Mediaboss Marketing

This post originally appeared on ZeMing M. Gaos website, and we republished with permission from the author. Read the full piecehere.

While the whole world seems to be fixing its eyes on the bitcoin price charts, I closely watch a simple and mundane number:

The transaction fee/subsidy ratios of BSV and BTC.

These ratios are the most significant Bitcoin chart to look at, because it is signaling the future.

Why is this important? Because this is where the dynamics of competitive mining economics is active.

In the past years, the total number of transactions on BSV blockchain has increased from nothing to first surpassing that of BTC and then reaching 10-100 times that of BTC as of March 2023.

If the trend continues, BSV miners will enjoy exponential growth of revenue from network fees, while BTC miners will face a growing avalanche of pressure to migrate to BSV for superior profitability, and this despite the fact that fee per transaction on BSV is many thousands of times lower than that on BTC and is likely to continue to drop further lower by many times in the future.

The only reason why the increase in BSV transaction volume has not already caused a shift of mining behavior according to the prediction of mining economics was a quite simple one: in the past, while the number of transactions of BSV increased, the fee per transaction of BSV decreased proportionally to cancel out the effect. Considered with a long-term view, this is healthy. Even though it is desirable for the fee/subsidy ratio to increase to show the superiority of BSV mining economics, it would not be good for the ratio to increase for a wrong reason, specifically as a result of fee per transaction increase. This is because the latter would diminish the utility of the system. A real production economy is always based on actual utility, in which a product/service is rewarded because it has made something more efficient. As BTC and the rest of the crypto sector find their life support in a fake economy driven by ponzymistic mental energy, it is a good thing that the real utility blockchain is not affected by that. So far, BSV has been doing marvelously well in this respect.

At the same time, the transaction fee cannot drop continuously without a limit. The lowest natural transaction fee is 1 sat/transaction, beyond which special measures would be necessary. Given the already very low transaction fee on BSV, the future decrease of the fee is expected to decelerate, to be outpaced by the increase of the transaction volume.1

Therefore, if the total number of transactions on BSV continues to increase unboundedly, it will be inevitable that the transaction fee/subsidy ratios of BSV will pull away from that of BTC.

For example, the current peak of transaction volume on BSV is 50 million transactions per day. If it increases another 100 times to 5 billion transactions per day and sustains at around that volume, it will translate to about 10 BSV per block (versus the current 0.1 BSV per block). But if we assume the fee per transaction further drops from the current 25 sats/tx to 10 sats/tx, it would be about 4 BSV per block. In that scenario, the fee/subsidy ratio of BSV will be around 0.65 (65%).

In comparison, the fee/subsidy ratio of BTC is likely to be still in the range of 0.01-0.03 (1-3%) because there is inherently limited room for BTC transaction fees to move.

As will be explained in detail in this chapter, such a drastic gap between the fee/subsidy ratios will have irresistible impact on the miners profitability. The above is a very conservative estimate. Significant economic impact could be felt by the miners well before fee/subsidy ratio of BSV reaches 65%. It could happen at just 25% or even before that.

At the present time, the fee/subsidy ratio of BSV is just a bit over 1%, comparable to that of BTC. The transaction economics is therefore completely buried under noise.

But it will not remain like this forever, because the economics of profitability is an operative force like gravity is.

The basics of bitcoin mining economics

At the most basic level, the economics of bitcoin mining is not complicated, and is the same with BTC as with BSV.

Miners block reward = block subsidy + network transaction fees

The block reward is a miners revenue for successfully creating a valid block on the chain.

As will be shown in this article, in terms of comparative mining profitability, the block subsidy parts essentially cancel out on each other among BTC, BSV and BCH, and thereforethe only competitive action is found in the network transaction fees.

And as will be shown in this article, the trend of the network transaction fees, along with the inherent designs of BTC and BSV, spells bad news for BTC.

Please do not quickly jump into the following superficial conclusions:

Your intuition is wrong if you think the above. Read on. But first a hint:

The actual prices of BTC and BSV are irrelevant in this analysis, as the dynamics is determined by the relative ratios, and the fundamental profitability metrics is the profitability per-unit hash power (rather than that of the total hash power).

For example, the current price of BSV is 1/500th that of BTC. But as far as the mining subsidy is concerned, mining on BSV is equally profitable to that on BTC, because mining BSV requires 500 times less hash power. Therefore, the subsidy part of the economics evens out between BTC and BSV, and the only thing that is competitive comes from the network transaction fees, which is a focus of this article.

Because historically the price ratio and hash power ratio between BTC and BSV have largely matched each other in the market, this conclusion does not change whether this ratio further deteriorates to 1/1000 or improves to 1/10, or even 10/1, in the future.

This is not a theory. If youre a miner, whether you understand this intellectually or not, you will actually feel it in your mining operations. Anyone who has done multi-chain BTC/BCH/BSV mining simultaneously would know this as a fact.

The background & statusquo

The total block reward is a miners total revenue for successfully creating a valid block on the chain.

And creating a valid block involves two major types of work performed by the miner, namely:

(1) building a block, and(2) proving the block.

Building a block including adding and processing transactions in the block. It can be very simple when the miner includes only those transactions that have simple straight scripts, but may become very complex when the miner includes transactions that have complex smart contracts.

For BTC, there are no complex smart contracts to speak of. All transactions on BTC have simple standard scripts and a miner needs no special software nor technological know-how to process these transactions. Before you say wait a second, just because BTC doesnt have complex smart contracts now does not mean it will not have them in the future! please be reminded that it is a linchpin design of BTCnotto have such smart contract. In order to support the digital gold moniker and an attractive but fake decentralization narrative, BTC Coreremovedall the Bitcoin smart contract capabilities and limited the block size to 1 megabyte. And this is all so deeply entrenched that they would have to fork into a new chain while openly acknowledging that they were totally wrong in order to change it.

With BSV, however, a new field is opened up because more and more transactions are created by customers to take advantage of the smart contract capability on BSV. A BSV miner has a choice to make when building a block, namely deciding what transactions it wants to include in the block it is building.

