German Ministry of Finance Considers Monero Is More “Harmful” than Bitcoin

Maria Rodríguez
-
1
German Ministry of Finance Considers Monero Is More “Harmful” than Bitcoin

The high levels of anonymity of Monero and Bitcoin generate concern in the German government

In a recent report issued by the Federal Ministry of Finance of Germany, the minister described Monero (XMR) as a risky cryptocurrency, since digital privacy currencies are more vulnerable to be used in illegal transactions and operations than Bitcoin (BTC). This information was detailed in the report.

In this sense, the government agency conducted a full investigation into the risks of using this type of cryptocurrency to conduct financial operations. In the same way, the government measured the main problems of cryptocurrencies in terms of security, transparency, and functionality.

The conclusion determined by the investigation, in the first national risk report 2018-2019, showed that cryptocurrencies such as Monero (XMR) offer high levels of identity protection. In fact, Monero is able to conduct transactions anonymously, much more than the Bitcoin platform (BTC).

Hence, according to the German Ministry of Finance, these digital assets result to be potentially “dangerous” for the economic security of individuals and financial organizations. In addition, it added that Monero could well be an asset widely used for money laundering, or even as a method of financing terrorism.

The report explains the increasing use of these cryptocurrencies, which could be a type of illicit use that could well be investigated, although with great difficulty.

“Due to the increasing popularity that Monero has acquired in dark networks, it can be expected that this cryptocurrency, specifically, will gain more practical relevance in the future in the area of ​​security”, the document says.

In addition, this report detailed that this cryptocurrency contains sophisticated features that make it really difficult to track the money used in transactions. It is impossible to verify the origin of the funds. The German authorities qualify as “ideal for criminal acts” the fact that Monero safeguards the identity of those who conduct the transaction.

The report also notes that within the darknet itself, (or dark network, where most clandestine and illegal operations are conducted), Bitcoin (BTC) represents a high level of risk to be used in fraudulent and criminal financial operations. Other research shows that anonymity also resulted to be a point against the asset.

At the conclusion, the German agency announced that the legislation in the country will soon be modified, in order to go in line with the guidelines of the European Union, which goes against fraudulent acts such as money laundering and terrorist financing. The authorities also consider to determining a regulatory framework that monitors the actions of companies engaged in cryptocurrencies such as virtual exchange houses, digital wallets, custody services, among others.

The report ended by giving a series of recommendations that could be followed to raise security levels in the face of the use of these technologies the German territory. It was also explained that there was a lack of reliable data to ensure how much cryptocurrencies were used in Germany and the relationship between Bitcoin and terrorism.

Therefore, it was determined that these assets are increasingly used to raise funds for terrorist purposes.

By María Rodríguez

Messenger Is Killed by Dash Dressed as Bitcoin

Willmen Blanco
-
0
Messenger Is Killed by Dash Dressed as Bitcoin

The Dash project blames the media for presenting it as a “currency of privacy.” Now it seeks to position itself as a cryptocurrency not different from Bitcoin.

In modern communication, it is commonly observed that sources of information conveniently change their statements to satisfy third parties. When making these changes, they do not usually assume responsibility and defend their opinions. On the other hand, interviewees, companies or spokespersons take advantage of the old practice of blaming the media.

This strategy, known as “killing the messenger,” is a last resort behavior through which sources try to dissociate themselves from their own statements, and thus allege that they were misunderstood or never said anything about it.

Something similar occurred recently with Dash, a cryptocurrency project that has big differences with Bitcoin. However, the Dash Core Group (DCG) foundation believe that there is no distinctive feature between Bitcoin and Dash that allows one to comply with regulatory guidelines, excluding the other, according to Omar Hamwi, business development manager at DCG.

The controversy arose after Dash was eliminated from several cryptocurrency exchanges houses, since these institutions are complying with recommendations by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) to mitigate the risk of illegal financial activities occurring through virtual asset service providers (VASP).

Dash was eliminated because it was represented in the media as a “privacy currency,” disregarding the actual analysis of the nature of the Dash blockchain, as stated by Hamwi. In fact, in the white paper of Dash the cryptocurrency is presented as an “Encrypted Currency Centered on Privacy,” which contradicts the executive.

