Posted on

Bitcoin Investor: Ethereum (ETH) Is A “Science Experiment” At Best

Bitcoin Investor Issues Scathing Remarks About Ethereum

Tuur Demeester, an altcoin cynic, Bitcoin proponent, and crypto investor, recently compiled his years of skepticism regarding Ethereum (ETH), issuing a multi-faceted argument regarding why he’s against the current third most valuable cryptocurrency by market capitalization. Demeester, who has become a well-respected recently took to Twitter to convey his opinion via a 50-part thread, which quickly became the talk of the town.

Although he gave a multitude of reasons why he’s skeptical of the project, a few overarching points persisted throughout his thread. Demeester noted that ETH’s underlying architecture and culture is the opposite of Bitcoin’s, while still aiming to offer what the flagship cryptocurrency set out to solve. In his eyes, the overlap includes decentralization, immutability, store of value, asset issuance, and smart contracts.

He subsequently noted that as such, Ether’s ~$15 billion valuation is “still too high,” quipping that project remains a science experiment at best. The fact that Ether isn’t a viable form of digital money in Demeester’s eyes only adds to this rationale that its valuation is well overinflated.

Demeester, who founded Adamant Capital (a self-proclaimed Bitcoin Alpha Fund), went on to bash Ethereum’s scaling prospects, first noting that sharding, often deemed the holy grail of blockchain protocols, is still a “pipe dream.” The Bitcoin proponent added that the promise that on-chain scaling was nigh are false, even explaining that a preliminary Casper whitepaper was lackluster.

The Adamant Capital chief added that Proof of Stake (PoS), which is key in the integration of sharding, isn’t a viable consensus mechanism to enlist, noting that there are censorship vulnerabilities. Demeester even referenced his own tweet, which claimed that “Ethereumism” sounds like Marxism, as PoS, a still “unproven, [yet] ideal future” for the project, will purportedly provide perpetual income for all Ether holders. The critic added:

 Vitalik is no stranger to embracing free lunch ideas, e.g. during his 2014 ETH announcement speech, where he described a coin with a 20% inflation tax as having “no cost” to users.

In closing, doing his best to convey the cardinal points of his argument in a short message, Demeester explained that the Ethereum ICO was akin to a securities offering, whereas purchasing Ether for BTC was like “buying shares in a startup that had “invent time travel” as part of its business plan. He even quipped that the project is the “Yahoo of our day — an unscalable “blue chip” cryptocurrency.”

Vitalik Buterin Reacts

Since Demeester released his scathing comments, a number of Ether proponents have come out to rebut a number of his points. Most notably, Vitalik Buterin himself, the Russian-Canadian coder extraordinaire that is a co-founder of Ethereum, released a point-by-point response via a Reddit thread on the matter.

In Buterin’s response, which gained traction on the bonafide Ethereum subreddit, the developer did his best to break down each of Demeester’s points, and provide evidence to claim why such criticism was baseless or non-sensical. On the matter of ETH being a science experiment, Buterin, who was recently awarded an honorary doctorate from Basel University, simply stated that this isn’t an argument.

ETH Logo Title Image Courtesy of via Flickr

The post Bitcoin Investor: Ethereum (ETH) Is A “Science Experiment” At Best appeared first on Ethereum World News.

Posted on

Don't Expect New Bitcoin Highs in 2018

Tuur Demeester is an economist and investor.

The following article references an opinion and is for information purposes only. It is not intended to be investment advice. Seek a duly licensed professional for that.

Despite an already six month cool-off period, for 2018 we see more sideways and downside potential in the bitcoin price due to sluggish retail demand, hesitation from institutions and a current market cap that seems too high relative to the activity occurring on available blockchains.

Many investors and advisors are on record stating that $5,700 was the bottom in bitcoin for this year, and that higher prices lie ahead. While we are very bullish on bitcoin’s long-term prospects, we do heed caution for more short-term price optimism.