This is where the BSV mining business becomes sophisticated and competitive beyond the mere hash power competition. A BSV miner cannot just blindly include every transaction into its block. Transactions having smart contracts can be highly complex and diverse, and they can come from all kinds of customers in various businesses, from art, esports to enterprise software. To include such transactions in a block requires a good understanding of the customers business logic, building a good business relationship with the customer, and developing software capabilities to compile the smart contracts to straight OP_codes. Advanced miners may even go beyond and start to build tools for new businesses in BSV blockchain ecosystem. There is no limit.

Proving a block is a different matter. Broadly speaking, it involves two different kinds of block proving activities:

(i) solving a hashing puzzle, which is a hashing competition among miners for the next block (as every miner builds its own block and wants its block to be accepted in the chain), and(ii) validating and accepting the block created by another miner who has won the hashing competition (miners are required to do this as matter of the consensus).

Note that the miner who has won the next block does not need to do extra work in validating and accepting the block, because all of that should have been done in building the block already, see the above (1), building a block. But to be accepted to the chain, the block has to be validated and accepted by other miners.

It is important to also note that, after a block has already been built, validating and accepting the block by another miner becomes easy and can be done by any miner, because all transactions have been compiled into straight scripts (OP_codes). In other words, although not every miner may be sophisticated enough to build a block to include transactions that have complex smart contracts, every miner that runs standard mining software is capable of validating and accepting such a block created by another miner.

This is part of the Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus among the miners.

The concept of PoW itself has been a source of confusion, because by work in Proof-of-Work, most people refer to hashing only. But thats a misunderstanding. There are at least two different types of work involved as indicated above.

The term mining is also confusing, because to many people, it suggests working for newly minted coins as a block subsidy only. But that is not accurate. The reality is:

(1) there is no ongoing minting (in a real sense of the term) of bitcoin, as all 21 million bitcoins were minted all at once when the Genesis block was created; and(2) the only difference between block subsidy and network transaction fees is that the former receives new coins from the preprogrammed coinbase (an initial market) while the latter receives coins from customers (a secondary market).

Therefore, even after the block subsidy has stopped, miners work continues, and the work may still be considered mining in a sense that the process yields coins for a miner.

It is therefore misleading to focus on the block subsidy only. The block subsidy is supposed to be a temporary bootstrapping strategy for establishing the blockchain. The real dynamics of the mining economy is in the network fees.

The block subsidy is mostly static (except for halvings roughly every four years). And more importantly, as will be shown in this article, block subsidies are non-differential between different chains (that is, they are essentially the same for BTC, BSV or BCH, on a unit-hash power basis).

Currently, BTC and BSV prices track almost precisely in proportion to the network hashing powers (or in reality it is the other way around, but the key is that they are correlated). In other words, the ratio between BTC price and BSV price is almost exactly the same as the ratio between BTC hash power and BSV hash power. Both ratios fluctuate with time, but they are almost synchronized to match between the chains.

It means the market is completely writing off the network transaction economics.The market only sees the simple hashing part, and is completely blind to the transaction part that is the real story in the future.

This reflects a temporary fact that the fee/subsidy ratios of both networks are still very low and almost negligible (i.e., the network transaction fee is still a small portion on these networks and have a negligible impact on miners decisions on operations).

However, this ignores what is already happening behind the scenes and will likely happen at an even faster pace in the future.

This will be the textbook example of asymmetric information, or information failure, or knowledge failure of the market.

But watch thetrend!

The network transaction volume is rapidly growing on the BSV blockchain, while that on BTC is flat and capped by design. As a result, transaction fees as a component of the BSVs total block rewards is expected to grow as well, while the counterpart of BTC is perpetually limited by design. In the past, the total transaction fee per block on BSV did not increase despite the transaction volume increase, only because the fee per transaction on BSV has decreased proportionally to cancel out the overall effect. But because the fee per transaction cannot keep going down without a limit, it is expected to decelerate, and as a result the total transaction fees per block will eventually go up with the transaction volume.

Therefore, if the transaction volume on BSV keeps going up, an inescapable squeeze is being formed.

Imagine when BSVs fee/subsidy ratio rises to 9, while that of BTC remains at 0.01 (1%). It would mean that, for roughly the same amount of hash power, a miner can generate 10 times (10x) as much revenue on BSV as that on BTC. It would also translate to much higher profits (see Section What about profitability?).

If the fee/subsidy of BSV is 99 while that of BTC remains at 0.01 (1%), the difference would be about 100 times (100x), so on. There really is no ceiling for this as BSV is unbounded in terms of the block size and the number of transactions included in one block. See further below for a more detailed mathematical explanation for this conclusion, but at this point, just trust the math.

But in reality, thats not going to happen, as miners would have moved over to BSV long ago, because no business can ignore such a huge difference in revenue efficiency, and ultimately in profitability as well.

BTC miners therefore face a growing avalanche of pressure due to BSVs exponential growth of network fees. If a 10% or 20% extra profit margin is not sufficient to overcome ignorance, ideological bias, personal sentiments, whatever the case it may be, how about 50%, 100%, 200%, 500%, or 1000%?

Wherever there is a higher profit to be made, the capital and resources will figure out a way to follow. The friction or resistance cannot be infinite, and therefore a breakout point will arrive sooner or later. It is simple economics and capitalism. A rapidly growing economic force cannot simply be ignored or pushed back by mere slandering. There will bound to be reactions, legally or not.

So overall, as long as the BSV adoption continues, it will all gravitate toward BSV.

For the same reason, the apps and transactions on BSV are absolutely the key. If they keep going up like they have been during the last month, something big is going to happen in the BSV landscape, including the coin price. It will not be a matter of personal opinions, but objective economics.

The present and thefuture

The present price difference between BTC and BSV is a known fact. The purpose of this article is to help readers focus on the trend.

Note again that BTCs network fees are limited by design and have already reached the upper limit, while BSVs are unlimited. The potential room of growth can therefore also be unlimited, perhaps reaching a difference of a million times and more in the future. Speaking of potential, this is based on objective boundaries defined by each system, not a mere subjective opinion. Please keep this in mind while reading this article, as otherwise some of the logic and reasoning may not come through naturally.

