Twitter investigates the use of Blockchain in the fight against 15,000 scam bots

Washington. Last Wednesday, September 5, Jack Dorsey was questioned at the House of Representatives’ E&C Committee. The CEO of Twitter was asked to present solutions to the deputies in the fight against bots, which are used for political opinion-making and the systematic fraud of cyber criminals. According to their own statements, they are investigating the huge potential of the blockchain to disable the 15,000 active fake bots for scam.

Last Wednesday, the managing director of the microblogging service Twitter was interviewed. Jack Dorsey had to answer questions from members of the United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce (E&C). This committee oversees, among other things, telecommunications and the protection of US consumers. Twitter boss Jack Dorsey presented possible solution scenarios in the fight against fake bots of all kinds. In order to rule out systematic fraud, one could imagine using block-chain technology to establish more effective trust and enforcement mechanisms.

Giveaway-Scam, Fake-News & Bitcoin Revolution: Twitter under pressure

The Twitter operating company must urgently come up with a way to effectively curb various forms of fraud, identity theft and the spread of fake news about the Bitcoin revolution. We remember the use of countless programs (bots) that have demonstrably contributed with targeted disinformation and smear campaigns to the election of Donald Trump as incumbent president of the United States. Cybercriminals, on the other hand, focus on overly trusting consumers who believe too much in the promises of Twitter accounts. Time and again, fake accounts are used by celebrities to distribute alleged gifts in Ethereum or through the Bitcoin revolution. If you want to get some of the money, you should transfer a part of your wallet to the noble donors beforehand “for verification”. We have reported on such incidents again and again.

Research into the possibilities of Bitcoin loophole has not been completed for a long time

At Dorsey’s hearing, Californian MP Doris Matsui wanted to know what he would do about the Bitcoin loophole. But Dorsey’s answers were rather evasive. He believes that there is a lot of potential on the blockchain issue that is still untapped. However, one had not yet advanced as far as one would like in the exploration of the possibilities: However, there are employees within the company who are working on a solution. They should examine the practical use of the blockchain in the fight against fake bots of all kinds.

Who wants to have a look at the quite interesting survey by Doris Matsui, can do this from one hour and 26 minutes in a video recording at this point. Industry experts suggest the Ethereum ERC725 protocol as a way out. The integration of a comparable blockchain solution, in which Twitter accounts are checked decentrally for authenticity, could reduce the number of fraudulent accounts to zero, they say. However, a final assessment by Twitter is still pending.

Front National wants to ban Bitcoin in France

If it were up to the National Front, the Bitcoin should be banned in France immediately. The political party sees any form of virtual currency as a serious threat and they should protect and preserve the “real economy” at all costs.

Bitcoin has received the attention of many governments and politicians around the world. Yet no country except Russia wants to ban Bitcoin at all. But most central banks have issued a warning that one could get involved in assets that would not be covered by banks or governments.

Front National and the Bitcoin secret ban

The Front National is a political party in France that is more likely to belong to the right-wing spectrum and that initially takes a relatively aggressive stance towards the Bitcoin secret virtual currency like this: The members of the party feel obliged to protect the “real economy” above everything else. They also assume that the euro will need all the support of the euro zone in times of imminent “Brexit”.

Front National MEP Bernard Monot told the media about cryptosoft:

“Cryptosoft and digital currencies are the result of a capitalism that is taking its final steps. Negative interest rates are becoming more common throughout the Eurozone. To overthrow the existing financial system is not the right way forward. Cryptosoft currencies are an incentive for end-users to empty their bank accounts to escape the fear of negative interest rates.”

Others, however, see the democratic value of Bitcoin and its companions as preventing citizens from becoming hostages to banks. Building on this, Monot said he believes that Bitcoin and other virtual currencies are a scam and that end consumers need to distinguish between electronic money and virtual currencies.

These clashing ideas have sparked a debate within the Front National, which will eventually lead to the proposal to ban Bitcoin and other crypto currencies in France. In addition, they want to create a new government authority to monitor within the euro zone that no one uses Bitcoin or other virtual currencies.

We would rather see the franc restored in France

“The euro should be the only legal currency within France and other European countries. It is possible to ban consumers from buying and selling Bitcoins, but then they could still buy them elsewhere internationally. But then on an equal footing with the euro.”