To find the starting point of the historic parabolic rally in bitcoin that ended at $20,000 we have to go as far back as August 2015, when bitcoin traded at below $200. This past rally was a stupendous, historic move. Even in secular bull markets, the collective of economic actors need time to absorb the information embedded in its characteristic high volume rallies.

As I’ve indicated in my 2018 outlook, I think chances are high for this year to be remembered as a shakeout year: a lemon market in altcoins, regulators catching up and infrastructure growing pains.

Short-term bearish signs

Since January, the bitcoin mining hashrate (aggregate computations per second made to secure the network ) has tripled, which means that a huge amount of new or more efficient mining rigs have come online. In combination with declining prices, this means that miners who weren’t able to upgrade their machines or find cheaper electricity have been faced with a steep decline in profitability, a 90% drop in 7 months (altcoins have faced similar or steeper declines).

With profit margins under heavy pressure, it’s not unlikely that miners are and will stay responsible for a significant amount of selling in the market.

Next, trading volumes are not dead, but still below those seen during last winter and spring.

It’s unclear how much of the recent pick-up in volumes are the result of a short squeeze and how much is coming from new long-term buyers coming in.

Aggregate Bitcoin trading volumes. Source:

After last year’s FOMO, retail interest in bitcoin has now become very sluggish:

  • A Gallup poll conducted three months ago suggested that less than 0.5% of U.S. investors “will probably buy bitcoin in the near future.”
  • Despite transaction fees and volatility having dropped strongly, merchants are seeing +50% lower bitcoin revenues compared to last fall.
  • Google searches are not suggestive of a quick retail fueled recovery either:

Next, here are some comments we’ve gathered from bitcoin analysts, market makers and Wall Street insiders:

The first bitcoin ETF will likely not be approved before 2019. So any anticipation of approval by September will likely be met with disappointment.

While institutional investors are certainly getting involved in bitcoin, the vast majority of the firms are trading firms who are looking to make markets regardless of price: they’re just as happy to take on short positions as they are to go long. Institutions who are known to be long-biased, such as mutual funds and pension funds are not ready to invest because they’re not yet comfortable with the available custody solutions.

There’s also the NVM Ratio, which is designed to reflect early stage adoption, now suggesting that there’s now too little on-chain activity to justify bitcoin’s current market cap:

The assumption here is that bitcoin’s market value is mostly derived from it being a network that connects users around the world: the more people and entities use the bitcoin blockchain to settle transactions, the more it acquires the liquidity and utility that we’d expect from digital gold.

The NVM ratio approximates that by measuring daily active addresses on the blockchain. Similar valuation models have been made for growth companies such as Facebook and Linkedin, where the number of monthly active users reasonably correlates with enterprise value.

(There are several objections one could raise against the NVM Ratio: it doesn’t take into account transaction amounts nor the difference between old an new addresses, it doesn’t discount spam attacks, it doesn’t acknowledge limitations to the block size and neither does it consider institutions coming into the market who build derivatives on bitcoin that rely on a small amount of high-value cold storage addresses. More work is needed to refine valuation models. That said, even though bitcoin’s core value proposition is as a store of value, we do think we’re still in the early adoption phase, and hence using a valuation metric that reflects this adoption makes sense to us. In that context, we think the NVM’s on-chain activity based valuation method has merit.)

The related NVT ratio, which tries to measure if the daily dollar value of all bitcoin transactions is relatively high or low versus the market cap, also suggests overvaluation.

Finally, in the past few months, we’ve also seen a number of macro events that would appear to be bullish for bitcoin as a safe haven: the North Korea debacle, a spike in volatility, Chinese stocks breaking down, etc. However, these shocks didn’t move the meter for bitcoin.

