Connect with us

Monero

Kristin Boggiano – Cointelegraph Magazine

Published

on



Kristin Boggiano, a lawyer and co-founder of the CrossTower digital asset exchange, developed her ethos on protecting the vulnerable while working and living in the Amazon during the 1980s, helping fight for the rights of the Cofán people against the Big Oil companies.

She later worked creating mortgage-based derivatives on Wall Street right before exotic derivatives shouldered part of the blame for causing the global financial crisis, or GFC. In the aftermath, she put her inside knowledge to good use as a regulatory lawyer helping shape market reforms.

It was partly due to the GFC that institutions were slow to adopt Bitcoin in the early 2010s, she says.

“I came upon [Bitcoin] from the perspective of a lawyer, because my clients wanted to buy and trade it. I had to figure out what it was and how to trade it,” she recalls, looking back on the early days of crypto markets between 2011 and 2013.

Back then, her clients were not ideological types — they were institutions that saw opportunities in arbitrage. They didn’t have any philosophical desire to change the world with Bitcoin. They just saw it as an asset class, even as early as 2011 and 2012.” One of these clients was Western Union, a financial services business she was representing.

But Bitcoin soon faced a reckoning with the collapse of its primary exchange, Mt. Gox, and the much-publicized arrest of Ross Ulbricht, who was operating the Silk Road darknet market.

“As soon as Silk Road happened, and Mt. Gox, I think institutional participation became questionable from a fiduciary perspective. You don’t want to participate in illicit activities.”

Seven or eight years later, the institutions are returning in full force. Boggiano considers proper regulation in the name of safety and legality to be critical to integrating the crypto industry with the powers that be. Just as the Cofán people of the Amazon needed environmental regulations to keep their land free of oil waste, she believes retail traders similarly need strong regulations to protect them from financial harm.

 

 

Apart from being the president of the institutionally focused platform CrossTower, Boggiano is also the founder and co-chair of Digital Asset Regulatory & Legal Alliance, whose “approximately 90 members are executives, senior legal and compliance officers of financial institutions and blockchain technology companies.”

She previously worked as both chief strategy adviser and senior regulatory counsel for Guggenheim Partners, an investment firm with $270 billion dollars under management. The firm has gotten recent press due to its chief investment officer, Scott Minerd, predicting Bitcoin will reach $600,000.

Sounds a little derivative

With her father serving as a doctor in the Air Force, Boggiano grew up on the move. “I lived in Texas, California, Taiwan, New Mexico, New Jersey, Colorado and back to New Jersey,” she says. When her parents divorced, she then split time living with each of them, until she left to study developing economics at Sarah Lawrence College, graduating in 1992.

After writing a thesis about Texaco’s work in Ecuador and the adverse human rights and environmental consequences of U.S. foreign policy on developing countries, she received a grant to travel to Ecuador where she worked for a law firm advocating for the rights of Indigenous peoples.

“I wound up finding the Cofán people in the upper-Amazon basin, and then wound up living with them on and off for a while, helping them think through how to acquire the title to their land.” The difficulty was that the Ecuadorian government owned rights to the oil underneath, which it wanted to extract — with U.S. oil companies often assisting in the drilling.

After two years of fighting for Indigenous rights, Boggiano was inspired to apply to law school. She graduated from Northeastern University School of Law in Massachusetts in 1997, also completing an MBA at the same institution in 1996.

“In the process of studying, I became fascinated with the derivatives markets.”

While still studying, her first job in 1995 was with the enforcement divisions of both the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission in New York, both tasked with regulating the U.S. financial system.

She soon got a job “trading or structuring equity and credit derivatives” for hedge funds and high-net-worth individuals on behalf of Merrill Lynch in the late ’90s.

“I was working 18 hours a day, sometimes seven days a week — it was just a really crazy market. [Chair of the U.S. Federal Reserve Alan] Greenspan was keeping interest rates really low, and people were really looking for yield at that time. So they were coming up with creative methods of creating products.”

“I think ‘81 was the first swap,” Boggiano tells Magazine as she explains the early history of derivatives before she entered the game. She’s referring to financial swaps, which are derivatives contracts that allow parties to trade the cash flow of one asset for another. These exploded in popularity because investors were looking for yield after the reduction of bank interest rates.

