Best TruStories of the Week - #8


#43

(still in the shallow water)… but India and their stance on crypto is a 100% given that there’s room for discussion to deny the validity of it. with the claim that they are going to make crypto legal, when several articles in the past has stated that the central bank is not in favor of it.

am i getting good at denying claims now? i’m the thinking the more you educate yourself on the topic, and the deeper you get into it, you see repetition and are able to tell what is valid and what has room for discussion. just takes time…to sniff out the b.s.


#44

I would stake a Backing Claim (100 cred) in support of the analysis @bhaumik provided here: Best TruStories of the Week - #8

Here, I’m attempting to verify information provide by Coinbase.

Background : Coinbase provides snaphots of specific transactions where essentially two transactions occur; one off an orphaned block and one of the attacker block. Their write up provides an intuitive graphic.

As of this writing, their analysis highlights 15 transactions, 12 of which contain instances of ‘double spending’. This analysis takes a look at one of the more recent transactions in an attempt to verify / recreate Coinbase’ reporting with some external sources.

Most of the links in Coinbase’s analyses reference https://minergate.com I’d like to supplement/corroborate their analysis with data from https://blockscout.com/etc

As of 10:27pm PT, January 7 Coinbase provides three most recent cases of double spending on the ETC chain.

The first entry indicates two transactions:

First, a transaction of 4,000 ETC at orphaned block 7254430:


Transaction from: 0x3ccc…ed2c06 to 0x2c9a…401e69

The below screenshot confirms the transaction noted above at value of 4,000 ETC.

A second - double spend - transaction at block 7254435 is shown below. This block is not orphaned, suggesting that the attacker has mined on a new chain:

This picture confirms that the ‘double spend’ transaction is from: 0x3ccc…ed2c06 but this time to an entirely different address: 0xd850…eb3e47, yet in the exact same amount of 4,000 ETC.

On https://blockscout.com/etc we can confirm that block 7254430 has indeed been orphaned, as there is no transaction. The implicated hash is corroborated 0x3ccc…ed2c06

For the second - double spend - transaction, on block 7254435, on blockscout’s interface, we see a successful transaction of 4,000 ETC
from: 0x3ccc…ed2c06 to: 0xd850…eb3e47

Given that I can make sense of Coinbase’s detailed reporting with some different sources, I can confidently back @bhaumik’s analysis with 100 Cred.

p.s. For those interested, the SlowMist Team provides additional analyses.


#45

Claim : Anitha Beberg has a vision to vastly broaden the scope of timebanking through Seva Exchange, implementing a digital token to be exchanged openly on a blockchain network.

Category : Use cases and Timebanking

Source : https://fi.co/insight/seva-exchange-is-the-blockchain-and-a-i-platform-reinventing-timebanking-for-volunteerism-in-the-digital-economy

My Stake : Back claim 50 Cred

My Argument/Evidence : I just listened to episode 362 on Freakonomics podcast published on January 9, 2019 and it was confirmed that Seva Exchange and Andrew Yang are partnering together to further explore this idea and technology. http://freakonomics.com/podcast/andrew-yang/


#46

@bhaumik Thanks for the follow up on this! Great additional information. I would also back your corrected claim with 100 cred: Calgary businesses who participate in the new digital currency launch are required to accept 10% of payments with Calgary dollars.

Amazing how just a few words can impact the validity of a claim.


#47

i just watched the video from that link, with her and dr. edgar cahn. amazing work what they are doing, and it can definitely reach the masses if people are educated more on timebanking. would love to actually join seva myself!


#48

Claim: Proof-of-Stake has the benefit of using economic penalties to make various forms of 51% attacks vastly more expensive to carry out than Proof-of-work.

Source: https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Proof-of-Stake-FAQs

Category: Consensus protocols

My stake: Back claim (50 Cred)

My argument/evidence: Simple: In Proof-of-Work, mining equipment can be repurposed even after an attack. For example, you might attack one chain with your mining hardware and then use the same hardware to mine on a different chain. In Proof-of-Stake, your stake can’t be repurposed because one methodology often used to punish bad actors is to “slash” their stake. So if you try to attack the network and get caught, your stake is slashed. As Vlad Zamfir says, “it’s as though your ASIC farm burned down if you participated in a 51% attack”.