That BTCs daily fees has almost a hard cap is a well-known fact. It is because the total number of transactions the BTC blockchain can process is already at or near its maximum block capability. Although the actual number fluctuates from time to time, it has touched the top frequently in the past. And by the very design of BTC which predicates on small blocks, the top is a hard ceiling, with no possibility to pierce through.

With the total number of transactions per block fixed, the only way to increase the transaction fee is to increase the fee per transaction, which is unrealistic because ranging between $1-$20 it is already too high. It is in sharp contrast with the $0.00001 transaction fee on BSV, which has unlimited block size, and therefore unlimited number of transactions per block. For more detail, seeBTC and Bitcoin, what is the real difference?

It really is an exciting time to be in the BSV space.

The dynamics between hash power andprice

The dynamics between hash power and price is not a simple cause and effect relationship. Nevertheless, the correlation and even causality between hash power and price is real:

The total hash power of a blockchain (BTC or BSV) is largely determined by the block difficulty level. Block difficulty adjustment happens once in a while due to the 10 min block time restriction, which is affected by miner competition (because more competition leads to higher hash power and thus shortens block time), which in turn is driven by miners profitability, which in turn is determined by revenue sources and the coin price.

The coin price at any given time is determined by the market.

The market is influenced by demand and supply.

With an asset that has no utility, the demand and supply is purely speculative, depending on peoples perception of the future price, the network strength (which in turn correlates to hash power), the selling of newly mined coins by miners, and many other things. It is therefore not a simple one directional linear relationship.

But as BSV processes more and more transactions and bigger and bigger blocks, BSV becomes a real commodity, not for pure speculative trading, but actuallyneededby businesses, entrepreneurs, consumers to have transactions and to store data on the BSV chain. Thus, a market that has real economic basis emerges, and BSV price will be driven by economic demand and supply, not just speculations.

As the demand increases, the price will increase too, because BSV has a limited supply.

Therefore, if transactions and block sizes continue to grow and the number of sats per transaction stabilizes, it will eventually come to a point where BSV price will be pressured to rise. The faster the growth is, the higher the pressure is. This pressure may not be felt temporarily when the difference is still small, but eventually will be, if the growth does not stop.

But if the BSV price continues to rise, BSV hash power will rise as well, leading to higher energy cost for the miners. Will this diminish the attraction for miners to move to BSV?

The answer is no, because ultimately, a miners willingness to increase its hash power are driven by profitability. Due to the extra revenue of transaction fees, the mining economics continues to be in favor to BSV, because no matter how much BSV hash power rises, it cannot make BSV miners transaction fee revenue advantage disappear.

Definitions andexamples

In order to look at this more quantitatively, let us look at several definitions.Block reward= block subsidy + network transaction feesBSV/BTC hash ratio: BSV hash power / BTC hash powerBSV/BTC price ratio: BSV price / BTC priceFee/subsidy ratio: network fee / block subsidy (either BSV or BTC, respectively)BSVs fee percentage: BSV network fee / BSV block reward (%)BTCs fee percentage: BTC network fee / BTC block reward (%)BSV-BTC differencein fee: BSVs fee/subsidy ratio minus BTCs fee/subsidy ratio (%)

The issue before the miners is quite simple:

Anytime when BSVs fee/subsidy ratio is greater than BTCs, there is attraction/pressure for a miner to move its hash power from BTC to BSV, because the difference is extra revenue, almost free surplus profit, provided that the BSV/BTC hash ratio and BSV/BTC price ratio are roughly tracking each other (which have been historically).

This is because, when BSV/BTC hash ratio and BSV/BTC price ratio are the same, the block subsidy alone results in the same profitability on BSV and BTC.

For example, currently, BTC price is 500 times that of BSV, but if the mining subsidy only is concerned, mining on BSV is equally profitable to that on BTC because mining BSV requires 500 times less hash power (and correspondingly 500 times less equipment and energy). So the subsidy part of the economics evens out between BTC and BSV. The conclusion would remain the same whether BTC/BSV price ratio is 1000 or 10, or even reversed at 1/10 or 1/1000 for that matter.

At the present time, because the fee/subsidy ratios of BTC, BCH and BSV are all very small, the mining profitability of these three chains are essentially the same when measured over a longer period of time by unit power conception, e.g. per THash/s, despite some short period fluctuations. See for example, profitability charts onbitinfocharts.com.

But all this will change when BSVs fee/subsidy ratio quickly rises above BTCs, and the difference becomes bigger and bigger. See further discussions below.

In other words, the bitcoin subsidy portion of the block rewards always cancel out with each other when compared between BTC and BSV, and as a result, any competitive difference in profitability comes only from the difference in transaction fees.

This may be very counterintuitive to many, because peoples mind tends to gravitate toward this skepticism: how can that be when BTC price is hundreds of times that of BSV?

The key: the actual prices of BTC and BSV are irrelevant in this analysis, as the dynamics is determined by the relative ratios, and the fundamental profitability is theper-unit hash powerprofitability (rather than the total hash power).

Now,ifBSVs fee/subsidy ratio and BTCs fee/subsidy ratio were also the same (in other words, BSV-BTC fee/subsidy ratio difference is zero), the transaction fee part of the economics would also be the same on BSV as it is on BTC, making the per-unit hash power profitability on both blockchains entirely equal to each other.

But as the transaction volume on BSV keeps increasing but that of BTC doesnt,BSVs fee/subsidy ratio and BTCs fee/subsidy ratio are not going to be the same.

Due to the design difference of BSV and BTC, the difference is destined to be large, and may grow larger and larger with no bounds.

And that, is where the real dynamics is operative.

When the fee/subsidy ratios of both blockchain are small, miners can ignore them. For example, when BSVs fee/subsidy ratio is at 2%, it is still almost negligible, despite its being twice the BTCs 1%, the difference (2% -1% =1%) between the two is almost negligible.

But if the difference between fee/subsidy ratios of BSV and BTC becomes larger, say over 10%, or 15%, it would become harder to ignore. And a difference of 25% or greater may be impossible to ignore.