Some caveats

All this being said, lower bitcoin prices ahead are not a foregone conclusion:

  • The bitcoin price has already come down by 62 percent since December.
  • Since March, the Chinese Yuan has dropped by 8 percent against the dollar. If this slide continues, Chinese capital could flee into bitcoin.
  • Bitcoin dominance is gaining ground, which we think indicates the market’s slow realization that there’s a large moat around the bitcoin ecosystem now which will make it hard to dislodge.
  • The 2015–’17 rally was historic but not entirely unique for this ecosystem: between late 2011 and April 2013, the bitcoin price multiplied by 100x, and, after a six-month correction, it multiplied again by 10x.
  • Value investors are already anticipating the May 2020 block reward halving, which will cut down bitcoin’s annual supply inflation from 3.7 percent to only 1.79 percent.
  • A bitcoin ETF approval, even if it’s delayed, would be a huge deal because it makes the asset extremely accessible for the retail investor. After the first gold ETF went live in 2004, the gold price rallied by 350 percent (and it’s still 200 percent higher today). The 2017 rally has also set in motion a flurry of corporate activity on the bitcoin infrastructure side, and the promise of established banks, brokers, payment processors, and security providers offering their own solution suites is catching the attention of value investors.


We think the market likely needs more time to absorb the recent 30-month rally, which could produce lower prices.

We don’t foresee new all-time highs in bitcoin for 2018, and unless data starts suggesting differently, we are expecting mostly sideways or lower price action.

Vintage Merry-Go-Round via Shutterstock

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.

Posted on

Is Darknet Done With Bitcoin?

A new study by Recorded Future has found that Bitcoin is losing its position as the number one currency on the Darknet markets. The Internet tech company analyzed 150 of the most active message boards, marketplaces, and illicit service providers and noticed that the Darknet communities sentiments toward Bitcoin have taken a turn.

The Darknet economy

The Darknet is an Internet that uses non-standard communication protocols and ports to make it a bit more difficult for the digital identities of users to be revealed. The Darknet requires users to run a special software,  the most popular being TOR. to connect to the Internet. One of the main purposes of using the Darknet is to make the information provider and the person accessing the information difficult to trace. Because of this privacy feature, the Darknet has become famous for its Darknet markets like Silk Road that allowed users to effectively exchange anything,  legal or illegal over an Amazon-like marketplace. The anonymous Internet is said to attract criminals and those interested in black market activities as well.

A backlogged network

In mid-2016, Recorded Future noticed that the 150 entities they were analyzing were all expressing concerns regarding the functionality, usability and security of Bitcoin in the Darknet economy. Although it was a relatively mild increase compared to the increase in interest in Bitcoin in the latter half of 2017, the Bitcoin network was beginning to become overloaded with traffic which resulted in higher transaction fees for those using the Darknet markets. On Dec. 23, 2017 transaction fees were $52.18.

Recorded Future found that the average transaction size on the Darknet is $50-$300. If an individual tried to transact on Dec. 23, 2017 – it could have been the case that the transaction fee was more costly than the amount being transacted. One member of a Darknet message board posted this on the forum he uses:

“What’s happening at the moment is incomprehensible. Despite that I’ve used the recommended commission fees, my transactions have remained pending for the past three days, and my work has been paralyzed. Dear vendors, please implement alternative payment options; otherwise, I will miss out on this Christmas season.”

A Christmas miracle

The backlogged queue on the Bitcoin network was making it difficult for some individuals in the underworld to conduct their business. This users transaction was logged so far back in the queue that it took several days for it to become verified. To combat double-spending attacks, most vendors on the Darknet adopted a rule requiring three confirmations before treating transactions as complete. Because a transaction cannot be complete until the payment has been confirmed, this user was effectively frozen out of conducting his “business.”

Although he was worried he would “miss out on this Christmas season,” his Christmas miracle was about to occur. To combat, the exuberant transaction fees that were increasing daily, vendors began accepting alternative payment options. The study found that Litecoin was the second most popular currency with 30 percent of all vendors accepting LTC, and Dash the third most popular currency, with 20 percent of all vendors accepting DASH.