#49

Claim: Data shows that almost 5 new Cryptocurrency ATM’s are installed daily worldwide

Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/almost-5-new-cryptocurrency-atms-installed-worldwide-each-day-data-shows

Category: Use Cases

My Stake: Back Claim 100 Cred

My Argument/Evidence: a total of 4167 crypto ATMs have been installed worldwide. Installations in the United States rose from 1,216 on Jan. 1, 2018 to 2,475 as of today — 1,259 new ATMs in just over a year. California has the highest number of any state — with a total of 473 machines — followed by Illinois with 250.

This graphic illustrates that nearly 5 ATMs are installed each day. The gauge scale is calculated based on the last 60 days, speed is calculated based on the last seven days.

A whopping 70 percent are located in North America with 55 percent in the United States alone and 15 percent in Canada. 23% of these are in Europe of which around 6.5% of these are in Austria and the United Kingdom contributing to 4.8% of them. Asia shares 2.6 percent of these with most of them installed in Hong Kong. 1.3 and 1.1 percent are in Oceania and South America respectively with African countries having only 0.2 percent of the total of these machines.

Nearly all of these ATMs support Bitcoins and more than 30% of the total only supporting Bitcoin exclusively. Around 65% of the machines support one or more altcoins including Litecoins (LTC), Ethereum (ETH), Bitcoin Cash (BCH), Dash (DASH), Monero (XMR), Dogecoin (DOGE) and ZCash (ZEC). Nearly 60% of the machines support LTC, and around 50% of them support ETH.


#50

Claim: London Barber’s business sees the benefit of accepting Crypto as a form of payment

Source: https://cryptonewsreview.com/exclusive-why-crypto-reddit-is-losing-its-mind-over-russells-barbershop-in-surrey/

Category: Use Cases

My Stake: Back Claim 100 Cred

My Argument/Evidence: Cryptocurrency evangelists have been sending messages of goodwill to barber Ergys Mekshi all Thursday afternoon. The 29-year-old dad of two had posted in r/Cryptocurrency about accepting Bitcoin, DASH, XRP, Ethereum, Monero and Litecoin at his shop in Ewell, Epsom, 14 miles south west of London. His tablet has been blowing up ever since.

“The majority have been very good, very positive,” he tells CryptoNewsReview .
“Obviously a lot of people commenting want me to use certain cryptos. I’ve put up there the ones I feel people will be aware of. I mean, I’m not getting 25 people a day, I may only get one person a week wanting to pay in crypto.”

It’s a shot of his barber chair with a sticker on the glass that reads ‘Bitcoin Accepted Here’, ‘Ethereum accepted here’, ‘Litecoin accepted here’, ‘Monero Accepted Here.’ You get the idea.

“I’ve been accepting crypto for months, but the sign only came today,” he laughs. “I also take Tron and Kin but there’s literally not enough space on my mirror for the stickers!”

3,889 votes and 679 comments so far on Reddit

Which is the most popular crypto that people pay in?

“Weirdly so far it’s Ethereum, even though it’s not meant to be a currency. That just seems to be the one they’re holding. Bitcoin is actually the [least used]. I’d like to start using Bitcoin Cash as well but literally no-one has ever asked me about it.

“In the past year I’ve taken maybe £3,000-4,000 in cryptocurrency. It’s a nice amount. It may also be the same customers paying again and again but it shows you what you can do.”

This is what cryptocurrency supporters want to see on every high street in the UK. But It’s a tough old road, both for crypto-friendly business owners, and for the shoppers who want to pay for things in cryptocurrency. So maybe Ewell is just ahead of the curve? How many of his neighbouring businesses also accept crypto? There aren’t any.

Where exactly can you use Bitcoin? This website shows you 15 major retailers and services that accept Bitcoin as a form of payment.

Presented below is a map of the world, and if you zoom in on your desired geographic location, you can see what companies accept Crypto as a form of pay. The map updates frequently.