Consider a situation where BSVs fee/subsidy ratio is at 100% while that of BTCs is at 1%. This would mean that on BSV, the transaction fees are half the block subsidy (a 1/2 and 1/2 split), but on BTC it is negligible. Together this would translate to a 2x in total revenue per-unit hash power on BSV as compared to BTC, and in much higher profit as well (see below Section What about profitability?).

The revenues in the above scenario are as follows:

total BTC block reward = 6.25 BTCtotal BSV block reward = 6.25 BSV + 6.25 BSV = 12.5 BSV.

That is, the mining revenue with a given amount of hash power would double (2x) if it is on BSV blockchain from the BTC blockchain.

If BSVs fee/subsidy ratio further becomes 10, while BTCs fee/subsidy ratio remains 1%, the total block rewards would be as follows:

Read the rest here:

The economics of Bitcoin mining - CoinGeek

On March 22, global crypto exchange LBank launched the third edition of the online AMA event Exploring New Narratives for 2023 through its official Twitter account. Over 40,000 listeners tuned in to the previous two editions to hear what industry experts had to say about the current state of crypto and blockchain. This article compiles what insiders think about the impact of Federal Reserve rate hikes, their outlooks on the bearish market, meme coins, and the rise of CBDCs.

1. LuckyStar, Builder, BSDAO

LBank: You mentioned that Bitcoins Fear & Greed Index is currently hovering around 60, the highest level since November 2021. How much importance should be placed on that figure, and how much do you think it will fluctuate in the coming months?

LuckyStar: The recent fluctuations of Bitcoins price have confused many people. The surge in its price may be due to various factors, such as pressure on the banking system, a high likelihood of interest rate hikes, and the US governments BTFP program, which injects liquidity into the market. However, Bitcoins value is still linked to the US dollar economy and is affected by trends on Wall Street, the US Dollar Index, and US bonds. The outbreak of COVID-19 and the Silicon Valley Bank incident have also affected the crypto market. The development of decentralized stablecoins may be an important narrative for the future of the crypto market.

The upward trend in the crypto market may continue until the end of April due to the provision of liquidity, although I am not very optimistic about the market in the second half of the year due to the possible domino effect that failing banks can cause. It is also possible that the crypto industry itself may repeat the same mistakes of the 2008 financial crisis.

2. nnova.eth, Social Media Manager, Saito Network

LBank: Why do you always claim that meme coins matter for this industry?

nnova.eth: Meme tokens definitely are important and will play a significant role in the future of Web3. They are expanding beyond being just a token with the name of a dog species and actually building layer 1 ecosystems, which is a bullish signal. Memes are a form of cultural expression that can convey complex ideas in a simple format and can create a sense of community, and inspire people to take action. Meme tokens are high-risk assets, and its difficult to predict their market movements, but I suggest you keep an eye on the biggest meme projects nonetheless.

The success of these projects is not only due to technological advancements but also due to the strong community aspect that is a core value of Web3. This success will always be a middle finger aimed at the traditional finance system.

3. Jay Wong, Global Partnerships Manager, CB Recruitment

LBank: Do you believe meme coins have sufficient utility and value?

Wong: I am not interested in meme coins, but do track the value and utility of a project. For example, Shiba Inu (SHIB) is a project that has a strong community, but I question whether the virality of meme coins is necessary to build a successful platform. I believe they may play a role in the future of gaming and in attracting a younger demographic. However, I want to see a value proposition from layer 1 and layer 2 projects that differentiate them from existing platforms.

LBank: What are your thoughts on the adoption of CBDCs?

Wong: The use of CBDCs is a positive development, driven mainly by technological advancement. Although some people may have concerns about government control and potential technical issues, CBDCs are a big step-up in efficiency over the current system. I believe CBDCs will be a catalyst for progress, rather than something used for good or bad.

4. Sonny Kong, CFO, Superpower Squad

LBank: Arbitrum (ARB) has been making quite some waves in the industry. Why is that?

Kong: Arbitrum is a layer 2 network based on the Ethereum blockchain, providing scalability and efficiency for dApps and smart contracts. Projects focused on solving real-world problems and improving user experience, like ARB, are more appealing to institutional investors. The recent trend of projects combining artificial intelligence, decentralized identifiers, and social media have the potential to create innovative applications and attract a larger user base. I expect to see more projects that offer new use cases and improve user experience in the blockchain space.

5. Crypto Meina, Founder of Crypto Meina Podcast

LBank: What will be the impact of further interest rate hikes on macroeconomics in the crypto market?

Crypto Meina: Raising interest rates to curb inflation could obviously lead to a liquidity crunch and slower economic growth, while the crypto market is likely to remain correlated with traditional markets in the short term. The Circle (USDC) pegging incident was an isolated event, but there may be more regional banks with similar situations. I recommend retail investors maintain a focus on quality assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum.

6. Victor Lee, CEO, ThirdFi.org

LBank: As a professional investor, what are your outlooks for the market sentiment toward the end of 2023?

Lee: The market is currently rebounding, despite this being contrary to the current Bitcoin housing cycle. Banks running out of money is the catalyst for this. While the sentiment among investors has not yet shifted, this contrarian trend is getting more obvious. The market will remain volatile and will continue to fluctuate for a good while.

LBank: In the past, you have brought up the conflict between regulation and the adoption of globalized digital assets like cryptocurrencies. What does that conflict look like?

Lee: The government is controlling the most precious commodity in our lives; our money. People around the world are slaves to debt-based economies. Governments are minting more of their currencies, while Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are becoming more valuable. The governments attempt to regulate and slow down the process of cryptocurrency adoption is a contrarian bet, but ultimately the free market will do its work and people will demand access to these products that allow them to control their own wealth.

LBank: What is your take on the adoption of CBDCs?

Lee: CBDCs will allow for easy transactions between different parts of the world without relying on intermediaries or centralized entities. Blockchain technology can replace the current financial system, but it will require time for people to adopt it. Besides that, CBDCs can bring more transparency to the financial system and hold the government accountable. Introducing CBDCs is a better way to improve the financial system rather than completely replacing it. The usage of CBDCs by banks and governments will be beneficial to everybody.