Other Darknet studies

Back in 2016, economist Tuur Demeester was in the process of researching the Darknet markets. Demeester turned to r/DarkNetMarkets to see if the community could provide him with the statistics he was looking for: what percentage of trades on the Darknet was conducted with BTC?  Was DarkCoin used and how often? How many Bitcoins were spent on the Darknet on a daily/monthly/yearly basis? But Demeester was not met with any useful answers from the community.

Darknet Markets research?

Prior to Demeester’s endeavor, The Digital Citizens Alliance released a table with statistics about the number of drug listings on the Darknet markets in August 2014, but this table provided no information regarded prices, trade volumes and preferred payment methods.

Furthermore, Nicolas Cristin, an associate research professor in the School of Computer Science and in Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) together with Kyle Soska, a Ph.D. candidate in CMU’s school of electrical and computer engineering back in 2013, conducted a study from 2013-2015 to get a handle on the Darknet market economy.

When the Silk Road was shut down in October 2013, Cristin and Soska noticed that the take-down spawned the development of anonymous online marketplaces, which continue to evolve to this day. Cristin and Soska used long-term measurement analysis on 16 different marketplaces for over two years (2013– 2015) to calculate the growth of the online anonymous marketplace ecosystem. Their research documented the types of goods being sold, the effect – or lack – of adversarial events, such as law enforcement operations and large-scale frauds, on the overall size of the economy. The two also gained insights into how vendors are diversifying and replicating across marketplaces, and how vendor security practices (e.g., PGP adoption) are evolving.

Payment methods are evolving

Recorded Futures study concluded by stating that the efforts that vendors are taking to diversify acceptable payment methods on the Darknet markets will continue. Although payment methods like Litecoin and Dash are becoming more popular, Recorded Future still expects Bitcoin to have a place in the Darknet economy- just a much smaller market share than it currently has. Recorded future also warns that with increased popularity in digital currencies will come an increase in malicious tools like ransomware that will try to take advantage of the mainstream trends in cryptocurrency.

Posted on

SegWit ‘Death’ Challenge: BitPico Vows To Fork As Goes 100% Bitcoin Cash

SegWit ‘Death’ Challenge: BitPico Vows To Fork As Goes 100% Bitcoin Cash

SegWit2x may still happen, rumors suggest after its cancellation as Roger Ver’s goes full Bitcoin Cash.

While the community reacted to the ‘death’ of the hard fork, its ghosts are already haunting Bitcoin as previously unknown entity BitPico vowed to continue “regardless.”

“We are carrying out the fork regardless as everything is set in motion. Backing down the difficulty right now is a strategy,” BitPico wrote from a Microsoft iCloud address.

“Wonder why 30 percent network hash-rate disappeared? It’s ours; the miners that will continue what is set in motion… A handful of humans cannot stop what they have no control over…”

SegWit2x Final Steps

The message raised suspicions, with entrepreneur Tuur Demeester suggesting it could even be a hoax.

The broad sense of relief that SegWit2x had failed to achieve consensus meanwhile appears not to have affected everyone.

Major US exchange Coinbase subsequently announced it was “monitoring” the 2x “update” and would make a statement “in the coming days.” Users reacted with confusion, as cancellation of the fork seemingly left nothing to be discussed.

Roger Ver, appearing disappointed at the NYA signers’ decision to cancel, released a message confirming his resource would strictly deal with Bitcoin Cash only in the future.

Public Service Announcement

The so-called “public service announcement” was condemned on social media by those regretting that entry-level users accessing simply because of its well-known address had little idea they were not accessing Bitcoin, but the Bitcoin Cash fork.

Posted on

Bitcoin SegWit2x Hard Fork Benefits Not Visible: Bruce Fenton

Bitcoin Foundation executive director Bruce Fenton has become the latest high-profile Bitcoin personality to criticize SegWit2x.

