Kameir

Recent disclosures by members of Ukraine’s legislature revealed that three lawmakers have a combined wealth in bitcoin of almost $50 million. According to a report from RIA Novosti, Russia’s international news service, the three lawmakers are all members of the “Petro Poroshenko Block,” which constitutes the largest group of legislators within the Parliament.

Of the three named by the report, Dmitry Golubov possesses the most bitcoin: 8,752 BTC, an amount worth roughly $37 million at current prices. Alexander Urbansky possesses 2,494 BTC while Dmitry Belotserkovets owns 398 BTC, worth approximately $10 million and $1.6 million, respectively.Two bills to provide legal frameworks for cryptocurrencies including Bitcoin have now been submitted to the Ukrainian parliament. The latest one proposes recognizing them as financial assets. It also defines cryptocurrency derivatives, market of cryptocurrencies and their derivatives in Ukraine,” Bill No. 7183-1 was submitted last week.

And, other report confirmed that 150 Bitcoin machines will be installed in Ukraine later this year.

While US regulators keep making anouncements with little content in reference to the treatment of cryptocurrencies, countries like Switzerland are moving fast to embrace these new financial tools

The national railway company of Switzerland, Swiss Federal Railways (SBB), recently announced a new service. Starting on November 11, Swiss customers will be able to buy bitcoins from over 1,000 SBB ticket machines.

And, Swiss private bank Falcon is now offering their clients to store and trade bitcoins direclty via their cash holdings. A clear move that signals the traction the virtual currency is gaining even in slow-changing asset management.

The group’s new blockchain asset management service is being offered in partnership with cryptocurrency broker Bitcoin Suisse.

Hu Bing, a researcher at the Institute of Finance and Banking, a Chinese government-supported academic research organization, claimed that the government’s ban on initial coin offerings (ICOs) is only temporary

Bing emphasized that the Chinese cryptocurrency community must understand that the government has not “forbidden” ICOs but instead “paused” them, demonstrating the government’s intention to resume ICOs in the near future.

Bing further said that the Chinese government and its financial regulators are currently considering the potential of allowing ICOs to raise money in a controlled environment, through a licensing program.

BTCChina Response to News Article On “Banning Bitcoin Exchanges”

We have received a large number of questions from customers following the publication of a news article by Caixin alleging that Chinese regulators would stop bitcoin trading.

Our response is as follows:

• BTCChina operates in strict accordance with Chinese regulations. If the Caixin report is accurate, we will continue acting in strict accordance with regulators, and continue protecting the safety of customers’ funds.
• The Caixin report says that regulators have not said bitcoin itself is illegal, and have not decided to prohibit private, one-on-one bitcoin transactions. If the report is accurate, BTCChina will stop all BTC/CNY trading, and change its business model to become an information service provider for private, one-on-one digital asset trading.

Many people regard digital assets, of which bitcoin is the embodiment, as the necessary result of recent advances in internet technology and the largest scale practical application of blockchain technology. In additional, bitcoin’s blockchain may have a far-reaching positive impact on the economy, becoming a foundational layer upon which other revolutionary software projects are based. We believe digital assets will have a far-reaching impact on the global economy.

BTCChina thanks you for your support, and will continue working to provide the best service for all customers.

BTCChina, Saturday, September 9th, 2017

Filecoin – a data storage network intending to use blockchain technology (!) – today officially completed its initial coin offering (ICO), raising more than $257 million over a month of activity with $205MM coming from the ICO. $52MM had been sold ahead of the ICO to VCs – likely at a discount.

Filecoin clients can tune their storage strategy to suit their needs, creating a custom balance between redundancy, speed of retrieval, and cost. The worldwide Filecoin storage and retrieval markets make vendors compete to give you flexible options at the best prices.

What is an initial coin offering?

A common misinterpretation of paradigms is the belief that the discovery of paradigm shifts and the dynamic nature of science with its many opportunities for subjective judgments by scientists are a case for relativism: the view that all kinds of belief systems are equal. However, when a scientific paradigm is replaced by a new one, albeit through a complex social process, the new one is always better, not just different.

These claims of relativism are, however, tied to another claim: that the language and theories of different paradigms cannot be translated into one another or rationally evaluated against one another—that they are incommensurable. This gave rise to much talk of different peoples and cultures having radically different worldviews or conceptual schemes—so different that whether or not one was better, they could not be understood by one another.

However, the philosopher Donald Davidson published a highly regarded essay in 1974, “On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme” (Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association) arguing that the notion that any languages or theories could be incommensurable with one another was itself incoherent.

If this is correct, Kuhn’s claims must be taken in a weaker sense than they often are. Furthermore, the hold of the Kuhnian analysis on social science has long been tenuous with the wide application of multi-paradigmatic approaches in order to understand complex human behavior.

Paradigm shifts tend to be most dramatic in sciences that appear to be stable and mature, as in physics at the end of the 19th century. At that time, physics seemed to be a discipline filling in the last few details of a largely worked-out system. In 1900, Lord Kelvin famously told an assemblage of physicists at the British Association for the Advancement of Science, “There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement.”[veracity of this quote challenged in Lord Kelvin article] Five years later, Albert Einstein published his paper on special relativity, which challenged the very simple set of rules laid down by Newtonian mechanics, which had been used to describe force and motion for over two hundred years.

In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Kuhn wrote, “Successive transition from one paradigm to another via revolution is the usual developmental pattern of mature science.” Kuhn’s idea was itself revolutionary in its time, as it caused a major change in the way that academics talk about science. Thus, it could be argued that it caused or was itself part of a “paradigm shift” in the history and sociology of science. However, Kuhn would not recognise such a paradigm shift. In the social sciences, people can still use earlier ideas to discuss the history of science.