Not only the media are blamed but also the journalists that cover the cryptocurrency source, saying that the latter seek to spread “nervousness” through their articles. The reason for this accusation is that some journalists still name Dash as “Darkcoin,” its original name modified in 2015.

A journalist told Hamwi that they do not report the news to generate nervousness. On the contrary, they seek to educate, teach and also report daily events that occur in the ecosystem to keep users updated.

He asked Hamwi not to attack the media or career journalists who have been dedicated to covering this source for years. They are not to blame for Dash being removed from exchange houses as the cryptocurrency has the option of being anonymous.

Dash Is Not and Will Not Be Bitcoin

Although Dash wants to dress as Bitcoin to regain space in exchanges, the project has many differences with the main cryptocurrency in the market. The most obvious is its governance and corporate style system, which has centralized marketing and development teams.

Those who can decide on the path that the project must take are the ones having the financial capacity to maintain a master node. In other words, the operators, a sort of board of shareholders, decide how part of the treasury will be spent, something clearly business-related and non-collaborative, as in the case of Bitcoin.

Dash seeks to reflect how similar it is with Bitcoin. However, there are fundamental differences that, by far, leave it in two different scenarios. There are the aspects of speed, security and cost of transactions as elements in favor of Dash.

Despite the efforts made to make both cryptocurrencies resemble, Dash is not Bitcoin in any way. Whilst millions of people use Bitcoin worldwide driven by education, only a few thousand use Dash. This is the result of marketing campaigns deployed on a global scale as a strategy to find new users.

By Willmen Blanco

Bitcoin Not to Be Considered Cryptoanarchists’ Toy

Willmen Blanco
-
0
Bitcoin Not to Be Considered Cryptoanarchists’ Toy

Disruptive technologies improve at a faster rate than user needs. Computers, phones and even the Internet were initially discarded as toys.

In the decade of the 1990’s, people did not foresee that the introduction of smartphones, computers or Internet access would improve work and personal life considerably. These technologies have allowed communicating more easily, gaining access to new information instantly and making possible new forms of recreation. Today’s changes are due in part to the interaction that people have with these products.

However, people’s way of thinking and assessing technological advances has not changed. There are still people who consider having Bitcoin unnecessary if there are national fiat currencies or gold. This is commonly heard in family gatherings, social networks, or even from experts in any field. This is an evil that afflicts all disruptive technologies, according to the academic and business consultant, Clay Christensen.

Disruptive Technology that Arrives with a Delay

Christensen states that some technological advances are updated at a much higher rate than user needs, so they should be seen as processes. In this sense, at the time of its launch, a technology may not be accessible to everyone, its characteristics may be misunderstood, or its proposal may not solve some immediate problems.

Chris Dixon, investor and Co-founder of Hunch, says that this nature of disruptive technologies leads the Internet economy to change radically every decade. The most influential companies 10 years ago may not exist today or have been relegated by proposals not taken seriously at first.

The first telephone could only transmit voices two or three kilometers away, so the Western Union company decided not to acquire it due to lack of usefulness in the rail system. Although the invention was initially discarded because it was found to be like a toy, over the years it became one of the most important advances of the 20th century.

Christensen stresses that the key to success is how fast technology can improve and how versatile it is to change. If a product can constantly improve, it can be made more useful in users’ eyes.

Bitcoin Is Catching the Wave

It should be mentioned that Bitcoin emerged as a secret in 2009, and mining companies, along with startups and exchange houses began to emerge in subsequent years. The emergence of new sources of work confirmed that Bitcoin was ceasing to be a marginalized and unknown invention by 2012.

However, a good part of Bitcoin society considered (and still consider) it as a specially tailored toy for cryptoanarchists. As a utopian dream by someone who has not slept well and suffers from state paranoia, Bitcoin does not seem to be able to offer a solution to a tangible need. After all, there are still gold and fiat currencies, which continue to function as storage of value and exchange of value, respectively.

