Welcome to your community. We would like you to take a minute and read our newcomers guide.
1 pointStellar-based Zero-fee decentralized cryptocurrency exchange, StellarX transferred from its beta phase on 28th September. The exchange which was first announced this year July, is based on the universal marketplace of Stellar (XLM). For crypto to Fiat transfers, Stellar is an open-source protocol. XLM, which is its own cryptocurrency, according to CoinMarketCap is currently the 6thlargest and has a market cap of $4.8B. Stellar allows users to make deposits in U.S dollars, directly from a US bank account, which has made it a "real Fiat onramp." Furthermore, for some Fiat currencies like the Hong Kong dollar, euro, British pound, Chinese yuan, and others, the exchange shows digital tokens. StellarX in the blog post also mentioned that it hopes to add digitized version of other types of assets like commodities, stocks, real estate and bonds. In comparison with Robinhood (a major U.S financial services provider), Stellar has revealed that users will not spend a dime while using its platform, thanks to the company’s promise to “refund all network fees.”
1 pointBitcoin developers ABC looks to be very aware of this, the main reason for proposing to hardfork over matters not seem to required urgency at a time. While BCH implementations like bitcoin unlimited and the new Craig Wright project haven't made their intention known yet at that point, but what can be deduced is that there are serious opposition against developer and a big possibility of bitcoin cash splitting into multiple chain. As developers are been banned from communication channel, different vulture chain have started to take advantage. To good examples are bitcoin cobra and bitcoin stash. The bitcoin cash is based on the ideology that a hard fork minority chain can be a legitimate successor than the original one. Every one within the bitcoin community should be aware of the fact that the disagreement within will be settled by the chain splitting into multiple forks using the tenets as justification, "After all bitcoin cash is bitcoin" to buttress this point our attention needed to be drawn into certain issues: the core foundation of any give community rest on ideology. Nations, religions, and political associations can't exist without ideology. It is only communities with stable ideologies that would experience growth and success and cryptocurrency isn't different in this case. Let take a look into this: Christianity is religion and has this tenet, a very strong belief that "there is only one true God" and this strengthens the religion because other members in other religions would be weakened. A case study can be said of the now extinct sect called the "shakers", that endorsed celibacy in Christendom. The reason is because its members couldn't have the children to continue the practice. The very ideology that comes with bitcoin cash also backs ups it use of chain splits to settle a dispute within the community. An account below of an incoherent statement by David Jerry professional in B cash. He proposed that the minority chain backtracks and switch to the winning one in other to solve a chain split without taking into consideration that bitcoin cash itself is a minority chain to bitcoin, hence the instability of the idea that hardfork minority chain can be a legitimate successor to an original one. While, David Jerry's solution works with bitcoin, it’s never applicable with the bitcoin cash ideology. The conclusion is that bitcoin cash would always be unstable where it's community threatens to split permanently off the main chain. The block sizes debate was the original used in the creation of bitcoin cash. Theorists claim it's not about the size of it. The most important idea in the block size is that backwards compatibility is intact. This ideology is stable because it assures the membership of those who fail to upgrade their software as bitcoin is not just a software project but a coordinating system for a given community facing a very harsh and unfriendly group. With this in mind it’s certain that software upgrade requirements would only weaken the bitcoin community against the adversaries. The critics might say that the state level adversaries aren't active hence the possibility of practicing hardforks but what they don't comprehend is the nature of ideology. Ideologies can only be strengthened through strict adherence. Therefore, a cryptocurrency project can not easily move to a policy of no hardforks with a surprise emergence of the adversaries. For a project like bitcoin cash it’s a two way thing users that have been conditioned to believe that hardforks are safe would be sitting ducks when a malicious state sponsored hardfork comes along as those who are condition not believe they are safe would be immune against such an attack. The foundation of all cryptocurrency must be built on a stable and sustainable ideology.