demonstration app to build—akin to transferring plain text between computers in Internet terms. Bitcoin may not be the platform that captures much of the innovation yet to come, but it’s clearly benefitting from the network effects of being the first real-world deployment that demonstrates the power of this technology.

Never before could anyone build a monetary “country.”

Our locally-issued currency (“fiat” for short) is a relatively fragile, modern invention. We don't have to look very far into history to see how this method may well be ill suited for our future. Consider the Bretton Woods Agreement — named for international conference held in a New Hampshire town of the same name in 1944, at the end of WWII. In short, the agreement was that countries may set their own interest rates, so long as they artificially constrained and fixed exchange rates between each country.

Why? The goal was for countries to have sufficient yield in capital to rebuild war-torn Europe. If currencies were to be fluid, all the capital would go to the economy with the highest real yields (and likely be unavailable for lower-return, but still necessary projects.) The IMF and World Bank were established to finance shortfalls across member countries. But differences in inflation rates went on to rip this agreement apart by the beginning of the 1970s. Even at the size of nations, it's hard to keep anything static in markets. Even after further recalibration, the subsequent floating exchange rates put in place led to rampant inflation in the ‘70s.

In our modern age—with unlimited information and entirely geographically dispersed organizations—why would any organization tie themselves to their geographically-proximate neighbors? Ask anyone who has managed payrolls across currencies: it's an entirely different risk. Now with Crypto, anyone—whether a company, a protocol, a network (think EBay buyers and sellers)—can create their own monetary country. This new country's value, relative to more-commonly-traded-counterparts, may experience significant amounts of volatility.

It doesn't matter that Bitcoin's transactions aren't scalable: you don't have to carry only one physical currency to the global markets. It doesn't matter that it's highly volatile, relative to fiat currency: you will seamlessly be able to convert value to the economic “country” where you need to spend it. Some of these countries (maybe even Bitcoin itself) will eventually become incredibly stable. (Or maybe a monetary country will emerge that provides a simple future yield contract, with desired stability characteristics.)

Some of these “new countries” may badly draw their own borders and be unsustainable or disastrous. Existing nations may be hostile—and attempt to seize or shut down smaller crypto countries. As the Bitcoin project itself has shown—internal politics and inability to move quickly might be huge challenges within these projects. Regardless of an individual ecosystem’s success or failure, this is a new power we've never seen or experienced at scale.

It's a currency. It's access to the network. And it's equity in the project.

With the “real” rates (interest minus inflation) stuck at nearly zero for so long, there's just too much money seeking return. I've written before about the ICO phenomenon and the incredible volume (relative to VC as a whole) that is rushing into the system. At the core: the flexibility of the token system is allowing market demand for non-zero interest returns to seep into new technology projects. So what’s an ICO? Answer: it totally depends.

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

TriForce Tokens Blockchain Gaming Supported by Coventry University Enterprise Ltd, Going Through IP Audit Process With Innovate UK

TriForce Tokens Blockchain Gaming Supported by Coventry University Enterprise Ltd,
Going Through IP Audit Process With Innovate UK

 

Gaming solutions company TriForce Tokens confirms support

from Coventry University Enterprises Ltd and an ongoing IP audit with the U.K. government's innovation agency Innovate UK. Pre ICO scheduled for Oct. 14th. Blockchain gaming solutions start-up TriForce Tokens continues to build momentum, partnering with Coventry University Enterprises Ltd for corporate and business cooperation, while initiating an IP audit with the U.K. government's Innovate UK for its technology and brand. For more information on TriForce Tokens's vision and development objectives, visit the TriForce Tokens website and read the official whitepaper. TriForce Tokens Steam-like blockchain-based gaming platform is in Early Alpha and can be accessed for players and for developers.

Taking the booming online games industry into the blockchain era

More than 2 billion people – almost a third of the entire planet — will be playing games online by the end of 2017, generating revenues in excess of $100 billion*. This number is set to increase by more than six percent annually, as mobile users join a growing legion of console and PC gamers. TriForce Tokens seeks to shake up the multi-billion dollar online games industry with a decentralized platform that will enhance game development and improve player experiences.

The TriForce Tokens revolution: decentralized gaming for new revenue models

TriForce Tokens' chief objective will be to address the main issues that prevent independent developers from producing successful titles, acknowledging that they work with smaller budgets, limited resources and tight deadlines. A decentralized platform promises a way to rapidly deploy common features such as tournaments, P2P trading and peer ranking, across games and platforms.

Players on separate games and platforms will not be forced to abandon their digital empires, as TriForce Tokens will look to harmonize all existing digital assets into a single ecosystem of digital wealth. Using a tokenized system, players can trader with others, earn rewards from competitive events. Developers can use the same tokens to compensate users for tasks and charge custom fees for P2P transactions.

Blockchain transparency is a feature of TriForce Tokens, encouraging communities that foster happiness, safety and ethical conduct. Helpful players who contribute to collaboration are recognized by a unique and transparent honor system, rooting out fraud and negative elements such as "toxic communities" harmful to player retention.

To mitigate player attrition, developers can benefit from TriForce Tokens' big data algorithms and behavioural analysis, learning deep player insights that will greatly assist in creating novel gaming experiences. TriForce Tokens features another blockchain innovation in its authentication network, that hopes to assist developers in copyright and piracy protection. It will also provide alternative methods for developers to still extract some revenue from already pirated content.

Strengthening its position through strategic partnerships

TriForce Tokens recognizes that a multi-faceted approach must be taken to position themselves as a serious leader in online gaming, with sound business, compliance and corporate structures as vital as technology development. TriForce Tokens now has the pleasure to announce that it has initiated an IP audit process with the U.K. government's innovation agency, Innovate UK. The audit will assess TriForce Tokens' technology and brand, helping to provide a stronger business focus to ensure they deliver maximum value. Innovate UK will work with TriForce Tokens to connect them with relevant partners through its innovation networks.