In comments on Twitter Sunday, Fenton triggered responses from other well-known Bitcoin industry and community figures after he wrote that he “didn’t see the benefit” of the hard fork.

“What’s the end goal? Switching dev teams alone?” he asked. “What makes it worth it? ROI?”

SegWit2x’s imminent activation has led to increasingly hostile rhetoric from supporters of Bitcoin Core, who frequently suggest the fork is an attempt to unseat its developers as a “hostile takeover.”

Fenton stopped short of stating outright SegWit2x would be hostile to Bitcoin, instead appearing to reinforce the futility of the operation.

“If the goal is to simply to honor agreements then people shouldn’t have made those agreements to begin with,” he added in a further tweet.

Reacting, others could not agree on whether the goal of November’s fork was to switch development teams.

“I don’t think goal is to switch, but to coerce Core to adopt block size increase,” BitGo engineer Jameson Lopp wrote, while entrepreneur Tuur Demeester conversely stated his opinion to the contrary.

Despite the supposed threat posed to Bitcoin network stability, prices have increased in the run-up to the fork’s November 18 deadline.

Meanwhile, the fifth hard fork of Ethereum occurred problem-free over the weekend, with prices rising towards $350.

Posted on

Tell Us Why You Bought Bitcoin Or Face Account Closure: US Bank To Customer

US bank PNC allegedly “wants nothing to do with Bitcoin” but still threatens to close accounts if customers do not reveal why they bought it.

That’s according to a story circulating on social media getting increasing attention from the cryptocurrency community.

A post by PNC account holder u/EliToohey Thursday recounts how the bank contacted them demanding to know why Bitcoin had been purchased from exchanges Coinbase and Xapo.

“I’ve had a banking relationship with PNC Bank for 15 years and I just got a call to verify unusual activity,” the post reads.

“He asked me to confirm a couple transactions then asked ‘For what purpose are you buying Bitcoin’”.

When the user refused to divulge the “purpose,” the bank’s representative threatened to close the account.

“I told him I wouldn’t answer, he then asked ‘What are you going to do with the Bitcoin’”, u/EliToohey continues.

“I again told him I wouldn’t answer. He then informed me that his security team told him they would ‘exit the relationship with me’ if they didn’t get satisfactory answers.”

The episode is not unusual in the often bizarre relationship banks have with cryptocurrency.

Tales of threats and sudden account suspensions have surfaced not just in the US, but also in Europe, with UK-based Barclays becoming one of the worst offenders in terms of contradictory and overreaching policy.

Banks’ treatment of Bitcoin combined with bankers’ championing fiat has led to increasing ridicule from cryptocurrency investors in light of JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon’s allegations that Bitcoin is a “fraud.”

Unlimited fiat money supply was a topic touched on by entrepreneur and commentator Tuur Demeester Wednesday, who highlighted a quote from the US Federal Reserve on the issue.

Posted on

Bitcoin: $4600, 50% Dominance, Forks Leave Altcoins No Room For Moon

Cryptocurrency markets were celebrating Monday as Bitcoin passed $4600 and SegWit gained 10% transaction share.

As the overall value of crypto passed the $150 bln market cap boundary once again, Bitcoin appears to have broken out of a stagnant period after failing to stay above $4400 last week.

The latest data from Coinmarketcap and Bitcointicker show prices hovering around $4575 at press time.

SegWit proponents are especially satisfied, with last week’s disputed assertion that the technology was already going “parabolic” now looking more likely.

The proportion of Bitcoin network transactions using the upgrade, which activated in August, grew by almost half from 7% to 10% last week.

In altcoin markets, meanwhile, things are less certain. A look at the top 50 assets shows mixed fortunes as Bitcoin grows to retake over 50% market cap dominance, with NEO dropping 13% in 24 hours and others seeing a broad downtrend.


Vinny Lingham’s Civic token, which had been as high as $0.70, is currently hovering at its lowest rates since an uptick saw it reach $0.37 in August. It had dropped 12% to $0.28 since Sunday.