#51

Claim : Department of Energy establishes fossil energy research fund open to blockchain projects.

Category : Crypto funds

Source : https://www.energy.gov/fe/articles/energy-department-announces-nearly-5-million-fossil-energy-research-funding-universities

My Stake : Back claim 100 cred

My Argument/Evidence : The DOE website specifies for areas of interest for a $5 million fund for university research surrounding fossil energy. One of these areas of interest is “Cybersecure Sensors for Fossil Power Generation”, in which blockchain and decentralized tech are mentioned as potential technologies.


#52

Claim: Proof-of-Work disincentives forking better than Proof-of-Stake because the minority chain would be at risk of 51% attacks by the miners of the majority chain.

Category: Consensus protocols

Source: https://twitter.com/QWQiao/status/1083474116211027968

My Stake: Back claim (100 Cred)

My Argument/Evidence: This is one of those claims that can’t be falsified with data yet because we don’t have any Proof-of-Stake chains out in the wild right now. I would argue that this has so far proven to be a valid statement for Proof-of-Work chains – all one needs to do is compare the hashrate of Bitcoin vs. all the forks of Bitcoin.

Bitcoin hash rate: https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin-hashrate.html
Bitcoin cash hash rate: https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin%20cash-hashrate.html
Bitcoin SV hash rate: https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin%20sv-hashrate.html
Bitcoin Gold hash rate: https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/bitcoin%20gold-hashrate.html

… you get the point. Bitcoin is the most secure fork with the highest hash rate, and the rest are minority forks which have much smaller hash rates.

Now, I’m excited to see how this plays out for Proof-of-Stake blockchains. Will there be forks which are equally secure? Or will there always be a dominant fork + many minority forks? :thinking:


#53

Claim: Tron’s ICO whitepaper did not plagiarize from other projects.

This claim comes from Tron founder Justin Sun himself via an article on Breakermag.com. Breakermag spoke to Simon Morris, a former executive at BitTorrent who was in talks with Sun about creating a BitTorrent token. Morris quotes Justin as saying "I had very candid conversations with [Sun] about [the] plagiarized white papers…"I said Justin, maybe what you should do is acknowledge the fact that you were young and you were scrappy, and maybe this happened, but now you’ve moved on and you’re sincerely building things. [I told him] this was probably a preferable way to communicate in Silicon Valley than to pretend it didn’t happen.

"His reaction was to say, We have come to a consensus that this did not happen. And we have moved on.

Category: Projects
Sources:


https://www.ccn.com/vitalik-buterin-continues-to-troll-tron-over-whitepaper-plagiarism-allegations/
https://coincentral.com/community-accuses-tron-plagiarizing-whitepaper/



My Stake: Challenge claim (50 Cred).

Argument/Evidence: Evidence/arguments that Tron’s whitepaper is plagiarized comes from many different sources. Trustnodes.com has a solid breakdown of the sources of the copied passages. Defenders of Tron, and Sun himself, claim that this is not a case of plagiarization but rather one of poor translation from Chinese to English by volunteers. image|585x357

The translation issue muddies that waters a bit because the written languages are so different, comparing word for word between the original Chinese whitepaper and the English sources is more art than science. Others defend Tron by pointing out that appropriating work from others into your own is more culturally acceptable in China than in the west.

This leads to the issue of what is considered plagiarism. Plagiarism comes down to attribution. Building upon the works of others is normal, healthy and expected. But passing those works off as your own by providing no references whatsoever is plagiarism. I am challenging Sun’s claim because of the passages copied from IPS token and Filecoin with no attribution. But because of the translation complication, I’m only challenging with 50 Cred.
Note: I am not claiming that the code is plagiarized, only the text parts of the English version of the whitepaper. Some defenders on Reddit seem to confuse the two.


UPDATE

After a few more hours of research, I would like to change my stake (if such a thing is possible), from Challenge with 50 Cred to Back with 10.

Here’s why:

I download the whitepapers of IPFS, Filecoin, and Tron and scanned through looking for similarities. Besides a few headings, there were few. There are several claims that sections of Tron’s whitepaper were simply copy/pasted from either Filecoin or IPFS but I couldn’t find any passages that were blatant reproductions.