TriForce Tokens will also receive business support from Coventry University Enterprises Limited.  Coventry University Enterprises Ltd's award-winning Technology Park is a prestigious location that hosts some of the region's most innovative businesses and is home to the Serious Games Institute. It already benefits from the synergy of membership with two of the industry's foremost advocates: TIGA, a games and publisher network, and trade association with proven political clout in the U.K., and Swiss-based Crypto Valley Association, a collective of the world's leading blockchain and cryptographic tech initiatives.

TriForce Tokens and Crowdsale

TriForce Tokens (TFT) will be the currency powering payments and rewards on the decentralized gaming ecosystem. They will also be available to trade on external platforms, driving significant appreciation of value as the project grows in strength. TriForce Tokens Steam-like blockchain-based gaming platform is now available for testing. The Early Alpha can be accessed  for developers. As part of a fundraising exercise to support the development of its platform, TriForce Tokens will conduct a public crowdsale of tokens via an Initial Coin Offering (ICO).

A pre-ICO will open on Oct. 14, 2017 (1.30pm GMT) for 48 hours only. Participants in the pre-ICO are able to buy tokens with a 60% discount on top of the standard rate of 1 TFT at $0.20. In addition, 50 random pre-ICO participants will be chosen to receive a free Ledger Nano S hardware wallet. Following this, TriForce Tokens will launch its main ICO event from Nov. 12, 2017 to Nov. 25 (1.30 p.m. GMT), 2017. TriForce Tokens also has ambitions to become the first fully-compliant U.K. ICO, and is working on ISO27001 certification and General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) compliance.

The Team

TriForce Tokens is backed by an ensemble of experts from a range of sectors, including corporate management, online gaming, computer security and blockchain development.

Some of its key team members include:

Pete Mardell, CEO

Mardell established himself as a strong engineering professional with his work on a range of technical web applications when he was Head of Development for a recruitment agency in the UK. An avid gamer, Mardell is also a long-time cryptocurrency enthusiast.

Raza Ahmed, CTO

Ahmed has vast experience as a Senior Full Stack Web Developer and qualified blockchain developer, with expertise in Solidity (Ethereum), Javascript, SQL, Node.js, and AngularJS, among others. An MSc holder in Software Development, Ahmed has developed web applications for almost eight years. An associate professor at Coventry University's Faculty Research Centre for Manufacturing and Materials Engineering, Dr. Shah currently lectures in Ethical Hacking and Computer Security.

Jakub Kafarski, Front-end Engineer

Kafarski has worked on front-end engineering for the likes of Noveo, Madkom and Ericsson across Poland, U.K., and Sweden. He works as a front-end software engineer at CycloMedia Technology, a leader in its field. He is skilled at JavaScript, React, Redux and Node.js and is a member of Mensa.

Sorina Rusu, System Developer

Rusu is a passionate developer with extensive experience in PHP and Node.js. Her good organization skills and dedication has been key to her successes with consulting and tech firms in Romania as well in the U.K.

Haider Malik, Senior Full Stack Developer

A Javascript expert, Malik also doubles as an instructor at learning academies Udemy and Fullstackhour.

Simona Patrut, Marketing

Patrut has a strong marketing background, including a management role at Romania's Hilmi Medical Center, where she has managed entire product marketing cycles. She is an expert at building new partnerships for strong brand awareness.

Mihai Bratoi, Brand Designer

Bratoi is a Platinum Designer at U.K. designing firm 99designs. His work focuses on creating unique, memorable designs that respond well to customer needs for corporate needs and social media. TriForce Tokens is the source of this content. Virtual currency is not legal tender, is not backed by the government, and accounts and value balances are not subject to consumer protections.

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

Sweden Use Crypto Tech To Become Cashless Pioneers

Sweden Use Crypto Tech To Become Cashless Pioneers

 

Sweden, the Scandinavian nation famous for ABBA, Björn Borg, and Volvo,

is leading the way when it comes to becoming the world's first cashless country – and the technology behind Bitcoin, and the cryptocurrencies it has spawned, is catalysing the process. Two years ago, in October 2015, Niklas Arvidsson, a researcher in industrial economics and management at the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, helped to produce a study that predicted his country would be the first to introduce a cashless society. "Cash is still an important means of payment in many countries' markets, but that no longer applies here in Sweden," he said.

The progressive Swedes are on course to achieving their lofty aim, and other Scandinavian nations are following suit. Consider that reports indicate that 56.3 per cent of the country's 1,600 bank branches – 900 of 1,600 – neither hold cash nor accept cash deposits any longer. Further, circulation of the country's traditional currency, the Swedish krona, has been falling for some time; in 2009 the figure was SEK106 billion whereas last year it was just SEK60bn.

Why is this happening?

According to data obtained from Visa, Swedes use bank cards three times more often than the average European. And a Riksbank report, published in December 2016, showed that 97 per cent of the country has access to cards, compared with 85 per cent cash.

There are many additional benefits to living in a society that does not need to use cash – not least when it comes to personal safety. People are less likely to be robbed, and also thieves will not as easily be able to sell on their stolen items. Another key factor is the rise in popularity of Swish, an app owned by six Swedish banks (Danske Bank, Handelsbanken, Länsförsäkringar, Nordea, SEB and Swedbank). It allows anyone with a smartphone to transfer money from one bank account to another, in real time. All that is required is the sender and receiver's phone numbers.

Swish was launched in 2012 and by the end of 2015 it had attracted 3.6 million users, which is more than a third of Sweden's 9.9 million population. Also that year some $515 million was transferred using the app. Those eye-opening numbers have increased significantly since, and now even churches have started to reveal their telephone numbers at the end of each service to make it easier for parishioners to boost their coffers.

This trend has forced Sweden's central banks to consider introducing a digital form of government-backed money, and the technology behind Bitcoin, the pioneering cryptocurrency launched eight years ago, is being promoted as a leading option. A major concern about going cashless in Sweden is that it could exclude the 'unbankables' – that is people without a bank account – and those who do not own a smartphone. Bitcoin, however, has the ability to solve those problems through technology. Users do not require a bank account, and they can, in effect, spend their money anonymously.