Speculation surrounding the lack of progress appeared to center on increased attention to Bitcoin’s two upcoming forks.

“Money will flow back into the others soon enough,” a response to observations by commentator Chris Burniske on Twitter reads.

Ahead of Bitcoin Gold and SegWit2x, investors could be buying up bitcoins purely in order to claim the equivalent number on two other chains, suspicions suggest.

Posted on

South Korea in Centre of Bitcoin Universe As It Passes China in Bitcoin Trading

After the massive upheaval in the Bitcoin market over the past weeks because of negative news from China, it appears that Bitcoin transaction volume has shifted out of China.

In a move that should not be surprising, South Korea has passed China in total Bitcoin trading volume today, as reported by Joseph Young and Tuur Demeester via Twitter. Young’s Twitter post indicates the shift:

The change in the processing of transactions indicates that traders have moved to South Korea. The largest exchange in South Korea has processed more transactions than Bitfinex and Bittrex.

The shift represents a substantial movement of the Bitcoin community away from China, where regulators have confirmed that all Chinese exchanges will be closed shortly.

The shift toward South Korea indicates a response to the legalization of Bitcoin in the country in recent months.  A general move away from China has generally occurred, even as the country has begun to tighten its grip on the cryptocurrency market.

Indication of flexibility

The shift to South Korea is a simple indication that the Bitcoin community is flexible. Because Bitcoin is a decentralized cryptocurrency, no government is able to truly ‘ban’ it, much less generally control it. Countries are beginning to see that the best route forward is embracing the currency.

While many saw the negative news about China as a bad thing for Bitcoin, the reality is that this news simply proves what cryptophiles have believed about Bitcoin from the beginning. It is remarkably flexible and multifaceted.

Posted on

Opinion: Collapse of Bitcoin’s “New York Agreement” Would Have Long Term Consequences

The New York Agreement appears to be crumbling, and that’s bad for Bitcoin. No, I’m not taking a stance on the agreement itself. I recognize that all scaling plans are controversial, and I don’t know whether the “2x” part of the agreement would be good for Bitcoin or not.

Who is in charge anyway?

I do know a little about trust, though. I also know that Bitcoin has a rather complicated governance model. At first, it seems rather simple: miners have the final say on which code changes to accept because that’s the way Nakamoto consensus works. The longest chain is the winner, the end. Full stop.

There are those who argue that even more important than miners are the “economic actors.” Supporters of a proposed user-activated soft fork, which never occurred, had argued:

“There are strong economic incentives in the Bitcoin system for nodes to cooperate and remain in consensus to prevent chain splits. If the economic majority is signaling as of Aug. 1st, miners have many incentives to follow along. Not following along would make it difficult to sell coins mined after August 1st as the blocks would not be accepted by the economic majority. Essentially, miners would be producing an altcoin not recognized by users and exchanges, making them less useful and in lower demand.”

This is an interesting point-of-view, and while it’s unlikely that exchanges and wallets would choose to go a different way from the overwhelming majority of hashpower, I’ll leave that argument for others to sort out.

Then, of course, there are the merchants and their payment processors, such as BitPay, whose opinions must be taken into account. Finally, but not least of all, are the end-users of Bitcoin. Their support is most important of all, yet from a technical standpoint, they essentially have no say in the matter.

New York Agreement

I won’t rehash the four-year scalability drama here, but suffice it to say that Bitcoin was divided into two camps: the big blockers and the small blockers. The big blockers wanted just that–an increase to Bitcoin’s 1 MB blocksize. They also believed in on-chain scaling, such that all transactions occur on Bitcoin’s Blockchain. Now and forever more.

The small blockers were looking for a more elegant and permanent solution, and they eventually settled on a code called Segregated Witness (SegWit). This code separated the signatures from the transaction data in each block, then only counted the transaction data as subject to the 1 MB cap. SegWit also allows off-chain scaling through something called the Lightning Network. Transactions would occur off the Blockchain between parties on the Lightning Network, while periodically being “settled” on Bitcoin’s Blockchain. This solution would theoretically allow virtually unlimited scaling.