To confirm, I uploaded the PDF’s of the whitepapers to https://copyleaks.com which compares two docs at a time to check for plagiarism.
Comparing Filecoin with Tron gave me this:


And IPFS with Tron gave me this:

I think this confirms that there at least no copy and pasted passages.
I ran the checker a third type as a control with two different versions of the Tron whitepaper:

In sum in looks like Justin Sun’s claim that the Tron whitepaper is not plagiarized may be true. I’m still not super confident because I’m not sure the version of the whitepaper originally alleged to be plagiarized is the same one I’m am analyzing, and several respected community members, including Vitalik, seem convinced that the paper is not original.


#54

Claim : “Using Primotif, anyone anywhere in the world can buy S&P500 exposure using ETH.”

Category : Use cases

Source : https://multicoin.capital/2019/01/08/12-markets-crypto-decentralization-can-actually-improve/

My Stake : Back claim (1 Cred)

My Argument/Evidence : I am not 100% if this technology works since I haven’t used it but according to their website: "Primotif lets users buy sets, small portfolio units, that is comprised of Augur shares and dy/dx short tokens. Augur shares track the underlying major index, such as the S&P 500, while the short tokens provide a hedge against the volatility in the ETHUSD price.

They used Augur, Set Protocol, dY/dX and 0x protocols to build this system. They’ve created Augur markets for all of their indexes. When a user expresses interest in buying a set on their platform, their backend issues a Set with components bought from Augur and short ether liquidity pools. Then this Set is exchanged for ETH with the user using 0x.

Working with tools that were still in development poses many challenges. For example, Augur shares are ERC-20 tokens with 0 decimal places. This is unusual and did not play well with the Set Protocol. Through many hours working with the team, they were able to overcome this." https://devpost.com/software/primotif

Unknown: this is what I found out on Reddit: "So how does this work on the Augur front? I get the concept, sounds quite good!

However, Augur is an exchange. There has to be counterparties and a resolution. If I want to buy the S&P index via Primotif, I am buying an Augur token on a position (yes it’ll rise, no it’ll go down). There has to be other money in that Augur market for me to “win”, on the other side. Furthermore, would there ever be a resolution date. Am I missing a key attribute or component of how Augur works?" https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/9mpabi/primotif_exposure_to_global_market_indices_like/

Somebody asked about a use/test on Twitter but no one responded: Bitcoin Baller ‏ @ JUST_HODL_IT Jan 9

@ tbtstl is there a way to currently use/test out primotif ? Or was it only made for competition

0 replies0 retweets1 like


#55

Claim : The most widely used dapps have a few thousand daily users and a study of 43 blockchain applications found a zero percent success rate

Category :Use Cases

Source : https://www.coindesk.com/0-success-why-blockchain-apps-just-arent-taking-off

My Stake : Back Claim 10 cred

My Argument/Evidence :

Irrespective of the implications behind the claim, I thought this was an interesting exercise on the popularity of DAPPs as they stand today. To investigate this claim, I used dappradar to look at the popularity and past 24h and 7 day run rates of average daily users.

I found the following:

Among the top apps, the highest according to this website is around 10k, with most hovering or below 2-4k. This would fall in line with what the claim is putting forward.

Also - sidebit that is interesting. It seems that gambling is the most “successful” use case for DAPPs as they stand today.


#56

Claim : A number of US states are passing specific blockchain and smart contract enabling legislation, including a law making blockchain records admissible in Vermont, and in Arizona in April 2018 which made clear that “writing” included blockchain records and both Arizona and Tennessee have passed laws […]

Category: Use cases, Regulation, Governance, & Smart contracts

Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/smart-contracts-contract-disputes-michael-bacina/

My Stake: Back claim (100 Cred)

My Argument/Evidence: As the author suggested, it’s on Arizona House Bill 2603. See below.