Bitcoins and other top cryptocurrencies – Ethereum, Ripple, Dash, Litecoin, and Ethereum Classic – can be purchased outright, and in a straightforward manner, from investment platform eToro, for instance. It has six million members across 140 countries and the company's motto is "crypto needn't be cryptic". Trading on eToro is attractive because it has a fast online verification process, global offices (including in the United Kingdom), and members can use the CopyTrader tool to match the strategies of top-performing traders. Many in the FinTech space believe the Blockchain, a decentralised ledger which is the backbone of cryptocurrencies, is the real game-changing innovation. In Sweden, and elsewhere, they have already toyed with ways in which it can be used in their public services. And sooner rather than later it could well underpin the world's first cashless society.

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

The race to create the Amazon or Instagram of cryptocurrency

The race to create the Amazon or Instagram of cryptocurrency

  • Although the extreme hype around blockchain and cryptocurrency today attracts hucksters and scammers, investor Chris Dixon and Coinbase founder Fred Ehrsam argue that the significance of the rise of cryptocurrencies is undeniable.
  • Just as Amazon created the first web-native e-commerce site, and Instagram the first mobile-native photo site, somebody's going to create the first blockchain-native business.
  • What could it be? Dixon and Ehrsam had no predictions, but contributor Eric Jackson has some ideas.

 

What will be the first native app that taps into the power

of the blockchain, cryptocurrencies and tokens? That's the provocative question posed last week by venture capital investor Chris Dixon and Coinbase co-founder Fred Ehrsam in Andreessen Horowitz's tech podcast "Why Crypto Tokens Matter."

Although the extreme hype around blockchain and cryptocurrency today attracts hucksters and scammers, Dixon and Ehrsam argue that the significance of the rise of cryptocurrencies is undeniable. The analogy they use to explain the significance is this: in the way that the web allowed for the programmability of information for the first time, cryptocurrencies and tokens allow for the programmability of money or value for the first time. The development of the web allowed for new businesses operating at a global scale which the world had never seen before. They believe cryptocurrencies will offer the same potential.

However, Amazon didn't become a $500 billion business overnight. It's taken over 20 years to get to its current size. Dixon and Ehrsam argue that it required the development of a whole ecosystem around Amazon and other web companies – including web servers, databases, logistics, and payment systems – for them to maximize their potential. There will be the same need for a massive build out in infrastructure for cryptocurrencies and tokens to reach the same potential.

But the most intriguing idea in the podcast is how both Dixon and Ehrsam agree that the companies which have the greatest chance to capture the most value with every big wave of technology – such as web, mobile, and now crypto – are the ones who "burn the boats" to yesterday's technology and go all-in on being the first native app for the new wave. For instance, Amazon set the example when it came to native web apps for e-commerce. Unlike Barnes & Noble, they didn't try to keep one foot in traditional retail with their brick-and-mortar stores and one in the web world. They showed the world what a total focus on e-commerce looked like.

The mobile-only world arrived 10 years ago with the unveiling of the Apple iPhone. However, the initial mobile apps were modeled after websites – cramming a large amount of data fit for a web page on to a tinier mobile screen. Flickr was the dominant photo site in 2007. It created a mobile app for itself but still was geared to you going to your computer and uploading photos. It wasn't until Instagram came along when the world saw what a mobile-only photo app looked like. For a long time, there wasn't even a webpage for Instagram. Users flocked to it, and Facebook bought it for what seems like a bargain price of $1 billion in 2012. It's still the dominant photo-sharing app today

What this business might look like

So what will be the first "blockchain-only" native business? Dixon and Ehrsam don't have any predictions of what that business will be or when it will arrive. But it's helpful to think about what such a business could look like, if you're an investor like me and interested in keeping your eyes open to find out what to look for.

To me, what's most interesting about the whole advent of cryptocurrencies in the past year is Etheruem and how it allows for "smart contracts" to program the relationship of money between parties. The basic idea is that, if something happens, then someone should get paid automatically. You can imagine intricate conditional patterns that allow for people to be generate value for themselves automatically while stripping out a bunch of intermediaries which have existed up until now taking out a toll at every step along the way. The businesses that can pop up, go after big markets, and put these old intermediaries out of business should have a big leg up on future competition.

Here are some ideas of possible businesses to look for in the years ahead (and invest in if you're lucky):

  • The first all-blockchain insurance company that only issues policies in smart contract form.
  • Human futures. On my recent podcast with Balaji Srinivasan, he spoke about the company Upstart. It was founded a few years ago with the idea of actually allowing you to invest in an individual's potential future income stream. You could decide to lend to them based on their background and ask for a share in their upside career (almost like an agent). Smart contracts would make that business model feasible. Upstart pivoted away from that model a few years ago but it will be possible in the future.
  • We already have have online law firms like LegalZoom which allow you to more easily incorporate your business for example. What about a law service only focused on creating smart contracts without a lot of expensive overhead of top laywers running around billing by the hour?
  • Why not a LinkedIn career service focused on matching short-term gigs that tap in to your specific expertise and pay you in some cryptocurrency?
  • The first institutional investment bank allowing only blockchain-based trading of securities with immediate settlement. They could also finally crack the IPO code for the perfect "dutch auction" of new issues with a perfect matching of buyers and sellers to the optimal amount of money raised goes to the issuer, instead of the investment banking clients.
  • The first blockchain-based rewards system that rewards participants with special offers if they allow advertisers see when they perform certain tasks or reach certain levels.
  • The first blockchain-based mortgage lender or credit card issuer.
  • With the whole Equifax scandal of the past few weeks, why not a blockchain-based (hyper secure) credit bureau to replace the status quo credit bureaus of today with a promise of better confidentiality and better credit information?