“Foreign exchange derivatives were the early ‘90s,” she calculates, adding that equity derivatives started to be used around ‘96, “But they were just starting and they republished the definitions in 2002.” Working on the trading floor, this put the young Boggiano in the middle of a financial revolution of the time.

That all sounds familiar

In many ways, Boggiano’s description of the ’90s and early 2000’s Wall Street world invites comparisons to the more recent decentralized finance, or DeFi, boom of the cryptocurrency world. Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin did not initially offer any opportunities for cash flow beyond appreciation, but that is changing with things like Ethereum 2.0 offering staking rewards of several percent per year.

Today, many lenders such as BlockFi and Celsius, as well as various exchanges including Boggiano’s CrossTower, offer opportunities to earn interest yield on cryptocurrency holdings. Furthermore, DeFi platforms like Ethereum’s SushiSwap and Binance Smart Chain’s PancakeSwap allow users to exchange cryptocurrencies through the use of liquidity pools. These liquidity pools act as decentralized cash reserves to which anyone can contribute, with those contributors then earning yield in the form of trading fees.

The concept of DeFi has been called “financial Lego,” and goes much deeper. The tokens representing stakes in these liquidity pools can themselves be staked on other platforms (or vehicles, as they might have been called in Boggiano’s early days) to allow for yield farming, often generating tokens in new projects that may vest immediately or over several years.

 

 

Just like the 18-hour days Boggiano recounts, there is no shortage of “DeFi degens” skipping sleep to manage their yield farms across a multitude of newly emerging platforms. FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried famously spends almost every waking moment at his Hong Kong desk and sleeps on an office beanbag.

In 2000, Boggiano left the floor to work at a law firm and help build new products for the new financial ecosystem. “It was a wild market. I was doing credit-default swaps on residential mortgage-backed securities, and then putting those into other vehicles,” she explains.

In 2007 and 2008, the global financial crisis decimated the market.

“Once the market crashed, I became a regulatory lawyer and helped shape regulation from pre-Dodd-Frank [Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act], all the way through rule-making 200-plus rules,” Boggiano recounts, recalling the tumultuous era when she worked to create stability by way of regulation and oversight.

It may not be fair to assign all the blame for greed upon the innovators of Wall Street; it was the investors, after all, who demanded returns on their capital despite a difficult economic environment where previously high interest rates had fallen. No longer could you put your money in a bank account and watch it grow as consistently. With the idea that money should earn favorable interest firmly entrenched over generations, the creation of exotic new methods to achieve it seems inevitable.

Bitcoin from the ashes

It was in the fallout of this crisis that many began to question the stability and even legitimacy of the financial system centered largely on Wall Street.

What made this early derivatives market more serious than an anonymous online DeFi casino was that the money flowing through it was not the gambling budget of self-styled “degens” who “aped in” to new yield strategies without critical analysis. Instead, the money often represented the life savings and mortgages of average people.

Who better to step into a role as a regulator than someone who understood this crucial area intimately? That person was Boggiano, who retreated from the chaos of the trading floor to a law office where she would work to help rebuild the system in hopes of allowing it to earn back people’s trust.

It was in this position as a lawyer that Boggiano came across Bitcoin in 2011. Major financial institutions she was working with were interested in it, but they were skittish.

The level of scrutiny at the time was very high, not least because the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme had recently come to light and the industry was in regulatory flux, Boggiano explains.

Today, things are different.

“We’re unquestionably seeing the participation and acceptance of Bitcoin from the institutional perspective,” Boggiano asserts, listing the likes of Elon Musk, MicroStrategy, Visa and Mastercard, as well as the endowment funds of major institutions like Harvard, Stanford and Yale as recently converted supporters. There is even interest on various national levels, such as China and the United States working on a digital yuan and dollar, respectively.

“I think that there’s a natural, healthy competition that Bitcoin has with respect to monetary policy in the United States and elsewhere. That competition is a good thing because it’s forcing countries to think about their economic systems.”

“We’re gonna see significant adoption and change over the next three to five years — it’s going to be a different economy,” she says with total confidence.

One question that comes to mind is whether some institutions feel as if they missed the crypto boom, seeing as they were often prevented from making moves in the early years due to the associated uncertainty. Boggiano does not frame this as a missed opportunity but as an appropriate exercise in caution. “I think that they’re doing the prudent analysis that they need to do in order to protect their investors. I think you’ve seen more activity from prop desks, who don’t have to report to investors,” she says.