Bill Title: Corporations; blockchain technology
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Republican 1-0)
*Status: (Passed) 2018-04-03 - Chapter 122 [HB2603 Detail]
Download: Arizona-2018-HB2603-Chaptered.html
[…]
53. “WRITING” OR “WRITTEN” INCLUDES BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY AS DEFINED IN SECTION 44‑7061.
[…]

Unknown: I am not sure if any lawyer or representative has written a regulation on smart contract yet. Will update soon.


#57

Claim : Decred has “a Bitcoin-grade developer team, a hyper-secure and fork-resistant design."

Category : Decred

Source : https://twitter.com/cburniske/status/1083802282255237120

My Stake : Back claim (50 cred)

My Argument/Evidence : There are three components: 1) Bitcoin-grade developer team 2) hyper secure and 3) fork resistant design

  1. The founders of Decred were former Bitcoin developers (source: Chicago Tribune)
  2. What it would cost to do a majority attack on Bitcoin vs Decred, showing Decred is 20x more expensive to attack than Bitcoin (source)
  3. This Reddit post walks through a theoretical case in which a minority fork is attempted, and how the hybrid POW/POS protocol prevents it from taking place

#58

I’ve read your post a couple times now. Great find… definitely not what I would have expected either. I don’t use Steemit, but it seems like their Reputation points are helpful in promoting the right behavior yet they have the ability to just ban users outright if they don’t follow the rules and downvoting them isn’t effective.


#59

I’d back this claim with 50 Cred.


#60

Claim: The brother of late drug kingpin Pablo Escobar is launching a new stablecoin cryptocurrency

Source: https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/01/11/escobar-pablo-cryptocurrency-trump/

Category: Stablecoin

My Stake: Back Claim (10 Cred)

Evidence/Analysis:

For those who watched “Narcos”, Escobar Inc. (a private investment firm) launched a ERC20 token called ESCOBAR.

Etherscan confirmed token existence. 2 holder addresses, 3 transactions and market value ($0.00) so far according to Etherscan.

Escobar Inc. website also stated its launch of the token.

Context:
Escobar Inc. was trying to raise fund to impeach Trump, but got shut down after $10 million mark. Therefore they wanted to raise fund via ESCOBAR that is 1:1 pegged USD and won’t be easily censored. Interesting to see how much money ESCOBAR could raise as “stablecoin”.


#62

Claim : Ethereum Classic’s 51% Attacker Had Mysteriously Sent Back $100,000 To Gate.io Exchange

Category : Ethereum Classic

My Stake : Back claim (50 cred)

My Argument/Evidence : On Jan 12, 2019, Gate.io published an article stating, “On Jan.10, we found that the recent ETC 51% attacker returned 100k USD value of ETC back.”

My thoughts: This claim is valid and able to be confirmed; however, how do we know that Gate.io is telling the truth? Anyway, I’m still going to back the claim with 50 cred.


#63

My Stake: Challenge claim (50 CRED)

I found the original Tron whitepaper:

Original Tron whitepaper: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmWh3LEWUQN8LsoHerQecmwfACXAPNKE9wigx6t9dLitmE/tron/Tron-Whitepaper-1031-V18-EN.pdf

IPFS whitepaper: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmR7GSQM93Cx5eAg6a6yRzNde1FQv7uL6X1o4k7zrJa3LX/ipfs.draft3.pdf

So, the Tron whitepaper has a lot of theory, which doesn’t need to be necessarily copied. What I have tried to do is to find elements of the white-paper which could have been copied. That might be less percentage wise, however it shouldn’t really matter - what matters is whether there were elements of the whitepaper which were directly picked up.

Comparison of the files on CopyLeaks.
https://copyleaks.com/compare-embed/compare-two-files/43f48da5-52ff-4082-9ef3-d5e37fa0c009/6799357/1/1?key=72nTOgLXY5cbUjhpfE20

It shows only 60 words copied, however those are blocks of code just copy-pasted from the IPFS whitepaper. Also, CopyLeaks failed to identify similarities such as the following image. So, it shows that Tron not only copied some blocks of text/code, they also rephrased to prevent being accused of plagiarism.

In conclusion, from the evidence I feel that parts of the original white-paper were efficiently copied.