We need to get beyond the Jamie Dimon type of discussion about bitcoin being a fraud or the speculative bubble around cryptocurrencies. Instead, we need to look at the underlying technology around these currencies, especially smart contracts that are programmable and enforceable. These contracts will allow for many new disruptive businesses to be formed on top of them. If you find the first new "native app" to be built on top of the blockchain in a big product category, it's likely that you'll find an attractive long-term investment.

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

Dubai just got its first official cryptocurrency

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

AngelList Creator Naval Ravikant Backs S&P-Style Cryptocurrency Fund

AngelList Creator Naval Ravikant Backs S&P-Style Cryptocurrency Fund

 

 

A startup led by former Facebook and Google employees is launching a cryptocurrency index fund.

Backed by AngelList founder Naval Ravikant, Bitwise Asset Management is today coming out of stealth mode to reveal its first product, the Bitwise Hold10 Private Index Fund – a market cap-weighted basket of the top 10 cryptocurrencies by network value. With the launch, investors who participate in the fund will own shares meant to reflect the value of the underlying assets, allowing them to achieve what BitWise argues is a broad exposure to the cryptocurrency market.

The fund's co-founders are Hunter Horsley, a former Facebook and Instagram project manager and Wharton graduate, and Hong Kim, a Google veteran and former Korean military software security expert. One of the key goals of the fund, Horsley said is to create a way for investors to gain exposure to cryptocurrency with the ease and economy of investing in an S&P 500 index fund.

Horsley told CoinDesk:

"We want to create a meaningful and secure way to own a portfolio of cryptocurrency. We feel that, today, it's too hard and it's too expensive."

Bitwise's basic thesis breaks down rather neatly along those lines – particularly the assessment of the founders that existing investing options now present significant challenges to retail investors. According to Horsley, prior to March of 2017, investors could gain broad exposure to the cryptocurrency asset class simply by owning bitcoin, which until then represented 85 percent of the total market value. However, with the rise in the total market capitalization of the various different networks to more than $100 billion, he contends that achieving such exposure now requires more active management and, given the nascent stage of the market, specialized expertise.

Fees and features

But amidst a boom in the number of investment options available, Horsely intends to compete on more than simply market knowledge. Notably, the fund charges just 2 percent on an annualized basis. Further, it does not charge a fee on profits, making it more reasonably priced than alternatives, he claims. By comparison, other funds are charging investors a traditional hedge fund-style "two and twenty" fee, which includes a sizable 20 percent fee charged against any profits the fund generates. While the fund requires investors be both accredited and based in the U.S., the minimum investment is a relatively modest $10,000.

Also, in what he argued puts the fund in contrast to a wave of other hedge funds launched over the summer, Horsley said Bitwise will seek a passive investment strategy. While other funds actively trade crypto assets in an attempt to generate a larger return, he said BitWise will simply hold a portfolio of assets that represents the broader market.

Another advantage, Horsley said, is that retail investors won't have to take ownership of any cryptocurrencies themselves, or to devise a strategy to ensure the security of their investments. "We are 100 percent 'cold storage'," he said, in reference to the way the fund stores its assets in a more secure, offline environment. The only time the assets will come out of cold storage, he added, is when the fund rebalances itself – meaning the times when the fund must buy or sell coins in order to reflect the same relative market capitalizations of the market more broadly.

Horsley explained:

 

"I think for some people it can be feasible to store things in hardware wallets, and do it themselves, but there are, of course, a lot of risks to doing that. I think, from a security perspective, having a titled share – the assets of which are then backed by our storage – is really helpful."

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

Dragonchain, Originally Developed at Disney, Opens Limited Supply Initial Coin Offering (ICO)

Dragonchain,
Originally Developed at Disney,
Opens Limited Supply
Initial Coin Offering (ICO)

Dragonchain, the blockchain platform originally developed at Disney
SEATTLE, Oct. 2, 2017 /PRNewswire/ — Dragonchain, the blockchain platform originally developed at Disney, opens its public Initial Coin Offering (ICO) today, the one-year anniversary of Disney releasing it as open source. Running Oct. 2 – Nov. 2, the tokens issued during the ICO (Dragons) will provide access to Dragonchain platform services, project incubation, and professional services to support enterprises, start-ups, and entrepreneurs building applications on the platform.

Dragonchain simplifies the integration of real business applications on a blockchain and provides features such as easy integration, protection of business data and operations, currency agnosticism, and multi-currency support. The company also provides professional services to build-out development and successful tokenization ecosystems with long term value utilizing an incubation model. Please visit and contact us at https://dragonchain.com/.

"Our vision for Dragonchain is a secure and flexible blockchain platform paired with a crowd scaled incubator," said Joe Roets, Founder and CEO of Dragonchain, Inc. "The system is modeled to create feedback loops and accelerate blockchain projects and market success." Dragonchain was originally developed at Disney's Seattle office between 2015 and 2016 under the name "Disney Private Blockchain Platform." The project launched as open-source by Disney on October 2, 2016, and is now maintained by the Dragonchain Foundation.

In addition, Dragonchain officially announces the formation of its Advisory Board to provide strategic guidance on future endeavors. "Dragonchain's context-based approval ushers in a new era of inter-linked blockchain databases, multi-dimensional datastores that scale to customer requirements," said Jeff Garzik, co-founder at Bloq and Dragonchain Advisory Board member. "Joe and the Dragonchain team are bringing a unique solution to market – the latest in blockchain technology, combining ease of integration, cloud scalability and secure grounding in public blockchain networks."

Dragonchain Advisory Board members include:

Jeff Garzik, co-founder, Bloq
A futurist, bitcoin entrepreneur and software engineer, Jeff is co- founder and CEO of Bloq, a code-for-hire service that delivers enterprise grade blockchain technology to leading companies worldwide.

Matthew Roszak, co-founder, Bloq and founding partner, Tally Capital
Co-founder at Bloq and founding partner at Tally Capital, Matthew is an avid supporter and investor in the exciting technology frontier of blockchain.