Neither group could gain more than about 40 percent support from miners, so at the appropriately named Consensus conference in May, both sides agreed to a compromise. SegWit would be activated in August, and Bitcoin’s blocksize would be doubled in November. Over 80 percent of miners agreed to this compromise, and the activation of SegWit was successfully accomplished on schedule.

There’s one interesting twist to this story, however. An overwhelming majority of Bitcoin’s miners and Bitcoin-based companies agreed to the plan, but Bitcoin’s core development team refused to get on board. Core supported SegWit and were delighted when it activated. But they will not support any increase of the blocksize in November.

Not my agreement

Now all Hades is breaking loose, because some of the signatories of the agreement, such as Bitwala and F2Pool, are reneging. They will not go through with the doubling of the blocksize in November, no matter what the supermajority of miners decides.

Following the “Breaking Bitcoin” conference in Paris recently, famous Bitcoin investor Tuur Demeester tweeted:

Since the blocksize increase would require a hard fork to carry out, an overwhelming majority of miners would have to agree to it. Even just a few miners withdrawing their support could doom the plan.

It’s about trust

I frankly couldn’t care less whether the blocksize is increased to 2 MB or not, and I can’t imagine that it would make much of a difference in the long run in any event. But what I do care about is Bitcoin’s ability to solve future, unforeseen problems. The project we call “Bitcoin” is more than a network and more than computer code; it’s a diverse ecosystem of countless individuals and groups with varying motivations and different incentives.

Withdrawing one’s support from important agreements erodes trust within the community. Parties that don’t trust each other have a difficult time compromising and meeting possible future challenges.

What will be the next crisis? What happens if Bitcoin faces something potentially catastrophic, like the creation of a true quantum computer capable of running Shor’s algorithm? Will we be able to implement Lamport signatures quickly enough, if nobody in the community trusts one another?

Trust is one of the most precious resources in the universe, and once betrayed, it grows back ever so slowly. Parties that don’t trust one another won’t work with each other and won’t sacrifice a little of their own interests for the greater good. If Bitcoin is going to become as huge as we all believe, we can be assured that there will be even more serious, possibly existential, crises in the future. Now is the time to for the signatories of the New York Agreement to decide if they are as good as their word, or if they can’t be trusted to keep their promises–neither those of today nor of tomorrow.

Posted on

Ethereum, Bitcoin and The Following Digital Currencies are Taking Steps Back from The Major Levels – Tuur Demeester

Many times mentioned in our recent “Litecoin increase – Bitcoin Cash Sell Off” blogs – Tuur Demeester Adamant Research Editor – on his twitter account pointed out just how close the price are to the major public-eye psychological price and yet they pulled back.

The latest bullish market increases that have been going on for Ethereum, Litecoin, Bitcoin and so on were significant in many ways. Ethereum tested the $400 level but was put down by the selling pressure going downflow around 20 percent in two days, Bitcoin climbed and went past the major $5.000 but could not hold at all and declined trading now at $4506.94 or Litecoin attempting to take on the monster resistance of $100 but could not pass it and pulled back to hovering over the $70 mark.

It is known that the mainstream factor is doing its job and having much effect as the virtual currency awareness is growing on a global scale. The public, hedge fund managers and mainstream investors are buying in and demanding cryptocurrencies with which great surge would be awaited proportionally.

But the truth and facts that the value and prices of most of the digital currencies has surged and skyrocketed with thousands of percentage points will be with everybody and their mind. As to any event taking place like the latest once of great increasing levels, the markets will first find their new stable ground before taking any attempt of traders/investors and the public with enough confidence to find higher positions of value.

Read Also:

– For more Cryptocurrency market related Updates and News Follow us on our Facebook and Twitter pages.