7. Petros Naziroglu, Heads of Institutional Solutions, Skynet Trading

LBank: What are your thoughts on the adoption of CBDCs?

Naziroglu: Venture capitalists will eventually move towards government-backed digital currencies, and the adoption of CBDCs may actually be driven by interest rate hikes and the potential impact on inflation and debt for countries with currencies pegged to the US dollar. CBDCs could be beneficial for smaller nations looking to hedge against risks by allowing them to denominate their debt in their own currency. However, the adoption of CBDCs may come with the loss of some personal freedoms.

8. Joshua Sum, Co-Founder & Core Lead, College Dao

LBank: What is your take on the adoption of CBDCs?

Sum: CBDCs have a clear use case and are a step in the right direction, but central banks are not keen on them right now, and infrastructure and education are major hurdles. We are involved in blockchain education and believe that the industry needs to do a better job of teaching the public and lawmakers about this technology before we can achieve further adoption.

9. Samuel, Founder, EKOS LLC

LBank: Can you elaborate on the importance of the freedom to transact and how blockchain technology provides an alternative to centralized payments?

Samuel: While regulation protects consumers and maintains stability, recent actions by the US government indicate their interest in undermining the blockchain industry. Self-regulation using code and AI to translate this code into language can help solve the problem of understanding and verifying smart contracts. However, theres a need for balanced rules that dont undermine the core ideas of the industry and acknowledge that achieving this balance requires collaboration between the industry and regulators.

LBank is preparing the next Exploring New Narratives for 2023 Twitter Space. If you are interested in participating, dont hesitate to contact us.

Google Form: https://forms.gle/CyuUDyzynGSngVSG8

Email: sara.shen@lbank.info

TG: @frankiessara (https://t.me/frankiessara

Disclaimer: This is a paid post and should not be treated as news/advice.

Go here to read the rest:

LBank hosts third edition of New Narratives for 2023 Twitter Space - AMBCrypto News

Partial truckload shipping continues to evolve with technology, and its become much more popular over the last few years. This freight movement method allows shippers to combine their PTL freight with other shipments to fill a truckload.

Both dry van and reefer trucks containing meat, dairy, and produce can benefit most from shipping multiple loads together. Partial truckload shipping is a great option because it is a much more cost-effective and efficient way to ship a wide range of items nationwide.

Technology only continues to evolve and play a key role in the trucking industry. Automated load matching systems, real-time tracking, and predictive analytics are just a few examples of how shipping continues to change.

These technological advances are one of the main reasons more shippers are turning to partial truckload shipping to meet their needs. Using this efficient method is a great way to lower transportation costs while ensuring the shipment reaches its destination on time.

Here is an overview of how the latest technology is making a big impact on the partial truckload shipping industry.

One of the biggest challenges faced by shippers and carriers in partial truckload shipping is finding the right match for their refrigerated or dry van freight. Trying to do this task manually is often time-consuming and stressful.

However, automated load matching systems make it much easier to find the best shipment to ensure your items reach their destination. Automated load matching systems use algorithms to quickly match available freight carriers that have available space in their trailers.

Using this technology also makes it easier for smaller shippers to access partial truckload shipping services nationwide. Previously, only large shippers had the freight volume necessary to make partial truckloads cost-effective.

For example, the use of automated load matching systems allows smaller shippers to consolidate their shipments with others to fill up reefer trucks, which reduces their shipping costs and makes it easier to schedule shipments.

These innovative systems can easily find the right match, which saves shippers time and money. Load matching systems also play a vital role in reducing empty miles, which happens whenever a carrier drives with an empty trailer.

Using automated load matching systems is a win-win situation for shippers and carriers, as its a great way to improve efficiency. Partial truckload shipments will only continue to become even more widespread as more companies adopt load-matching systems.

Real-time tracking technology is another essential component of the partial truckload shipping process. Using real-time tracking and visibility makes it possible for shippers and carriers to easily monitor the location and status of their freight at any time.

Investing in this technology is a great way to make well-informed decisions for managing routing, scheduling, and delivery times. Its also much easier to make any changes with up-to-date information.

An added benefit of real-time tracking is that it greatly improves the customer experience. For example, customers can easily track their shipments in real time, which gives them much greater confidence in the delivery process.

Customers will also receive alerts if any delays or issues arise, which helps to keep them informed. Using this technology creates a much better customer experience and eliminates any guesswork about a shipments arrival time.

Real-time tracking also makes it much easier for shippers to find available carriers. Many technology platforms now provide access to a vast network of carriers, allowing shippers to quickly find nearby carriers with available capacity to secure the best rates.

The cost savings and convenience of real-time tracking and visibility will only cause this technology to be even more widespread throughout the shipping industry.

The evolution of partial truckload shipping has also been heavily influenced by predictive analytics. In simple terms, predictive analytics is the process of using advanced data, algorithms, and machine learning technology to identify the likelihood of future outcomes.

Predictive analytics is often used in partial truckloads by optimizing route planning, improving load matching, and forecast price variations for each shipment. For example, route optimization uses predictive analytics to identify the most optimal routes for transporting goods.

Numerous factors are considered in determining the most optimal route, such as distance, the amount of traffic, and weather conditions. Calculating these different factors helps a carrier minimize transportation costs while improving delivery times.

Load matching is another key part of predictive analytics. Algorithms can match loads with the most suitable carriers by considering historical data, carrier capacity, equipment type, driver availability, and transit times.

All of this data helps improve efficiency, making it much easier for carriers to make well-informed decisions. Ultimatly, the role of predictive analytics is essential in decreasing costs and improving the entire shipping experience.

Blockchain technology has the potential to significantly impact the evolution of partial truckload shipping, as it creates a more secure and transparent recording of transactions.

One potential application of blockchain technology in partial truckloads is tracking shipments. A verifiable record reduces the risk of lost or stolen shipments and provides much greater visibility into the supply chain.

Another potential impact of blockchain technology is in the area of smart contracts. Smart contracts are a form of self-executing contracts that include the terms of the agreement between a buyer and seller that are directly written into lines of code.