Ed Fries, tech industry advisor and co-founder of the original Xbox
Ed joined Microsoft in 1986, and as a VP, spent 10 years as one of the early developers of Excel and Word. He left the Office team to pursue his passion for interactive entertainment and created Microsoft Game Studios. Over the next eight years he grew the team from 50 people to over 1200, published over 100 games, co-founded the Xbox Project, making Microsoft one of the leaders in the video game business.

Collin LaHay (Collin Crypto), Gambit founder
Blockchain expert, Bitcoin angel investor, ICO advisor, founder at Gambit, entrepreneur, internet marketer and founder of CollinLaHay.com a search engine marketing business offering.

Tom Bush – former assistant director, FBI CJIS Division
National security, homeland security and law enforcement subject matter expert with over 33 years in federal law enforcement and owner at Tom Bush Consulting.

Chris Boscolo – Founder, lifeID
A specialist in cloud-computing, Amazon Web Services, network security, TCP/IP network protocols embedded systems and Linux kernel drivers, Chris has more than 20 years' experience building commercially successful products. "With increased concerns around security and privacy, blockchain is a transformative technology," said Tom Bush, owner at Tom Bush Consulting and Dragonchain Advisory Board member. "Dragonchain is positioned to be a notable player in this sector."

About Dragonchain
Dragonchain simplifies the integration of real business applications on a blockchain and provides features such as easy integration, protection of business data and operations, currency agnosticism, and multi-currency support. The company also provides professional services to build-out development and successful tokenization ecosystems with long term value utilizing an incubation model.

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

Blockchains: How They Work and Why They’ll Change the World

Blockchains:
How They Work and Why They’ll
Change the World

The technology behind Bitcoin could touch every transaction you ever make

 

Bitcoin was hatched as an act of defiance.

Unleashed in the wake of the Great Recession, the cryptocurrency was touted by its early champions as an antidote to the inequities and corruption of the traditional financial system. They cherished the belief that as this parallel currency took off, it would compete with and ultimately dismantle the institutions that had brought about the crisis. Bitcoin’s unofficial catchphrase, “In cryptography we trust,” left no doubt about who was to blame: It was the middlemen, the bankers, the “trusted” third parties who actually couldn’t be trusted. These humans simply got in the way of other humans, skimming profits and complicating transactions.

Bitcoin sought to replace the services provided by these intermediaries with cryptography and code. When you use a check to pay your mortgage, a series of agreements occur in the background between your financial institution and others, enabling money to go from your account to someone else’s. Your bank can vouch that your money is good because it keeps records indicating where every penny in your account came from, and when.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies replace those background agreements and transactions with software—specifically, a distributed and secure database called a blockchain. The process with which the ownership of a Bitcoin token will pass from one person to another—wherever they are, no matter what government they live under—is entrusted to a bunch of computers.

Now, eight years after the first blockchain was built, people are trying to apply it to procedures and processes beyond merely the moving of money with varying degrees of success. In effect, they’re asking, What other agreements can a blockchain automate? What other middlemen can blockchain technology retire?

Can a blockchain find people offering rides, link them up with people who are trying to go somewhere, and give the two parties a transparent platform for payment? Can a blockchain act as a repository and a replay platform for TV shows, movies, and other digital media while keeping track of royalties and paying content creators? Can a blockchain check the status of airline flights and pay travelers a previously agreed upon amount if their planes don’t take off on time? If so, then blockchain technology could get rid of Uber, Netflix, and every flight-insurance provider on the market.

Satoshi Nakamoto

If the blockchain were a religion, Satoshi would be God. This anonymous hacker is responsible for writing the Bitcoin white paper, releasing the first Bitcoin code, and inspiring legions of blockchain developers. Many have sought to reveal his/her/their identity, but to this day that information remains secret.

Those three proposed applications aren’t hypothetical—they’re just a few of the things now being built on Ethereum, a blockchain platform that remotely executes software on a distributed computer system called the Ethereum Virtual Machine. In the blockchain universe, Ethereum, which has its own cryptocurrency, called ethers, is by far the project that is most open to experimentation. But zoom out and a diverse collection of potentially disruptive innovators floods into view. New groups are pitching blockchain schemes almost daily. And the tech world’s titans don’t plan to miss out: Microsoft is offering its customers tools to experiment with blockchain applications on its Azure cloud. IBM, Intel, and others are collaborating on an open-source blockchain initiative called Hyperledger, which aims to provide the bones for business-oriented blockchains. Meanwhile, many of the largest banks—the very institutions that blockchain pioneers were trying to neutralize—have cobbled together their own version of the technology in an attempt to stay ahead of the curve. And even Bitcoin, which runs on the first and most successful blockchain, is being retrofitted for applications its designers never dreamed of.

Pretty much without exception, these new blockchain projects remain unencumbered by actual mass adoption. No single blockchain concept or strategy has yet revolutionized any industry. Bitcoin itself is used by no more than 375,000 people in the entire world on any given day, according to Blockchain.info. But the investor dollars are pouring in, and proposals are floating and colliding like tectonic plates on a hot undercurrent of hype and intrigue.

When the mantle cools, which blockchain platforms will persist, and which will slowly sink back beneath the surface? To make any kind of prediction, you’ve got to understand what a blockchain really is and what it does. The place to start, logically enough, is with Bitcoin.

How Do Blockchains Work? The Bitcoin Example

 

In 2009, an anonymous hacker

(or group of hackers) going by the name of Satoshi Nakamoto unveiled the first entirely digital currency. The technology worked on the principle that, at its foundation, money is just an accounting tool—a method for abstracting value, assigning ownership, and providing a means for transacting. Cash is the historic means of accomplishing these chores. Simply possessing the physical tokens—bills, coins—equals ownership, and it’s up to the individuals to negotiate transactions among themselves in person. As long as cash is sufficiently difficult to replicate, there is no need for a complete accounting of who owns what portions of the money supply, or for the details of who the various holders were of a single $50 bill going back to when it was printed.