Contrary to what the Front National members think, it is impossible to ban Bitcoin. The popular crypto currency is not bound by rules and does not wait to be “allowed”. Building on this, the party plans to present a detailed economic programme on 29 July. The main topics there will be Bitcoin and crypto currencies.

Who of you feels reminded of a certain German party? I am myself partly amused, but also a little frightened. The Bitcoin system gives us democratic freedoms that no central government has been able to offer us so far. Everyone can be their own bank and the Bitcoin is not only stable at the moment, it is gaining in value, we are seeing ever greater acceptance and, I hope, better stability. On the one hand, I am amused because such a project is unlikely to be implemented. How do you even imagine this government authority to monitor, which nobody buys Bitcoins in the EU? And from here on I am a little frightened, is that the surveillance state that some fear? It remains to be seen how things will develop in the future, I am curious to see what the Front National will allow itself at the end of the month with its report on Bitcoin and other crypto currencies. What are your opinions?

Bitcoin – Blocksize debate, the thousandth

Since 2015, the blocksize debate about how to scale Bitcoin has been boiling up again and again. Despite the developers’ best efforts, this question remains the biggest challenge for Bitcoin’s further development.

Even now, one year after the first proposals in this direction, Miner are again in favour of increasing the block size. They hope that this will make Bitcoin fit for more transactions and a larger number of users. The Bitcoin core developers, on the other hand, focus on optimizations through top-level protocols. In their opinion, this is the safest way forward.

But what is a Bitcoin loophole?

On the one hand, Segregated Witness has been released as a solution to solve the Bitcoin loophole problem. In addition, a new mining pool (ViaBTC) and Roger Ver himself have begun using Bitcoin loophole software that can handle larger blocks.

With this not-small Miner, the party that advocates large blocks has gained some weight and can block segregated witness if necessary. They might even become powerful enough to go for a fork.

David A Johnston is Chairman of the board of the Factom Foundation. In his opinion, a fork is inevitable after these events. In several blog posts he emphasizes that the two camps in the Bitcoin community now have different goals and should therefore operate in two separate networks.

“After more than two years of fighting, the loss of time of one or two months due to a fork is a small price to pay: the development of both concepts could finally progress undisturbed.

Different visions on the news spy?

A new fork? Not everyone wants to go along with Johnson’s opinion: Critics say that such attempts by miners to force an increase in the news spy block size have so far failed. What should be different today?

“I don’t think it could come to such a fork. Yes, there is a very noisy group that makes its case. But it’s a tiny group whose arguments don’t have a realistic foundation,” says Coinkite CEO Rodolfo Novak.

Novak recalled that Bitcoin Unlimited resembles concepts such as Bitcoin XT and Bitcoin Classic – both proposals hit the same notch in the blocksize increase. And where are they now?

All of these proposals have sparked discussion, but no one has managed to unite the 95% Hashrate on themselves, what needs to be achieved for an upgrade.

This time some observers see the chances for a fork a bit more realistic, as there was continued support for a blocksize increase from the Miner.

Stephen McKie is product manager at a bitcoin-based social platform called Yours. He pointed out that according to some news, the Segregated Witness and Lightning Network solutions preferred by the core developers are advancing, which would prevent a fork like the one above.

“With the advent of implementations similar to the Lightning Network, the blocksize debates could be silenced, so that everything would remain as it was in terms of scaling.”

Either way, Johnston thinks that the only sensible solution in this debate would be to split along different visions.

“It would be better than the endless arguments.”

From his point of view, the Ethereum split is a great example of a vision-based fork, as each group can now focus on its own.

BTCC CEO Samson Mow also said that ViaBTC and others could launch their own currency whenever they wanted.

“If someone really thinks that the block size is an obstacle to potential adoption and that this is the reason for high fees and unpredictable confirmation times, why shouldn’t they fork and solve all the problems?

Currently, however, both groups are economically tied to each other. Mow says that a hard fork would not only endanger Bitcoin’s future, but that of all those who support Bitcoin.

“A hard fork would cost billions of dollars, a price that people and companies who own Bitcoin would have to pay.