These contracts can be used to automate certain aspects of the shipping process. Using this technology help reduce the administrative burden of managing partial truckload shipments for dry van freight or reefer trucks while also increasing efficiency and reducing the risk of fraud.

Overall, blockchain technology can play a significant role in the evolution of partial truckload shipping. Blockchain technology offers much greater transparency, security, and efficiency.

Using this technology can also help drive innovation and improve the customer experience. As a result, more shippers and carriers will continue to rely on blockchain technology due to its wide range of benefits in the transportation industry.

Technology will only continue to play a significant role in the evolution of partial truckload shipping. For example, implementing automated load-matching systems has greatly improved efficiency and reduced costs by matching loads with available carriers.

Real-time tracking and visibility have also increased transparency and improved communication between shippers and carriers.

Predictive analytics has enhanced decision-making by providing insights into market trends and performance metrics. In addition, the use of blockchain technology has increased security and trust in transactions by creating a transparent and tamper-proof ledger.

Ultimately, the role of technology will only continue to advance and will have a transformative impact on anyone working in the partial truckload shipping industry.

You might also like

See more here:

The Role of Technology in the Evolution of Partial Truckload shipping - Robotics and Automation News

PwC to Become a Technology Integration & Development Partner with Chainlink Labs

SAN FRANCISCO, March 22, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- Chainlink Labs, a developer of Chainlink, the industry-leading Web3 services platform today announced that it has entered into a strategic joint business relationship with PwC Germanyto help accelerate enterprise blockchain adoption.

The fastest-growing network of enterprise oracle nodes - Chainlink offers the most time-tested oracle infrastructure for helping enterprise systems securely access the rapidly growing blockchain economy.

In this collaboration, Chainlink Labs will help empower companies working with PwC Germany that want to interface with the blockchain economy but lack the expertise to develop smart contracts and operate node infrastructure. PwC adds its strong technical expertise and regulatory understanding as a lever to help customers to develop compliant and secure smart contracts and operate infrastructure. Supported by the expertise of both organizations, enterprises will be assisted in developing bespoke blockchain solutions that harness the power of Chainlink middleware.

Blockchains and smart contracts are poised to fundamentally reshape global industries. However, enterprise blockchain adoption has historically been hindered by technical hurdles such as a lack of secure connectivity between enterprise systems and blockchains and limited interoperability between various on-chain networks. As the market-leading blockchain middleware for the entire Web3 ecosystem, Chainlink helps reduce the complexity of blockchain technology for enterprises, helping them unlock its potential for generating business productivity and profitability.

PwC Germany has been involved with blockchain technology through developing in-house blockchain solutions such as Blockchain Explorer and Transaction Analyzer BETA, Tokenization Framework, Smart Contract Formal Verification Framework, Digital Asset Valuation Model and Travel Rule Integration. They also provide an array of services such as technology assessment and strategy, ecosystem management, technology consulting, and more. The organization's recent report "Time for Trust" further highlights how blockchain technology has the potential to bring fundamental changes to the corporate world, to economic processes, and to society as a whole.

Story continues

"We're pleased to enter into a strategic partnership with Chainlink Labs as integration & development partner to help accelerate the enterprise adoption of blockchain technology" said Dimitri Gross, Technology Interest Group Lead for Digital Assets and Crypto at PwC Germany. "PwC Germany and Chainlink Labs aim to help accelerate enterprise adoption of blockchain technology in key enterprise sectors such as capital markets, ushering in a new era of transactional security, transparency, and efficiency. We are excited to empower businesses with the knowledge, integrations, and solutions they need to seamlessly and securely interface with the growing blockchain economy."

"We're excited to support PwC Germany through this strategic collaboration, which will help enterprises securely connect their existing systems to all major blockchain networks," stated William Herkelrath, managing director of business development for Chainlink Labs. "By interacting with the blockchain economy through Chainlink, enterprises can begin realizing the transformative power of smart contracts and blockchain oracles."

About Chainlink

Chainlink is the industry-standard Web3 services platform that has enabled trillions of dollars in transaction volume across DeFi, insurance, gaming, NFTs, and other major industries. As the leading decentralized oracle network, Chainlink enables developers to build feature-rich Web3 applications with seamless access to real-world data and off-chain computation across any blockchain and provides global enterprises with a universal gateway to all blockchains.

Learn more about Chainlink by visiting chain.linkor reading the developer documentation at docs.chain.link. To discuss an integration, reach out to an expert.

About PwC Germany

Build trust in society, solve important problems.

When it comes to auditing and advisory, PwC supports clients of all industry fields to reach their goals. We advise corporations as well as family-owned companies, industry- and service companies, global players and local heroes, the public sector, organisations and NGOs. With our know-how and our expertise, around 600 partners and more than 13,000 experts in 21 locations in Germany support our clients in terms of finding solutions for complex questions in a world changing rapidly in line with our purpose statement "Build trust in society, solve important problems".

Cision

View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/chainlink-labs-and-pwc-germany-announce-strategic-joint-business-relationship-to-accelerate-enterprise-blockchain-adoption-301778026.html

SOURCE Chainlink Labs

Here is the original post:

Chainlink Labs and PwC Germany Announce Strategic Joint Business Relationship To Accelerate Enterprise Blockchain Adoption - Yahoo Finance

Disclaimer: The datasets shared in the following article have been compiled from a set of online resources and do not reflect AMBCryptos own research on the subject

Chainlink (LINK) is a decentralized oracle network that allows smart contracts on blockchain platforms like Ethereum (ETH) to securely access off-chain data and resources. The Chainlink network comprises several components, including Chainlink nodes, which retrieve data from external sources and provide it to the smart contract, and Chainlink oracles, which verify the authenticity of the data provided by the nodes.

The Chainlink network uses a consensus mechanism to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the data provided by the nodes. Chainlink is widely used in decentralized finance (DeFi) applications and it provides a wide range of services, such as price feeds, randomness, and identity verification. It is also used in the gaming and prediction market, supply chain management and many other industries.