However, if you could piece together a running tabulation of who held every bill, then suddenly the physical representations would become unnecessary. Banks and payment processors have already partially sublimated our physical currency into digital records by tracking and processing transactions within their closed systems. Bitcoin completed the transformation by creating a single, universally accessible digital ledger, called a blockchain. It’s called a chain because changes can be made only by adding new information to the end. Each new addition, or block, contains a set of new transactions—a couple of thousand in late August—that reference previous transactions in the chain. So if Helmut pays Hendrieke a bitcoin, that transaction appears at the end of the chain, and it points to the transaction in which Helmut was previously paid that coin by Helche, which in turn points to the time before that when Helche was paid the coin by Halfrid, and so on.

Bitcoin’s blockchain, unlike the ledgers maintained by traditional financial institutions, is replicated on networked computers around the globe and is accessible to anyone with a computer and an Internet connection. A class of participants on this network, called miners, is responsible for detecting transaction requests from users, aggregating them, validating them, and adding them to the blockchain as new blocks. Shortly after the Distributed Autonomous Organization debuted on the Ethereum blockchain, someone siphoned US $60 million in ethers from this autonomous version of a venture-capital fund. In a bold move, the Ethereum developers rewrote the blockchain code to return the money.

Validation entails both verifying that Helmut actually owns the bitcoins in his transaction and that he has not yet spent them elsewhere. Ownership on the Bitcoin blockchain is determined by a pair of cryptographic keys. The first, called the public key, resides in the blockchain for anyone to see. The second is called the private key, and its owner keeps it safe from view. The two keys have a special mathematical relationship that makes them useful for signing digital messages. Here’s how that happens: Helmut takes a message, combines it with his private key, does some calculations, and ends up with a long number. Anyone who has the original message and knows the corresponding public key can then do some calculations of their own to prove that the long number was in fact created with the private key.

In Bitcoin, transactions are signed with private keys that correspond to the public key most recently associated with coins being spent. And when the transaction gets processed, those coins get assigned a new public key. But the main role of miners is to ensure the irreversibility of new transactions, making them final and tamperproof. The method they use for doing so is thought to be the most significant contribution that Satoshi Nakamoto—whoever he or she is—made to the field of computer science.

Ensuring irreversibility becomes necessary only when you invite anyone and everyone to take part in the curation of a ledger. If the Bitcoin blockchain were being run by a single bank with a set of known validators operating under a single jurisdiction, then enforcing the finality of transactions would be as simple as writing it into company policy and punishing anyone who didn’t follow the rules. But in Bitcoin, there is no central authority to enforce the rules. Miners are operating anonymously all over the world—in China, Eastern Europe, Iceland, Venezuela—driven by a diversity of cultures and bound by different legal systems and regulatory obligations. Therefore, there is no way of holding them accountable. The Bitcoin code alone must suffice. To ensure proper behavior, Bitcoin uses a scheme called proof of work.

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

Do You Need a Blockchain?

Do You Need a Blockchain?

According to a study released this July

by Juniper Research, more than half the world’s largest companies are now researching blockchain technologies with the goal of integrating them into their products. Projects are already under way that will disrupt the management of health care records, property titles, supply chains, and even our online identities. But before we remount the entire digital ecosystem on blockchain technology, it would be wise to take stock of what makes the approach unique and what costs are associated with it.

Blockchain technology is, in essence, a novel way to manage data. As such, it competes with the data-management systems we already have. Relational databases, which orient information in updatable tables of columns and rows, are the technical foundation of many services we use today. Decades of market exposure and well-funded research by companies like Oracle Corp. have expanded the functionality and hardened the security of relational databases. However, they suffer from one major constraint: They put the task of storing and updating entries in the hands of one or a few entities, whom you have to trust won’t mess with the data or get hacked.

Blockchains, as an alternative, improve upon this architecture in one specific way—by removing the need for a trusted authority. With public blockchains like Bitcoin and Ethereum, a group of anonymous strangers (and their computers) can work together to store, curate, and secure a perpetually growing set of data without anyone having to trust anyone else. Because blockchains are replicated across a peer-to-peer network, the information they contain is very difficult to corrupt or extinguish. This feature alone is enough to justify using a blockchain if the intended service is the kind that attracts censors. A version of Facebook built on a public blockchain, for example, would be incapable of censoring posts before they appeared in users’ feeds, a feature that Facebook reportedly had under development while the company was courting the Chinese government in 2016.

I Want a Blockchain!

Do you really need a blockchain? Asking yourself a handful of the questions in this interactive can set you on the right path to an answer. You’ll note that there are more reasons not to use a blockchain than there are reasons to do so. And if you do choose a blockchain, be ready for slower transaction speeds.

However, removing the need for trust comes with limitations. Public blockchains are slower and less private than traditional databases, precisely because they have to coordinate the resources of multiple unaffiliated participants. To import data onto them, users often pay transaction fees in amounts that are constantly changing and therefore difficult to predict. And the long-term status of the software is unpredictable as well. Just as no one person or company manages the data on a public blockchain, no one entity updates the software. Rather, a whole community of developers contributes to the open-source code in a process that, in Bitcoin at least, lacks formal governance.

Given the costs and uncertainties of public blockchains, they’re not the answer to every problem. “If you don’t mind putting someone in charge of a database…then there’s no point using a blockchain, because [the blockchain] is just a more inefficient version of what you would otherwise do,” says Gideon Greenspan, the CEO of Coin Sciences, a company that builds technologies on top of both public and permissioned blockchains. With this one rule, you can mow down quite a few blockchain fantasies. Online voting, for example, has inspired many well-intentioned blockchain developers, but it probably does not stand to gain much from the technology.