“I think that the narrative to institutions is that when there’s sufficient adoption, [when] the number of Bitcoin wallets that are being utilized is considerable, it becomes a lot less likely that it’s just going to plummet to zero.”

Boggiano says it’s important to protect retail investors who are playing alongside the institutions. “We have a very antiquated financial system and regulatory process — I think that there’s a natural struggle that’s happening between innovation, and trying to protect the retail.”

Any investment offered to retail, she explains, is more highly scrutinized than those in which only sophisticated investors, like institutions and high net worth individuals, can participate in, as it is assumed that the latter entities are better equipped to understand the investments and manage losses. “Those protections are there so there isn’t fraud, there isn’t manipulation.”

Still, Boggiano acknowledges, “It’s primarily been a retail-driven asset class which is very unusual — mostly, asset classes are run by institutions.”

More regulation, less privacy?

“With respect to Bitcoin, I feel there is a moral obligation to develop a means to encourage privacy, but ensure safety,” says Boggiano. While she values privacy, she thinks protecting retail investors and the wider population is a higher priority.

An example of this being beneficial came during the Capitol insurrection, where investigators tracked down Nick Fuentes, who’d received 13.5 Bitcoin from an overseas donor. According to Boggiano, that was a great demonstration of deanonymizing Bitcoin transactions by way of following “digital breadcrumbs” in the name of public safety.

Coinbase is one company that is said to help authorities follow these digital breadcrumbs by providing crypto surveillance services to U.S. government agencies like the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Internal Revenue Service.

“We really need to develop an alternative means of protecting people’s privacy, but also to be able to track down transactions related to human trafficking and drug cartels, because those are not acceptable industries.”

Boggiano is, in some ways, the mirror opposite of Erik Voorhees, a previous Journeys interviewee and fellow Bitcoin entrepreneur also running an exchange platform, who said that “Institutions and government exist purely to curtail people’s power over money.”

Whereas Voorhees’ viewpoint reflects an individualist ethos of unbridled liberty where collectivist institutions limit the powerful and ambitious, Boggiano instead describes governments and regulations as necessary to protect the vulnerable, like the Cofán people of the Amazon who needed environmental regulations to keep their land free of oil waste.

“Left to people’s own devices, you get these imbalances of power and that can be very destructive to people who are in vulnerable positions,” she states.





Source link

Monero

North American crypto miners prepare to challenge China’s dominance – Cointelegraph Magazine

Published

on

By



Springtime is coming to the North American cryptocurrency mining industry. With access to robust capital markets, cheap power, a stable political climate and increasing participation of technological innovators, industrial-grade mining operations are burgeoning in the United States and Canada, providing competition to Chinese mining pools that now control more than half of the world’s hashing power.

These new ventures are acutely aware of the need to minimize mining’s carbon footprint. In March, when Neptune Digital Assets and Link Global announced they would develop a new five-megawatt Bitcoin mining facility in Alberta, Canada, for instance, Neptune CEO Cale Moodie cited the “substantial global pressure to develop sustainable [emphasis added] Bitcoin mining operations around the world” — adding that the project would be powered by solar, wind and natural gas.

“A large investment in North America mining infrastructure is currently taking place,” Ethan Vera, co-founder and chief financial officer of Luxor Technologies and of Hashrate Index, tells Magazine, while CoinShares chief strategy officer Meltem Demirors writes in a recent blog post: “We have seen over $200M of capital deployed into building onshore mining capacity in the United States alone.”

“There’s an upwards trend in mining companies looking at the U.S. and North America,” Amy Davine Kim, chief policy officer of the Chamber of Digital Commerce, tells Magazine, and there is a growing willingness among some U.S. states to support such crypto mining ventures. Kentucky, for instance, passed two bills in March that give tax breaks to crypto miners, whom the state wants to attract in order to create jobs and energize local economies.

“North American capital has been unleashed,” Vera explains, adding: “Public and private markets are pouring money into Bitcoin mining,” and it is all setting the stage “for large-scale North American build-out.”

What took so long?

Some wonder how and why Western nations allowed China to take such a lead in crypto mining in the first place. China now accounts for 65% of global BTC mining, according to the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance. This is compared with only 7.24% for the U.S., which is the second-largest hub, though no one really knows the global distribution with certainty. 