According to CoinMarketCap, LINK was trading at $7.13 at press time, with a market cap of $3,687,240,019. LINK had a 24-hour trading volume of $261,346,041. Data from Coinglass shows that the total open interest on LINK futures went down by -1.89% over the past 24 hours.

In late 2020, LINKs price experienced a significant bull run, reaching an all-time high of over $20 in December of that year. This was driven in part by the overall bull market in the cryptocurrency space, as well as a strong demand for LINK as a utility token on the Chainlink network. Since then, the price of LINK has come down somewhat, but it has remained relatively stable and continues to be a popular investment asset.

One reason for LINKs relatively strong performance may be its strong adoption in the cryptocurrency space. The Chainlink network has gained significant traction among developers and users, and it has a number of high-profile partnerships and collaborations. Additionally, LINK has a strong development team and is backed by a number of well-respected investors, which adds to its credibility and appeal.

On 10 November, Chainlink startedofferingproof of reserve services for troubled crypto exchanges. This feature was launched back in 2020 but has started to gain popularity in the wake of the current unrest in the industry.

Apart from the staking upgrade, Chainlink announced various partnerships over the last week that will increase its adoption. The company announced on 24 October that prices in theBitizenwallet will be powered by Chainlink price feeds following its integration into Polygon mainnet.

Chainlink also revealed a channel partnership withTokenomia.pro, a web3 consultancy firm catering to token engineering and smart contract design, among other things.

Chainlink alsoannounceda partnership with international banking network SWIFT, which came as much-needed positive news for its stakeholders.

Speaking at SmartCon22, Chainlink Co-founder Sergey Nazarov unveiled plans to launch staking at the end of 2022, in addition to a new economic model for the Web3 services platform.

On 29 September, SWIFT, the international banking network,announceda collaboration with Chainlink in order to developacross-chain interoperability protocol (CCIP) in an initial proof-of-concept (PoC). This move will pave the way for the institutional adoption of Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT).

According to Chainlinks officialwebsite, the transaction value enabled by the network so far is a whopping $7.2 trillion.

Back in 2014, SmartContract.com set out to develop a bridge between external data sources and public blockchains. Ironically, this led to the creation of a centralized oracle system called Chainlink. In 2017, this product was reshaped into what we now know as the Chainlink Network.

Chainlink is the largest oracle project in terms of market cap and total value secured, and a number of crypto-projects associated with it. An oracle is basically software that acts as an intermediary between the on-chain and the real world.

Moreover, Chainlink provides a lot of use cases. Users of Chainlink can operate nodes and make money by managing the blockchains infrastructure. The Price Feed Oracle Networks are powered by a number of node operators. The platform integrates more than 100 projects with 700 Oracle networks, giving it access to over a billion data points and protecting over $75 billion.

So, what does this movement mean, and is now a good time to get into LINK? This article will talk about the altcoin ranked twenty-fourth by market capitalization. In fact, it will also touch upon what are the key factors to consider when making a decision on buying into LINK.

Heres a fun fact fromDefi Llama Chainlink is securing more value than all of its competitors combined. The network has secured more than $14 billion from protocols that rely on its data feeds.

In May 2021, Sergey Nazarov, Co-founder, and CEO of Chainlink disclosed in apodcastthat Chainlink is estimated to have 60% of the market share.

A monopoly like this has its cons. For instance, during the Terra collapse, Chainlink caused an $11.2 million loss to the Venus protocol. This was when the latter was unable to access accurate data from Chainlinks price feed.

In fact, the Chainlink ecosystem boasts some big names like VISA, SWIFT, Google Cloud, etc.

Its important to note that most of the LINK in circulation is being used for speculation rather than rewarding node operators. This, as expected, raises eyebrows among value investors.

Some believe that Chainlink is creating economic value in the industry by catering to a number of crypto-projects. Alas, that value doesnt seem to reflect on their native tokens price.

Even so, following Chainlinks 7 Juneproposalof the staking update, LINKsurgedby nearly 20% from $7 all the way up to $9.

The proposed staking update is much anticipated in the crypto space. The update will be beneficial for the tokens value as oracles will be required to stake LINK. This update will also enable community participation, leading to enhanced overall security.

Nazarov clarified that Chainlink does not produce blocks, but make consensus on hundreds of oracle networks about price data. He further added that the developers team is finally satisfied with the security and scalability of theconsensus mechanismand ready to launch staking this year.

The update will also bring additional utility to LINK, beyond facilitating payments to node operators.

Chainlink developers estimate that the proposed staking will yield 5% annually thanks to proceeds from Chainlinks data feed users and emissions from the treasury reserve. The goal is for treasury emissions to end once Chainlinks usage grows, leaving all staking rewards to come from fees paid by oracle users.

Whilespeakingat NFT.NYC 2022, Lauren Halstead from Chainlink Labs outlined the spectrum of Chainlinks use cases using the example of dynamic NFTs. Halstead demonstrated how dynamic NFTs can be updated in real-time with the help of off-chain data gathered by Chainlink.

Interest Protocol, the first fractional reserve banking protocol on the Ethereum blockchain, announced earlier this month that it had entered into a strategic partnership with Chainlink. Chainlink will help Interest Protocol integrate two of its features, namely Chainlink Keepers and Chainlink Proof of Reserve.

On 15 August, Floki Inuannouncedthat they had integrated two products from Chainlinks suite with their newly launched FlokiFi Locker on BNB Chain and the Ethereum mainnet. In an interview with BSC news, a core team member of Floki said,

We feel excited to be working with Chainlink to enhance the integrity of the FlokiFi Locker protocol. Chainlink is by far the biggest decentralized oracle solution in the world as well as the best and most reliable.

On 28 August, Chainlinkinformedits community on Reddit that the Chainlink Verifiable Random Function (VRF) was being used by more than 350 projects across Avalanche, Ethereum, Fantom, and Polygon, as a source of provably fair randomness for their NFTS, dApps etc. Chainlink VRF is the industry-leading random number generator (RNG) solution for an off-chain solution and smart contracts.

Data fromwhalestatsrevealedthat LINK is the most widely held token among top Ethereum whales. This information is derived from the data collected from the wallets of the top 5000 Ethereum whales.