“I find myself debunking a blockchain voting effort about every few weeks,” says Josh Benaloh, the senior cryptographer at Microsoft Research. “It feels like a very good fit for voting, until you dig a couple millimeters below the surface.” Benaloh points out that tallying votes on a blockchain doesn’t obviate the need for a central authority. Election officials will still take the role of creating ballots and authenticating voters. And if you trust them to do that, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t also record votes. The headaches caused by open blockchains—the price volatility, low throughput, poor privacy, and lack of governance—can be alleviated, in part, by tweaking the structure of the technology, specifically by opting for a variation called a permissioned ledger.

“I find myself debunking a blockchain voting effort about every few weeks”

In a permissioned ledger, you avoid having to worry about trusting people, and you still get to keep some of the benefits of blockchain technology. The software restricts who can amend the database to a set of known entities. This one alteration removes the economic component from a blockchain. In a public blockchain, miners (the parties adding new data to the blockchain) neither know nor trust one another. But they behave well because they are paid for their work. By contrast, in a permissioned blockchain, the people adding data follow the rules not because they are getting paid but because other people in the network, who know their identities, hold them accountable.

Removing miners also improves the speed and data-storage capacity of a blockchain. In a public network, a new version of the blockchain is not considered final until it has spread and received the approval of multiple peers. That limits how big new blocks can be, because bigger blocks would take longer to get around. As of July, Bitcoin can handle a maximum of 7 transactions per second. Ethereum tops out at around 20 transactions per second. When blocks are added by fewer, known entities, they can hold more data without slowing things down or threatening the security of the blockchain. Greenspan of Coin Sciences claims that MultiChain, one of his company’s permissioned blockchain products, is capable of processing 1,000 transactions per second. But even this pales in comparison with the peak throughput of credit card transactions handled by Visa—an amount The Washington Post reports as being 10 times that number.

As the name perhaps suggests, permissioned ledgers also enable more privacy than public blockchains. The software restricts who can access a permissioned blockchain, and therefore who can see it. It’s not a perfect solution; you’re still revealing your data to those within the network. You wouldn’t, for example, want to run a permissioned blockchain with your competitors and use it to track information that gives away trade secrets. But permissioned blockchains may enable applications where data needs to be shielded only from the public at large. “If you are willing for the activity on the ledger to be visible to the participants but not to the outside world, then your privacy problem is solved,” says Greenspan.

Finally, using a permissioned blockchain solves the problem of governance. Bitcoin is a perfect demonstration of the risks that come with building on top of an open-source blockchain project. For two years, the developers and miners in Bitcoin have waged a political battle over how to scale up the system. This summer, the sparring went so far that one faction split off to form its own version of Bitcoin. The fight demonstrated that it’s impossible to say with any certainty what Bitcoin will look like in the next month, year, or decade—or even who will decide that. And the same goes for every public blockchain.

With permissioned ledgers, you know who’s in charge. The people who update the blockchain are the same people who update the code. How those updates are made depends on what governance structure the participants in the blockchain collectively agree to.

Public blockchains are a tremendous improvement on traditional databases if the things you worry most about are censorship and universal access. Under those circumstances, it might just be worth it to build on a technology that sacrifices cost, speed, privacy, and predictability. And if that sacrifice isn’t worth it, a more limited version of Satoshi Nakamoto’s original blockchain may balance out your needs. But you should also consider the possibility that you don’t need a blockchain at all.

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden

Building Blockchains – Ripe Model for Principal- Agent Problem

Building Blockchains
– Ripe Model for Principal-
Agent Problem

 

Management theory, in broad terms, deals with the relationship

between managers and business entities. Inherent in this relationship is the principal-agent problem. This problem arises because the interests of a manager (agent) can — and often do — diverge from the interests of the owners of the business (principal) that he or she is managing.

Classic management incentivization: the carrot and the stick

Business organizations mitigate the principal-agent problem by use of incentive games that better align manager and business owner interests.

Example 1 (Reward-Based Game):

A manager is incentivized to generate revenues for a business because this is a performance metric that will influence his or her compensation. Revenues also benefit the business and its owners by increasing a company’s equity value (benefiting shareholders), enabling the company to pay down debt (benefiting creditors), allowing employees to be paid on time, etc.

Example 2 (Deterrent-Based Game):

A manager is deterred from acting in a manner that incurs excessive risk and liability for the business owners. One way this is achieved is through legal mechanisms such as vicarious liability or ‘piercing the corporate veil.’ The former may allow a manager to be held directly liable for the injury, or illegal conduct, of his or her employee; the latter may allow a manager to be held personally and solely liable in the context of fraud, etc.

I would hazard that the modern ‘business organization stack’ is built upon hundreds of different reward and deterrent incentive games, each playing a part in collectively establishing a Nash equilibrium between the ‘players’ within a business (i.e., managers and owners). These games are prevalent at all layers of the stack — e.g., compensation structures, human resources policies, governance policies, laws and regulations, etc. — and each game provides ‘checks and balances’ to the principal-agent problem that are fundamental to the viability of the organization.

Enter the ‘Cryptoeconomic Business Model’

With the advent of Blockchain-based assets — and the exponential influx of capital into the Blockchain industry over the past few years — we have witnessed the birth of a novel business model. This model enables companies to make money in new ways through the creation of open-source protocols and code (an invaluable service for which we once relied upon the altruism, rather than profit motive, of developers to provide).

I refer to this as the cryptoeconomic business model. This can be defined as any business model predicated on making profit by building a cryptoeconomic system, i.e., a peer-to-peer cryptographic network which functions on providing incentive payments to (assumed) adversarial nodes. Virtually all public/permissionless Blockchains today are ‘cryptoeconomic systems’ by this definition.

The cryptoeconomic business model upsets the classic principal-agent equilibrium that is often achieved by using reward and deterrent incentive games. This is done by introducing an entirely new class of stakeholder into the ecosystem — the Keepers of a Blockchain network (e.g. tokenholders and other participants who provide a form of ‘paid labor’ into the network, such as validators, miners, etc.)