Some have pegged the Chinese share to be lower. For example, a 2020 study commissioned by Fidelity Investments estimates that 50% of global mining power capacity is “likely” in China, with 14% in the United States. Meanwhile, an April 6 paper written by academics from the University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Tsinghua University, Cornell University and the University of Surrey in Nature Communications, a peer-reviewed journal, estimates the Chinese share to be much higher: “As of April 2020, China accounts for more than 75% of Bitcoin blockchain operation around the world.

The paper goes on to explain that some of China’s rural areas are considered an “ideal destination for Bitcoin mining” because of cheaper electricity prices and large tracts of undeveloped land for mining pool construction.

“In the early days, the Wild-West nature of the mining industry held back major investments,” says Vera, explaining how Bitcoin mining became so geographically skewed. “The opaqueness of the ASIC supply chain” — the application-specific integrated circuits that are specifically designed to perform the hashing calculations demanded of miners — “and mining pool auditability led capital to be sidelined.” 

With regard to “auditability,” he further explains that “Most miners didn’t know if they were getting underpaid for their hashrate to mining pools. If mining pools quoted them a fee it was very hard to check that was the actual fee being charged. In many cases miners blamed mining pools for underpayment.” More recently, however, “There has been a large improvement in the mining supply chain professionalism,” Vera adds.

China’s dominance is perhaps better explained in macro terms, suggests Yu Xiong, associate dean international at Surrey University and chair of business analytics at Surrey Business School — and one of the authors of the Nature Communications paper. North America is saddled with higher labor costs and energy costs than China, which leads the world with roughly 30% of global hydropower capacity and a 50% share of coal power generation. “Those facilitated the mining industry in China,” Xiong tells Magazine.

Chase Lochmiller, CEO and co-founder of Crusoe Energy Systems — a Colorado company that uses waste gas from oil well sites to power Bitcoin mining rigs — tells Magazine that more miners are now migrating to North America, driven by the increased attention paid to BTC by investors and society in general.

Bitcoin mining “slammed” by environmentalists

Any movement to North America could also invite further scrutiny from environmentalists who have attacked Bitcoin’s prodigious consumption of energy — and its related climate-threatening emissions. The annualized energy consumption of the Bitcoin mining industry in China alone will peak in 2024 at 296.59 terawatt-hours, according to the Nature Communications paper, which “exceeds the total energy consumption level of Italy and Saudi Arabia” in 2016.

In March, Bank of America analysts “slammed” Bitcoin mining for its environmental wantonness, noting that “A single Bitcoin purchase at a price of ~$50,000 has a carbon footprint of 270 tons, the equivalent of 60 ICE [internal combustion engine] cars.”

The proof-of-work consensus mechanism used to verify Bitcoin transactions requires would-be miners to compete against each other to solve complicated mathematical puzzles. Computers, such as ASICs, specially built to solve those problems burn through immense amounts of electricity. Miners that solve the puzzle get to form and confirm the next “block” of transactions, and they receive BTC as a reward for their efforts.

Still, “This is a security feature of PoW not a bug,” says Vera. If the puzzles to be solved — the answers to which are called “hashes” — are too easy to solve, the network invites denial-of-service attacks from hackers.

Lochmiller says that high energy usage in itself is “not necessarily a bad thing” if it is done right. Crusoe Energy, for instance, has developed a technology that captures the natural gas that is “flared” into the atmosphere at oil well sites and uses this waste gas “to power modular data centers [mining rigs] deployed directly at the wellsite.” 

When co-locating rigs in this manner — as the company has done in Colorado, Montana, Wyoming and North Dakota — the result is an overall 71% reduction in CO2 emissions when compared with flaring, Lochmiller tells Magazine. “It’s a net benefit to the environment, and a net advantage to BTC.”

The ecological challenges attached to crypto mining “are easily addressable,” Clark Swanson, CEO of Blockcap — one of the largest Bitcoin mining operations in North America — tells Magazine, adding:

“The Bitcoin network is the first use of energy that does not require its source of energy to be co-located near the end user population.” 

Swanson stresses that BTC mining is moving toward making renewables the primary source “and perhaps one day the sole source of energy to the Bitcoin network.” Even today, Blockcap utilizes power that achieves a nearly 50% carbon-neutral output. “We are continuing to drive our carbon-emission target to neutral.” At present, however, most Bitcoin mining globally is not powered by renewable energy sources like solar, wind or hydro. According to the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, “39% of hashing’s total energy consumption comes from renewables.”