According to a report published by Fortune Business Insights, the global Internet of Things (IoT) market is projected to grow at a CAGR of 26.4% annually between 2022 and 2029. Given the rising adoption of blockchain technology in mainstream businesses like banking, logistics ets, we can expect a similar growth rate in cryptocurrencies that enhance IoT-based businesses. Chainlink would be an appropriate example of this.

At press time, LINK was trading at $7.067 with bears taking precedence.

The month of August saw Chainlink closing in on double-digit territory when it set a two-month high of $9.52, before falling to prices that rendered the monthly return negative. This is pretty volatile, compared to the rather calm sideways movement witnessed by LINKs price in July.

Even with all the volatility, the overall theme for August can be summed up with one word: Bearish.

September, however, was bullish, with October seeing bits of both. As far as November and December are concerned, the less said, the better.

While 2023 began on a positive note, its fortunes were reversed in mid-February. LINKs most recent downtrend has been fueled by the macroeconomic headwinds faced by the crypto-market at large.

Eric Wall from Arcane Assets has been rather critical of Chainlinks activities. In May 2021, hestatedthat the network is not crypto-economically secure, citing the developers state and the fact that the model relies on a trusted system.

Zeus Capital has been a vocal critic of Chainlink since 2020 when they published a fifty-nine-pageinvestigative report. One outlining how the network is a fraud, going as far as calling it the wirecard of crypto.

CryptoWhale turned up the heat on Chainlink developers in a series oftweetstoo. It accused the team of running a pump-and-dump scheme. These allegations came following a $1.5 billion LINK sell-off allegedly by Chainlink insiders and developers in June 2021.

One billion LINK tokens were pre-mined in 2017, following which Chainlink raised $32 million through an initial coin offering (ICO). Thirty percent went to the founders and the project. Thirty-five percent accounted for airdrops and rewards for node operators. The remaining thirty-five percent went towards issuing to investors.

According toEtherscan, the top hundred wallets hold roughly 75% of LINK supply. This doesnt look so good for a token thats supposed to be decentralized. Chainlinks supporters have, however, argued that a certain degree of centralization will help developers to effectively respond to network-threatening events.

Data fromEtherscanalso revealed Chainlink developers addresses consistently dumping their holdings on Binance, something that hasnt been received well by the community.

One would think that this works out well in favor of decentralization, but most of those tokens have been bought up by whales.

A number of analysts believe that the performance of LINK and ETH is correlated to some extent.

Chainlinks growth is inherently tied to the growth of smart contracts and blockchain services. Increased adoption of smart contracts translates to an increase in demand for data feeds from oracles.

Chainlinks utility has attracted cross-chain ventures. Non-Ethereum-based protocols like Polkadot and Solana are building integrations with Chainlink for access to its oracle network.

Experts at Changellyconcluded from their analysis of LINKs previous price action that in 2025, the crypto should be worth at least $26.64. The maximum price for LINK, according to them, would be $32.01. Considering its press time price, that would yield a whopping 312% profit.

On the contrary,Finders panel of experts has projected a median value of $40 for LINK by December 2025.

Ethereum merging its mainnet and Beacon Chain is expected to affect LINKs price action, too. In fact, it has also been demonstrated that theres some correlation between ETH and LINK. ETH rose above $4000 and LINK broke the $50-mark to reach its all-time high last year.

Talking in the context of the Mainnet merge, if ETH should break the $ 10,000 level, then it is likely that LINK will follow suit and touch $100.

In light of new business partnerships, API connection improvements, and Chainlinks customized services, there are alsoprojectionsthat place a maximum price of $45.75 on LINK by 2025.

Are your LINK holdings flashing green? Check theprofit calculator

Changellys crypto experts have estimated that in 2030, LINK will be trading for at least $182.88, possibly peaking out at $221.4. That would mean a return of 2650%.

Joseph Raczynski, the technologist, and futurist at Thomson Reuters and one of the panelists forFinder, has a rather positive outlook on LINKs future. He sees the coin worth $100 in 2025 and $500 by 2030.

Link is pushing the boundary on one of the most important aspects of blockchain technology connections to other blockchains, databases and ecosystems. Chainlink could be the highway among blockchains, which is a huge key for the industry.

Justin Chuh, the Senior Trader at Wave Financial, made his own projections for the future of LINK too. He sees the coin at $50 in 2025 and $100 in 2030.

Forrest Przybysz, the Senior Cryptocurrency Investment Analyst at Token Metrics, shared his immensely bullish stance on the tokens future value and projected LINK to be worth $500 by 2025 and $2500 by the end of 2030.

He added,

LINK has one of the fastest, smoothest growth curves of any cryptocurrency and has a major lead in terms of its competition.

Chainlink had previouslyclarifiedthat it would continue operating on the Ethereum blockchain following the Merge to the proof-of-stake (PoS) consensus layer scheduled for next month, rubbishing claims of any association with forked versions of the Ethereum blockchain, including proof-of-work forks.

The major factors that will influence LINKs price in the coming years are,

Launched in 2017, Chainlink is fairly new to the industry and its full potential is yet to be determined. On-chain metrics suggest that users are confident about the future of LINK.

While it is true that the service provided by Chainlink pertains to a specific niche, one cannot deny the relevance of said niche and its importance in the future. Oracles essentially cater to all blockchains that utilize smart contracts, making the services of platforms like Chainlink vital for their operations. Companies from both traditional backgrounds and from the crypto space agree that smart contracts hold considerable significance, significance that will only grow in the future.

From an investment point of view, one might compare Chainlink and its token to how a traditional company and its shares function. If the company has a healthy balance sheet and has a meaningful contribution to the economy, then its shares are bound to perform well. The same can be said for Chainlink, because they are the leaders of their sector and their services are essential to several projects, both now and in the future.

The above analogy would not hold true for even a third of the thousands of crypto projects that exist today.

As far as the Fear and Greed Index is concerned, it flashed signs of Fear.

Continue reading here:

Chainlink (LINK) Price Prediction 2025-2030: LINK bears gain precedence - AMBCrypto News