If the traditional business has two classes of players (managers and owners), the cryptoeconomic business has three (managers, owners and Keepers). These new entrants complicate the game theory model because, now, instead of the acting only on behalf of owners, there are two sets of stakeholders (owners and Keepers) whose interests depend on the efforts of a manager. What happens when the interests of these different sets of stakeholders diverge? In whose interests would (or should) an agent be motivated to act?

Token offering events & the risk of divergence/dilution

Value creation in a traditional business model is different than value creation in a cryptoeconomic business model. In a traditional business, the final milestone of success is achieving profitability. Managers are incentivized to achieve profitability, and then to perpetually increase profitability, because the fruits of this labor accrue 100 percent to the business entity benefiting both owners and managers. Simple enough. This is not exactly the case for a cryptoeconomic business model. Early in the cryptoeconomic business life cycle, each milestone benefits managers and owners collectively — but upon a company’s token offering event milestone (note: because the term ‘ICO’ is a faux pas) there is a fundamental shift.

Value creation no longer accrues to the business entity, but directly to the product/output of that business (i.e., the cryptoeconomic system)

In a cryptoeconomic business model, the final milestone is not profitability per se, but in the value of the Blockchain network/token, which recent scholarship suggests may be measured as a token’s current utility value (“CUV”) and discounted expected utility value (“DEUV”). CUV/DEUV come into play immediately following the token offering event milestone, concurrently with the introduction of Keepers into the stakeholder set.

So how does this impact our thinking on managerial incentives?

The immediate observation is that managers and owners will only benefit from working to increase a network’s value to the extent that they retain some amount of that network’s native tokens. In practice this amount might be in the ~20–50 percent range for the business entity, which is sizable, but significantly less than the 100 percent value retention model of a traditional business.

In theory, managers have ‘skin in the game’ by virtue of these token holdings and should be motivated to drive growth in the token’s CUV/DEUV with the expectation of selling those retained tokens for a profit at some later date. This outcome would be ideal as it implies an alignment between manager-owner-Keeper interests. But the problem is that the dilution from 100% value retention (in a traditional business model) to ~20–50 percent value retention (in a cryptoeconomic business model) may also dilute a manager’s motivation to create long-term value for the network. Without sufficient reward/deterrent games in place, managers are prone to instances of moral hazard and myopic thinking.

It is plausible, for instance, that this may result in some degree of friction between the profit motive of managers, which incentivizes a manager to retain a significant portion of the tokens for the core business and the interests of the other Keepers/tokenholders who would benefit from those tokens being distributed more broadly thus creating network effects that could increase the CUV/DEUV of the token. This would be an example of misalignment between manager-owner-Keeper interests.

Other challenges in managerial motivation post-genesis block

Another challenge is due to the fact that revenue models (i.e. ‘rent-seeking’) may not be viable in cryptoeconomic systems. If a manager were to extract profit/revenue from a network by coding a centralized fee* into a protocol or dApp (i.e. any type of transaction fee that remits value back to the business), a likely outcome is that the protocol or dApp would either: (i) fail to gain adoption, or (ii) be hard forked by users (or duplicated by a competitor) to remove the fee from its code base thus making the network more cost-efficient.

*Note:

To clarify my point on centralized fees, certain platforms use sustainable fee models as a feature of the platform’s cryptoeconomic design (e.g,. Factom and Counter-Party, wherein a portion of fees are burned to increase the scarcity of the token). Also, as the use cases for dApps/protocols continue to proliferate, centralized fees may prove to be an accepted business model for certain applications of Blockchain technology.

Here are a few of the other ramifications of this challenge:

Profiting upfront; creating value later:

The creators of cryptoeconomic networks (currently) realize value for the business entity primarily via two streams: (i) the proceeds of token offering events, and (ii) the retention of some amount of the offered tokens. Both of these milestones occur relatively early in the life cycle of a business. Given that the majority of a manager’s compensation/profit is front-loaded, experience has shown that some managers will opt to simply complete a token offering event before ‘jumping ship’ to the next project, rather than working to generate value for their current project.

CUV/DEUV is a bad indicator of managerial competence:

We may not yet have the best tools to evaluate managerial performance in cryptoeconomic business models. CUV/DEUV are inherently different metrics than earnings per share, EBITDA, return on equity, etc. (the latter are some of the tools used to evaluate CEO performance in a traditional business). CUV/DEUV is driven by supply and demand; more fitting for valuing a commodity than equity. To evaluate a manager’s performance on the CUV/DEUV of a token is akin to evaluating a gold company CEO’s performance on the price of gold.

The lack of legal mechanisms to protect Keepers/token-holders:

There exists an elaborate body of corporate, securities and employment law designed to address the principal-agent problem between participants in traditional business structures (e.g., vicarious liability, ‘piercing the corporate veil,’ fiduciary duties owed by directors to shareholders, etc.) These protections do not (yet) exist for the Keepers/token-holders of cryptoeconomic systems. Granted, there is free market mechanism in play by virtue of the Keepers’ ability to hard fork a protocol in retaliation to mismanagement, but this overhaul should only be used as a last resort.

Singular token offering events: 

For traditional start-ups, the process of raising capital occurs in tranches (i.e. Seed, Series A, Series B, etc.) and each tranche is largely tied to a manager’s ability to demonstrate progress towards profitability since the previous tranche. Token offerings — on the other hand — are mostly structured as singular events. This structure alleviates the much needed external pressure on managers to deliver on building their products on time and on budget. It also fails to backstop losses for investors in the event that a manager fails to deliver.

These are just a few examples of how the principal-agent problem can manifest itself in the context of new, cryptoeconomic business models— each of which will eventually be solved by new incentive games designed for the tripartite (i.e., manager-owner-Keeper) environment.I suspect that the study of management theory in the context of cryptoeconomic business models will continue to be an evolving field — and a very relevant one at that.

Chuck Reynolds


Marketing Dept
Contributor
Please click either Link to Learn more about -Bitcoin.
Interested or have Questions. Call me 559-474-4614

David https://markethive.com/david-ogden