Not all are impressed by recent measures, however. Alex de Vries, founder of Digiconomist, calls the co-location solution preposterous, telling Magazine: “We’re not having a climate change problem because fossil fuel extraction is not efficient enough.” He adds:

“Using a byproduct of fossil fuel extraction still means Bitcoin is running on fossil fuels, and it only adds to the bottom line of fossil fuel companies.” 

De Vries admits that solar panels provide green energy and are an improvement over using flared gas, “but so far the only substantial source of renewable energy going into the Bitcoin network is dodgy hydropower that can only be obtained for just a couple of months per year,” as is the case in China’s Sichuan provincethe world’s largest BTC mining hub. 

Even if the Bitcoin network were to run entirely on renewable energy, continues de Vries, it wouldn’t solve all its PoW-related problems. “This network runs on highly specialized equipment that cannot be repurposed,” and the growing demand for the ASIC machinery “already adds to the disruption in the global semiconductor supply chain.” The end result will be “a substantial pile of electronic waste on top of all that energy consumption. No amount of green energy can fix that.”

Optics will become more important, arguably, if the mining industry’s center of gravity shifts from China to North America, where regulators and environmentalists might be more sensitive than China’s energy authorities to the industry’s energy consumption and carbon footprint.

A security risk?

Beyond the energy and environmental questions, others see significant security risks in Bitcoin’s consensus mechanism. “Just consider that half of the network’s hashrate is physically located in China,” says de Vries. “That’s a major security risk.”

Something similar was suggested by Ripple co-founder Chris Larsen in an opinion piece for The Hill in August 2020. He wrote: “At least 65 percent of cryptocurrency mining is concentrated in China, which means the Chinese government has the majority needed to wield control over those protocols and can effectively block or reverse transactions.”

 

 

In the same vein, former Acting U.S. Comptroller of the Currency Brian Brooks noted in November 2020 that China has captured more than 51% of the mining capacity on the Bitcoin blockchain, “which means that the very first Internet of Money […] is now essentially owned by China. So, as a country, we now face a geostrategic competitiveness issue, which is: Do we in the United States want to own Internet 2.0 in the same way that we own Internet 1.0?” 

Warnings about a 51% attack on the Bitcoin network from China or elsewhere crop up fairly regularly in the cryptoverse, but the risk is mostly theoretical, writes developer Jameson Lopp in an August 2020 blog post. Irrespective of its “scary-sounding” name, if such an attack were to come, it would be “limited in its effectiveness” and “unlikely to disrupt network operations for more than a short period of time.” 

During such an assault, the attacker couldn’t actually steal people’s Bitcoin arbitrarily, explains Lopp, and attackers could only double-spend only their own coins. Also, the hackers could neither make invalid transactions valid nor change consensus rules. These limitations, continues Lopp, probably make cryptocurrency exchanges the “juiciest targets” for 51% attacks. But there are numerous downsides for even these more limited assaults, including the fact that “Any exchange with decent liquidity to make them attack-worthy will likely have withdrawal limits.” Lopp adds that the threat from China, limited as it is, will further diminish over time:

“Over the very long term I expect we will see semiconductor foundries outside of Asia begin producing more mining chips and countries with even cheaper power sources will continue to become more industrialized, thus providing more competition when miners are seeking out new locations to set up shop. China’s mining dominance is unlikely to last; I expect that this theoretical attack will become less and less likely.”

It isn’t environmentalists, hackers or even hegemonic nation-states that will eventually doom the PoW mining model, according to Kevin Dowd, professor of finance and economics at Durham University in the United Kingdom — it’s the basic laws of economics.

Dowd argues that Bitcoin mining has the industrial structure of a natural monopoly — i.e., where production is cheapest with one producer. “There are inherent centralizing tendencies that will eventually undermine its value proposition,” Dowd tells Magazine. This problem of excessive centralization isn’t going away, even if most BTC mining shifts from China to North America, he asserts.

Is the PoW consensus doomed?

Does the PoW protocol come with its own expiration date, then? After all, Ethereum, which boasts the second-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, is moving to a proof-of-stake consensus mechanism that should bring with it significantly reduced energy consumption and a smaller carbon footprint — along with increased speed, if all goes well. Does this represent the future of blockchain technology?