This technology has gained a step toward the future, since it has advanced to a need that many have not yet identified. In today’s society, authorities have lost their credibility and personal information is used as a weapon. For this reason, privacy and transparency are increasingly valuable assets. Therefore, Bitcoin can be used to store value and also as a currency; however, its strength is its ability to offer the transparency and privacy not found in other value exchange systems.

By Willmen Blanco

A Blockchain Solution Will Allow Inherit Bitcoins

Maria Rodríguez
-
0
A Blockchain Solution Will Allow Inherit Bitcoins

The solution will allow users to be in “hands” of a specialized lawyer and a multi-password to protect the owner of the digital currencies.

Recently, it was announced that a company dedicated to create blockchain solutions, called Casa Covenant, developed a tool that will allow people who use cryptocurrencies to delegate their assets as inheritance using, even, real estate lawyers specialized in this area.

The tool will work as a custody service for cryptocurrencies, cataloging digital currencies as valuable properties with the right to be inherited or transferred to a family member in case of inactivity or if the owner is sick. This would avoid the fear that some people who save on cryptocurrencies constantly have. In the event of a death, the money will not disappear.

Casa Covenant is a startup which is mainly dedicated to developing multi-signature keys to improve security, as well as creating nodes for Lightning Bitcoin. A few days ago, through its official blog, the company published a document detailing what would happen to these bitcoin assets, once their owner died unexpectedly. It explained how companies proceed today. The first, and the most common procedures, is that the assets remain without being able to access them.

The second option is that a family member or a relative of the deceased can have access to passwords and codes, so that these assets can be accessed. But this is a completely vulnerable option to theft and diversion of funds.

And the third option is the one suggested by the company, where a protocol is put into operation. That protocol can be expressed in a testament and in a completely legal way, using lawyers and documents duly registered in the ordinary public bodies. In this way, the platform helps contain these digital assets and distribute them to who will be the heir of the deceased.

Casa Covenant created a solution based on unifying the multi-signature structure they have developed with the traditional legal system, with the aim to achieve a proper estate planning. To make this possible, the company developed a system of six signatures or keys. Three of them will be used to access the funds withheld and one of them will be in hands of the deceased’s lawyer. This will allow that all funds can be accessed in a safe manner.

Another key will be protected by the company. The key can only be recovered when the lawyer comes with a court order, and a death certificate. In this way, the company is responsible for keeping the bitcoins safe, until the heir asks and access to the assets.

Nick Newmann, who is a representative of the company, says that everything related to legal aspects is not completely covered, since they could have certain failures in the inheritance process for this type of property. Despite this, they explain that they are still working to improve the service.

“In evaluating ways to handle these problems, we realized that the integration of this multi-signature technology with the existing legal and estate planning system is the first correct step. One day a more independent inheritance process will come, but there are many pitfalls when going too far and too fast”, Newmann said.

By María Rodríguez

Canadian Bank is Against Bitcoin ATMs Installation in Aruba

Maria Rodríguez
-
0
Canadian Bank is Against Bitcoin ATMs Installation in Aruba

The RBC bank forced the country to take BTC ATMs out of circulation because these devices violate its regulations.

For regulatory reasons, a Bitcoin ATM (BTC) that worked in a mall of Aruba was taken out of circulation. It is known that this cashier was the only one on all the island which operates with BTC and that, until the moment, has been disabled.

According to the company that owns the ATM, Bitcoin Aruba, which is also an organization responsible for managing and promoting the use of cryptocurrencies, the decision is due to some pressures made by the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC). Said financial institution would make stronger pressures against the owners of the place where the cashier operated. According to Bitcoin Aruba’s statements, this cashier fails to comply with the local regulatory framework and the regulations of the banking institution.

During an interview, the technology consultant, representative and spokesperson for Bitcoin Aruba, Yuri Feliciano, commented that the only BTC cashier that worked on the island was operating in the Bar-Restaurant called “Local Store Aruba”, which is located in the Oranjestad locality. However, the measure forced the bar to stop providing the service and remove it from the place.

According to Feliciano’s statements, the Canadian bank forced the store to eliminate the cashier since it mainly fails to comply with the bank’s regulations. For this reason, Bitcoin Aruba, the organization that owns the BTC ATM, is currently evaluating the new location where it will place the equipment. To make it possible, Bitcoin Aruba has contacted several banks to ask them about their regulations and rules to install the ATM.

“Yes, we own the ATM, but the RBC bank has forced the Local Store to take out the machine since they say it violates its regulations. We are looking for a new location that has not banking with RBC. We have called different banks and there are two of them that do not have problems with the machine”, Feliciano concluded.

The ATM was operative in the Aruba Local Store since last July. According to what Feliciano said, the machine began its operations from day one and maintained a good flow of transactions. This was possible since, as explained the spokesman and owner of the machine, the inhabitants of the island are very interested in cryptocurrencies. He claimed that there is a real demand for BTC.

To conclude, Feliciano said that very soon they will announce, through the social networks and local media, the new location of the ATM so that inhabitants of the island and tourists can access the services offered by the cashier and the organization responsible for promoting it.

It is known that this is not the first Bitcoin ATM that suffered the same destination. Previously, one of these ATMs was taken out of circulation for similar reasons. The suspension of the activities of these ATMs in the Caribbean island is a great obstacle that the cryptocurrency industry faces and must overcome.

By María Rodríguez

Cryptowhales Are Moving Stablecoins rather than Bitcoin

Willmen Blanco
-
0
Cryptowhales Are Moving Stablecoins rather than Bitcoin

BTC falls again below USD 8,000. Stablecoins have been moved in and out of exchange houses.

In the past days, several things have been occurring simultaneously in the cryptocurrency market. First of all, the price of Bitcoin fell back below USD 8,000, and thus cryptowhales have been moving large quantities of stablecoins like USDT and USDC at exchange houses.

Besides, the few Bitcoin movements observed seem to indicate a trend somewhat contrary to the accumulation of value, since they are transactions made from unknown wallets to different exchange houses.

Bitcoin and Cryptowhales

After the price of Bitcoin fell back below USD 8,000, cryptowhales have not moved large amounts of this cryptocurrency. The few that have been observed have been from unknown wallets to exchange houses such as Binance and Coinbase, which in some way reverses the trend that had been showing accumulation of BTC.

Some examples observed were two movements, one for 1,046 BTC and another one for 627 BTC. Probably, they are having a conservative approach because the price of Bitcoin in the market is falling, either to wait to buy when it falls further or to keep the amount that they already have, waiting for the cryptocurrency to recover.

In other words, they are not selling or buying in large quantities. Instead, they are moving stablecoins to wait to analyze the market, determine what is occurring and decide on the course that allows them a greater benefit.

Some graphs by Whale Alert show how the changes in the price of the most popular cryptocurrency can take place in a matter of hours. Cryptowhales are thus preparing their next movements to face the variations of the price of Bitcoin and see how they can influence them for their own economic benefit.

Stablecoins in Motion

As mentioned above, the largest or most constant transfers that cryptowhales have made in recent days are USD Coin (USDC) and Tether (USDT), both of which are stablecoins.

However, USDC is a stablecoin backed by the US dollar; it is an Ethereum token and the only stablecoin backed by decree currently compatible with Coinbase.

On the other hand, USDT is a stablecoin whose main objective is to have a 1:1 value against the US dollar.

Interestingly, cryptowhales are moving these cryptocurrencies from one exchange to another, rather than accumulating them. Whether they want to exchange their amounts for US dollars or other cryptocurrencies, these operations are probably aimed at protecting themselves against the fluctuation of cryptocurrency prices, such as that of Bitcoin.

Since these institutions have a considerable influence on the market, cryptowhales’ transfers should not be taken lightly as they may be waiting for the best time to emerge.

At the moment, Bitcoin is struggling to return to the USD 8,000 level, but the depth of its fall seems not to be entirely completed. However, there are those who fervently believe that in mid-November it will exceed US $ 10,000. For their part, cryptowhales have not been buying or selling large amounts of this cryptocurrency but have chosen to move stablecoins.

By Willmen Blanco

1...1,4561,4571,458...1,654Page 1,457 of 1,654