“Proof-of-work is the only battle tested consensus mechanism,” says Vera. “While proof-of-stake may work, it is still an experiment.” His business believes that Bitcoin will remain attached to a PoW consensus “indefinitely — and it will only get better with time.”

“I see value in both consensus mechanisms,” Lochmiller tells Magazine. The sheer size of investment required to undertake BTC mining discourages cyberattacks, while PoS is “still in its infancy, still being rolled out.” Swanson adds that in Bitcoin’s 12 years of existence, the PoW consensus protocol has successfully thwarted all attacks on the network, stating:

“While a proof of stake protocol may be more efficient from the use of power utilization and computational speed, it has inherent deficiencies that make it insufficient as a long-term Bitcoin protocol.” 

When asked if mining is Bitcoin’s Achilles’ heel, Kim answers: “I disagree. There are ways to incentivize appropriate energy consumption.” Bitcoin mining, as currently constituted, may be wasteful, but other things waste a lot of energy and emit lots of carbon, including the U.S. military. Ecology alone may not be a sufficient reason to abandon PoW mining. 

“First, we need better data,” adds Kim. How much ecological damage is really being done? “We also have to look at the benefits” of the Bitcoin network, which allows a safe, secure way to transfer value anywhere in the world and can bring millions of unbanked individuals into the world’s financial system for the first time — to cite two potential benefits. Ecology is a concern, yes, “But it’s important not just to talk about climate only,” says Kim.

A new center of gravity for BTC mining?

Can one really expect Bitcoin mining activity to shift significantly from China toward North America in the next few years? Given its higher energy and labor costs and its stricter regulations, Xiong is doubtful that North America will dethrone China anytime soon. Perhaps, however, “Some other countries with more renewable energy, and lower operation costs, could rival China,” he tells Magazine.

“The U.S. is growing aggressively” as a mining venue, says Lochmiller, partly a result of the “professionalization” of the sector. But all those Chinese mining groups aren’t going to vanish overnight — barring some major regulatory intervention. As such, Lochmiller expects China to still claim 40% to 50% of the world’s BTC mining activity three years hence, with perhaps 30% from North America, 20% from Europe and the remaining 10% from elsewhere.

Regarding mining’s future configuration, “I’d love to see it inverted,” says Kim, with 65% for the U.S. and 7% for China — though that probably isn’t likely. The key thing is the U.S. needs a comprehensive policy at both the state and federal levels to attract and keep innovative crypto and blockchain firms. 

Kim adds: “We want that work here — as happened with the Internet and Silicon Valley.” Already, states like Kentucky and Texas and cities like Miami are recognizing that blockchain represents the future, “So I anticipate seeing some progress on the mining front over the next three years.” 

“North America is on the verge of an explosion of hashrate growth, leveraging robust capital markets, sophisticated energy infrastructure and political climate,” says Vera. “I expect North America to gain another 10% of global hashrate market share over the next year.”

Clearly though, as the North American mining industry develops, it has to be mindful of the ecological costs of growth, and continued movement toward renewable and carbon-neutral energy sources is critical if it is to gain mining share, stresses Vera. “As Bitcoin gains mass adoption, this [the environmental impacts] will continue to be the major argument against it.”





Source link

Continue Reading

Monero

miss al simpson – Cointelegraph Magazine

Published

on

By



Cointelegraph Magazine is a new publication that goes beyond the daily news and delves much more deeply into the stories, trends, and personalities that inspire cryptocurrency and blockchain conversations around the world.

We are people-centric, delving into *why* the true believers of blockchain feel they can change the world (and why they think it needs to be changed).

Through long-form features, thoughtful analysis, and a little humor and satire, we illustrate how the implementation of this technology is affecting the lives of countless people — today, right now, not at some distant point in the future.

Terms / Privacy



Source link

Continue Reading

Monero

Page not found – Cointelegraph Magazine

Published

on

By



Cointelegraph Magazine is a new publication that goes beyond the daily news and delves much more deeply into the stories, trends, and personalities that inspire cryptocurrency and blockchain conversations around the world.

We are people-centric, delving into *why* the true believers of blockchain feel they can change the world (and why they think it needs to be changed).

Through long-form features, thoughtful analysis, and a little humor and satire, we illustrate how the implementation of this technology is affecting the lives of countless people — today, right now, not at some distant point in the future.

Terms / Privacy



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending